40

Li, America’s Philosophy for Children Teaching Method and the Improvement of Children’s Character

America’s Philosophy forChildren Teaching Method andthe Improvement of Children’sCharacter
JUNJIE LI (TRANSLATED BY ANDREW COLVIN)
Note: This translation is based on an early draft ofa paper delivered by Li Junjie in Honolulu in 1998.
A later revised version of the same paper has been
published in Jiaozuo Education Research, 2001.2,
pp 9-11.)IIn June of 1997, sponsored by the Beijing Soong ChingLing Foundation, Dr. Thomas Jackson and six representatives from the Hawaii Philosophy in the Schools
Project visited our country to present a series of demonstrations on the implementation of the Philosophy for Children(P4C). Teachers from various grade levels remember thesepresentations to this day, and have responded warmly to theidea of combining some innovative P4C educational principles with our own educational practices. In our city, Jiaozuo, teachers from four elementary schools, one middleschool, and two kindergartens expressed strong interests inP4C. They began to study and apply P4C and found that it
formed a natural combination with their own program ofcharacter education. This combination has become part of
new educational reform movement among Chinese teachers, the results of which have been quite significant.
There are several differences in the education system,
theories, and methodologies in the United States and China,
and in some degree, these differences are enormous. Why
then was Philosophy for Children so warmly welcomed andenthusiastically accepted by Chinese educators? There are, I
think, three reasons:1.

Education is a kind of scientific endeavor, and scientific endeavors should not be limited by nationalboundaries. Moreover, education is also a kind of socialendeavor with its own rules and principles, and when
educators probe these out, the results from their efforts
can transcend national boundaries and contribute to thewhole of mankind. For example, education today has
been shaped by both the teachings of the ancient Chinese educator Confucius, and the more recent American educator John Dewey, whose Democracy and Education symbolized the emergence of education as anindependent branch of science, and whose emphasis on
the importance of the lives and activities of children has
persisted as both a practical and valuable idea for educators today.
2.

Philosophy for Children tries to change traditional
teaching methods and to help children to think forthemselves in a responsible way. Hence it is moving inthe same direction as education reforms in our own
country. For us, the goal of character education is todevelop both the physical and mental abilities of children, and Philosophy for Children has proven successful in the development of children’s creative thinking.

3. The Hawai’i team impressed teachers with their outstanding workshop. During their short stay, they vividly
demonstrated how to do Philosophy for Children in theclassroom, and they successfully encouraged all partic ipants to take part in inquiries. In their demonstration,teachers and students communicated easily and students
took an active role in discussions. The results of theseworkshops surpassed our expectations.
Among these reasons, I think the second – that the theories
and principles behind Philosophy for Children fit in wellwith those emerging today in China – is perhaps most significant. To show why I say this, I will first have to discuss
Li Junjie (jiaoks@mail.jzedu.com.cn) is co-editor of the “Jiaozuo
Educational Journal” and a researcher in the Jiaozuo Education
Graduate Department. He has been involved with P4C since 1997.

Thinking: The Journal of Philosophy for Children, Volume 17, Numbers 1 & 2

the emergence of character education in China.
IIIn our traditional model of elementary and middle school
education, the body of students in the classroom is taken asa single unit, the teacher is expected to play the main role,and the results of both learning and teaching are evaluatedby means of an examination. In each classroom, teachers
give lectures and students listen. Students must learn a great
deal of content and spend an enormous amount of time
studying. Most teachers and students take this way of teac hing for granted, and believe that this method has many advantages – for example it helps students become adept inmemorizing vast amounts of textbook material. But there isan old Chinese saying, “When it comes time to apply what
one has learned from books, they will see that they havelearned little.” People think that the more students canmemorize, the stronger and more useful their foundationmust be. It is because they have this strong foundation thatso many young Chinese have won top prizes in international academic examinations.
But over the past eighty years, education in China has
been adversely affected by the model of “education for taking exams.” Since only a very limited number of students in
China are able to enroll in China, the competition for getting into a college is extreme. When children are still in elementary schools, they have to earn top grades in order to
get into a good middle school. When they get into middle
school, they have to work hard to get into one of the betterhigh schools. After they get into high school, they have towork extremely hard to compete with other students in order to get a seat in college. Therefore, students, schools, andparents all take moving ahead in schools as their only objective, and “taking exams” as the main goal of education.
In “education for taking exams,” elementary and middle
schools emphasize filling student’s brains with information,
but ignore their moral, physical, and aesthetic dimensions.
Teaching methods are directed toward pouring information
into students, and not toward the development of thinking
skills, personal character, and creativity. In this model ofteaching, students are treated like empty cups, and not surprisingly many psychological problems have been reported.
In short, “education for taking exams” has become a barrier
to the development of education in China.
During the late 1980s, educators in tune with the deepening call for reform in education suggested that we need tochange from “education for passing exams” to “character
education,” and their suggestions found support in government. What is meant here by “character education”? Itmeans taking as the main goal in education the improvement of the overall character of each student, and working
toward this goal in accordance with scientifically basedmodels of physical and mental development among children. To do this, educators have to respect students’ pointsof view and intentions, while at the same time focusing on

41

the development of their wisdom and potential. In short theoverall goal of education should be the formation of ahealthy character.
We are now actively trying to develop a program ofcharacter education. We have carefully changed the lessonplans and classroom structure. We created new methods ofassessments. But most importantly, we have reformed theway we teach. In terms of their intellectual development,
we pay meticulous attention to stimulating students’ curiosity, interest, imagination, and their desire to learn. We replaced the old boring lectures with a form of guidance
through fun activities. In the classroom, we now often startwith an interesting question or a beautiful story to spark student’s interests, and encourage them to inquire for themselves. We pay attention to creating a harmonious atmosphere since we want students to learn in a relaxing environment. Our teachers’ faces are no longer too serious, but now
reveal emotion and feelings. In terms of their aesthetic development, we teach students how to feel beauty throughimagination, and to draw, paint, and do calligraphy. We
also employ teaching methods suitable to the natural courseof the student’s moral and physical development. In doing
so, we allow students to enjoy the development of theiroverall character.
In the development of “character education” we especially want to teach students how to learn. As the Americanfuturist Alvin Toffler once remarked, “The illiterate of the
21st century will not be those who cannot read and write,
but those who cannot learn, unlearn, and relearn.” We thinkthat teaching students how to learn is one of the most important tasks for teachers. Teachers should use the classroom and after -school activities to teach students how tohandle the skills of learning. We want our students to become people with the capacity to learn and who are good atlearning.
IIIIt was under this kind of background that Philosophy forChildren was introduced into our country. Having witnessed and participated in Dr. Jackson’s workshop, wecame to understand that P4C is about the philosophy ofeducation – that is, it is a philosophy of educating children.
This contemporary philosophy does not merely aim to answer questions, but attempts to help children express theirown point of view clearly and precisely. It calls attention to
the process of inferring, and encourages analysis and dialectical thinking. Therefore, I would say that Philosophy forChildren is a practical philosophy, and its life force is foundin its ability to continuously give birth to new ideas, an ability which results from the cooperative efforts of teacher andstudents. As practiced in Hawaii, Philosophy for Children
attempts to create a “safe place” for building a reflective
community of inquiry. In this community, children sit together in a circle and are encouraged to speak out freely andraise questions. And although children are free to criticize

42Li, America’s Philosophy for Children Teaching Method and the Improvement of Children’s Character

activities. Students walkin the classroom with asmiling face. The environment of their classroom is relaxing andhappy. Some classes use
the eight tools from The
Good Thinker’s Tool
Kit, and some ask students to create stories
while listening to music.
All of these things are
the resulting fruits of theeducational exchange
between Hawai’i andChina.
In closing we would
like to raise a few concerns and questions thathave come up in our research and implementation of Philosophy foreach other’s ideas, the environment of this community isquite harmonious. In a P4C session the teacher no longer
acts as a representative of the Truth, but becomes anothermember in the community of inquiry, thereby allowing for
the unlimited development of children’s imagination andcreativity.
In tune with the nature of thought in children, Dr. Jackson has developed an appealing and playful “GoodThinker’s Tool Kit” to assist children in thinking critically.
Starting with one question, children are encouraged to discover more; starting from a more simple question, they areencouraged to go deeper and deeper. Instead of studying
dull and tedious material, children are instead encouraged toseek knowledge and pursue truth in a relaxing and joyfulenvironment. According to our understanding, Philosophy
for Children emphasizes the process of inquiring instead ofsimply trying to offer answers. It probes associations amongquestions, but does not focus on finding the correct answer.
It represents the idea that “the nature of philosophy is denyand doubting.” By doing these things, P4C leads students tobecome better learners.
These Philosophy for Children teaching principles andmethods have been adopted and used by several schools in
our city. Teachers in our kindergartens that have adopted
P4C, encourage children to raise the questions that they
themselves care about as a means of initiating an inquiry. In
some schools, teachers helped children make their own“Good Thinker’s Tool Kits,” and developed a method fortaking turns in a discussion in which a red flower is passedalong through the circle to the beat of a drum, and when thedrum stops, whoever has the flower gets the opportunity tospeak. This is a playful and fun way to have a discussion
with a large group of students. Several elementary schoolshave also introduced P4C in their classes and after -schoolChildren.
1.

The first concern arises from the dialectical relationshipbetween “learning as hard work” and the notion of“joyful education.” The traditional Chinese approach toeducation takes learning as hard, bitter work, but P4C
suggests a need to change “bitter” into “joyful” learning. Are these two conceptions necessarily antagonistic
or can they be reconciled?

2. The second issue concerns the amount of content or information students need to grasp. In our country, theeducation plan emphasizes the task of passing know ledge on to students. It requires students to cover andlearn a large amount of information and content. At thesame time, however, the implementation of P4C requires a lot of class time, and if we use P4C as a generalteaching method, it will be hard to cover the required
content. Are there any good solutions for solving thisconflict?
3. The third issue has to do with the role of the teacher inthe pursuit of the truth and in bringing inquiries to aconclusion. We have seen that P4C rejects the pouringmethod in favor of a more scientific and democratic approach to learning. There are, to be sure, some questions that even teachers can’t answer. But in many instances teachers do know the right answer. Isn’t there aneed for teachers to play leading roles in the process ofinquiry?
The above questions are for mutual discussion. We hope tolearn more P4C teaching methods, and warmly welcome theHawai’i P4C team to visit China again.