Interaction of Philosophy Education with Teaching and Learning

Philosophy of education as an exceptional region of logical work showed up in the twentieth century in English-talking nations and, as a matter of first importance, in the USA. Inspirational work of J. Dewey (1859-1952) stimulated the acceptance of "philosophy of education" as mandatory measurement of competent and responsible practice in education. Before Dewey no one had been demonstrating so hard the need of teaching practice dependent on philosophical standards. None of the scholars when he finished such huge numbers of works dedicated to education (more than 40 books and 800 articles). Subsequently, an idea showed up in the English-talking world that practicing educators should utilize educational philosophy as potential reason for the entire of educational idea and practice. As indicated by B.M. Bim-Bad, a standout amongst the most significant occasions in reasonable exercises was the emergence of the Department of Cultural Extension in Brazil. It was established by P. Freire, rationalist and education practitioner. Gatherings of social augmentation were framed inside the extent of the Department, the education was deliberate, class-and-exercise framework was surrendered and illustrative strategy was supplanted by exchange, while educator turned into a facilitator of understudies' joint work. Initially, it had been gone for grown-ups and absence of education destruction, however Freire's philosophy before long discovered wide use in pre-ever more elevated education and later reached out over general education school. Since 1980s Freire's philosophy, converging with long and all around tested project-based learning and J. Dewey's philosophy lying at its heart, has discovered wide use in designing and management education in Europe and the USA, particularly in corporate education of the last mentioned. Therefore, as B.M. Bim-Bad notes, philosophy of education, which starts and finishes with practice, has achieved general education school under the name of Service Learning. Administration Learning is a free instructional class, inside the extent of which reasonable aptitudes, nuts and bolts of social project planning and direct of social occasions are educated. A few contemporary scholars of education, drawing on crafted by MacIntyre and others in the Aristotelian custom, have explored the complex connection among theory and practice and its implications for our field. Strikingly, Wilfred Carr has created at some length the case that we are mixed up in understanding philosophy of education as being concerned with hypothetical learning as particular from practice, contending that inquiries regarding the rationale of educational theory can't be examined in isolation from inquiries concerning the rationale of practice. As a result, he proposes, 'every single educational theory are theories of theory and theories of practice' (Carr 1995, p. 41). There is, clearly, a sense in which, as educators of philosophy, our practice is interlaced with theory and with 'theory of theory'. In the accompanying talk, in any case, I need to recommend that these discussions can be improved by thinking about a portion of the more close to home, maybe full of feeling, measurements of doing and teaching philosophy. I will explore a few issues associated with the teaching of philosophy in an advanced education context, drawing on the idea that this practice makes a reflective (and reflexive) space in which to interrogate suspicions concerning

I will allude to as the topic of philosophical style, can improve our practice and contribute to our comprehension of these issues.

In the summary of the Strands or sub-disciplines which structure philosophical inquiry. The initial two strands ask what savants call fundamental inquiries. The two strands are (1) power, or put another way, the nature of things, the distinction between the manner in which things seem, by all accounts, to be (e.g., a street surface may look wet from a separation on a hot day) and the manner in which they truly are (the street is really dry); and (2) epistemology, or thinking about things. We can't emphasize enough that remembering the philosophical language isn't the point of this activity, albeit one ought not fear utilizing the language of the logician. All things considered, as educators we have turned out to be acquainted with utilizing the language of education and uninhibitedly use terms, for example, "instructional method," and "educational modules," terms that might not be so familiar to others outside of the discipline of education. Each discipline has its very own wording that is specific to that discipline. All things considered, for our purposes the expression to one side of the colon is the thing that we will focus on. When we take part in the practice of philosophical inquiry, and we propound a specific view, so as to safeguard this position we present arguments planned to help this view. The undertaking of reasoning about philosophical issues is known as logic. Logic is the branch or sub-discipline of philosophy that involves the development and evaluation of arguments. Logic can be said to be procedural, as it deals with the guidelines and techniques that underlie inquiry. We can, be that as it may, pose philosophical inquiries about logic itself, e.g., What is truth?, Is information identified with truth or deception? Additionally, logic, as instructed in colleges, involves basically formal reasoning. Be that as it may, the practice of philosophy in the study hall deals more with logical results and attracting consideration regarding reasoning devices as a way to promote quality thinking and deep learning. It is the last mentioned, or procedural contemplations, that we will be concerned with here.

One clear manner by which our situation as logicians of education who additionally instructs philosophy of education places uncommon demands on us is, without a doubt, which we remain in a remarkably basic position towards the literature on teaching in advanced education. There has been an expansion speakers and the prerequisite that they think about their teaching in terms of guidelines, points and results. Henceforth we currently have courses, for example, the Professional Certificate in Teaching and Learning in Higher and Professional Education, which, from 2007, will be a required qualification for all new university speakers. The Higher Education Academy, which accredits these courses, is concerned to 'develop national expert guidelines in teaching and learning in advanced education' (see http://www.heacademy.ac.uk/), and the required modules for this certificate center around zones, for example, 'Improving Lecturing', 'Designing Courses and Curricula' and 'Appraisal' and lay incredible accentuation on improving understudies' learning background by articulating clear points and results for classes, planning sessions, developing introduction skills and designing evaluation processes. The literature which supports this approach and the managerial language which supports it and which is evident at all dimensions of advanced education has just been criticized by a few scholars (see for instance Standish 1997; Smith 1999, 2001). As these investigates delineate, for scholars of education, the literature on teaching in advanced education can't be essentially an apparatus to use in our expert practice, however is unavoidably part of the topic of our own examination advantages. The managerial culture and language, and the manner in which it has penetrated advanced education, has been legitimately criticized for its inclination to concentrate on controllable results which generally rule out spontaneity and the energy of the educational encounter (see Standish 1997). Numerous savants would contend that this culture is especially ill-suited to the investigation of philosophy, which isn't basically about obtaining knowledge, skills, or notwithstanding seeing, however has to do with encountering a specific method for doing and thinking. In spite of the fact that journalists in the field of teaching in advanced education continually emphasize the point that 'the most significant point in assessing the educational process isn't what educators attempt to instruct, however what students really prevail with regards to learning' (Gooday 2002, p. 144), logicians may feel that the attention on 'what understudies will/ought to learn' darkens the point that in truth we are progressively concerned with empowering understudies to encounter what it resembles to ponder a specific issue, or, ideally, to 'do' philosophy. The conception of education suggested by a significant part of the literature on teaching and learning in advanced education appears to represent the sort of frame of mind in which, as Standish says (1997, p. 453), 'spontaneity, imagination and the encounter with the obscure are

those recommended by Ramsden (2003) and different authors in the field, is without a doubt one which tries to limit an 'encounter with the obscure'. To put it plainly, as commentators of the current trend for formalizing the process of advanced education teaching have called attention to, the individuals who contend, with Ramsden, that 'in the frontal area is the thing that understudies are relied upon to learn and how they approach learning it… ' (Ramsden 2003, p. 120) are probably going to ignore basic parts of the educational encounter.

I think learning and teaching are inseparable deep rooted adventures. This voyage isn't constrained to study hall setting; however it is likewise gotten down to business by different wellsprings of learning, including social communication. It is significant that one should accept all the open doors of learning genuinely and accomplish maximum utility. I additionally take the teaching learning process as a two way process where the two understudies and instructors adapt together and become together. To serve the teaching and learning relationship better, I consider interest as an advantage for create knowledge and which requires addressing. Addressing skills of both the student and the educator assume a significant role in improving critical thinking among understudies. This will serve as a foundation of the learning process and develops the skills of reasoning. Posing Inquiries provoke intrigue, stimulate profundity thinking, and permit intellectual focus. Reflecting upon this announcement I have confidence in my teaching philosophy that knowledge ought to be changed into understudies such that empower them to end up critical scholars as opposed to repetition students. Moreover, I trust that teaching isn't a science that has a foreordained equation that fits into all understudies in each situation. Subsequently, I think about that learning project ought to be organized dependent on two things. One is the substance that will be instructed and another is understudy learning style. This is in accordance with the Gardner's Multiple Intelligences Theory, whereby there are different manners by which knowledge can be picked up and learning can be maximized. The diverse knowledge. Individuals effectively realize what promptly enamors their imagination. Also, understudies gain proficiency with an extraordinary arrangement when they are united into argumentative dialogs, for example, banter, controversy issues, and case situations. This will assist them with building up their legitimization skills and give a chance to benefit multifaceted knowledge. For instance, if an educator is utilizing the blend of customary addresses with understudy banter, the understudy will gain from the instructor just as from different understudies. Through this, they will likewise take in ideas from different points of view. Along these lines, this multifaceted approach will make positive learning condition for every one of the understudies. Also, as an understudy, I have taken that learning isn't significantly reliant on the substance conveyance; however it requires an extensive and exhaustive planning. I concur with the perspectives on Bastable that the activity plan is basic for the achievement of objectives and targets. A decent planning means to keep the student and educator focused, accomplish these objectives inside the time allotment and give maximum utility for example learning as a result. The means of educational planning cycle incorporate appraisal, plan, actualize and assess. In education, the initial step i.e., appraisal is the process of social affair data from diverse sources with respect to what understudies definitely know and what they have to know. Second step i.e., planning, incorporates the development of appropriate objectives and destinations applicable to dimension of understudies. Usage, the third step, is to place arrangement without hesitation or execution. In conclusion, evaluation is the significant piece of planning cycle that incorporates recognizable proof of students' qualities and shortcomings and estimating results. The blend of various developmental and summative appraisals must be wanted to gauge the accomplishment of learning results of students.

Dewey's ideas reflect the effects of new the industrialized colonized society, laden with the issues and aftermaths of two World Wars. Dewey was to a great extent inspired by Marx's theory of social battle and struggle between classes. Marx's theory of contention is that the society is stratified and layered with various strata and there is a challenge inside these diverse classes. Marx focuses on that social investigation should focus on class structure and relations. Dewey had a motivation from Habermas' considerations, which are in the conventions of Kant, and emphasize the role of education to change the world into a progressively altruistic, just, and populist society. His compositions on democracy and

through making revisions in the financial wrongs and by getting political closures that would prompt movement of a society. Subsequently, education for Dewey is the culmination of his political ideas. The molding of a society in which the basic merchandise, among which are the knowledge and social insight, are appropriated reasonably among all who partake in that society (Berding, 1997). Foundation of progressive schools in the eighteenth century was a push to liberate customary schools' arrangement of education, and essentially to encourage the intellectual development of a tyke. In any case, Dewey was critical about these progressive schools on the reason that freedom alone was no arrangement; learning needs, a structure and request must be founded on an unmistakable theory of experience, not just the impulse of instructors or understudies. Then again, Rousseau, and later Pestalozzi, Froebel and other educational scholars trusted that a tyke resembled a seed and in the event that they were left to feed and support normally, they would normally bear blooms and natural products. In Democracy and Education (1916), Dewey obviously expresses that the procedure of teaching prompts the purpose of teaching. As teaching and learning is instructive; along these lines, the topic ought to be arranged in compelling ways. He obviously expresses, "The topic of the student isn't … indistinguishable with the defined, the solidified, and systematized topic of the grown-up" (p. 190). The topic alone isn't an assurance of learning and development; rather, the educator should design and interface the topic to the understudies, keeping in thought the necessities, wants, premiums, and subjective development of the understudies, as he appears 'By the way We Think'. Dewey's principle concern was dissimilarity between the encounters of tyke and the sort of ideas forced upon him. He trusted that this hole controls a youngster's common encounters and capacities, compelling him to pursue the manages of a formal education. Dewey is similarly critical of the progressive education which forces ideas, for example, the privilege of free articulation or free action as these precepts of education additionally force ideas upon a kid. Dewey was deeply inspired by the vision of a liberal free society and understood the squeezing need of freedom and equality, emancipation from social limits to liberate individual and society from the structures of intensity.

Notwithstanding when reflection is utilized as a vehicle for veritable educator development, it is regularly observed as an end in itself, detached to instructors. Kemmis (1985) has contended that reflection is definitely a political demonstration that either rushes or concedes the acknowledgment of an increasingly compassionate, just and fair society. All teaching activities have an assortment of results which incorporate (1) individual outcomes the impacts of teaching on understudies' social and enthusiastic development and social connections; (2) scholarly outcomes the impacts of teaching on understudies' intellectual development; and (3) political results the total impacts of school involvement on understudies' life possibilities. In my view, reflective instructor education needs to address these measurements, and it ought not be bolstered except if it makes a commitment to the creation of a superior society for everybody's kids. I don't get this' meaning in functional terms for those of us who get ready educators? Initially, we have to perceive that reflection without anyone else implies practically nothing. All instructors are reflective in some sense. It is imperative to think about what we need educators to reflect about and how. Various distinctive theoretical systems have been developed throughout the years in a few nations to portray diverse approaches to characterize the focus and quality of reflection. Interfacing instructor reflection to the battle for social equity that exists in all nations today does not mean just focusing on the political aspects of teaching. Educators need to know the scholarly topic they are responsible for teaching and how to change it to associate with what understudies' as of now know to promote more noteworthy comprehension. They have to realize how to find out about their understudies what they know and can do, and the social assets that they convey to the homeroom. Educators likewise need to realize how to clarify complex ideas, lead talks, how to evaluate understudy learning, deal with a study hall and numerous different things. Interfacing instructor reflection to the battle for social equity implies that notwithstanding ensuring that educators have the substance and educational foundation expected to instruct in a manner that promotes understudy understanding (dismissing a transmission model of teaching that just promotes repetition reiteration), we have to guarantee that instructors realize how to settle on choices once a day that don't superfluously constrain the existence odds of their students, that they settle on choices in their work with more noteworthy awareness of the potential political results of the diverse decisions that they make. While education activities by instructors inside schools clearly can't take care of societal issues independent from anyone else, they can contribute

teaching can never be neutral. Educators must act with more prominent political clarity about whose interests are served by their day by day activities. They will be unable to change a few aspects of the circumstance at present, yet in any event they will know about what's going on.

As opposed to what we discovered in regards to instructors' PC use, there are not many contrasts in the teaching practices of Professionally Engaged Teachers who work in high-SES and low-SES settings. In the two cases, they are significantly more constructivist than different instructors. This is valid as for the dynamic learning procedures, for example, bunch work and understudy projects and furthermore as for psychologically testing instructional practices. There is a tendency for Professionally Engaged Teachers to have more constructivist teaching theories in high-SES schools than in low-SES schools, however in terms of actual teaching practices; their constructivism is practically unclear between the two altogether different financial settings. The discoveries in this section can be summarized in the accompanying manner: Despite the way that exemplary utilization of PCs is firmly connected with constructivist convictions and teaching practices, and in spite of the way that, over all SES settings, Professionally Engaged Teachers are significantly more likely than different instructors to hold constructivist convictions and to utilize constructivist teaching practices, just in the higher-SES schools do Professionally Engaged Teachers utilize PC assets. This distinction seems, by all accounts, to be basically the aftereffect of low dimensions of access to PC advances in low-SES school settings– they are less present all through the school, preparing and support for PC utilize is less accessible, and the two educators and understudies are more averse to have PCs at home. In the meantime, for educators who are not expertly drawn in, having more school and home PC assets (i.e., the circumstance in high-SES schools) does not convert into more elevated amounts of Exemplary Computer Use. PC assets are helpful just when there is an instructional method that warrants their utilization, and Private Practice Teachers, as we have seen, are considerably less likely than different educators to have the essential academic perspective and to utilize the sorts of instructional methodologies that would make PC assets profitable to their practice. This proposes a reasonable partition is as much an issue in our wealthier schools similar to the advanced gap for more unfortunate schools. Right off the bat, it appears to be reasonable to expect that on the off chance that there are contrasts in style in philosophy educators, at that point, clearly, there are contrasts in style in philosophy understudies, and that in the event that I happen to be a 'for example scholar', I am probably going to relate better to understudies who are 'for example understudies' than the individuals who are 'for example understudies'. In spite of the fact that, as I have stated, these distinctions should be developed further, it seems, based on my own teaching background, that there are comparable contrasts in style among understudies. In a typical college class, this may not pose an extraordinary issue, as understudies examining philosophy are probably going to be exposed to a scope of educators with various temperaments and styles. Singular understudies will likely respond preferable to specific educators over to other people. We could, in this manner, expect a kind of implicit division of work among ourselves with regards to rational style, trusting that things will adjust at last for the understudies. In any case, a significant number of us who instruct philosophy of education in Education Departments are teaching understudies who have not had any methodical preparing in philosophy, and frequently our course is the main philosophical one they visit. This point is by all accounts bolstered by my very own reflections on my teaching practice. What I am aware of here isn't just my natural need to build precedents that get over a point instead of to explain the structure and implications of the point, however my own feelings about the material I am teaching. Along these lines, to utilize a classic case, Plato's likeness of the cavern, which I frequently use with my education understudies, is a conspicuous possibility for a 'for example logician'. Be that as it may, Plato, of course, had a complex philosophical framework, just mostly reflected in the plan of this comparison. However while talking about the illustration of the cavern with understudies, what strikes me is that, by and by, I find examining the actual analogy the model more intriguing and energizing than spelling out the issues it involves. The understudies I instruct are doing research degrees in education, from a wide scope of disciplinary viewpoints and professional foundations, and I generally solicit them toward the start from my course (which frames some portion of the center research preparing program), if any of them have contemplated any philosophy previously. However, regardless of whether understudies have any prior philosophical experience, and the degree of this experience or knowledge, does not appear, episodically, to have much effect to the quality of our dialog. There appear to be dependably to be a few

of effect to my ability to disclose things to them, yet what I respond to most powerfully, as an instructor and as a rationalist, is that initial sparkle. The understudies I instruct are doing research degrees in education, from a wide scope of disciplinary viewpoints and professional foundations, and I generally solicit them toward the start from my course (which frames some portion of the center research preparing program), if any of them have examined any philosophy previously. Be that as it may, regardless of whether understudies have any prior philosophical experience, and the degree of this experience or knowledge, does not appear, episodically, to have much effect to the quality of our talk. There appear to be dependably to be a few people who, maybe by temperament, will 'get it', while others don't. The presence of any prior knowledge on their part will unquestionably have any kind of effect to my ability to disclose things to them, yet what I respond to most powerfully, as an educator and as a savant, is that initial flash. So also, my very own experience proposes that even before being accepted into one or other of the 'analytic' or 'continental' approaches and custom, or notwithstanding monitoring the strains between them, numerous understudies appear to show natural temperamental contrasts in identifying with philosophy. Despite the fact that, as I stated, the connection between temperamental elements and distinctive philosophical conventions likely merits further investigation, what premiums me here is the role of philosophical temperament and style in teaching. One positive proposal emerging from this discourse is that we should know about our very own philosophical temperament and style, and to ponder why and how we identify with certain philosophical ideas and how we convey them in our teaching. In any case, if, as I recommend, this isn't just an issue of academic technique, however is personally associated with our feeling of our identity, there might be little we can or ought to do to transform it. Of course we can, as referenced above, endeavor to give definitions regardless of whether we are 'for example logicians', and look for appropriate precedents regardless of whether we are 'for example logicians'. Yet, this does not change the way that there might be fundamental contrasts of temperament which keep running far deeper than inquiries of methodology.

This investigation uncovered the powerful teaching strategies, prerequisites and boundaries in Iranian Higher Education. Educators taking an interest in this investigation trusted that teaching and learning in advanced education must connect with the understudies in scrutinizing their assumptions and their models of how the world functions, so they can achieve a more elevated amount of comprehension. They trusted that to develop effective individuals to manage the difficulties in advancing the society, most developed nations are endeavoring to utilize new teaching techniques in advanced education. Every one of these strategies is understudy focused and are the consequence of significant projects. Research led by Momeni Danaei and associates likewise demonstrated that utilizing a mix of different teaching strategies together will prompt progressively compelling learning while at the same time actualizing only one teaching model can't adequately promote learning (10). Be that as it may, in light of the employee's encounters, powerful teaching strategies in advanced education have a few necessities and hindrances. In this investigation, hindrances as per codes were partitioned two noteworthy classes: educator related obstructions and guideline related ones; thus, the total utilization of these strategies is beyond the realm of imagination. In any case, instructors who know about the need of drawing in the understudy for a superior comprehension of their substance attempt to utilize this strategy as a blend that is class discourse introduction and including understudies in teaching and learning.

The led examination of the literature concerning the issue of the research permitted to reach the accompanying inference: we are certain that any school subject, just as methods of teaching it, are parts of the philosophy of education and are, correspondingly, founded on unique methodology. All things considered, methodology and methods of a specific subject ought to be, most importantly, developed in real life, inside the practice of specific observations and studies itself, and not simply through hypothetical development of methods. Consequently, philosophy of education in its new understanding isn't just hypothetical cognizance of foundations and manifestations of educational process, yet additionally practice, direct implementation of hypothetical educational basis into regular daily existence. Philosophy of education does not simply rely upon the evolvement of social philosophy (and philosophy in general), it likewise executes built up philosophical (world view) standards in different educational practices through its strategies. Despite the fact that Dewey's multitudinous works and commitments are in education, governmental issues, humanism, logic, and style, given the constrained extent of this paper the focus has been Dewey's educational philosophy

Summing up the remarkable works and ideas of John Dewey was a difficult assignment. In his long satisfying vocation in education, Dewey realized progressive reorganizations in educational philosophy, approaches, and teaching methods. Basically, with the tyke as the focal point of education, Dewey's philosophical ideology focuses on the development of youngster who is a valuable individual from society; a society which has faith in value and freedom, practices democratic characteristics and ideals. There have been pedagogical and practical challenges looked by the practitioners in applying Dewey' approach to education. The most significant analysis is his absence of clarity regarding how to set up frameworks that can see through the initiation of ideas to the finish of the encounters, to measure the development and development, and to design, and plan educational modules unmistakably. Be that as it may, given every one of these protests it can't be denied that John Dewey stays one of the spearheading figures of contemporary educationists, who left a rich trail of researchers and educationists, who continually examine the methods and theories of education introduced by him and add significantly to his collection of knowledge.

1. Chapayev N. K. (2013). Filosofiya i istoriya obrazovaniya [Philosophy and history of education]. M.: Publishing house: Academia. 2. Woods, R.G. & Barrow, R. (2006). An introduction to the philosophy of education. London: Methuen. 3. Anderson A. (2012). The European project semester: A useful teaching method in engineering education project approaches to learning in engineering education. Journal of Engineering Education. 2012; 8: pp. 15-28. 4. Aghamolaei T, Shirazi M, Dadgaran I, Shahsavari H, Ghanbarnezhad A. (2014). Health students‘ expectations of the ideal educational environment: a qualitative research. Journal of Advances in Medical Education and Professionalism. 2014; 2(4): pp. 151-7. 5. Faghihi S.A., Khankeh H.R., Hossini S.J., Arabshahi S.K.S., Faghihi Z., Parikh S.V., et. al. (2016). Improving continuing medical education by enhancing interactivity: lessons from Iran. Journal of Advances in Medical Education & Professionalism. 2016; 4(2): pp. 54. teaching would be better; cooperative or lecture. Iranian Journal of Medical Education. 2010; 11(1): pp. 24-31. Persian. 7. Zarshenas L, Momeni Danaei Sh, Oshagh M, Salehi P. (2010). Problem based learning: an experience of a new educational method in dentistry. Iranian Journal of Medical Education. 10(2): pp. 171-9. Persian 8. Klug J., Bruder S., Kelava A., Spiel C., Schmitz B. (2013). Diagnostic competence of teachers: A process model that accounts for diagnosing learning behavior tested by means of a case scenario. Teaching and Teacher Education. 2013; 30: pp. 38-46. 9. Choi D.G. & Vries H.J. (2011). Standardization as emerging content in technology education. International Journal of Technology and Design Education. 2011; 21(1), pp. 111–35. 10. Mart, C.T. (2014). A Passionate Teacher: Teacher Commitment and Dedication to Student Learning. International Journal of Academic Research in Progressive Education and Development, 2, pp. 437-442. 11. Brophy, J. (2004). Motivating Students to Learn. 2nd Edition, Erlbaum, Mahwah. 12. Kocoska, J. (2009). The Student Position in Democratic Classroom. Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences, 1, pp. 2429-2431. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2009.01.427

Associate Professor & HOD, Department of Education, Harlal Institute of Management & Technology, Geater Noida, Uttar Pradesh sandygandhar2020@gmail.com