Evidence for the Dewey Discontinuity Hypothesis: A Rejoinder to Garrison

Abstract

In these remarks I address the three main criticisms Professor James Garrison raised about a thesis I presented in the August, 2001, issue of the Teachers College Record. Garrison begins his remarks with the comment that my argument, which demonstrates that Dewey underwent a dramatic midcareer shift in thinking, is “so stunning, so remarkable, that if true, it would transform Deweyan scholarship” ~2001, p. 723!. My goal, let me hasten to say, is much more modest than that. Progressive educators continue to view Dewey as being largely about child-initiated activity, which I think grossly underestimates the subtlety of the educational approach he developed in the second half of his career. ~This approach, I am now inclined to think, can perhaps best be characterized as that of “realist constructivism.” In this approach, the teacher helps the child perceive and label regularity in various disciplinary situations—that is, mathematical, scientific.! As I began to carefully examine Dewey’s writings on a number of subjects, it became clear to me that he had begun to entertain severe doubts about the process— induction—which had been a staple of his early advice to educators ~EW 5; MW 6!. Dewey, it became more and more evident, had undergone a major change in thinking sometime around 1915, altering his views not only about education but also about philosophy and psychology. I am not the first to note discontinuity in Dewey’s thinking from early to late, of course ~cf. Diggins, 1994; Edel & Flower, 1985!, although I may have developed this thesis more than others. The results of this reexamination of Dewey have been published in a number of journals; a piece that focuses specifically on changes in Dewey’s views of education, in fact, was published in the August 2000 issue of Teachers College Record. This work has been controversial. The response by Garrison, the focus of this rejoinder, is not the first that he and other critics have written to a piece I published about Dewey ~cf. 1996, pp. 213–24; 1999a; 1999b!; I am sure it will not be the last. I do want to point out that there is nothing personal in this disagreement. I have tremendous respect for Garrison as a scholar. That said, I do want to address the two main issues that Garrison raises with regard to the discontinuity theory. First, he takes exception to my statement that Dewey backed away from the notion that it is the frustration