INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)

ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue X October 2025

The Philosophical Underpinnings of the Teaching and Learning

Process: A Deweyan and Freirean Perspective

Farrelli Hambulo¹,Inonge Milupi²,Gladys Matandiko³

University of Zambia, Institute of Distance Education, Zambia

DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.47772/IJRISS.2025.910000729

Received: 08 November 2025; Accepted: 15 November 2025; Published: 22 November 2025

ABSTRACT:

This article addresses the often-overlooked philosophical foundations of the teaching and learning process by

offering a comparative analysis of two influential pedagogical philosophies: John Dewey’s pragmatism and

Paulo Freire’s critical theory. While much of the contemporary discourse on education focuses on practical

methodologies and measurable outcomes, this paper argues that deliberate philosophical understanding is

essential for effective and ethical pedagogy. The central thesis is that although both Dewey and Freire

champion a student-centered approach, their differing philosophical underpinnings - one rooted in democratic

experience and the other in the deconstruction of power - lead to distinct conceptions of the teacher’s role, the

nature of knowledge, and the ultimate purpose of schooling.

The analysis first examines Dewey’s pragmatist vision, where learning is framed as the continuous

reconstruction of experience, and the teacher acts as a guide facilitating problem-solving for the development

of democratic citizens. It then analyzes Freire’s critical theory, which treats education as a political act and a

tool for liberation. In this framework, the teacher serves as a co-investigator, and knowledge is co-created

through dialogue and conscientization to challenge oppressive structures. The paper then compares these

perspectives across three domains: the role of the teacher, the nature of knowledge, and the goals of education.

Findings show that while Dewey seeks to improve democratic practice from within, Freire aims to transform

and liberate society from oppressive conditions. The paper concludes that philosophical self-awareness is a

practical necessity for educators, enabling deliberate, informed, and ethically grounded choices in the

classroom.

Keywords: Philosophy of education; Pragmatism; Critical pedagogy; Student-centered learning; Philosophical

selfawareness

INTRODUCTION

In modern educational discourse, debate often gravitates toward measurable outcomes and practical

methodologies. Policymakers and educators deliberate on the effectiveness of specific teaching techniques,

curriculum implementation, and technology integration, with a primary focus on improving student

performance and developing tangible skills. While such practical concerns are important, they have often

eclipsed a more fundamental question: the philosophical ‘why’ that undergirds the ‘how’ of teaching and

learning. Without a robust philosophical lens, pedagogical practices can remain unexamined, leaving educators

to operate on inherited assumptions about the nature of knowledge, the purpose of schooling, and their own

roles within the educational process.

This article addresses that gap by arguing that deliberate and critical philosophical understanding is essential

for effective and ethically grounded pedagogy. It undertakes a comparative analysis of two influential, yet

philosophically distinct, traditions in educational thought: John Dewey’s pragmatism and Paulo Freire’s critical

theory. While both philosophies reject rote-based, teacher-centric instruction and are often described as

studentcentered, their foundational tenets diverge in important ways (Nweke & Owoh, 2020).

This paper’s central thesis is that although Dewey and Freire both advocate learner-focused education, their

their divergent philosophical underpinnings - one oriented toward improving democratic experience, the other

toward deconstructing social power - produce different conceptions of the teacher’s role, the nature of

Page 8959

www.rsisinternational.org

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)

ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue X October 2025

knowledge, and the purpose of schooling. To explore this thesis, Section 2 examines Dewey’s pragmatism;

Section 3 examines Freire’s critical theory; Section 4 compares the two thinkers across three domains (nature

of knowledge; role of the teacher; purpose of education); the conclusion synthesizes findings and offers

practical implications for educators.

2. The Pragmatist Perspective: The Education of Experience

John Dewey, a foundational figure in American pragmatism and progressive education, proposed a philosophy

that integrates schooling with community life. Writing at the turn of the 20th century as a corrective to rigid,

traditional models, Dewey argued that the purpose of education is not the mere transmission of inherited

knowledge but the fostering of continuous growth and the development of intelligent, democratic citizens

(Nevin, 2021).

Central to Dewey’s educational philosophy is the concept of experience. Dewey defines learning as a

“reconstruction or reorganization of experience which adds to the meaning of experience, and which increases

ability to direct the course of subsequent experience” (Dewey, 1916:89). This claim reorients education from

teacher-centered content delivery to student-centered engagement with the world. For Dewey, students’ prior

experiences are the foundation upon which new knowledge is built. The curriculum should therefore be

dynamic and integrated, serving as a tool for students to solve real-world problems. Knowledge is not a fixed

entity to be deposited into students’ minds but an instrument for inquiry and for navigating complex

environments.

This instrumental view reshapes the teacher’s role. Rather than a purveyor of facts, the teacher functions as a

facilitator or “guide on the side.” The teacher’s responsibility is to design learning environments rich in

opportunities for meaningful, hands-on experience - activities that connect academic content to students’

interests and lived realities. In Dewey’s classroom, students are active participants engaged in collaboration,

critical inquiry, and problem-solving; the classroom operates as a miniature democratic society where students

learn cooperation, communication, and shared decision-making.

For Dewey, the purpose of education is synonymous with growth. Education is a social process that cultivates

habits of mind necessary for adapting to change and contributing to the welfare of a democratic community.

The school is not merely preparation for life; it is part of life itself. Dewey’s pragmatism thus underpins a

pedagogy that values inquiry, experience, and the cultivation of engaged citizens.

3. The Critical Theory Perspective: The Pedagogy of Liberation

In contrast to the pragmatist vision of improving democratic society from within, Paulo Freire developed a

critical theory of education aimed at liberating the oppressed from unjust social orders. Working amid

widespread poverty and illiteracy in mid-20th-century Brazil, Freire treated education as an explicitly political

act: a tool that can either maintain the status quo or challenge it.

A central tenet of Freire’s philosophy is conscientization - the process by which learners become aware of the

social, political, and economic contradictions that shape their reality. This awakening is a prerequisite for

liberation. Freire insisted that consciousness cannot be bestowed by a teacher; it must be co-created through

dialogue. He critiqued the “banking concept” of education, where teachers deposit knowledge and students act

as passive receptacles; this one-way model, he argued, “anaesthetizes and inhibits creative power” and helps

maintain systems of oppression (Freire, 1970:72).

Freire’s alternative is problem-posing education, a dialogical method in which teachers and students jointly

investigate their shared reality. Here the teacher is reconceptualized as a co-investigator or co-creator of

knowledge. The teacher’s expertise is valued but placed in dialogue with students’ lived experiences, which

become legitimate sources of knowledge. The curriculum emerges from problems and “generative themes”

identified by students, ensuring that learning is connected to their lives and directed toward transformation.

Henry Giroux’s work situates Freire within a broader tradition of critical pedagogy that sees the ultimate

purpose of education as humanization and social transformation (Giroux, 1988). For Freire, education aims to

Page 8960

www.rsisinternational.org

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)

ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue X October 2025

empower the oppressed to become subjects of their own history, to challenge injustice, and to create a more

equitable society. The philosophical foundations of critical theory thus chart a pedagogy that is dialogical,

politically engaged, and oriented toward liberation.

3.1 Two Brief Classroom Vignettes Illustrating Practice

3.1 Vignette 1 (Deweyan Practice)

In a Deweyan classroom, a teacher notices students’ curiosity about local river pollution. She frames a

multiweek inquiry in which students investigate water quality, design simple tests, collect and analyze

samples, and present potential community interventions. The teacher organizes the activities, models scientific

inquiry, and scaffolds students’ reflection on the consequences of different interventions. Assessment

emphasizes problem-solving processes, collaboration, and the ability to apply knowledge in civic contexts. The

project situates learning in community life, cultivating democratic habits through practical inquiry and shared

responsibility.

3.2 Vignette 2 (Freirean Practice)

In a Freirean-styled unit, the teacher begins by asking students to identify pressing problems in their daily

lives; students repeatedly name unfair water access and hazardous waste practices. The teacher facilitates a

dialogical process where students and teacher map the social, economic, and political structures producing the

problem. Students research local actors, histories, and policies, and they plan collective actions - such as a

community forum or petition - as both learning and praxis. The teacher foregrounds critical reflection and

conscientization, positioning students as protagonists who analyze and act upon oppressive conditions.

4. A Comparative Analysis: Contrasting Philosophies, Divergent Practices

To prepare for a focused comparison, I examine three domains where philosophical commitments most

directly shape practice: the nature and function of knowledge, the role and authority of the teacher, and the

overarching purpose of education. These domains reveal both epistemic commitments (what counts as

legitimate knowledge and how it is justified) and practical consequences (how teachers act and what schooling

aims to accomplish). The following comparative analysis uses these lenses to clarify where Deweyan and

Freirean thought converge and where they diverge.

Table 1. Comparative summary of Dewey and Freire across three domains

Domain

John Dewey (Pragmatism)

Paulo Freire (Critical Theory)

Nature

of Instrumental; validated by practical Co-created; oriented toward critical

knowledge

consequences

consciousness

Role of teacher

Guide/facilitator; structures inquiry

of Growth and democratic participation

Co-investigator; dialogical partner

Liberation and humanization

Purpose

education

Sources: primary texts and comparative scholarship.

First, the two philosophies hold distinct views on the nature of knowledge. For Dewey, knowledge is an

instrumental tool for solving problems and fostering growth. It is acquired through a reflective and interactive

process with one’s environment and is validated by its practical consequences. Knowledge in a pragmatist

framework is not a fixed external truth but a fluid, evolving instrument that helps individuals navigate and

improve democratic life. For Freire, knowledge is a tool for understanding and transforming social reality; it is

co-created through critical dialogue and action. Its value is measured by its capacity to produce

Page 8961

www.rsisinternational.org

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)

ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue X October 2025

conscientization and to empower the oppressed to challenge systemic injustice. The central contrast lies in the

primary function of knowledge: Dewey emphasizes improving democratic practice; Freire emphasizes

uncovering and challenging the power structures that render democracies unjust.

Second, the role of the teacher differs markedly. Dewey’s teacher is a “guide on the side” who structures

environments to facilitate inquiry and problem-solving. The teacher designs experiences that connect to

students’ interests and helps them derive meaning from interactions with the world. While not an authoritarian

figure, the Deweyan teacher remains a more experienced guide leading a journey of discovery. In Freire’s

framework, the teacher is a co-investigator or co-creator of knowledge. This relationship is more horizontal

and dialogical: authority is based not on superior knowledge but on a shared commitment to critical inquiry

and liberation. The teacher’s role is to participate in a mutual process of decoding reality alongside students.

Finally, the ultimate purpose of education differs. For Dewey, the goal is growth and the cultivation of

thoughtful, engaged citizens who can sustain and improve democratic society. His vision seeks to refine and

perfect social life through education. Freire’s vision is more radical: education’s purpose is liberation. He

conceives education as a means for oppressed people to gain critical awareness and to become agents of social

transformation. This contrast - education for democratic improvement versus education for social liberation -

highlights a philosophical chasm within progressive educational thought.

Although both thinkers champion learner-centered approaches, their philosophical differences yield divergent

educational practices. These differences have practical implications for curriculum design, assessment, and

teacher preparation.

CONCLUSION

This article has shown that beneath the shared progressive spirit of John Dewey’s pragmatism and Paulo

Freire’s critical theory lie different philosophical foundations that yield divergent educational practices.

Dewey’s philosophy, shaped by a desire to improve and refine democratic life, frames knowledge as a tool for

practical problem-solving and the teacher as a guide for growth. Freire’s philosophy, emerging from the

struggle against systemic oppression, treats knowledge as a vehicle for liberation and the teacher as a

dialogical co-investigator. The tension between educating for competent democratic participation and

educating for critical transformation is a central analytic insight of this comparison.

Practically, philosophical self-awareness can be operationalized in teacher education and professional

development through three modest strategies: (1) structured reflection prompts that ask educators to state their

implicit aims (for example, whether they prioritize growth within existing democratic arrangements or

liberation from oppressive structures); (2) small-scale curricular experiments that test whether a unit centers

problemsolving for civic competence or problem-posing for critical inquiry; and (3) lesson debriefs that

explicitly connect classroom choices to epistemic commitments. These measures help teachers translate

abstract philosophical commitments into everyday pedagogical decisions.

Acknowleding that many contemporary educators enact hybrid practices, the comparison offered here should

be read as analytic rather than classificatory: Deweyan and Freirean orientations can coexist or be blended in

practice, and empirical work could fruitfully examine how teachers navigate these tensions in diverse contexts.

Future research might explore how these philosophies inform digital pedagogy or interventions aimed at

educational inequity.

Ultimately, a reflective and ethical pedagogy requires philosophical self-awareness. By understanding the

foundational ideas that guide practice, educators can make more deliberate, informed, and courageous

decisions in their classrooms. The teaching and learning process is not merely a set of techniques; it is a human

endeavor imbued with philosophical meaning, and it is in this meaning that the power of education resides.

REFERENCES

1. Abdi, A. A. (2001). The Dialectics of Education: A Comparative Study of the Concepts of

Democracy and Experience in a Sample of Major Works by Dewey and Freire (Doctoral

dissertation). University of Alberta.

Page 8962

www.rsisinternational.org

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)

ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue X October 2025

2. Darwish, B. (2009). Education as a Political Act: Dewey, Freire and the International Baccalaureate

Theory of Knowledge Curriculum (Master’s Thesis). Queen’s University.

3. Deans, T. (1999). Service-Learning in Two Keys: Paulo Freire’s Critical Pedagogy in Relation to

John Dewey’s Pragmatism. Michigan Journal of Community Service Learning, 6, 15–29.

4. Dewey, J. (1916). Democracy and Education: An Introduction to the Philosophy of Education. The

Macmillan Company.

5. Elias, J. L., & Merriam, S. B. (1995). Philosophical Foundations of Adult Education (2nd ed.).

Krieger Publishing Company.

6. Feinberg, W., & Torres, C. A. (Eds.). (2001). Democracy and Education: John Dewey and Paulo

Freire. Rowman & Littlefield.

7. Freire, P. (1970). Pedagogy of the Oppressed. Herder and Herder.

8. Ghiraldelli Jr., P. (2016). Educational Theory: Herbart, Dewey, Freire, and Postmodernists. Springer

Nature.

9. Giroux, H. A. (1988). Teachers as Intellectuals: Toward a Critical Pedagogy of Learning. Bergin &

Garvey.

10. Nevin, S. A. (2021). The Spirit of Education: Politics and Pedagogy in Plato, Rousseau, Dewey, and

Freire. Doctoral Dissertation. Yale University, New Haven, CT. Retrieved from Y a le’s EliScholar

repositor y .

11. Nweke, C. C., & Owoh, A. T. (2020). John Dewey and Paulo Freire: Comparative Thought on

Experiential

12. Education. Nnadiebube Journal of Philosophy, Vol. 4(1), pp. 1–15

13. O'Loughlin, M. (2018). Learning to be: A Pedagogy of the Oppressed. In K. L. Slaney & M. A.

Kørnøv (Eds.), Psychological Studies of Science and Technology (pp. 197–216). Cham, Switzerland:

Springer.

Page 8963