Consequentialist Reasons for Some Education Reforms
Abstract
The reasons for education reforms – as a particular form of social reforms – are either consequentialist or non-consequentialist. However, the reasons for the education reforms that are briefly discussed from the perspective of the philosophy of education in the present paper are above all consequentialist. These are the reasons for proposed education reforms in EU countries whose strategic aim is equated with the enhancement of two values: creativity and innovation. It is supposed that these education reforms will have good effects and not that they are good in and of themselves. Therefore, although creativity and innovation might be seen as having intrinsic value, they are – in these education reforms – treated predominantly as instrumental values. It seems that the introduction of such education reforms can be understood as a decision founded not on causal explanation, but rather on the basis of a special type of teleological explanation, which has the logical form of a “practical syllogismâ€. In this case, the occurrence of an action is explained in terms of the goals and purposes of the agent; it shows that the agent did what s/he did because s/he tried to achieve a certain goal and believed that certain means were necessary or sufficient for achieving this goal.
Downloads
References
Anscombe, G. E. M. (1963). Intention. Basil Blackwell.
Anscombe, G. E. M. (1989). Von Wright on practical inference. In P. A. Schlipp & L. E. Hahn (Eds.), The philosophy of Georg Henrik von Wright. La Salle.
Beardsley, M. C. (1965). Intrinsic value. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research, 26(1), 1–17.
Brown, W. (2015). Undoing the demos: Neoliberalism’s stealth revolution. Zone Books.
Cachia, R., Ferrari, A., Ala-Mutka, K., & Punie, Y. (2010). Creative learning and innovative teaching: Final report on the study on creativity and innovation in education in the EU member states. Publications Office of the European Union.
Conference Theme. (2013). Creativity and innovation in educational research. ECER.
Council of Europe. (2009). Council conclusions on a strategic framework for European cooperation in education and training (Education and training 2020). Official Journal C 119, 28. 05. 2009.
Elster, J. (1987). Comment on van der Veen and Van Parijs. Theory and Society, 15(5), 709–721.
EUR LEX. (2006). EUR-Lex-52006DC0033 (Communication from the Commission to the Council, the European Parliament, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions – Implementing the Community Lisbon Programme: Fostering entrepreneurial mindsets through education and learning /* COM/2006/0033 final */).
EUR LEX. (2008). EUR-Lex-l29020 (Decision No 1350/2008/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 December 2008 concerning the European Year of Creativity and Innovation (2009)).
Ferry, L. (2014). L’innovation destructrice [Destructive innovation]. Plon.
Frankena, W. K. (1973). Ethics. Prentice-Hall.
Garrouste, C. (2010). 100 years of educational reforms in Europe: A contextual database. Publications Office of the European Union.
Godin, B. (2008). Innovation: The history of a category, project on the intellectual history of innovation working paper No. 1. www.csiic.ca
Jolly, A. (Ed.) (2003). Innovation: Harnessing creativity for business growth. Kogan Page.
Kant, I. (2004). The moral law (Groundwork of the metaphysic of morals). Routledge.
Laval, C. (2018). Foucault, Bourdieu et la question néolibérale [Foucault, Bourdieu and the neoliberal question]. La découverte.
Levin, B. (1998). An epidemic of education policy: (What) can we learn from each other? Comparative Education, 34(2), 131–141.
MacIntyre, A. (1964). Against utilitarianism. In T. H. B. Hollins (Ed.), Aims in Education. The Philosophical Approach. Manchester University Press.
Manifesto for creativity and innovation in Europe. (2009). European Commission - IP/09/1702 12/11/2009. P. 1.
Moore, G. E. (1912). Ethics. Williams and Norgate.
Ross, D. (2002). The right and the good. Clarendon Press.
Schumpeter, J. A. (1942/1962). Capitalism, socialism and democracy. Harper.
Tatarkiewicz, W. (1980). A history of six ideas: An essay in aesthetics. Nijhoff.
Von Wright, G. H. (1971). Explanation and understanding. Cornell University Press.
White, J. (1982). The aims of education restated. Routledge and Kegan Paul.
Zimmerman, M. J. (2010). Intrinsic vs. extrinsic value. In E. N. Zalta (Ed.), The Stanford encyclopaedia of philosophy (Winter ed). http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/win2010/entries/value-intrinsic-extrinsic/
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
- Authors are confirming that they are the authors of the submitted article, which will be published online in the Center for Educational Policy Studies Journal (for short: CEPS Journal) by University of Ljubljana Press (University of Ljubljana, Faculty of Education, Kardeljeva ploščad 16, 1000 Ljubljana, Slovenia). The Author’s/Authors’ name(s) will be evident in the article in the journal. All decisions regarding layout and distribution of the work are in the hands of the publisher.
- The Authors guarantee that the work is their own original creation and does not infringe any statutory or common-law copyright or any proprietary right of any third party. In case of claims by third parties, authors commit themselves to defend the interests of the publisher, and shall cover any potential costs.
- Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/deed.en that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work.
