Joanna Swann urges for a reform to not only the practice of all teachers but those who create legislation for a country’s education system in her works entitled ‘Learning, Teaching and Education Research in the 21^st Century‘. Her works indicate ‘An Evolutionary Analysis of the Role of Teachers‘ in her subtitle, and she offers this account by an in depth review of Karl Poppers evolutionary epistemology.  This philosophical account of learning provides the foundation of her own research stemming from her initiation into educational academia in the 1970’s to present day and has fostered questions about how learning takes places within the individual and how teachers can best facilitate these achievements.

Swann’s book is subdivided into three main sections: Part 1 entitled ‘Learning‘ is structured around the explanation of Poppers theories and the coordinated research which has followed that influenced Swann’s own research; Part 2 entitled ‘Encouraging Learning‘ begins to criticize mainstream public education systems and their structured curriculum, and instead offers accounts of ‘student-initiated curricula’ as an alternative; Part 3 entitled ‘Developing Teaching‘ is centered around how those within the education field can bring about the changes indicated in Part 2 and provides a link with Part 1 as the theory behind said development. Self-proclaimed that her book is for anyone who considers themselves a teacher, her book offers strong philosophical arguments without being technically overbearing for those without a philosophy background and explains all arguments in their most basic formality. Although many persons may be self-proclaimed teachers, this book is best geared towards those within education as a profession and less as a hobby or by product of being a parent.

The development of Swan’s philosophical interpretation of Popper’s work is thoroughly developed throughout this book. Concepts and ideas are revisited as they become relevant within the many chapters, and are used to provide fundamental arguments for the topics addressed. Swan indicates that a central concern within today’s education system is that many educationists have assumed that learning is a passive process, where information is directly transferred from the environment. Swan argues that this assumption is flawed, and instead insists that learning is an entirely subjective experience which does not take place because there’s a transfer of data from the environment. Instead, ‘[T]he learner’s response to an external stimulus is always one of interpretation’ (Pg. 21).  It is this internal interpretation which allows for the learner to see possible mismatches in expectations and proceed through problem-solving using trial and error elimination. Swann provides a full explanation of this argument and possible counter argument rebuttals in chapters two and three, as initially this idea to me seemed to go against the grain, for which Swann recognises with many of her readers. Upon considering her argument in full however, and reflecting on my own learning I have been persuaded to agree that my own learning has taken place internally, either consciously or unconsciously as she has indicated by trial and error elimination. However, Swann glides over an assumption of innate knowledge, specifically in chapter three: ‘An individual’s initial dispositions embody expectations and preferences that are inborn; they are part of its genetic make-up’ (Pg. 43). This assumption is not provided a full explanation either in possible counter arguments or philosophical research which I feel could improve the strength of Swann’s argument if offered. Her further development of empiricism and rationalism in Chapter nine would additionally support this argument if fully expanded to discuss the philosophical conflict of innate knowledge outlined in the many different research resources available from such philosophers.

‘Without desire there is no problem, and within out a problem there is no learning’ (Pg. 85).  Generally the public can empathize with both teachers, parents, and the students alike who complain that they don’t want to have to learn (teach) part of the curriculum due to a lack of interest in the topic. Swann states that learning does not take place where there is no desire to problem solve as indicated in the quote above and takes the extreme to suggest that students should have the capacity to decide what they want to learn in school, and the teachers should then provide a learning environment which offers such resources. However Swann places many different constraints are placed in this scenario, including for instance the teacher eliminating suggestions from students which are not possible within a classroom setting such as scuba diving. Swann not only taught at the primary level using this technique but suggests that it is the only way to create autonomous learners who will be able to take such life skills and use them essentially to change the world. She insists that national curriculum squanders creativity and oppresses its learners and teachers while also failing to provide an environment which will create lifelong learners and enquirers.  In the present educational systems, teachers are authoritarians who have students dependent on them and instead Swann wishes this relationship to be one where the teachers facilitates and encourages without being the person providing a structured lesson.

‘Students are dependent on teachers, who in turn are dependent on policy makers’ (Pg. 207). Swann recognizes that many present day teachers are working solely under the political constraints offered by the governments of education who restrict their freedom for such learning environments by insisting on prescribed learning agendas as with England’s National Curriculum. Swann offers four specific constraints which such educational institutions foster including: ‘inhibit activity, particularly autonomous activity that is exploratory, self-initiated and self-directed, discourage criticality and creativity, suppress desire and curtail the exercise of preference and generally limit opportunities for trial and error elimination’ (Pg. 101). As a secondary school teacher within England myself, these constraints are exactly the opposite of which I wish to provide in my classroom, however I do feel constrained by the curriculum requirements that I am required to provide. Swann recognizes these feelings throughout her work, and therefore offers solutions for teachers and educational institutions in Part 3 of her book. She offers a detailed outline of potential action research which can be initiated in order to help bring about the changes and progression of education which she has proposed in chapter ten, ‘Improving Our Practices as Teachers‘. Although I share Swann’s idealisms, the changes she’s requesting within our present education system require changes from a top-down initiative and she challenges these education regimes in chapters six and seven. Her aim comes across that further action research will help to initiate a change in these regimes which is best stated as: ‘What I have offered in this book is an argument about the nature of the improvement that is needed – in the way that teaching and formal learning are conceived – and I have provided some specific ideas as to how teachers can organize their teaching and conduct themselves with students, and how professional development for teachers can be effectively facilitated’ (Pg. 232).

© 2012 Cicely Alsbury

Cicely Alsbury has completed a B.Sc. Honours degree in Marine and Freshwater biology with a minor in nutrition, as well as a B.A.in philosophy from the University of Guelph, Ontario, Canada. She has recently completed an M.A. at the University of Hull, Yorkshire, U.K. Her philosophical interests concentrate on the evolution of computational thought processes, providing a link between studies in evolutionary biology with contemporary analytic theories of mind.