the china project...Educational
Reform in an Era of Globalization On
November 1, 2003, a wild bushfire approaching Claremont was dramatically
and unexpectedly subdued due to the overnight rainfall. In the bright and
sunny morning of the following day, Claremont witnessed a special event
involving over 50 international participants: the conference on Process
Thinking and Educational Reform in the Era of Globalization. The
conference was co-organized by the Center for Process Studies, Claremont
Graduate University, and the Institute for Transcultural Studies of
Beijing International Studies University. Lasting four full days, and
saturated with engaging discussions and tight schedules, the conference
turned out to be a rewarding experience for all the participants, who
arrived from 18 universities in the United States, China, Canada, Austria,
Taipei, and other regions. The
conference began with a keynote address delivered by John B. Cobb, Jr.
Cobb offered a historical survey of the four classical models of
university education, ranging from Paris, Halle, and Berlin to Phoenix,
with sharp observations regarding their respective merits and demerits.
This was all set against the current context of globalization. Above all,
Cobb proposed an inspiring blueprint of a Whiteheadian university with
focus on the problem-solving aspects of education in order to help
humankind to find its way through our current crises. With
particular reference to the deeper faith and moral imagination
in Whiteheads terminology, George E. Derfer presented his own thesis by
reclaiming human presence in the processes of education and
globalization. This line of thought was supplemented by David R.
Griffins proposal of global democracy in view of the Whiteheadian
ideals of the truth and the common good. Ronald P. Phipps, whose support
was crucial to the conference, developed a Whiteheadian theory of
education that emphasized creative and synthetic learning aimed at liberating
and cultivating the creative potentials of students and teachers in order
to contribute to the advance of knowledge and civilization.
Other speakers, including George
Allan, Mary Elizabeth Moore, John Gingrich, William Doll, Teresa Langnes,
Ouyang Kang, Ren Ping, Yu Yih-hsien, Chen Rongbo, Chen Xiaoping, Fan
Meijun, Yang Fubin, Wang Keping, Wang Zhihe, Robert Regnier, Zou Shipeng,
Wang Xiuge, Fu Dianying, John Regan, Karen Torjesen, Keyvan Geula, John
Sweeney, Fan Meiqin, Yan Jie, and Franz Riffert, argued for the
necessity of developing taste, creativity, emotion, active wisdom, and
morality by means of process theories of education. All shared the similar
viewpoint that education must include the arts, moral values, and
religious ideals. In
brief, this conference encouraged an active rediscovery of Whiteheadian
philosophy directed toward educational reform in the context of
globalization. Under such circumstances, the following notions were
critically reconsidered during the group discussions: the ultimate aims of
education and the crucial nourishment of active wisdom, the meaning of
Whiteheadian process thought and the traditional Chinese system thinking,
the analysis of moral ideals and the development of aesthetic taste, the
creative style of education in application, the notions of
character-formation and wholeness in personal becoming, education and
democracy in a global context, humanity-based educational methodologies,
and more. Comparatively speaking, focal attention was largely concentrated
on the wider interests of humanity-orientated education and how to best
promote these interests. All these discussions were synthesized into a
combination of the Whiteheadian concept of active wisdom with the
Confucianist notion of moral cultivation. During
the conference, theoretical hypotheses and thematic explorations were
punctuated with field-trip visits to several Universities: Loyola
Marymount, Redlands, La Verne, Pitzer, Claremont Graduate, Claremont
School of Theology, and other colleges. The visitors were warmly welcomed
by the hosts and shared their plans for practical reforms in the domain of
general education. Wherever they went, participants were lured into
question-and-answer sessions, identifying and clarifying the possible
difficulties and solutions that might arise in the course of reform. Those
who were from overseas, especially those from China, enjoyed the chance to
observe and experience the actual exercise of educational reform in actual
institutions. In order to provoke even more discussion, University
administrators from China were also invited to give brief accounts of what
is going on in their field of tertiary education. The discussions that
occurred over these four days were both fruitful and meaningful from a
long-term and even an international perspective. Despite
the short amount of time the participants were together, they engaged in
meaningful dialogue, productive intercultural communication, and developed
a strong affinity for each others projects. All involved felt the
necessity of pursuing the common good by means of a humanity-based
education par excellence. In addition, the participants also
engaged in a further investigation of Whiteheadian philosophy, traditional
Chinese thought, and constructive post-modernism. The goals and ideals put
forth at the conference requires a bridge for mutual understanding and
bilateral learning. This can be accomplished by enhancing academic
exchange and cooperation among institutions of higher education around the
world.
|