Condescension and critical sympathy: Historians of education on progressive education in the United States and England

William G. Wraga
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/00309230.2013.872677
2014-03-04
Paedagogica Historica
Abstract:Although progressive education was an international phenomenon, historical interpretations of it may be affected on the national level by academic and institutional contingencies. An analysis of how US and English historians of education interpret progressive education reforms in their respective countries identified a strain of condescension toward progressive education in history of education scholarship in the US, which often resulted in misrepresentations of the historical record. English historians of education tend to regard progressive education with critical sympathy. These findings are possibly explained by different institutional and academic circumstances of historians of education in England and the US.
education & educational research,history of social sciences
What problem does this paper attempt to address?
The problem that this paper attempts to solve is to explore the differences in historical interpretations of Progressive Education by American and British educational historians and the reasons for these differences. Specifically, the author analyzes how American and British educational historians interpret the progressive education reform reports in their respective countries, important progressive education practices, and the criticisms of progressive education. The study finds that there is a certain degree of contempt for progressive education in the American educational history community, and this attitude often leads to misunderstandings or misinterpretations of historical records; while British educational historians tend to view progressive education with a critically sympathetic attitude. These different interpretations may stem from the differences in the professional and academic environments of the educational historians in the two countries. Through comparative analysis, the author hopes to promote exchanges between American and British educational historians in order to achieve a more detailed and accurate understanding of progressive education.