Laura Tanner states her intentions about her
new book, Dewey’s Laboratory School: Lessons for
Today: "its concern is now: what we can learn from Dewey and
his staff as we wrestle with the same problems that they worked
out." She achieves this goal by identifying some of the common
pedagogical concerns and educational problems in schooling that
Dewey and his colleagues faced in the earlier part of this century
and their relevance in helping us understand and think about
current reforms in school administration, curriculum development,
and teacher professionalization. Yet, I believe, the success of her
account is in the balanced manner in which she has reconstructed
Dewey’s insights linked to teachers’ experimental
efforts at the Laboratory School; in effect, revitalizing
Dewey’s philosophy and practices for challenging problems
confronting us in schools today.
Tanner engages in a multidisciplined assessment of problem
identification that renders Dewey’s concepts meaningful for a
wide audience -- scholars, researchers, teachers, administrators,
policy makers, and students. She carefully examines some of
Dewey’s principal ideas about curriculum design and
integration, community and school relations, the interconnectedness
between student interest-discipline-motivation, teacher autonomy,
character education, administrative and faculty relationships,
clarifying what Dewey intended by availing us with accounts from
some of his more remote and seminal pieces. Importantly, she shows
how the Laboratory School activities functioned directly in the
experimental working out of some of his essential ideas. Tanner is
meticulous in her explications, presenting a collective voice of
interpretation -- Dewey’s self-critique, the Laboratory
School staff and teachers’ reflections on their practices,
modern day theorists, and her own expertise in curricular
studies.
One of the things that Tanner assumes is that the problems that
Dewey and his staff tackled are the same problems we encounter
today. This begs the question of the applicability of Dewey’s
thought for the present and future, its limitations and
possibilities. While we might speak of these problems in a familiar
language, we should be cautious about their meaning and the
appropriateness of old solutions for new problems: for example, the
contrasts between such issues as multi-cultural education, parent
education, mainstreaming, teacher autonomy, and their contemporary
counterparts diversity, school partnerships, inclusion, teacher
empowerment. While Tanner attempts to negotiate Dewey’s
position about these issues, in some cases, it may be well enough
to see them as separate as the historical circumstances influencing
their formation. Dewey addressed certain problems in education from
a certain philosophical perspective and, as well, defined the
problems of his time given the historical and intellectual climate
at the turn of the 20th century. Educational research since the
70's has taken a revolutionary turn in our ways of thinking about
education that includes a critique of the ideological and political
nature of knowledge construction and values in schooling.
Assessment of the value of a Deweyian reform agenda for the 21st
century needs to take these critical strides over the past few
decades into account.
Whether we take the lessons lost as today’s lessons to be
learned depends on continued efforts to be clearer in our
definition of ends and clearer in deciphering the fit between
intended aims, means, and educational outcomes. Tanner takes a
giant leap forward in this direction in our understanding
Dewey’s ideas in action. She provides an intelligent
extension of Dewey’s theory in unique ways: 1) the
interpretive connections she makes between Dewey’s
philosophical ideas, the psychology of thinking and learning, and
curriculum design; 2) the piecing together of a stage level
developmental approach to discipline based on the intrinsic
connection Dewey makes between interest and discipline and places
this in contrast to dominant cognitive psychological views about
moral development, 3) the highlighting of generative methods in the
pedagogy of discipline and learning (i.e., redirection, suggestion,
purposeful doing), and 4) the redefinition and reorganization of
faculty & administrative roles based on pedagogical principles
necessary for a good education. Tanner clearly positions Dewey as a
major contender on critical issues of reform. Theoretically, these
initiatives provide an opportunity for scholars to take another
look at Dewey’s educational philosophy and its extensions in
the classroom, in particular, the deep nature of reflective
practice. Practically, the 25 features of a Dewey School listed at
the end of her book offer a coherent reform agenda providing
educators with some basic Deweyian guidelines for implementation in
school restructuring today.
The book sets an example of the kind of integrated research
Dewey would no doubt approve, infusing conceptual analysis into
reflective thoughtfulness about the everyday practices involved in
the teaching-learning process. It is an excellent resource for use
in either undergraduate or graduate teacher preparation programs
and is a must reading for Dewey scholars and advocates across the
disciplines. Tanner’s book is timely and should prove to be
an invaluable contribution in revitalizing conversations about
teacher professionalization and educational policy for the new
century.