Philosophical Allegories in Rousseau

“Philosophical Allegories in Rousseau”
Philosophy and Literature, Vol. 31, Number 1, April 2007, p. 67-78.

In this essay, I point to an aspect of doing philosophy that is both often overlooked and educationally important. This is the activity of constructing philosophical allegories, of describing or recounting parts of one’s life in more or less explicit philosophical terms. I exemplify this idea of philosophical allegory through readings of three tales in Jean-Jacques Rousseau’s autobiographical works. Finally, I point to how the exercise of this capacity for constructing philosophical allegories acts as a counter-force to the kind of melancholia that is now becoming a permanent cultural condition. Learning to see oneself as a philosophical image at least provides a semblance of deeper meaning to what otherwise seems meaningless.

Philosophy and Language Learning

“Philosophy and Language Learning”
Studies in Philosophy and Education 2007 ;Volum 26.(1) p. 43-56

In this paper, I explore different ways of picturing language learning in philosophy, all of them inspired by Wittgenstein and all of them concerned about scepticism of meaning. I start by outlining the two pictures of children and language learning that emerges from Kripke’s famous reading of Wittgenstein. Next, I explore how social-pragmatic readings, represented by Meredith Williams, attempt to answer the sceptical anxieties. Finally, drawing somewhat on Stanley Cavell, I try to resolve these issues by investigating what characteristically happens to our view of language learning when we do philosophy. The focus throughout is on the relation between the individual (the learning child) and the community (usually represented by the parents), and how that relation is deformed when we operate with a certain philosophical notion of ground.


Key words: Language; learning; children; Kripke; Cavell; Wittgenstein

Teaching Excellence

An essay by Frances Wong
(Doctor of Pharmacy Student and former teacher)

After being a student for more than 18 years and a high school teacher for 3 years, I learned to view the profession TEACHING as a student and as a teacher. It does not mean I am an expert in analyzing this profession perfectly. It simply means that I think about teaching from two angles due to the different roles I have.

It is easy to ask a student to give some descriptions of an excellent teacher. Depending on the age/maturity/education levels of the students, the answers can range from sense of humor and caring to mastery of knowledge in subject and organization. Students see how a teacher delivers the “knowledge” but seldom sees how a teacher prepares a lesson.

It is also easy to ask a teacher to give some descriptions of an excellent teacher. Depending on the age group/audiences’ education level/teaching subjects, the answers can range from well-prepared and detailed lesson plans to good communication skills and classroom management. Teachers also focus on the delivery method when presenting a lesson in a classroom but sometimes neglect what students really need in order to learn and how to truly evaluate and assess students’ learning.

An interesting collection of views on good teaching was presented by Ken Bain in the book: What the Best College Teachers Do. There were many great pedagogy methodologies that I strongly believe college educators can use to their benefits. However, Bain stresses the most important thing is not to focus on the methodologies; it is to look at the before, during and after of teaching so one can evaluate and enhance his/her teaching. A good educator starts by examining his/her teaching philosophy before the class even begins. A philosophy which bases teaching on helping students to make connections between new materials with one’s previous knowledge and not just focusing on the delivery. All teachers want to be good teachers, but it is how one perceives “teaching” and “learning” that structures the way they help their students to achieve the ultimate goal of the class – learning. With that in mind, a teacher then can go on to planning out how he/she wants to reach that goal. During the course teachers will encounter different “curve balls” in classes that require open-mindedness and adjustments which will allow students to maximize learning. Evaluation after the class then becomes the key to climbing up the ladder toward excellent teaching. To create a good learning environment, one needs to make the much needed preparation, lesson planning, and assessments while keeping both teachers and students in mind.

After examining “teaching” from different angles, I see that even though there are many differences between primary, secondary, and post-secondary/higher education teachers, one thing we all have in common is the power to shape and influence the minds of our future. This commonality is the most important reason that we need to have good teachers for all types of students in all parts of the world. As pharmacy educators, are you ready to take upon this challenge in being as good of a teacher as you can possibly be? Whenever you are ready, the students are waiting.

Learning to be an Expert

The development of expertise is a fascinating area of cognitive science. I recently read a well-written story in Scientific American (August 2006, Volume 295, Number 2) on this topic entitled "The Expert Mind" by Philip E. Ross. Unlike the commonly held belief that experts have some innate talent that enables them to advanced knowledge and skills in a particular field (e.g. physics, history, health care, sports, music, chess), expertise is acquired through hard work and practice (practice, practice, and more practice). For most individuals of average intelligence, expertise in any field can be rapidly acquired in childhood and early adulthood. Undoubtedly individuals acquire knowledge and skills in some fields more easily than others - perhaps due to their personal learning style, positive feedback from mentors/teachers/parents, as well as social conditioning. But expertise in any field is primarily acquired through years of study and taking on challenges that are just beyond one's current level of knowledge/skill (known as the zone of proximal development).

The implications are important because it means that expertise is acquired through purposeful activity - and it is not something that is innately inherent. Or is it? What do you think?