Do the Unexpected! Why Deweyan Educators Should Be Pluralists about Political Tactics and Strategies<sup>†</sup>

Abstract How should Deweyan educators teach their students about engaging in efforts to bring about social change in a political context marked by polarization, power differentials, and oppression? In this article, Joshua Forstenzer argues that Deweyan educators must encourage their students to engage in pluralistic and creative experiments rather than teach a pre‐set model for social change. To this end, he engages with two critiques: one formulated by Lee Benson, Ira Harkavy, and John Puckett according to which Dewey's pedagogic vision failed to be sufficiently practically minded; the other formulated by Aaron Schutz — drawing on Saul Alinsky's theory of community organizing — according to which Deweyan educators fail to be meaningfully politically minded, because their democratic faith blinds them to the role of conflict in real politics. In response, this article argues that the Deweyan outlook is closer to Alinsky's than Schutz assumes and that it demands that we Deweyan educators introduce our students to a rich diversity of voices and traditions that address the concrete conditions of social change to provide our students with a fullness of civic experiences, as well as a depth of political and social ideas to challenge the status quo.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Educational Theory
Published
2025-03-19
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1111/edth.70006
Primary Topic
Pragmatism in Philosophy and Education
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Do the Unexpected! Why Deweyan Educators Should Be Pluralists about Political Tactics and Strategies†

Joshua Forstenzer
Educational Theory
Pragmatism in Philosophy and Education
article

Do the Unexpected! Why Deweyan Educators Should Be Pluralists about Political Tactics and Strategies†

Joshua Forstenzer
article en

Abstract

Abstract How should Deweyan educators teach their students about engaging in efforts to bring about social change in a political context marked by polarization, power differentials, and oppression? In this article, Joshua Forstenzer argues that Deweyan educators must encourage their students to engage in pluralistic and creative experiments rather than teach a pre‐set model for social change. To this end, he engages with two critiques: one formulated by Lee Benson, Ira Harkavy, and John Puckett according to which Dewey's pedagogic vision failed to be sufficiently practically minded; the other formulated by Aaron Schutz — drawing on Saul Alinsky's theory of community organizing — according to which Deweyan educators fail to be meaningfully politically minded, because their democratic faith blinds them to the role of conflict in real politics. In response, this article argues that the Deweyan outlook is closer to Alinsky's than Schutz assumes and that it demands that we Deweyan educators introduce our students to a rich diversity of voices and traditions that address the concrete conditions of social change to provide our students with a fullness of civic experiences, as well as a depth of political and social ideas to challenge the status quo.

Educational TheoryVol. 75(2)
University of the Humanities (MN), University of Sheffield (GB)
Openalex Percentile: Top 94%
Pragmatism in Philosophy and Education
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.