JOURNAL OF PHILOSOPHY AND HISTORY OF EDUCATION, VOL. 49

AN EVALUATION OF THE CONDITION OF THE FOUNDATIONS OF EDUCATION

J. Scott Wright

North Texas State University

The present study was initiated at the suggestion of Jed Arthur Cooper, professor of educational foundations at the University of North Texas. It was his contention that something had happened to the foundations of education since he had received his doctorate in foundations at Peabody College in 1964. He argued that there had been a demise in the importance of the foundations of education and that a study of what had happened over the past thirty years or so would be interesting and valuable. I thus embarked on the present study, which I initially chose to frame within the context of evaluating graduate programs in the foundations of education. If there had been a significant drop in the number of doctoral programs offered in the educational foundations in the United States, I surmised, then possibly further study could be initiated to determine whether this was evidential of broader implications to the study and utility of education and its foundational disciplines.

The study is fundamentally qualitative and essentially general in nature. In fact, it is simply a snap shot of graduate education in the foundations of education in 1976-1977 and 1996-1997. The academic year of 1976-1977 was chosen for reasons of ease of study. The ERIC documents in the UNT library containing university catalogs goes back only as far as that year. Additionally, documents with the prerequisite information from the publishers of Peterson's Guides to Graduate Study only go back to 1976.

The Problem

Professor Cooper expressed his concerns regarding the demise of the foundations of education in an address to the Society of Philosophy and History of Education at their annual meeting in the fall of 1997. His concern stemmed from his own experiences. After graduating with a Ph.D. in the foundations of education, he "anticipated a joyous career teaching, researching, and writing in the history and philosophy of education."⁽¹⁾ His path eventually brought him to the University of North Texas where he embarked on his teaching career as planned. However, changes were made to the curriculum and the courses in educational history and philosophy were dropped from the schedule. After an extensive time teaching human development, a subject in which Dr. Cooper had "minimal training and even less interest," he was able to find an acceptable niche teaching multicultural education courses which had just been added to the NCAT standards. This was clearly not what he had envisioned for his career in the academy. He laments "it is ironic that one who was so enthused about the historical and philosophical foundations of education and one with excellent training in that area would have so little opportunity to work in it during a thirty-four year career."⁽²⁾ These concerns therefore pose the questions. Is the experience of Professor Cooper a common one? Have the foundations of education been minimized in graduate education? Are new foundations faculty being produced? Can they get jobs? What is their role, and the role of the foundations disciplines, to be?

Defining Foundations of Education

Let me make clear at this point what the foundations of education were considered to be for the purpose of this study. In considering the evolution of foundations disciplines since 1964, it was clear that one had become prominent: psychology. This was not necessarily surprising due to the emphasis on psychology in society in general and in institutions of higher education. It was obvious that there had been no demise in the role of psychology in the study of education or in teacher preparation programs across the nation. Therefore, psychology was not considered as part of the foundations of education for the purpose of this study. Only history, philosophy, and sociology of education were considered.

Doctoral Programs in Foundations of Education

The first consideration as to the health of foundations of education in graduate schools of education was to determine their presence at the top schools in the nation. As a convenient source of these elite programs, the U.S. News and World Report list of the top 10 graduate schools of education was used.⁽³⁾ This list included:

1. Teachers College, Columbia University

2. Stanford University

3. University of California, Berkeley

4. Harvard University

5. University of California, Los Angeles

6. University of Wisconsin, Madison

7. Ohio State University, Columbus

8. University of Michigan, Ann Arbor

9. University of Minnesota, Twin Cities

10. Vanderbilt University, Peabody College

The U.S. News list was compiled based on five attributes: faculty resources, research activity, student selectivity, and two separate measures of reputation (ranked by academics and ranked by school superintendents).

Catalogs and Internet websites were accessed to examine the degree programs offered at these institutions (see Appendix A). Upon first examination of the programs offered by these institutions, what is immediately clear is the variety of degrees offered including title of the program and the curriculum and courses required. The degrees programs offered (either Ph.D. or Ed.D.) range from the traditional (History of Education, Philosophy of Education, etc.) to more progressive (though cryptic) titles such as Humanistic Foundations or Social Sciences and Comparative Education. However, of the top ten graduate schools of education, nine had doctoral programs in what could generally be defined as foundations of education. Peabody College at Vanderbilt was the only school where no degree program was offered that conformed to this study's definition of foundations of education. At most of these top ten schools, the foundations programs were somewhat multi-disciplinary in nature, where students were able to emphasize areas of particular interest (history, philosophy, sociology, anthropology, economics, religion, etc.). When the 1977 program offerings at these same institutions were evaluated, it was found that the same nine schools were offering degrees in foundations at the time. Only Peabody did not.⁽⁴⁾

A broader analysis was then completed of all doctoral programs in educational foundations/philosophy of education in the United States. Peterson's Guide⁽⁵⁾, a listing of degree programs in the various disciplines provided by schools through institutional surveys, was consulted for both 1977 and 1997 (see Appendix B). In 1977, 52 institutions offered doctoral study leading to a degree in foundations of education. By 1997, that number had fallen to 47. This is not a large decline (a 10 percent drop), however, and the fact remains that doctoral education in the foundations is being offered at some 47 institutions in 28 states. Additionally, this does not account for the universities that offer master's level programs in the foundations.

Job Availability

Now that it has been established that doctoral education in the foundations is still available on a wide scale, the question becomes one of employability. Can graduates in the foundations get teaching positions? The job postings section of The Chronicle of Higher Education⁽⁶⁾ was reviewed over a 15 week period (September 19, 1997 to January 9, 1998) to evaluate the availability of academic positions in the foundations. Job listings that were considered to apply were only those where one or more of the traditional foundations disciplines (history, philosophy, sociology) were specifically indicated in the advertisement. It was found that in this 15 week period some 56 different positions in 25 states were advertised (see Appendix C). These positions varied in rank (assistant professor to full professor) and in Carnegie Classification of institution (Liberal Arts II to Research I). Seemingly, this is a strong number of available positions, although a newly graduated Ph.D. would likely only qualify for entry level positions, probably at the assistant professor level. This evaluation could be misleading because many institutions do not advertise open positions for the fall term until spring. What is clear is that there are jobs available.

Teacher Preparation Program Requirements

We now know that the graduates of the doctoral programs in foundations do have at least a reasonable chance of getting an academic position in the field. Once they enter the professorate, what will they teach? Do teacher education programs require courses in the foundations or will the foundations faculty members, like Professor Cooper, be forced to teach in areas where they have little training to justify their employment? A cursory examination was completed of teacher education program requirements at the following institutions:

1. University of North Texas

2. University of Texas at Austin

3. Vanderbilt University, Peabody College

4. University of Minnesota, Twin Cities

5. Columbia University, Barnard College

6. University of Michigan, Ann Arbor

7. University of Wisconsin, Madison

This examination indicated that of the seven school listed, five continue to require at least one course in a foundations discipline other than psychology. Only the University of Texas at Austin and the University of North Texas do not require such. Additionally, at the five institutions listed which do require foundations courses, four offer numerous classes to fulfill the requirement. For example, at Columbia's Barnard College, students can choose from Philosophy of Education, History of Education, Contemporary Issues in Education, or Education in American History; at Wisconsin, students can choose from courses such as History of Education in the United States, Modern Philosophy of Education, Anthropology of Education, Social Issues in Education, etc.

Condition of Educational Foundations

We have established, at least in part, that the traditional foundations of education, are not dead. But there is still, nonetheless, anecdotal evidence to suggest that there has been a move away from an emphasis on history, philosophy, and sociology of education. Art Cooper's experience is surely not isolated; Texas is likely not the only state to discontinue requiring foundations courses in the preparation of its teachers. So, why have the foundations come to mean less? What can explain their slipping influence?

One need not go too far into the past to trace the importance of the study of foundations of education on teacher training in America. Most educators, certainly those with even a cursory interest in educational theory or policy, will give at least lip service to the primacy of the foundations discipline, particularly in teacher preparation. Because philosophy and history of education were the founding disciplines of teacher training programs⁽⁷⁾, it is not unusual to find the exaltation of them and their benefits in introductory textbooks such as the following:

It is through a study of the foundations of American Education that among other things the future teacher becomes aware of the school's role in society and of its responsibility for helping to solve our social problems; develops a understanding of the administration of present day schools; comes to appreciate the historical heritage of education; begins to formulate his own educational philosophy; develops an understanding of curriculum; and becomes knowledgeable of the professional aspects of teaching.⁽⁸⁾

Clearly the authors hold the study of foundations in high regard and estimate their benefits to the future teacher to be great.

Having established foundational studies as crucial to the professional development of a teacher, foundationalists also suggest that a discipline-oriented analysis of educational problems provides the structure for improving all instructional efforts. In his 1968 textbook on the foundations, H.R. White stated "education is a set of problems waiting to be solved and the disciplines are a set of tools waiting to be used;" for it is the use of the tools that tell researchers and practitioners alike "what was" (historical), "what is" (sociological), and "what should be" (philosophical).⁽⁹⁾ However, there is a problem inherent in the difference between the researcher (theorist) and practitioners or those who will slave in the trenches of the instructional battleground. Is there real advantage to the study and understanding of the foundations of education, these disciplines that enlighten yesterday, today, and tomorrow for the teacher in the trenches? Is there practical value in the foundations of education ?

One could easily argue that the educational establishment has clearly established the need for certain foundational studies. Almost without exception, an understanding of psychology has been emphasized as crucial to the development of professional educators. Few teacher preparation programs exclude courses in human growth and development from their curriculum. Additionally, courses examining the socio-cultural context of teaching and learning are ubiquitous in colleges of education both at undergraduate and graduate levels. Even the University of North Texas, devoid of other foundations courses, requires courses in educational psychology and multicultural education. According to Professor Young Pai at the University of Missouri at Kansas City, "education is a socio-cultural process" and "a critical examination of the role of culture in human life is indispensable to the understanding and control of educative processes."⁽¹⁰⁾ These two discipline are inherently pragmatic, dealing not with theoretical axioms and historical roots, but with real life problems and answers. Teachers see the psychological difficulties presented to students by disrupted family life and gang violence; principals deal daily with issues of cultural diversity. So, instruction and understanding in these disciplines impacts the practitioner in a wholly un-theoretical, increasingly pragmatic, R E A L way. Therefore, It is not difficult to see how the disciplines of sociology and psychology have established themselves as the bastions of foundational studies in most teacher education programs and account for a large number of faculty teaching positions in colleges of education around the country.

The lack of practical value then becomes the key to understanding the slipping influence of the founding disciplines of history and philosophy. According to R.L. Schnell of The University of Calgary, "as early as the 1930s, Teachers College had established the social foundations of education as a composite educational speciality in an effort to render educational history more relevant."⁽¹¹⁾ Yet by the 1950s, "educationalists (still) sought ways to demonstrate (history's) relevance in teacher education programs."⁽¹²⁾ Even by the 1970s, the foundation disciplines of history and philosophy were still striving to find ways to relate to practical principles.

In Art Cooper's valedictory address to the Society of Philosophy and History of Education, he lamented the bureaucratization of education:

I am concerned that administration in all facets of society has ceased to be a means to an end and has become the end in itself. Large impersonal bureaucracies spend many hours and enormous financial resources in developing unnecessarily large and complex policy manuals, doing strategic planning, and holding administrative retreats which have minimal positive effect on getting the job done.⁽¹³⁾

Professor Schnell certainly agrees with this contention and suggests that this adversely affects the teaching of history and philosophy in teacher education programs:

With the creation of new educational specialities, educational psychology and sociology, and the increased bureaucratization of public systems of schools that require new professionals and concomitant training programs,...educational history lost much of its rationale for inclusion as a requirement in professional education for teachers.⁽¹⁴⁾

So, no matter how potentially enlightening the study of history can be to the educational process, it has to be justified in terms of its "contribution to the effective management of minimal school programs defined in behavioral terms."⁽¹⁵⁾

History is not alone, however, in this search for practical relevance. Philosophy, arguably even more esoteric than history, "deals almost exclusively with fundamental principles and axiomatic assumptions of a non-material reality."⁽¹⁶⁾ Though we all act out of our own philosophies, whether we know it or not, it is still important to relate such attention to philosophy and theory to pragmatic classroom activity and educational attainment.

In the presidential address to the American Educational Studies Association (AESA), Joan Burstyn of Syracuse University acknowledges the lack of input by educationalists in the conversation on education topics in the United States. She emphasized that members of AESA have "powerful knowledge about history (and) philosophy" which "enables us to grasp the complexities of today's societal dilemmas."⁽¹⁷⁾ And yet it became incumbent upon her to "expand members' outreach to the public...how could we obtain a greater role in the current discussions on education?"⁽¹⁸⁾ She admitted a need for AESA to work within the profession to ensure the inclusion of foundations subjects in teacher education. She also heard from discussion groups that if "we don't engage ourselves as thinkers in educational practice, others will determine what education does and means on a 'real' level (while we claim the weak ideological level and its flimsy verbal power)."⁽¹⁹⁾ There is, therefore, a realization within the disciplines of educational foundations, of the failure to relate to issues of a practical nature. What remains to be seen is whether or not foundationalists will continue to slip in their influence. It is likely that there will always be a nest of educational theorists, historians, and philosophers at the large research oriented institutions. The questions remains, however, whether small liberal arts colleges, regional state universities, and other like institutions will find the need to harbor such dinosaurs in their schools of education.

Further Study Necessary

What the current study suggests, more than the fact that foundations of education are still alive but in a difficult and slipping position, is that more study is needed. A stronger and more accurate analysis of doctoral programs offered in the foundations and the number of graduates in each is necessary. An evaluation of teacher education programs in the 50 states with a long term trend analysis would also shed much light on the condition of educational foundations over the last 25-30 years. And finally, even a membership analysis of the Society of Philosophy and History of Education would suggest what trends are present.

APPENDIX A

U.S. News and World Report America's Best Graduate Schools

Education School Top Ten Rankings with Doctoral Offerings in Foudations of Education

Rank Institution Foundations Doctoral Programs Offered

1. Teachers College, Columbia University History and Education (Ed.D, Ph.D.) Philosophy and Education (Ed.D., Ph.D.) Religion and Education (Ed.D.)

2. Stanford University International Comparative Education (Ph.D.) Social Sciences in Education (Ph.D.) (Anthropology of Education, Economics of Education, History of Education, Philosophy of Education, Sociology of Education)

3. University of California, Berkeley Social/Cultural Studies in Education (Ph.D.)

4. Harvard University History of Education (Ed.D.)

5. University of California, Los Angeles Social Sciences and Comparative Education (Ph.D.)

6. University of Wisconsin, Madison Educational Policy Studies (Ph.D.)(Comparative Education, Philosophy of Education, History of Education, Social Sciences of Education, Public Policy and Educational Institutions)

7. Ohio State University Humanistic Foundations of Education (Ph.D.)

8. University of Michigan Educational Foundations and Policy (Ph.D.)

9. University of Minnesota, Twin Cities Comparative and International Development of Education (Ph.D.) Evaluation Studies (Ph.D.)

10. Peabody College, Vanderbilt University None

APPENDIX B

A Comparision of U.S. Institutions Offering Doctoral Degrees in Foundations of Education

1977 and 1997

According to Peterson's Guide to Graduate Programs in Business, Education, Health, Information Studies, Law and Social Work

Institution 1977(X) 1997(O)

Catholic University of America X

Cornell University X

Florida State University X O

Georgia Southwestern College X

Georgia State University X O

Harvard University X O

Illinois State University O

Indiana State University, Bloomington X? O

Kansas State University O

Kent State University X O

Loyola University of Chicago X O

Marquette University X

Memphis State University X

Michigan State University X

New York University X? O

Northwestern University X O

Ohio State University O

Pennsylvania State University O

Rutgers, State University of New Jersey X? O

St. Louis University X? O

Stanford University X? O

SUNY Albany O

SUNY Binghampton O

SUNY Buffalo X? O

Syracuse University X? O

Teachers College, Columbia University X O

Texas A&M University X O

Texas Tech University O

University of Arizona X

University of California, Berkeley X

University of Cincinatti X O

University of Connecticut X O

University of Florida X O

University of Georgia X

University of Hawaii X O

University of Houston X O

University of Illinois, Urbana-Champagne X X

University of Iowa O

University of Kansas X O

University of Kentucky X O

University of Maryland, College Park X O

University of Massachusetts, Amhearst X

University of Michigan, Ann Arbor X O

University of Missouri, Columbia X

University of New Mexico X O

University of New Orleans O

University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill X

University of Oklahoma X O

University of Oregon X? O

University of Pennsylvania X? O

University of Pittsburgh X O

University of Rochester X

University of South Carolina O

University of South Florida O

University of Southern California X

University of Tennessee, Knoxville X

University of Texas at Austin X

University of the Pacific (CA) X O

University of Toledo X O

University of Utah X? O

University of Virginia X

University of Washington X

University of Wisconsin, Madison X

University of Wyoming X

Wayne State University X O

TOTAL 52 47

X? - indicates that the Petersons Guide for 1977 indicated that the institution offered graduate programs in Foundations of Educaiton. The Guide did not specifically signify that a doctoral program was offered. However, based on other institutional data, the likelihood is that these institutions did offer doctoral programs in the field.

APPENDIX C

Chronicle of Higher Education New Job Listings for Educational Foundations Positions

September 19, 1997 - Volume XLIV, Number 4 3 positions

Montclair State University (NJ) 2 positions

Colgate University (NY) 1 position

September 26, 1997 - Volume XLIV, Number 5 0 positions

October 3, 1997 - Volume XLIV, Number 6 1 position

University of Nevada, Las Vegas 1 position

October 10, 1997 - Volume XLIV, Number 7 5 positions

United Arab Emirates University 1 position

Western Oregon University 1 position

California State University, Sacramento 1 position

Salisbury State University (MD) 1 position

Assumption College (MA) 1 position

October 17, 1997 - Volume XLIV, Number 8 0 positions

October 24, 1997 - Volume XLIV, Number 9 4 positions

Whitman College (WA) 1 position

University of Wisconsin, Milwakee 3 positions

October 31, 1997 - Volume XLIV, Number 10 2 positions

University of North Carolina, Greensboro 1 position

Grand Valley State University 1 position

November 7, 1997 - Volume XLIV, Number 11 6 positions

Bowling Green State University (OH) 1 position

St. Joseph's University (PA) 1 position

Pennsylvania State University, Altoona 1 position

Slippery Rock University (PA) 1 position (temp)

Western State College of Colorado 2 positions

November 14, 1997 - Volume XLIV, Number 12 4 positions

California State University, Northridge 1 position

University of Nebraska, Lincoln 1 position

Lamar University (TX) 1 position

Knox Colloge (IL) 1 position

November 21, 1997 - Volume XLIV, Number 13 1 position

Gordon College (MA) 1 position

November 28, 1997 - Volume XLIV, Number 14 7 positions

University of Rhode Island 1 position

Milliken University (IL) 1 position

Grinnell College (IA) 1 position

Pacific Lutheran University (WA) 3 positions

Texas Wesleyan University 1 position

December 5, 1997 - Volume XLIV, Number 15 9 positions

Troy State University (AL) 1 position

Georgia Southern University 1 position

University of Wisconsin, Eau Claire 1 position

University of Southern Mississippi 1 position

Brigham Young University (UT) 1 position

Southern Illinoins University, Edwardsville 1 position

New York Institue of Technology 1 position (adjunct)

Teachers College, Columbia University 1 position

December 12, 1997 - Volume XLIV, Number 16 5 positions

University of Illinois, Chicago 1 position

Indiana University 1 position

Utah State University 1 position

University of Nebraska, Kearney 1 position

California State University, Los Angeles 1 position

December 19, 1997 - Volume XLIV, Number 17 4 positions

University of Illinois, Chicago 1 position

Huntington College (TN) 1 position

University of Wisconsin, Whitewater 1 position

Barton College (NC) 1 position

January 9, 1997 - Volume XLIV, Number 18 5 positions

St. Bonaventure University (NY) 1 position

California State University, Los Angeles 1 position

Central Connecticut State University 1 position

College of Staten Island, CUNY 1 position

Mount Union College (OH) 1 position

TOTAL 56 positions

AVERAGE almost 4/wk

ENDNOTES

1. Jed Arthur Cooper, "Considered Concerns of a Conservative". Speech delivered at the Annual Meeting of the Society of Philosophy and History of Education, October 1997, 1, photocopied.

2. Ibid., 4.

3. Brendan I. Koerner, "Education Schools," U.S. News and World Report: America's Best Graduate Schools, 1997, 46. Many arguments have been made about the validity of such rankings and their applicability to the real value of education at the institutions ranked. However, the U.S. News rankings were a convenient and objective source for the present purposes.

4. It is somewhat ironic that Peabody is the only one of the top ten that does not offer a doctoral degree program in the foundations since this is where Professor Cooper, the initiator of the present study, was trained in the foundations in 1964.

5. Peterson's Graduate Programs in Business, Education, Health, Information Studies, Law, and Social Work, book 6, 31st edition. (Princeton, New Jersey: Peterson's, 1997), 912-917 and Peterson's Annual Guides to Graduate Study, (Princeton, New Jersey: Peterson's, 1977), 18-47. Used with permission.

6. The Chronicle of Higher Education, volume XLIV, numbers 4-17, September 19, 1997 - January 9, 1998.

7. Robert F. Lawson and R.L. Schnell, eds., Educational Studies: Foundation of Policy (Washington, D.C.: University Press of America, 1983), 1, 283.

8. James A. Johnson and others, Introduction to the Foundations of American Education (Boston: Allyn and Becon, Inc., 1973), xi.

9. H. R. White, Foundations of Education: Historical, Sociological, Philosophical (New York: David McKay Company, Inc., 1968), ix.

10. Young Pai, Cultural Foundations of Education (New York: Macmillan Publishing Company, 1990), 3.

11. R.L. Schnell, "History of Education: Revolution in Style and Content," in Education Studies: Foundations of Policy, eds. Robert F. Lawson and R.L. Schnell (Washington, D.C., University Press of America, 1983), 2-3.

12. Ibid.

13. Cooper, 5.

14. Schnell, 1.

15. Ibid, 7.

16. John L. McNeill, "Philosophy of Education," in Educational Studies: Foundations of Policy, eds. Roberts F. Lawson and R.L. Schnell (Washington, D.C.: University Press of America, 1983), 284.

17. Joan Burstyn, "Presidential Address: The Role of a Foundations Scholar in Our Multicultural, Postindustrial Society," in Educational Studies, (1996), 308.

18. Ibid.

19. Ibid, 310.