Philosophy for the children

The philosophy for the children is an innovative educational practice which seeks to develop the reflexive, creative and critical thought in the children of any age starting from democratic discussions and narrative handbooks within the teaching framework of a community of philosophical research. Created initially by Matthew Lipman, she experiences a world development. One can say that it constitutes today a current with whole share, with crossed Sciences of education, Philosophie and Pédagogie.

History and general information

Philosophy for children is not a more effective or simplified approach teaching traditional, external and frontal of philosophy. One does not present here a gallery of philosophers, with explanation of their works. On the contrary, philosophy for the children incarnates a new educational paradigm which wants to leave the experiment and designs the children, to learn how to them to think by a practice where they are brought to discover by themselves various elaborate reasoning. The goal is not to give to the children done everything answers, ready-with-thought, but to cause a questioning on their premises. It is not of a pedagogy of the answer, but about a pedagogy of the question.

The method consists of a debate on a philosophical question of range using stories, the heart of the method resting about a deliberation between children where the stimulating adult (teacher or intervening) has a role of guide and facilitator. By the meeting from the points of view and the confrontation of the argumentations, the children make the experiment of their thought, of that of the others and the nature of the discussion. To cause the philosophical debate, it is to allow a training by the practice of the democratic exchange.

Matthew Lipman is a philosopher and American pedagog. He is the creator and the principal developer of philosophy for the children since about thirty years. Its influence is world and all the experts, pedagogs or philosophers who make closely or by far of philosophy for the children all over the world claim of him or quote it like influences principal.

The model of Lipman was seen transposed to the Quebec, where it is applied abundantly and is the subject of many theoretical and practical productions, in particular by the researchers of the Université Laval, under the aegis of Michel Sasseville. Many other countries form also part of the IAPC (Institut for the advance of philosophy for children) of Lipman, and set up structures on the model and with patronage of Lipman.

The Lipman method

First of all professor of logic at the university, it is the first to try an initiation of the children to the thought logical and rational through a textual history intended to initiate the reflection (novel of philosophy for child, such the discovery of Harry Stottlemeier ), comes then the transformation from a group of children into a community of active research where one discusses and reflects together on the questions induced by the history in question (to create a co-operative group of research with a democratic operation). Then the meeting ends in suitable exercises relating to the episodes of the history which justified the ideological debate. Exercises which are intended to bring philosophical concepts that the children will be ready to receive ( teaching Guide ).

The whole is managed and followed by an teacher-organizer whose role is not to transmit knowledge to least educated but well rather to accompany the community and each child in their reflections, to the manner of a Socrate of group.

All the elements of the method function together and are answered the ones the others; they contribute all together to create a new school culture carrying the values of freedom and democracy.

A meeting proceeds in the following way:

# reading with high voice by the pupils, each one in his turn, of passages of a philosophical novel adapted to their level;

# raised by the group of the outstanding passages (each one can be expressed) and follows a “gathering” of the questions;

# discussion around one or several topics which they chose of investiguer, by supporting the argumentation and reformulation, the whole with the democratic values of listening and tolerance;

# after the discussion, even during this one, the organizer subjects the children to exercises resulting from the teaching Guide in order to reinforce the starters generated by the démocratico-philosophical debate.

Philosophical novels of Lipman

The philosophical novels are designed as “narrative handbooks” which present dynamic and alive reflections in the form of stories adapted to the level and the tastes of the children. The goal is to preserve and arouse the interest of the children, which only is able to bring them to an active participation and volunteer. The stories have this capacity of astonishment. The narrative handbooks are thus opposed to the traditional school handbooks which present science already completed and ready to be learned, and which rejects any relationship with accounts adapted to the children under the pretext that they are only imagined stories, and who are thus not scientifically valid.

These novels are used as model, in the direction where they introduce children seeking, to put questions. The pupils of the classes form them also a community of research, intended to reflect starting from the problems arising in the novel. The novels are used as releases of the questioning.

There exist several novels, each one approaching of the problems adapted to the level of each age.

Presupposed theoretical

The method of Lipman rests on the presupposed following ones:

the development and the emulation of the reflexive thought is good for the individuals of any age, and a fortiori for the children (of which the open-minded “was not damaged yet”);
the child is by nature a thinker who has theories (more or less naive);
any education must leave the child, of his subjectivity, to then lead it to develop its thought, by discovering, by the practice, the joys of logic and the scientific research;
the intersubjective activity of the dialog is a determining factor which makes it possible to call in question its thoughts and to confront them with the others in order to test the validity of it and which of this fact makes it possible to found a practice of the democracy;
the child is able to become a researcher answering the criteria of scientific rationality, and that is far from being a coquettery: is needed that the children discovers, includes/understands and uses the development processes of the knowledge because thus they develop their cognitive skills and they learn better classifies some, if not one continues to lock up them in a system which gives the illusion which knowledge are eternal truths that one cannot call in question, and which the knowledge consists in learning “by heart” from such truths.

Philosophy for the children in France

In France, even if the Lipman method is an asserted influence, each one was inspired some freely to feed its own theories and teaching practices. Research multiplied these ten last years in the field of didactic of the training of philosophizing. The didacticians lean in particular on the concrete methods of implementation of this training with enfants.
Two French-speaking research teams brought new prospects: the AGORA group with the University of Montpellier, around Michel Tozzi, and groups it AGSAS of the Université of Geneva, with Jacques Levine as principal craftsman. Just like the Lipman method, these currents agree to propose a practice of philosophy via the discussion, unlike the practice of philosophy to the college and the university which is carried out through the texts and of the great authors.

The practice of the philosophical discussion at the school is carried out today according to a large variety of devices, which diverge appreciably on the roles from the Master and the pupils or over the time devoted to the discussion for example.

The discussion in democratic matter

The characteristic of this device lies in the fact that the pupils are managers of their own word. This model originates in work of Alain Delsol, whose the current is inspired by Michel Tozzi, which recommended to give responsibilities to the children during the debate. Thus, four main roles can be held:

the Chairman : he does not intervene on the bottom of the debate, his role consists in managing the good behavior of it. It is charged democratically to distribute the word in the group, according to explicit rules. It takes care of calm, listening and the mutual respect: it is appropriate for that nobody cuts the word, does not applaud or moque.
the organizer : it is charged to point out the rules of the discussion so necessary (each one its turn, everyone is entitled to the word, that which did not speak yet is priority). The organizer with the delicate load to make emerge stakes of the question while presenting in what it deserves reflection, which approaches a problematization. It is also responsible for the quality of the argumentation, for that it can challenge the participants while asking to justify a position, to specify an assertion or to answer a divergent point of view which would be exprimé.
the reformulator : its role is to build direction in a debate which can tend to leave in several directions. The reformulator thus connects the interventions between them, to show in what they are answered, contradicts himself or is supplemented. He creates also bond between the contents of the interventions and the put question, in the objective to allow a progression of the idées.
the synthetizer : its role consists in giving a progress report on the evolution of the debate. It thus does not intervene in the discussion in order to be able to listen to all the participants and to keep a trace of their thought. The restitution of the exchanged remarks can be simple, while being satisfied to repeat what was known as in the chronological order. It can however be very complex, the synthetizer retaining only essence compared to the topic of départ.

These roles, which are of course not all essential, can be held by several people at the same time in order to facilitate the task. Because of their complexity, they are to be tested gradually. It is initially the Master who endorses the roles, before progressively delegating his functions to the pupils, by taking care to explain the prerogatives of each one. In the debate, discussing them can be accompanied by observing. The discussion is followed of an analysis a posteriori, which leaves a space of word to observing to be able to express what they noted.

The workshop of group

In this method developed by Anne Lalanne, the children learn how to philosophize, via the adult, according to three directions: technique of the debate, the democratic values (equal rights with respect to the word, respect of the other participants…) and intellectual requirements of philosophy (conceptualization, problematization and argumentation). The adult is guaranteeing compliance with the operating rules of the debate, which are known of all. He organizes the debate by raising questions and by ensuring the distribution of the word. He makes it possible the group to progress in the reflection by reformulating the ideas and by recalling the conceptual advance of the débat.
In the history of philosophy, this type of debate includes the principle of the Maïeutique which indicates the method by which Socrate said “to be confined” the spirits of the thoughts that they contain, without the knowledge.

The workshop philosophy

This device, otherwise called the protocol “I is another”, was thought by Jacques Levine and his group of research on the basis of projection of the Psychanalyse. The workshop philosophy is the protocol in which the guidance of the adult is marked the least. By the ideological debate with the other, the pupils are brought to discover the concepts and their clean pensée.
To the starting of the workshop, the adult gives only one question. The children exchange then between them, during ten minutes, while the adult remains quiet. This exchange is filmed or, failing this, is recorded. The class immediately listens to or views the recording after and can thus revive the course of the debate. Ten minutes of discussion follow, during which the teacher accompanies the reactions by the group.

The goûters philosophy

This experiment is declined in a series with the Milan editions directed by Brigitte Labbé and Michel Puech. These books, some also existing out of audio CD, encourage the children to reflect on broad topics on which they interrogent.
The principle is the following: there is to drink and to eat, the pupils sat by ground in circle, they settle as they want and speak thus more freely. It is advised not to be more than 10 people to ensure the good behavior of the debate. Either everyone agreed to speak about a precise subject, or somebody is charged to propose several subjects. In this case, each one reflects to decide which subject it prefers, then each one votes for the subject which it chose. The subject which collects the most voice becomes the subject of the debate. The total duration is of approximately an hour.

Handing-over in question teaching and political

In Pedagogy of the Philosophy, one generally considers whom the teaching of philosophy necessarily passes by the study of text of Philosophe S. what the professor seeks to make is to return the access to the philosophical texts (sometimes strong difficult) easier with his pupils. However, in the approach of philosophy for the children, even if there is a passage by the text (shared reading of the novels of Lipman for example), it is not the same thing as to try to teach to read texts of philosophers. The basic problem is here to know so to teach to philosophize, it is necessarily necessary to teach a philosophical culture or not (major great authors, works, confrontations with their texts and appropriations of their concepts).

Philosophy for the children would thus make sting at the horizon in France deep and total reconsideration of the teaching of philosophy in the school course, but also in the general opinion. Philosophy for the children and his growing popularity would rest the question of presupposed of the teaching of philosophy: the arguments of “philosophy like crowning of the studies”, or of intellectual maturity necessary would fall to water, involving with them a certain Establishment of philosophy.

But the handing-over in allegedly extreme question that philosophy for the children would bring would not limit that to the teaching of philosophy in France, it would extend to all education in Occident and would reinterrogate (as many educational models progressists would have done it in the history) its bases and its justifications. It would represent one énième handing-over in question of weight insofar as it would be incarnated in a practice with the encouraging results.

Random links: