Educating for love of wisdom : John Dewey and Simone Weil

The writings of John Dewey (1859-1952) and Simone Weil (1909-1943) were analyzed with a view to answering 3 main questions: What is wisdom? How is wisdom connected to experience? How does one educate for a love of wisdom? Using a dialectical method whereby Dewey (a pragmatist) was critiqued by Weil (a Christian Platonist) and vice versa, commonalities and differences were identified and clarified. For both, wisdom involved the application of thought to specific, concrete problems in order to secure a better way of life. For Weil, wisdom was centered on a love of truth that involved a certain way of applying one's attention to a concrete or theoretical problem. Weil believed that nature was subject to a divine wisdom and that a truly democratic society had supernatural roots. Dewey believed that any attempt to move beyond nature would stunt the growth of wisdom. For him, wisdom could be nourished only by natural streams-even if some ofthem were given a divine designation. For both, wisdom emerged through the discipline of work understood as intelligent activity, a coherent relationship between thinking and acting. Although Weil and Dewey differed on how they distinguished these 2 activities, they both advocated a type of education which involved practical experience and confronted concrete problems. Whereas Dewey viewed each problem optimistically with the hope of solving it, Weil saw wisdom in, contemplating insoluble contradictions. For both, educating for a love of wisdom meant cultivating a student's desire to keep thinking in line with acting-wanting to test ideas in action and striving to make sense of actions observed.

Ethical space in a secondary school: a case study /

Discourse in the provincial education system that includes Aboriginal peoples is a convoluted one-sided affair. This has contributed to the limited academic success for Aboriginal secondary students in the provincial school system. The Office of the Auditor General (2004) announced a 27-28 year gap in Academic success compared to non- Aboriginal students (p. I). Both Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal stakeholders are fiiistrated and confused with the lack of support for long-term solutions to address academic success for Aboriginal students. The boundaries in education that exist between the dominant society of Canada and Aboriginal peoples in education are hindering the development of ethical space in which to negotiate and apply "concrete arguments and concepts" (Ermine, 2000, p. 140) for 'best' solutions across the cultural divide. Recent literature suggests a gap in knowledge to address this cultural divide. This study reveals racism is still prevalent and the problem lies in the fallacy of Euro-Western pedagogical beliefs. There is a need to design ethical space that will assist transformation of cross-relations in education for inclusion of Aboriginal voices and content. I submit that ethical space involves physical and abstract space. This report is a qualitative, exploratory, and single case study of one northern Ontario secondary school attended by First Nations and Metis peoples who comprise 35% of the school population. Twenty-six stakeholders volunteered to participate in six interviews. The volunteers in this study are Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal. Aboriginal peoples are firom two First Nations, and Metis peoples. It is an Aboriginal designed and delivered study that a) describes an Aboriginally-designed research method to gather data across cultural divides in a secondary school, b) reviews Tri-Council Policy Section 6 (TCPS) regarding 'good practices' in ethical research involving Aboriginal peoples, and c) summarizes stakeholder perspectives of the 'best educational environment' for one secondary school.