Premium
Indirect Learning and the Aims‐Curricula Fallacy
Author(s) -
ADLER JONATHAN E.
Publication year - 1993
Publication title -
journal of philosophy of education
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.501
H-Index - 41
eISSN - 1467-9752
pISSN - 0309-8249
DOI - 10.1111/j.1467-9752.1993.tb00657.x
Subject(s) - fallacy , curriculum , epistemology , ideal (ethics) , inference , critical thinking , realization (probability) , philosophy of education , pedagogy , mathematics education , sociology , psychology , philosophy , higher education , political science , mathematics , law , statistics
I have two main theses. The first is that the inference from accepting an educational aim, especially an ideal aim such as self‐realization or critical thinking, to a conclusion as to the content or structure of a curriculum is fallacious. The first thesis should not be controversial. But even if so, the aims‐curricula fallacy is readily committed, and that calls for explanation. My second thesis is that the aims–curricula fallacy is often committed because the possibilities for realizing educational aims through indirect methods or learning is ignored.