Teaching Philosophy of Education for Heutagogical Ends
- December 26, 2018
- Posted by: RSIS
- Category: Education
International Journal of Research and Innovation in Social Science (IJRISS) | Volume II, Issue XII, December 2018 | ISSN 2454–6186
Teaching Philosophy of Education for Heutagogical Ends
Elvis Omondi Kauka
Department of Educational Foundations, University of Kabianga, Kenya
Abstract: This article examines the modus operandi in the teaching and learning of Philosophy of Education. It is premised on the perspective that a lot more can be done in the process of training teachers. It points out the different areas that a tutor of Philosophy of Education needs to explore before stepping into a lecture hall, and what the student teacher should expect. The highest expectation is that the student teacher should by the end his/her training be a Heutagogue and somehow a Philosopher Teacher.
I. INTRODUCTION
When students join Universities to train as Teachers, the society anticipates persons who after University Education will become not only professionals but also mature, creative, critical, independent, practical, flexible and holistic thinkers. Maturity, creativity, criticality, independence and holistic thinking are indicators of Heutagogy or in lay terms, ‘Self Determined learning” which is an extension of Self-directed learning or Andragogy. Some of the Educational courses at the University level professionalize students without paying much attention to the high order thinking. The professionalization of student teachers is indeed desired, but if it lacks a framework of high cognition it can easily lead to Professional Lethargy and stunted growth in learning, yet, a teacher by nature is a Lifelong Learner.
II. LIMITING PHILOSOPHY OF EDUCATION TO PEDAGOGY
Proper formation best facilitates high order learning and cognition among student-teachers in Critical thinking, Philosophy of Education and Philosophy of Teaching & Learning. There is no doubt that Universities and teacher training colleges offer these courses. Unfortunately, the emphasis seems to be laid on meeting the legalese of graduation and professionalization rather than on formation.
