This paper discusses the current fashion for brain-based learning, in which value-laden claims about learning are grounded in neurophysiology. It argues that brain science cannot have the ‘authority’ about learning that some seek to give it. It goes on to discuss whether the claim that brain science is relevant to learning involves a category mistake. The heart of the paper tries to show how the contribution of brain science to our grasp of the nature of learning is limited in principle. (...) Finally the paper explores the potential of brain science to illuminate specific learning disabilities. (shrink)

The paper argues that no criterion-referenced assessment system can achieve both reliability and validity at one and the same time. It shows that the reasons for this are conceptual, and hence that empirical research into the‘problem’ is a waste of money and effort. Considerable discussion is devoted to ideas of knowledge and understanding, and to proper educational objectives pertaining to these. Much reference is made to the current National Curriculum context in the United Kingdom, and conclusions are drawn for appropriate (...) educational policy in this area. (shrink)

Teachers are no longer simply being told what to teach, but also how to teach it. It is important therefore to examine whether some prescriptions of teaching methods are acceptable while others are not, and to justify opposition to certain forms of prescription. I show that some attempts to prescribe teaching methods are either empty, or incompatible with holding teachers to account for the pupil learning which is supposed to result. My argument does not depend on making any value assumptions (...) about ultimate educational aims. Examples from the National Literacy and Numeracy Strategies are discussed. (shrink)

In England, current government policy on children's reading is strongly prescriptive, insisting on the delivery of a pure and exclusive form of synthetic phonics, where letter sounds are learned and blended in order to ‘read’ text. A universally imposed phonics ‘check’ is taken by all five year olds and the results are widely reported. These policies are underpinned by the claim that research has shown systematic synthetic phonics to be the most effective way of teaching children to read. Andrew Davis (...) argues that there is a basic problem with this claim. Whatever it is that empirical researchers take themselves to be doing when they investigate synthetic phonics, they are not investigating a specifiable method of teaching reading. This is for two reasons. First, there are no such things as specifiable methods of teaching. Teaching is a vastly complex human activity involving contextual and reactive practical judgments that are responsive to the myriad contingencies of classroom life. The idea that teachers might proceed by way of prescribed methods rather than practical judgments is simply a fantasy. Second, teaching children to correlate letter combinations with sounds, and to blend sounds into sequences, is not teaching them to read. Reading is a matter of grasping meaning conveyed by text. While sustained attention to letter-sound correspondences can be helpful to some novice readers, we should neither assume that it is helpful to all nor confuse mastery of such correspondences with the ability to read. Davis's challenge to government policy on the teaching of reading, and to the empirical research that supposedly underpins it, is timely, radical and compelling. The zeal with which synthetic phonics is championed by its advocates has been remarkably effective in pushing it to the top of the educational agenda; but we should not mistake zeal for warrant. (shrink)

Over the last two decades the traditional conception of intelligence and other mental powers as stable individual assets has been challenged by approaches in psychology emphasising context and ‘situated cognition’. This paper argues that the debate should not be seen as an empirical dispute, and relates it to discussions in philosophy of mind between methodological solipsists and varieties of externalists. In the light of this I argue that attempts to conceptualise the identity over time of mental powers qua individual assets (...) run into intractable difficulties. Hence ‘individual asset’ views of many abilities should be abandoned. Implications for education policy particularly in regard to assessment are explored. (shrink)

Andrew Davis; Ability and Learning, Journal of Philosophy of Education, Volume 22, Issue 1, 30 May 2006, Pages 45–55, https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9752.1988.t.

I use Ian Hacking 's views to explore ways of classifying people, exploiting his distinction between indifferent kinds and interactive kinds, and his accounts of how we 'make up' people. The natural kind/essentialist approach to indifferent kinds is explored in some depth. I relate this to debates in psychiatry about the existence of mental illness, and to educational controversies about the credentials of learner classifications such as 'dyslexic'. Claims about the 'existence' of learning disabilities cannot be given a clear, simple (...) and unambiguous interpretation. In particular I show that science cannot deliver a definitive taxonomy of learner categories, and that this has important implications for teachers and policy makers. (shrink)

Teachers are no longer simply being told what to teach, but also how to teach it. It is important therefore to examine whether some prescriptions of teaching methods are acceptable while others are not, and to justify opposition to certain forms of prescription. I show that some attempts to prescribe teaching methods are either empty, or incompatible with holding teachers to account for the pupil learning which is supposed to result. My argument does not depend on making any value assumptions (...) about ultimate educational aims. Examples from the National Literacy and Numeracy Strategies are discussed. (shrink)

How far can consistent assessment capture all the worthwhile features of educational achievement? Are some important components of learning necessarily open to a range of potentially inconsistent judgments by different assessors? I argue for a cautiously affirmative answer to this question, drawing on analogies with aesthetic judgments and a rehearsal of the holistic characteristics of some assessment criteria. I also employ recent treatments of moral particularism and of concepts of incommensurability to oppose the drive for consistency in assessment required by (...) a high stakes accountability regime. (shrink)

Through a collection of contributions from an international team of empirical researchers and philosophers, _New Philosophies of Learning_ signals the need for a sharper critical awareness of the possibilities and problems that the recent spate of innovative learning techniques presents. Explores some of the many contemporary innovations in approaches to learning, including neuroscience and the focus on learners’ well-being and happiness Debates the controversial approaches to categorising learners such as dyslexia Raises doubts about the preoccupation with quasi-mathematical scrutiny and the (...) neglect of ethical reflection about education Discusses the possible grounds for concern, without exaggerating their similarities or offering sweeping judgements Includes contributions from empirical researchers and philosophers, including Usha Goswami, Howard Gardner, Julian Elliott, David Bakhurst, John White and Christopher Winch. (shrink)

PISA claims that it can extend its reach from its current core subjects of Reading, Science, Maths and problem-solving. Yet given the requirement for high levels of reliability for PISA, especially in the light of its current high stakes character, proposed widening of its subject coverage cannot embrace some important aspects of the social and aesthetic world. Verdicts on the latter often have holistic features, and there are dangers that such verdicts involve attempts to compare what cannot be compared. Judgments (...) about the normative and the social often feature a legitimate lack of consistency. (shrink)

Social externalism implies that many competences are not personal assets separable from social and cultural environments but complex states of affairs involving individuals and persisting features of social reality. The paper explores the consequences for competence identity over time and across contexts, and hence for the predictive role usually accorded to competences.

In this response, I agree with much of what Schrag says about the principled limits of neuroscience to inform educators' decisions about approaches to learning. However, I also raise questions about the extent to which discoveries about ‘deficits’ in brain function could possibly help teachers. I dispute Schrag's view that externalism/internalism debates in the philosophy of mind are relatively arcane and lack implications for the importance or otherwise for education of discoveries about the brain.

Over the last two decades the traditional conception of intelligence and other mental powers as stable individual assets has been challenged by approaches in psychology emphasising context and ‘situated cognition’. This paper argues that the debate should not be seen as an empirical dispute, and relates it to discussions in philosophy of mind between methodological solipsists and varieties of externalists. In the light of this I argue that attempts to conceptualise the identity over time of mental powers qua individual assets (...) run into intractable difficulties. Hence ‘individual asset’ views of many abilities should be abandoned. Implications for education policy particularly in regard to assessment are explored. (shrink)

Arguing that everyone has a right to privacy as control overaccess to `intimate' aspects of one's life, this author draws on thework of Julie Inness to discuss children's rights to privacy inclassrooms. Even if it is agreed that pupils should exercise this right,a central point is that there may be moral or other value considerationsthat justify setting the right aside. Among selected complexities, animportant extension is the right to psychological processes throughwhich learners acquire new knowledge.

This chapter contains sections titled: I II.

What is 'fairness' in the context of educational assessment? I apply this question to a number of contemporary educational assessment practices and policies. My approach to philosophy of education owes much to Wittgenstein. A commentary set apart from the main body of the paper focuses on my style of philosophising. Wittgenstein teaches us to examine in depth the fine-grained complexities of social phenomena and to refrain from imposing abstract theory on a recalcitrant reality. I write philosophy of education for policy (...) makers and teachers. Scrutiny of examples plays a vital role in communicating with such an audience. Starting points include 'accommodations' for disabled students, allegedly gender-biased tests, and the recruitment procedures of 'elitist' music conservatoires. A key intuition that fairness is associated with test validity turns out to be seriously flawed. Problems centre on the idea of a 'construct', and the supposed divide between an underlying construct and its behavioural manifestations. Equality of opportunity notions underlie some accusations of unfairness but there are alternative approaches to a just society. Both the judgments about fairness, and the proposed remedies are open to serious philosophical criticisms. There are widespread conceptual difficulties, together with inconsistent and contestable value judgments. (shrink)

The Common School should promote a sense of the distinctive worth of all human beings. How is the respect thus owed to every individual to be properly understood? This familiar question is explored by discussing ‘lookism’, a form of discrimination on the grounds of appearance. The treatment is located within a wider analysis of stereotyping. Ultimately stereotyping overlooks persons as sources of actions with moral significance and as potential owners of moral virtues. The Common School could profitably approach traditionally emotive (...) issues such as racism indirectly by helping students to understand in some depth how ‘lookist’ attitudes deny agency. It could then encourage students to apply these insights to traditional forms of discrimination. (shrink)

Abstract‘High stakes testing’ is to be understood as testing with serious consequences for students, their teachers and their educational institutions. It plays a central role in holding teachers and educational institutions to account. In a recent article Randall Curren seeks to refute a number of philosophical arguments developed in my The Limits of Educational Assessment against the legitimacy of high stakes testing. In this reply I contend that some of the arguments he identifies are not mine, and that others survive (...) his critique. (shrink)

Andrew Davis; Learning and Belief, Journal of Philosophy of Education, Volume 20, Issue 1, 30 May 2006, Pages 7–20, https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9752.1986.tb0.

Andrew Davis; 3. Understanding and Holism, Journal of Philosophy of Education, Volume 32, Issue 1, 7 March 2003, Pages 41–55, https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9752.

Andrew Davis; 7. Matching, Journal of Philosophy of Education, Volume 32, Issue 1, 7 March 2003, Pages 107–121, https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9752.00080.

David Carr, Andrew Davis; Can there be a Moral Psychology of Democratic and Civic Education & Understanding Mathematics, Journal of Philosophy of Education.

David Carr, Andrew Davis; Can there be a Moral Psychology of Democratic and Civic Education & Understanding Mathematics, Journal of Philosophy of Education.

Andrew Davis; 2. Accountability and the Economy, Journal of Philosophy of Education, Volume 32, Issue 1, 7 March 2003, Pages 19–39, https://doi.org/10.1111/1467.

Andrew Davis; 2. Accountability and the Economy, Journal of Philosophy of Education, Volume 32, Issue 1, 7 March 2003, Pages 19–39, https://doi.org/10.1111/1467.

Accountability involves not only schools answering to society, but parents and governments doing the same. In particular, governments should answer for the appropriateness of the educational aims they seek to promote. Making schools accountable to society through examination results is fundamentally flawed. Teachers must be able to account for how the specifics of their job relate to wider educational and social aims. The best approach to holding schools to account through external inspection is that of ‘audited self review’. The notion (...) of an agency of inspectors who are ‘superior’ to those they inspect is fundamentally inappropriate. (shrink)

Accountability involves not only schools answering to society, but parents and governments doing the same. In particular, governments should answer for the appropriateness of the educational aims they seek to promote. Making schools accountable to society through examination results is fundamentally flawed. Teachers must be able to account for how the specifics of their job relate to wider educational and social aims. The best approach to holding schools to account through external inspection is that of ‘audited self review’. The notion (...) of an agency of inspectors who are ‘superior’ to those they inspect is fundamentally inappropriate. (shrink)

In England, higher education institutions, together with the schools whose staff they train, are being required to incorporate synthetic phonics as one of the key approaches to the teaching of reading. Yet even if synthetic phonics can be identified as one of the component ‘skills’ of reading, an assumption vigorously contested in this paper, it does not follow that it can or should be taught explicitly and independently of reading for meaning. Imposing such a ‘method’ is, at a deep level, (...) incompatible with teachers acting as teachers and potentially constitutes a kind of abuse of early readers. Moreover, because of the conceptual difficulties confronting any attempt to specify synthetic phonics as an approach, there cannot exist, in principle, empirical research that actually supports its value. Current policy in England since the Rose Report, at least, assumes the opposite. All this cannot be dismissed as a little local difficulty for England concerning the teaching of reading English with all its spelling irregularities: there are broader implications for the relationship between research and teaching, together with continuing tendencies to impose ‘teacher proof’ approaches on schools and their staff in many countries. (shrink)

Andrew Davis; Bibliography, Journal of Philosophy of Education, Volume 32, Issue 1, 7 March 2003, Pages 153–155, https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9752.00083.

Andrew Davis; Bibliography, Journal of Philosophy of Education, Volume 32, Issue 1, 7 March 2003, Pages 153–155, https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9752.00083.

Andrew Davis; 4. Belief and Language-based Assessment, Journal of Philosophy of Education, Volume 32, Issue 1, 7 March 2003, Pages 57–65, https://doi.org/10.111.

Andrew Davis; 4. Belief and Language-based Assessment, Journal of Philosophy of Education, Volume 32, Issue 1, 7 March 2003, Pages 57–65, https://doi.org/10.111.

What do Elliot Eisner's discussions of objectivity mean for the strength of the link between consistency and truth in educational research? Following his lead, I pursue this question by comparing aspects of qualitative educational research with appraising the arts. I argue that some departures from the highest levels of consistency in assessing the arts are compatible with truth and objectivity, and that this is at least suggestive for how consistency in qualitative educational research should be viewed. In the final part (...) of the paper I look at some problems inherent in comparing the value of works of art, and consider whether similar issues arise when we attempt to grade different kinds of educational research. (shrink)

Religious exclusivism, or the idea that only one religion can be true, fuels hatred and conflict in the modern world. Certain objections to religious pluralism, together with associated defences of exclusivism are flawed. I defend a moderate religious pluralism, according to which the truth of one religion does not automatically imply the falsity of others. The thought that we can respect persons even when holding them mistaken strains credulity when we are dealing with religious convictions. Moreover, exclusivism is informed by (...) inadequate approaches to discourse about transcendence. The intentional-descriptivist approach to reference is not comprehensively adequate, and yet is assumed by some objections to pluralism. The irreducibly metaphorical character of much religious language means that differences between world religions can be more apparent than real. Approaches to religious education should embrace a moderate religious pluralism. (shrink)

This chapter contains sections titled: Introduction Disability Accommodations Unfairness and the Motivation of Candidates Unfairness in Music Conservatoires Unfairness in 11‐Plus Selection Conclusion Notes References.

Andrew Davis; 4. Belief and Language-based Assessment, Journal of Philosophy of Education, Volume 32, Issue 1, 7 March 2003, Pages 57–65, https://doi.org/10.111.

Andrew Davis; 5. Implications for Assessment, Journal of Philosophy of Education, Volume 32, Issue 1, 7 March 2003, Pages 67–74, https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-97.

Andrew Davis; 2. Accountability and the Economy, Journal of Philosophy of Education, Volume 32, Issue 1, 7 March 2003, Pages 19–39, https://doi.org/10.1111/1467.

Andrew Davis; 9. Is there a Future for Assessment and Accountability?, Journal of Philosophy of Education, Volume 32, Issue 1, 7 March 2003, Pages 145–152, http.

‘It worked there. Will it work here?’ We have to be able to identify the ‘it’ in that aphoristic question. Classifications of teaching methods belong in the social realm, where human intentions play a fundamental role in how phenomena are categorized. The social realm is characterized with the help of John Searle. Social phenomena are often open to interpretation, rather than definitive verdicts. The nature of the social limits the possibility of consistency in how teaching should be classified, which in (...) turn limits the viability of standard quantitative empirical research into effectiveness. Either classifications of teaching are very broad, which robs them of a researchable identity, or they are more specific, which can undermine their credentials as true teaching. So-called ‘Direct Instruction’ is a case in point. (shrink)

This chapter contains sections titled: Introduction Respect and Valuing Persons Lookism Discrimination and Stereotyping The Self, Stereotyping and Lookism Lookism, Common Schools and Educating for Respect Conclusion References.

Andrew Davis; 7. Matching, Journal of Philosophy of Education, Volume 32, Issue 1, 7 March 2003, Pages 107–121, https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9752.00080.