Practicing Pragmatism through Progressive Pedagogies: A Philosophical Lens for Grounding Classroom Teaching and Research
Abstract
This book contributes to the contemporary revival of pragmatism as a practical and ultimately, as Mayer argues, necessary philosophical stance within democratic schools. Given that pragmatism addresses the question of how people can move forward in the absence of transcendent Truth, the author shows how pragmatism also—and not incidentally—provides grounds for pluralistic democratic societies to move forward in the absence of shared belief systems. Weaving together philosophical analysis and classroom discourse research, Mayer explores the relationships among pragmatism, progressive educational theory, and democratic knowledge construction processes and their implications for enacting progressive educational practices in schools. Several original, research-based heuristics that can serve in reliably identifying, studying, and orchestrating distinctively democratic knowledge construction processes are presented. The importance of granting all students a share of interpretive authority is also emphasized. For in learning to observe and reflect on one’s own terms, attend closely to the observations and interpretations of one’s peers, and reason collaboratively in a transparent and principled manner, young people are enculturated into essential democratic values, commitments, and practices. This book is written for a general audience and is intended for all those concerned with strengthening the democratic character of schools and societies. It is likely to appeal to scholars, researchers, and practitioners with interests in philosophy and classroom discourse and curriculum studies, as well as philosophers of education and the social sciences more broadly.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Constructivist learning theory asserts that learners construct knowledge through engagement with real-world experiences.
“This study is grounded in constructivist learning theory, which asserts that learners construct knowledge through engagement with real-world experiences.”
From Redefining student assessment in AI-infused learning environments: a systematic review of challenges and strategies for academic integrity (2026) · cites this paper as [48]
Cites
Still being checked.
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Falaqi, M. R., Ritonga, A. W., Mufid, M., Hamid, M. A., Maulidi, Hidayat, S., Suladi, Sarwanih, & Handoyo, F. (2025) · British Journal of Religious Education · doi:10.1080/01416200.2025.2521384 · Cited by 32 · see citing works
Ncube, P. D. N., Dzvapatsva, G. P., Matobobo, C., & Ranga, M. M. (2026) · AI and Ethics · doi:10.1007/s43681-025-00871-w · Cited by 31 · see citing works
- Authors
- Mayer, S. J.
- Corresponding author
- Mayer, Susan Jean
- ORCID
- Mayer, Susan Jean
- Venue
- Routledge eBooks
- Publisher
- Routledge
- Published
- 2023-10-31
- OpenAlex
- W4388085959
- Cited by
- 2
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2025: 2
- FWCI
- 1.12
- Type
- book
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Routledge eBooks (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Philosophy › Pragmatism in Philosophy and Education
- Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Philosophy › Education, Philosophy, and Society
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Educational Theory and Curriculum Studies
- Keywords
- pragmatism, progressive education, democratic school, classroom discourse, interpretive authority, collaborative reasoning, democratic values, pluralism, curriculum studies, philosophy of education
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review