Soka Education - Humanitarian education for the new century
Tuesday, March 25th, 2008Although many people consider themselves to be Soka Educators, there’s no qualification or obvious signifier which identifies an individual pedagogue as a Soka Educator. “Soka” means value creation, and the basic humanistic principle of Soka Education is that human beings always and necessarily have the potential to create value, and that fulfilling our potential to create value in our own way is what makes us happy. The difference in the Soka educator is that we believe in the intrinsic capacity of each child to be themselves better than anyone, and we respect them for who they are in themselves.
The idea of value-creating education was first formed by the Japanese educator Tsunesaburo Makiguchi (1871-1944) as a response to the trend in education at the time to train the children to be war-machines for the fatherland. Makiguchi had already written a (later) influential book “The Geography of Human Life”, showing the need for critical thinking and creativity to enable the individual to fully contribute to a free society. He had been strongly influenced by the American educator John Dewey whom he had seen speak in Tokyo, but the expansion of thought in Japan was seriously arrested by the increasing militarism which came to engulf all society and led to the terrible experience of war in China, and then the World War which culminated in the disaster of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. By this time Makiguchi had died in prison, where he had been taken for refusing to compromise on his pacifist beliefs, by now strengthened by his practice of Nichiren Buddhism.
His beliefs were continued by Josei Toda, also a teacher who had worked for many years alongside with Mr Makiguchi, had become a Buddhist with him, considered him to be his master in faith, and had gone to prison for also standing up against Japanese militarization of religion. Josie Toda went on after the war to reform the lay Buddhist organisation Soka Gakkai, extending its reach beyond only educational philosophy into all walks of life, and helping many people struggling to recover their lives in the devastation of post-war Japan. It was the current President of Soka Gakkai International, Daisaku ikeda, who has established the Soka Universities and encouraged the activities of educators within the Soka Gakkai.
So Soka education is broadly based on the Buddhist belief in the intrinsic value of and respect for all life and for each individual, and the Soka teacher bases his pedagogy on his Buddhist practice, challenging issues which arise by referring back to our Buddhist faith. There is no strict code of practise for the Soka educator, as the style of teaching will depend on the situation faced within the educational environment. The main thing is the unique importance of each individual child, and the refusal to make use of the child’s individuality for an external purpose, such as grades or the needs of employers. Each child is valuable in his or her own right.
Of course the Soka environment is notably happy and relaxed and the children have confidence and highly developed questioning and communication skills. The reputation of the highest achievers in the Soka Universities is beginning to serve as a testimonial to the success of this educational practice. However Soka educators are to be found all around the world, in the Makiguchi Project in Action in Sao Paulo, Brazil*, as well as in Malaysian kindergartens, applying effective solutions to areas with grave social and economic problems.
I first came across Makiguchi when I was training to be a teacher, and studied him in more depth as part of post-graduate research on classroom behaviour. The Soka method has comparisons in the systemic theory of education which is also having dramatic effects in problem classroom areas, and which is gaining respect in many circles at this time. Gregory Bateson (1904 -1980), who started the whole systemic theory, drew on the Buddhist ideas prevalent in Hawaii when he lived there. (G. Bateson “Steps to an Ecology of Mind” New York Chandler 1972; Molnar and Linquist, “Changing Problem Behaviour in Schools” Jossey Bass 1989). By applying his basic principles in the classroom, I was able to solve the problems of motivation, self-esteem and disruptive behaviour exhibited by my classes and lead them to begin to enjoy learning and start to think more as “global citizens”. but the reason I originally liked Makiguchi came when I read that when the poor children arrived from the frosty streets in the morning, Makiguchi had lit the stove and prepared hot soup for his pupils to eat as they dried their socks on the stove. The Soka Educator is first and foremost a caring human being and a fine example to his students.
Since 2005, Soka Educators worldwide have expressed their views and shared their findings on the international forum confernces which you can find through the link below or contact Stephanie at tansey@usa.net at the website http://www.soka.ed.jp/kyoiku/k0004.html or see the latest newsletter below.
______________________________________________________________________________
Carl Rogers on Humanistic education article
Note 1. **Some background (Thank you to Kwabena Siaka from Earth Charter Communities Education Forum) I
‘The MIA effort in Brazil is widely supported by the communities they are involved in. Not because of any directed attempt by the members to spread the word, so to speak, but by the participants and administrators of the schools in which they have or are working with. Schools contact them to ask for the MIA project to come to their schools. This process happens almost exclusively through word of mouth. The MIA program was also helped by a timely government initiative to help develop a more humanistic mode of teaching. It was felt by the new government that the traditional way of teaching was too narrow and that teachers should be reoriented to teach to the whole child. Therefore the government has initiated a requirement for teacher professional development of 2 hours a month, with pay. Furthermore, parents, who were excluded from the process, to a large extent before ( by the educational system) were not seen as a part of the solution. The relationship between teachers and parents could be characterized as quite hostile. This is not the case in MIA schools, today. Parents in the MIA program are welcomed and in fact, are given the same treatment, when possible, as the teachers. Parents involvement is seen as crucial to the long term impact and sustainability of the program. Family involvement (an important community factor) is a key element in Makiguchi’s paradigm.‘Classroom methods and process
The MIA approach is very subtle and very respectful. And at the same time very direct. During an art class session, for example, teachers are given an art project to work on individually. In one of the classes I visited, the project was to make a drawing, which they had to cut afterwards into a shape. Three to four assistance circulated around the class, encouraging and praising the participants (teachers) at various stages in the process. Parents were also welcomed to join the activity. Throughout the session (treatment) the lead moderator would quote something from the Buddhist perspective on life or teaching. There was no big lecture on teaching or anything of that sort. In fact, I was wondering when that would come. Instead, from time to time, the lead moderator would say something like this, “Every person is precious, each of us has a mission that only we can fulfill.” The content of these messages and the philosophical influences came from a variety of thinking such as Friere, Dewey, Jung, Ikeda, Toda, and Nichiren. The materials that the participants had at their disposal were kept to a minimum to encourage cooperation. The notion of interdependence was introduced in this way and a simple quote or comment was made to reinforce this point. No pressure or dictates were applied or given to the participants.‘Community involvement of non members
The interaction with the schools and the community is essentially a dialogical process. What I mean by this is that a process of negotiations (dialogue) begins as soon as a school contacts the program. The MIA have found that it is better to have a liaison situated within the school context. This key person helps facilitate the introduction of the program into the school “community”. Which includes the family as well. This person can advise the program on local concerns and customs. That is not to say that there is no resistance to the change. One of the common questions is “are you trying to covert us to Buddhism.” This question is dealt with head on by introducing the organization of SGI and its principles, goals and activities through a short 15 minute video followed by a question and answer session with the school community. This kind of dialogue continues throughout the project, which is conducted in four phases over a two year period, each phase lasts six months.’
Note 2