Filozofia dla dzieci Wywiady

Philosophy with children (P4C) past, present and future [wersja angielska, rozszerzona]

Krzywoń Gregory filozofia z dziećmi
Po lewej Maughn Rollins Gregory, po prawej Łukasz Krzywoń
Łukasz Krzywoń talks with Maughn Rollins Gregory, successor of Matthew Lipman at Montclair State University.

Zapisz się do naszego newslettera

Wywiad ten w języ­ku pol­skim w nie­co okro­jo­nej wer­sji moż­na prze­czy­tać > tutaj.

Tell us in a nut­shell what you are cur­ren­tly doing?

I am a pro­fes­sor of the facul­ty of Edu­ca­tio­nal Foun­da­tions at Montc­la­ir Sta­te Uni­ver­si­ty. I teach clas­ses in phi­lo­so­phy of edu­ca­tion, gen­der issu­es in edu­ca­tion, edu­ca­tion and demo­cra­cy, and the ethics and poli­tics of edu­ca­tio­nal asses­sment. I also con­duct rese­arch in the­se are­as and I am the Direc­tor of the IAPC (Insti­tu­te for the Advan­ce­ment of Phi­lo­so­phy for Chil­dren).

Is this the role you took after Mat­thew Lip­man?

Exac­tly, sin­ce he reti­red in 2001. I star­ted wor­king at the uni­ver­si­ty in 1997, but at the begin­ning I was not per­mit­ted to work direc­tly in phi­lo­so­phy for chil­dren, becau­se I was hired for other tasks. It was a few years befo­re I was able to work clo­se­ly with Mat Lip­man and Ann Mar­ga­ret Sharp at the Insti­tu­te, and then in 2001 I beca­me direc­tor.

Why did you beco­me inte­re­sted in phi­lo­so­phy for chil­dren?

Sin­ce I was young I had many questions abo­ut life—mostly abo­ut the Mor­mon reli­gion in which I was raised—and my mother, who is devo­ut but also a questio­ner and a seeker, enco­ura­ged my questions and enjoy­ed discus­sing ide­as with me. Some­ti­mes, when we found our­se­lves deep in a the­olo­gi­cal per­ple­xi­ty, she would pick up the tele­pho­ne and call a reli­gio­us autho­ri­ty to get some guidan­ce. She was also a scho­ol­te­acher, and I spent many sum­mer after­no­ons with her, pre­pa­ring her clas­sro­om for the new scho­ol year and tal­king abo­ut what and how she would be teaching. When I began to stu­dy phi­lo­so­phy in col­le­ge, I reco­gni­zed that I had been doing phi­lo­so­phy with my mother for many years. In tho­se years, I often sha­red with my mother what I was reading or discus­sing in my phi­lo­so­phy cour­ses and then discuss it fur­ther with her. Whi­le I was an under­gra­du­ate phi­lo­so­phy stu­dent my mother found an artic­le abo­ut phi­lo­so­phy for chil­dren (P4C) in an edu­ca­tion maga­zi­ne and sha­red it with me. The descrip­tion made the pro­gram seem con­gru­ent with the best of the semi­nar-sty­le phi­lo­so­phy cour­ses I had taken and with the Socra­tic discus­sions my mother con­duc­ted in her own clas­sro­om. After my under­gra­du­ate degree I took a deto­ur from phi­lo­so­phy into law, which was excel­lent tra­ining for me, but I mis­sed phi­lo­so­phy. After law scho­ol I cler­ked for a coun­ty jud­ge for a few years, after which I deci­ded to take a bre­ak from law to get a masters degree in phi­lo­so­phy. I went to the Uni­ver­si­ty of Hawa­ii, whe­re I could stu­dy com­pa­ra­ti­ve Asian and western phi­lo­so­phy, and whe­re they had a strong phi­lo­so­phy for chil­dren pro­gram direc­ted by Dr. Tho­mas E. Jack­son. I stu­died San­skrit, Bud­dhist and Hin­du phi­lo­so­phy, had won­der­ful semi­nars on medie­val phi­lo­so­phy, aesthe­tics, and Kant, and fell in love with phi­lo­so­phy for chil­dren.

Sure­ly you remem­ber Lip­man and Sharp well. What was it like to be a mem­ber of the­ir team?

I met Mat Lip­man and Ann Sharp in Mexi­co City, whe­re I was stu­dy­ing for a PhD in Phi­lo­so­phy with a spe­cia­li­za­tion in phi­lo­so­phy for children—the first pro­gram of that kind—at the Jesu­it, Uni­ver­si­dad Ibe­ro­ame­ri­ca­na. Wal­ter Kohan, Ji-Aeh Lee, Chri­sti­ne Geh­rett, Gil­bert Tal­bot, and Edu­ar­do Rubio were in the docto­ral cohort with me, and Tere­sa de la Garza was the pro­gram direc­tor. Mat and Ann were two of the pro­fes­sors who flew in from aro­und the world to teach cour­ses and advi­se stu­dents. A job came up at Montc­la­ir Sta­te Uni­ver­si­ty whi­le I was wri­ting my dis­ser­ta­tion, and kno­wing that was whe­re P4C began and that I wan­ted to be part of it, I applied.

It was an honor to work clo­se­ly with Mat and Ann whi­le they were both very acti­ve. David Ken­ne­dy and Mark Wein­ste­in are also in the depart­ment. The Uni­ver­si­ty had masters degree pro­grams in Cri­ti­cal Thin­king and Phi­lo­so­phy for Chil­dren, and whi­le I was the­re we cre­ated a docto­ral pro­gram in peda­go­gy with a spe­cia­li­za­tion in phi­lo­so­phy for chil­dren. We ran the IAPC work­shops at Men­dham twi­ce a year for two weeks each time, and we had (and still have) a num­ber of inter­na­tio­nal visi­ting scho­lars stu­dy with us for weeks or mon­ths at a time. The IAPC publi­shed the jour­nal Thin­king (Ken­ne­dy even­tu­al­ly took over as chief edi­tor in pla­ce of Lip­man). We were all doing our own rese­arch, on phi­lo­so­phy of edu­ca­tion as well as phi­lo­so­phy for chil­dren. And we wor­ked with a small num­ber of local scho­ols, brin­ging gra­du­ate stu­dents in to do phi­lo­so­phy with chil­dren and to work with teachers in lear­ning how to do that. In the years that I was at the IAPC, Mat didn’t tra­vel a lot but Ann was con­stan­tly on the move, all over the world. I was able to tra­vel with her a num­ber of times, spe­aking at aca­de­mic con­fe­ren­ces and con­duc­ting P4C work­shops.

What was the dyna­mics of work betwe­en Lip­man and Sharp? It often hap­pens that one side sup­ports the other in what it is stron­ger. How was it in the­ir case? Who did what in this duet?

This is an inte­re­sting question. I recen­tly publi­shed a book with Megan Laver­ty on Ann’s scho­lar­ship, for which we rese­ar­ched her per­so­nal and pro­fes­sio­nal life. Ann died befo­re she mana­ged to publish her own book based on all the artic­les and book chap­ters she had writ­ten. She was very gene­ro­us and sha­red her texts at con­fe­ren­ces so that they could be prin­ted in local jour­nals. So her work was spre­ad all over the world, in dif­fe­rent lan­gu­ages. Much of it is dif­fi­cult to find, becau­se her artic­les did not always appe­ar in main­stre­am phi­lo­so­phi­cal or edu­ca­tio­nal jour­nals. Our work con­si­sted in fin­ding many of the­se texts and trans­la­ting them. We also invi­ted con­tem­po­ra­ry scho­lars to wri­te cri­ti­cal eva­lu­ations of her work. Ano­ther reason we put this book toge­ther has to do with the dyna­mic betwe­en her and Mat. Mat publi­shed much more than Ann, who spent so much time dealing with the dis­se­mi­na­tion of the method, con­duc­ting work­shops, direc­ting the degree pro­grams at Montc­la­ir, and hel­ping vario­us people start the­ir own P4C pro­grams all over the world. In fact, sin­ce the book came out, many people have expres­sed sur­pri­se that Ann Sharp had writ­ten as much as she had (only a frac­tion of which was col­lec­ted in the book). Mat was the offi­cial direc­tor of the IAPC, but he and Ann discus­sed eve­ry aspect of the Institute’s work toge­ther and made most admi­ni­stra­ti­ve deci­sions toge­ther.

So she was invo­lved in “apo­sto­lic” work?

Exac­tly. Mat wro­te his phi­lo­so­phi­cal novels for chil­dren alo­ne, but the teacher manu­als for the­ir use were writ­ten along with others, main­ly Ann. Later, she also wro­te her own novels for chil­dren. Also, Mat usu­al­ly only tau­ght one or two cour­ses a year for Montc­la­ir, but Ann typi­cal­ly tau­ght two or three per seme­ster. That’s aro­und 100 stu­dents a year, to assess and over­see the­ir pro­gress.

You’ve been in the P4C envi­ron­ment for two deca­des. We meet in Euro­pe, whe­re things have star­ted to live the­ir lives. What has chan­ged over the years? This was the sub­ject of many conver­sa­tions during this year’s SOPHIA meeting. What is your reflec­tion?

It’s an inte­re­sting topic. Recen­tly I’ve been rese­ar­ching the histo­ry of the move­ment. It is inte­re­sting how the under­stan­ding of children’s phi­lo­so­phi­cal prac­ti­ce has chan­ged over the years. For exam­ple, Lip­man and Sharp’s first book expla­ining phi­lo­so­phy for chil­dren did not con­ta­in any men­tion of the com­mu­ni­ty of inqu­iry, for which they later beca­me so famo­us. Ano­ther exam­ple is how Mat’s the­ory of thin­king evo­lved. His first edi­tion of Thin­king in Edu­ca­tion was only on cri­ti­cal and cre­ati­ve thin­king, which he descri­bed as “higher-order thin­king.” Later, he and Ann he deve­lo­ped the idea of caring thin­king. I think the way that the the­ory of P4C deve­lo­ped at the IAPC in con­junc­tion with the prac­ti­ce of doing phi­lo­so­phy in scho­ols, with giving so many work­shops for teachers and phi­lo­so­phers, and with exchan­ging ide­as with col­le­agu­es from so many parts of the world, is impor­tant. I belie­ve the strength, rich­ness and lon­ge­vi­ty of the IAPC appro­ach to P4C is a result of this mul­ti­fa­ce­ted deve­lop­ment. It was neither a case of deve­lo­ping the­ory first and then sim­ply apply­ing it, or of deve­lo­ping a prac­ti­ce and then the­ori­zing abo­ut it. Each of tho­se aspects infor­med the other. And the geo­gra­phi­cal, cul­tu­ral, phi­lo­so­phi­cal, disci­pli­na­ry, and age diver­si­ty of people invo­lved in the work pro­vi­ded a neces­sa­ry depth. In one of the last talks Ann gave befo­re her death, she empha­si­zed the need for P4C to rema­in cur­rent by con­ti­nu­al­ly lear­ning from and con­tri­bu­ting to new deve­lop­ments in phi­lo­so­phy, edu­ca­tion, and social move­ments. Not that this deve­lop­ment has been smo­oth, by any means! I’ve seen and taken part in quite a few heated disa­gre­ements abo­ut the mate­rials, methods, and gro­un­ding the­ories of just the IAPC appro­ach to P4C! To say nothing of what is now a glo­bal phe­no­me­non of bran­ding of dif­fe­rent appro­aches.

And what has chan­ged sin­ce Lip­man and Sharp are gone?

At the IAPC we have been pay­ing more atten­tion to the so-cal­led “Arc of Inquiry”—the tra­jec­to­ry from a pro­blem or question, thro­ugh vario­us ave­nu­es of gene­ra­ting and testing possi­ble respon­ses, toward nar­ro­wing down on what is most reaso­na­ble or meaning­ful or satis­fy­ing. This under­stan­ding of inqu­iry as some­thing that begins in pro­ble­ma­tic expe­rien­ce and aims for impro­ved expe­rien­ce ori­gi­na­tes in prag­ma­tism, of cour­se, but the IAPC appro­ach to phi­lo­so­phi­cal dia­lo­gue doesn’t depend on any­one being a prag­ma­tist! But this is the way we now con­duct our work­shops. This is not a big chan­ge, but it is a kind of an evo­lu­tion of the Lipman/Sharp method.

And in prac­ti­ce, the func­tio­ning of uni­ver­si­ties in the US has also chan­ged, which are more and more simi­lar to the cor­po­ra­te and busi­ness model. The govern­ment is less and less sup­por­ting higher edu­ca­tion, inc­lu­ding our uni­ver­si­ty, so pro­grams and facul­ties like ours have to find the money to sup­port our­se­lves. In the past, the IAPC had four full-time employ­ees and three per­ma­nent lec­tu­rers, who were able to rele­ase part of the­ir wor­king hours to the Insti­tu­te. That’s very much in the past. We used to have a who­le buil­ding, which was later redu­ced to a suite of offi­ces, and then to part of a sto­ra­ge room. In addi­tion, the­re are chan­ges in the edu­ca­tion sys­tem at eve­ry level that work aga­inst doing phi­lo­so­phy in scho­ols the way we con­ce­ive it: a high-acco­un­ta­bi­li­ty model, stan­dar­di­zed testing, pay pro­blems, and the asses­sment of teachers and scho­ols based on stu­dent test sco­res.

It sounds like things are going down a bit. It’s a bit wor­ry­ing. We in Euro­pe are also stri­ving for more phi­lo­so­phy in edu­ca­tion. Many good ini­tia­ti­ves appe­ar here and the­re. What, then, do you see for us in the near futu­re? What can we do?

In fact, phi­lo­so­phy in the Uni­ted Sta­tes has never had it easy. It has never been wide­ly reco­gni­zed as part of our cul­tu­ral heri­ta­ge. The­re have been many impor­tant US phi­lo­so­phers, but phi­lo­so­phy has never been a requ­ired cour­se of stu­dy in secon­da­ry edu­ca­tion in any sta­te. So from the very begin­ning it was a dif­fi­cult task. The IAPC pro­gram deve­lo­ped much faster in other parts of the world than local­ly, in the US. In the near futu­re, it is pro­mi­sing that vario­us appro­aches to doing phi­lo­so­phy with chil­dren in scho­ols have been deve­lo­ped, in the Uni­ted Sta­tes and aro­und the world. People no lon­ger think that the IAPC appro­ach is the only good approach—in fact, many are quite cri­ti­cal of it. Per­haps Ann and Mat tho­ught abo­ut the­ir work in this way. Today tho­se of us wor­king at the IAPC belie­ve our appro­ach is good and well-rese­ar­ched, but we never tho­ught it was the only way to do phi­lo­so­phy with chil­dren. A new P4C pro­gram at the Uni­ver­si­ty of Texas A&M, and a new masters pro­gram in P4C at the Uni­ver­si­ty of Washing­ton are good signs that the move­ment is gro­wing aga­in in the US. And the orga­ni­za­tion PLATO: Phi­lo­so­phy Lear­ning and Teaching Orga­ni­za­tion in the Uni­ted Sta­tes acts as a network, focu­sing on dif­fe­rent appro­aches and orga­ni­zing con­fe­ren­ces. The­ir acti­vi­ties are cha­rac­te­ri­zed by a spi­rit of coope­ra­tion and sha­ring, whe­re people learn from each other. This seems to be very pro­mi­sing.

During conver­sa­tions with other par­ti­ci­pants of SOPHIA, I heard an inte­re­sting remark that, for exam­ple in the UK, the most inte­re­sting and cre­ati­ve ide­as most often come from out­si­de the main SAPERE orga­ni­za­tion, which con­ti­nu­es Lip­ma­n’s work. Some­thing like this often hap­pens to esta­bli­shed tra­di­tions, when routi­ne begins to enter into the life of cer­ta­in ide­as.

I agree. But I would like to add some­thing here. Per­so­nal­ly, I think that the­re is a con­nec­tion betwe­en creativity—the need to rethink cer­ta­in things—and a return to one’s roots. When I attend con­fe­ren­ces such as this (SOPHIA) or even big­ger ones (ICPIC), people pre­sent the­ir inno­va­ti­ve ide­as, and I see that many of them have alre­ady been deve­lo­ped by others over the past 40 years. Tha­t’s ok, of cour­se, but this move­ment will be stron­ger, the more we are wil­ling and able to col­la­bo­ra­te across appro­aches and loca­tions. Stu­dy­ing what’s been done in the past is part of the work of eve­ry aca­de­mic and tech­ni­cal disci­pli­ne. We can’t be afra­id that doing a pro­per review of publi­shed rese­arch lite­ra­tu­re on a topic of inte­rest to us will some­how limit our cre­ati­vi­ty or our abi­li­ty to make an ori­gi­nal con­tri­bu­tion to the topic. The oppo­si­te is true, in fact. This is why I’m so exci­ted abo­ut the new oppor­tu­ni­ty to sha­re rese­arch publi­ca­tions in P4C in the data­ba­se. It’s also why I’m spen­ding so much of my own rese­arch time looking into the histo­ry of the move­ment. I think that har­dly any­one reads Lip­ma­n’s work today, let alo­ne Sharp’s, or even that of Gareth Mat­thews. It is not that they must do so, but I belie­ve it would be instructive—and cor­rec­ti­ve aga­inst some of the misap­pre­hen­sions of tho­se ear­lier scholar’s ide­as that I fre­qu­en­tly come across.

For this reason, I enjoy­ed the “Dia­lo­gu­ing Demo­cra­cy” Sym­po­sium held in con­junc­tion with the SOPHIA con­fe­ren­ce, whe­re I’ve had the oppor­tu­ni­ty to talk to you, Cathe­ri­ne McCall and Joe Oyler, who are respec­ta­ble elders in our com­mu­ni­ty. Meeting with your know­led­ge and expe­rien­ce. When we reach for the roots, we can see if the pro­blems we can deal with have not been reso­lved befo­re. Why com­mit mista­kes that have alre­ady been made and have been lear­ned from? When the­re are no elders among us and we do not go back to the past, to tra­di­tion, to learn, we lose a lot.

The­re is a tra­di­tion and the­re are new gene­ra­tions. The­re are many inte­re­sting les­sons in the past that may­be begin­ners are not awa­re of and that is why I would like to make them more acces­si­ble thro­ugh my work. As I’ve writ­ten abo­ut with Jen Gla­ser, a tra­di­tion only rema­ins vibrant, in good order, if it gets recon­struc­ted thro­ugh the new needs and inte­re­sts of the next gene­ra­tion. But that can only hap­pen if the next gene­ra­tion sees that the tra­di­tion can still give meaning to the­ir work and the­ir lives.

Ple­ase, tell us whe­re we can learn more abo­ut the IAP­C’s work. Abo­ut what you are doing now. You men­tio­ned ear­lier during the con­fe­ren­ce abo­ut your annu­al work­shops.

Eve­ry year during the first week of August, a sum­mer semi­nar takes pla­ce in Men­dham, New Jer­sey. A ver­sion of this semi­nar has been hap­pe­ning sin­ce the very begin­ning of the IAPC in the ear­ly 1970s, and it has run con­ti­nu­ously at Men­dham sin­ce 1985. During the semi­nar we intro­du­ce the par­ti­ci­pants to the IAPC appro­ach to phi­lo­so­phy for chil­dren, using the Lip­man / Sharp mate­rials and methods. It is an inten­se, resi­den­tial cour­se with an inter­na­tio­nal cha­rac­ter. We live and phi­lo­so­phi­ze and eat and hike toge­ther for eight days, so in effect we cre­ate an inten­tio­nal com­mu­ni­ty. It’s some­thing I look for­ward to eve­ry year. We also have two or three visi­ting scho­lars come to stu­dy with us at Montc­la­ir eve­ry year for a few weeks or mon­ths, or even for the enti­re aca­de­mic year. And of cour­se, each of us still con­ducts our own rese­arch.

You also men­tio­ned some­thing abo­ut an inter­net libra­ry …

Yes. This idea aro­se from a cer­ta­in need. Due to my posi­tion in IAPC, I rece­ive hun­dreds of ema­ils with questions like: Do you know some­one who publi­shed a work on P4C in a pri­ma­ry scho­ol rela­ted to mathe­ma­tics or lite­ra­tu­re? I have cre­ated the­ma­tic biblio­gra­phies over the years but when was foun­ded I tho­ught it would be the ide­al venue for sha­ring rese­arch in P4C. I wro­te to them and after abo­ut two years of nego­tia­tions they agre­ed on an addi­tio­nal cate­go­ry of Phi­lo­soh­py for Chil­dren with a num­ber of sub­ca­te­go­ries, each edi­ted by an expert in that sub-field. This data­ba­se now con­ta­ins publi­ca­tions on vario­us appro­aches to phi­lo­so­phi­zing with chil­dren, as well as the phi­lo­so­phy of chil­dho­od and edu­ca­tion.

Gre­at. What are the con­di­tions for adding works to this col­lec­tion? How is the con­tent of this work moni­to­red?

It must be a peer-revie­wed, aca­de­mic work such as a jour­nal artic­le, book chap­ter or book, rather than pie­ce of cur­ri­cu­lum. If you own the copy­ri­ght, you can uplo­ad the full text by your­self to the plat­form; other­wi­se, you can pro­vi­de a link to whe­re the work is publi­shed. You sho­uld pro­vi­de the abs­tract and key words, and you can nomi­na­te each work for up to three the­ma­tic cate­go­ries in the Phil­Pa­pers taxo­no­my.

June 2, 2019, Gal­way, Ire­land

Maughn Rollins GregoryMau­ghn Rol­lins Gre­go­ry is pro­fes­sor of edu­ca­tio­nal foun­da­tions at Montc­la­ir Sta­te Uni­ver­si­ty (USA), whe­re he repla­ced Mat­thew Lip­man as direc­tor of IAPC (Insti­tu­te of Pro­gress of Phi­lo­so­phy for Chil­dren) in 2001. He publi­shes and teaches in the field of phi­lo­so­phy of edu­ca­tion, chil­dre­n’s phi­lo­so­phy, prag­ma­tism, gen­der and edu­ca­tion, Socra­tic peda­go­gy and con­tem­pla­ti­ve peda­go­gy. He is a co-edi­tor of the Routled­ge Inter­na­tio­nal Hand­bo­ok of Phi­lo­so­phy for Chil­dren (2018) and has edi­ted a num­ber of spe­cia­list jour­nal issu­es devo­ted to phi­lo­so­phy for chil­dren. He is cur­ren­tly wor­king as the inau­gu­ral rese­arch coor­di­na­tor at ICPIC (The Inter­na­tio­nal Coun­cil of Phi­lo­so­phi­cal Inqu­iry with Chil­dren)

Łukasz KrzywońŁukasz Krzy­woń - MA in phi­lo­so­phy, gra­du­ate of the Uni­ver­si­ty of Sile­sia. Author of a text­bo­ok, Phi­lo­so­phi­ze with chil­dren, in Poland. His master the­sis, Hid­den Shi­ne, appe­ared in print in 2005. He wri­tes for a Polish maga­zi­ne Filo­zo­fuj!, whe­re he pre­sents conver­sa­tions on topics rela­ted to phi­lo­so­phy with chil­dren. He has lived in Ire­land sin­ce 2004. For many years he has been wor­king the­re with chil­dren and young people, leading, among other things, phi­lo­so­phi­cal inqu­iries in scho­ols. A spe­cia­list in phi­lo­so­phy for chil­dren with The Phi­lo­so­phy Foun­da­tion in Lon­don, he is also an acti­ve mem­ber of the Euro­pe­an asso­cia­tion SOPHIA, pro­mo­ting phi­lo­so­phi­zing with chil­dren in Ire­land and in Poland. He is cur­ren­tly wor­king as an envi­ron­men­tal edu­ca­tion offi­cer with Gre­en-Scho­ols Ire­land. He also runs his Lit­tle Rain­bow Aca­de­my Ire­land whe­re he pro­mo­tes arts and phi­lo­so­phy as means for a hap­pier world.

Najnowszy numer można nabyć od 30 października w salonikach prasowych wielu sieci. Szczegóły zob. tutaj.

Numery drukowane można zamówić online > tutaj. Prenumeratę na rok 2020 można zamówić > tutaj.

Aby dobrowolnie WESPRZEĆ naszą inicjatywę dowolną kwotą, kliknij „tutaj”.

Dołącz do Załogi F! Pomóż nam tworzyć jedyne w Polsce czasopismo popularyzujące filozofię. Na temat obszarów współpracy można przeczytać tutaj.

55 podróży filozoficznych okładka

Wesprzyj „Filozofuj!” finansowo

Jeśli chcesz wesprzeć tę inicjatywę dowolną kwotą (1 zł, 2 zł lub inną), przejdź do zakładki „WSPARCIE” na naszej stronie, klikając poniższy link. Klik: Chcę wesprzeć „Filozofuj!”