Experience, Education and Subjectivity: A Comparison of John Dewey's and Maurice Merleau-Ponty's Conceptions of Experience and Their Implications for Education

This thesis compares John Dewey’s philosophy of experience and Maurice Merleau-Ponty’s phenomenology, and illustrates how Merleau-Ponty’s phenomenology can strengthen and further Dewey’s philosophy of education. I begin by drawing the connection between Dewey’s philosophy of experience and his philosophy of education, and illustrate how Dewey’s understanding of growth, and thinking in education, is rooted in and informed by his detailed philosophy of experience. From there, I give an interpretation of Merleau-Ponty’s phenomenology with a focus on his descriptions of subjectivity that he presents in the Phenomenology of Perception. Following this, I outline some of the implications Merleau-Ponty’s phenomenology has on our understanding of rationality, expression and existence. In the final chapter, I make the comparison between Dewey’s philosophy of experience and Merleau-Ponty’s phenomenology. After demonstrating how these two philosophies are not only similar but also complementary, I then look to Merleau-Ponty’s phenomenology to provide insight into and to advance Dewey’s philosophy of education. I will illustrate how Merleau-Ponty’s understanding of subjectivity helps to support, and reinforce the rationale behind Dewey’s inquiry-based approach to education. Furthermore, I will show how Merleau-Ponty’s phenomenology and its implications for rationality, expression and existence support Dewey’s democratic ideal and add a hermeneutical element to Dewey’s philosophy of education.

Disability in the Digital Age: Reconfiguring Access, Inclusion and Equality

There is an abundance of research that examines disability and technology in the context of computers and the Internet, however few have examined disability and mobile devices. Also largely absent from existing literature are the voices of disabled people themselves. This dissertation draws upon science and technology studies (STS) and disability studies to address these gaps by conducting in-depth qualitative research that examines disabled people’s experiences using smartphones and tablets. At its core, this dissertation aims to provide insight on the following: 1) an understanding of how disability is perceived in the digital age and the subjective meanings of access, inclusion and equality; 2) the ways in which mobile devices impact the lived experience of disability; and 3) how perspectives in disability studies and STS can be applied to understand the relationship between the body, disability and technology. The empirical contribution of this research draws from participant diaries and interviews with disabled people, as well as from open-ended questionnaires completed by mobile app developers. The concept of ‘subjectivities of disability’ is introduced to refer to the uniquely personal and individual experience of disability. Findings reveal that mobile device use amongst disabled people redefines their subjectivities of disability through socio-technical interactions whereby disabled people use their devices in ways that are integrated into their everyday lives and positively shapes how they view themselves in relation to their experience of disability. The responses from app developers reveal that there is a place for disability in the mobile market and that disabled people play a key role in making apps accessible. The data suggests that mobile devices facilitate access, inclusion and equality by integrating the body in ways that recognize and accommodate diversity. The results furthermore make it clear that the interaction between disabled people and mobile devices takes on an embodied and social characteristic. This research concludes that both on an individual level and collectively, disabled people are engaging with digital artifacts in ways that promote agency and independence as well as reshaping how disability is experienced and perceived in the digital age.

An exploration of students’ perceptions and attitudes towards creativity in engineering education

This study used a mixed methods approach to develop a broad and deep understanding of students’ perceptions towards creativity in engineering education. Studies have shown that students’ attitudes can have an impact on their motivation to engage in creative behavior. Using an ex-post facto independent factorial design, attitudes of value towards creativity, time for creativity, and creativity stereotypes were measured and compared across gender, year of study, engineering discipline, preference for open-ended problem solving, and confidence in creative abilities. Participants were undergraduate engineering students at Queen’s University from all years of study. A qualitative phenomenological methodology was adopted to study students’ understandings and experiences with engineering creativity. Eleven students participated in oneon- one interviews that provided depth and insight into how students experience and define engineering creativity, and the survey included open-ended items developed using the 10 Maxims of Creativity in Education as a guiding framework. The findings from the survey suggested that students had high value for creativity, however students in fourth year or higher had less value than those in other years. Those with preference for open-ended problem solving and high confidence valued creative more than their counterparts. Students who preferred open-ended problem solving and students with high confidence reported that time was less of a hindrance to their creativity. Males identified more with creativity stereotypes than females, however overall they were both low. Open-ended survey and interview results indicated that students felt they experienced creativity in engineering design activities. Engineering creativity definitions had two elements: creative action and creative characteristic. Creative actions were associated with designing, and creative characteristics were predominantly associated with novelty. Other barriers that emerged from the qualitative analysis were lack of opportunity, lack of assessment, and discomfort with creativity. It was concluded that a universal definition is required to establish clear and aligned understandings of engineering creativity. Instructors may want to consider demonstrating value by assessing creativity and establishing clear criteria in design projects. It is recommended that students be given more opportunities for practice through design activities and that they be introduced to design and creative thinking concepts early in their engineering education.