Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Abstract

Philosophy for children is an educational movement that includes diverse goals that are not always clearly articulated by theorists and practitioners. In order to navigate the multitude of aims found in the philosophy for children literature I propose distinguishing between the following categories of goals: aims of education; educational goals of philosophy for children (internal and external); goals of a community of philosophical inquiry (procedural, epistemic, encounter, community, telos); goals of the facilitator; and goals of the children. The definitions of these various types are given along with some examples of how the distinctions between them can be of aid in understanding the approaches, criticisms, and practice of philosophy for children.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. I refer to the various practices which claim to engage children in philosophy in an educational setting, ‘philosophy for children’, but the focus of my discussion is on those approaches that rely on the use of the community of philosophical inquiry dialogue.

  2. E.g., camps, after school programs, museum programs, etc.

  3. For discussion of such differences, see, e.g., Vansieleghem and Kennedy (2011), Välitalo et al. (2016), Golding (2017) and McCall (2009).

  4. I use the words ‘goal’ and ‘aim’ as synonyms.

  5. See, e.g., Topping et al. (2019), Goering et al. (2013) and Lipman (2003).

  6. See, e.g., Trickey and Topping (2007) and EEF ( 2015).

  7. Reznitskaya (2005) notes the importance of assessing both the discussion (e.g., the use of reasons in the dialogue) and the educational outcomes of the philosophy for children programs which she characterizes with the question: “Have students participating in dialogical discussions internalized useful strategies that would allow them to perform better on reasoning tasks when social support is no longer available?” (p. 8). This implies a distinction between the goals of a CPI and the educational goals of philosophy for children.

  8. For example, in Brenefier’s video recorded philosophy session with high school students https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WqNLlf7hJkI. Accessed 07/18/19.

References

  • Biesta, G. 2017. Touching the soul? Exploring an alternative outlook for philosophical work with children and young people. Childhood and Philosophy 13(28): 415–450. https://doi.org/10.12957/childphilo.2017.30424.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carvalho, M., and W. Kohan. 2019. Finding treasures: Is the community of philosophical inquiry a methodology? Studies in Philosophy and Education. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11217-019-09659-y.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chetty, D., and J. Suissa. 2017. ‘No go areas’: Racism and discomfort in the community of inquiry. In The Routledge international handbook of philosophy for children, ed. M. Gregory, J. Haynes, and K. Murris, 11–18. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chetty, D. 2018. Racism as ‘reasonableness’: Philosophy for children and the gated community of inquiry. Ethics and Education 13(1): 39–54. https://doi.org/10.1080/17449642.2018.1430933.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Education Endowment Foundation. 2015. Philosophy for children: Evaluation report and executive summary. https://v1.educationendowmentfoundation.org.uk/uploads/pdf/Philosophy_for_Children.pdf. Accessed December 2017.

  • Gardner, S. 2015. Commentary on ‘Inquiry is no mere conversation’. Journal of Philosophy in Schools 2(1): 71–91.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Goering, S., N. Shudak, and T. Wartenberg. 2013. Philosophy in schools: An introduction for philosophers and teachers. London: Routledge.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Golding, C. 2012. Epistemic progress: A construct for understanding and evaluating inquiry. Educational Theory 62(6): 677–693.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Golding, C. 2017. Getting better ideas: A framework for understanding epistemic progress in philosophy for children. In The Routledge international handbook of philosophy for children, ed. M. Gregory, J. Haynes, and K. Murris, 65–73. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gregory, M. 2011. Philosophy for children and its critics: A Mendham dialogue. Journal of Philosophy of Education 45: 199–219.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gregory, M. 2013. Wisdom and other aims for precollege philosophy edcuation. In Philosophy for, with, and of children, ed. M.B. Glina, 3–19. Newcastle upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholars Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Johansson, V. 2018. Philosophy for children and children for philosophy: Possibilities and problems. In International handbook of philosophy of education, ed. P. Smeyers, 1149–1161. Berlin: Springer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Karaba, R. 2012. Reconceptualizing the aims in philosophy for children. Thinking: The Journal of Philosophy for Children 20(1–2): 50–54.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kennedy, D. 2015. Practicing philosophy of childhood: Teaching in the evolutionary mode. Journal of Philosophy in Schools 2(1): 4–17.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kohan, W. 2002. Education, philosophy and childhood: The need to think an encounter. Thinking: The Journal of Philosophy for Children 16(1): 4–11.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kohan, W.O., and M. Costa Carvalho. 2019. Finding treasures: Is the community of philosophical inquiry a methodology? Studies in Philosophy and Education 38(3): 275–289.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kohan, W. 2014. Philosophy and childhood: Critical perspectives and affirmative practices. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Lipman, M., A.M. Sharp, and F.S. Oscanyan. 1980. Philosophy in the classroom. Philadelphia: Temple University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lipman, M. 1988. Philosophy goes to school. Philadelphia: Temple University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lipman, M. 2003. Thinking in education. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Lipman, M. 2008. Philosophy for children’s debt to Dewey. In Pragmatism, education and children:international philosophical perspectives, eds. M. Taylor, H. Scheier, P. Ghiraldelli Jr, 143–152. Amsterdam: Rodopi.

    Google Scholar 

  • MacIntyre, A. 1984. After virtue, 2nd ed. Notre Dame: University of Notre Dame Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • McCall, C. 2009. Transforming thinking: Philosophical inquiry in the primary and secondary classroom. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Murris, K. 2013. The epistemic challenge of hearing child’s voice. Studies in Philosophy and Education 32(3): 245–259.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Murris, K. 2016. The Posthuman child: Educational transformation through philosophy with picturebooks. London: Routledge.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Murris, K. 2008. Philosophy with children, the stingray and the educative value of disequilibrium. Journal of Philosophy of Education 42(3): 667–685.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Newby, A., S. Gardner, and A. Wolf. 2018. Using communal inquiry as a way of increasing group cohesion in soccer teams. Analytic Teaching and Philosophical Praxis 39(1): 34–45.

    Google Scholar 

  • Noddings, N. 2005. Happiness and education. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rainville, N. 2001. Philosophy for children in native America: A post-colonial critique. Analytic Teaching and Philosophical Praxis 21(1): 65–77.

    Google Scholar 

  • Reznitskaya, A. 2005. Empirical research in philosophy for children: Limitations and new directions. Thinking: The Journal of Philosophy for Children 17(4): 4–13.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rondhuis, T., and K. van der Leeuw. 2000. Performance and progress in philosophy: An attempt at operationalisation of criteria. Teaching Philosophy 23(1): 23–42.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sharp, A.M. 1987. What is a ‘Community of inquiry’? Journal of Moral Education 16(1): 37–45.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sharp, A.M. 1992. The community of inquiry: Education for democracy. Thinking: The Journal of Philosophy for Children 9(2): 31–47.

    Google Scholar 

  • The Philosophy Foundation (nd). Thinking changes: Intellectual virtues. Retrieved from www.philosophy-foundation.org/our-mission.

  • Topping, K., S. Trickey, and P. Cleghorn. 2019. A teacher’s guide to philosophy for children. New York: Routledge.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Trickey, S., and K.J. Topping. 2007. Collaborative philosophical enquiry for school children: Cognitive gains at 2-year follow up. British Journal of Educational Psybchology 77(4): 787–796.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Välitalo, R., H. Juuso, and A. Surinen. 2016. Philosophy for children as an educational practice. Studies in Philosophy and Education 35: 79–92.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Välitalo, R. 2017. Internal goods of teaching in philosophy for children: The role of the teacher and the nature of teaching in philosophy for children. bienes internos de la enseñanza de la filosofía para niños y niñas: El papel del profesor y la profesora y la naturaleza de la enseñanza en filosofía para niños y niñas, 13(27): 271–290. https://doi.org/10.12957/childphilo.2017.27353.

  • Vansieleghem, N. 2005. Philosophy for children as the wind of thinking. Journal of Philosophy of Education 39(1): 19–35.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vansieleghem, N., and D. Kennedy. 2011. What is philosophy for children, what is philosophy with children—After Matthew Lipman? Journal of Philosophy of Education 45(2): 171–182.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Worley, P. 2016. Ariadne’s Clew absence and presence in the facilitation of philosophical conversations. Journal of Philosophy in Schools 3(2): 51–70.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Anastasia Anderson.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Anderson, A. Categories of Goals in Philosophy for Children. Stud Philos Educ 39, 607–623 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11217-020-09724-x

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11217-020-09724-x

Keywords

Navigation