Using the Textbook and Assigned Articles, Describe How the Historical Backgrounds of The

Using the textbook and assigned articles, describe how the historical backgrounds of the times and the personal experiences of Thomas Aquinas, John Stuart Mill, and Herbert Spencer influence their particular formations of educational theory sets? How are these three thinkers’ thoughts on education alike and how are they different?

Gutek: chs. 6, 17–18
Moreland: ch. 7

This module focuses on Thomas Aquinas, John Stuart Mill, and Herbert Spencer. Aquinas could be grouped with those in Module 3, but is instead placed here to discuss the nature of liberal education.These sections will then contribute to an analysis of arguments by Mill in his Inaugural Address.Of course, others can be placed here as well.The pattern in this course is that the thinkers explored have connecting points on many subjects in many contexts.The trick is to identify areas of commonality and definitive differencesto highlight theories in a practical analysis.

Aquinas’ influence, as explained in the text, comes from the medieval tradition. His primary influences are Aristotle (whom he spent a great deal of time translating and commenting on) and Augustine (for his marrying of Christian ideals and classics).The Thomistic tradition (as elaborated upon in the area of page 89) becomes his legacy.Keep his ideas in mind as we approach Mill and Spencer.

Mill could be grouped in with Module 1 and a discussion of Confucius and virtuous education, as his Utilitarianism claims to come about towards a nature of virtue through individualism, but he is placed here due to his being a product of liberal ideas.Note the discussion (around pages 302 and 303) that explore Mill in the modern era.His push of critical thinking and being “educated” to exercise liberty would be placed in jeopardy with the catering-to-the-masses nature of media production.Freedom of ideas and the critical exchange of such are the hallmarks of Mill’s ideas in the educational arena.Read with particular attention the interesting conclusive assessment of Mill in this chapter.
*Page references are from Gutek.

Spencer, in contrast with those like Erasmus, placed little value on the classics.His systematic, enlightened, materialistic, and modern approach placed him fully in the realist realm of thought.This placed him in opposition to the liberal education era as seen and promoted in others.This should bring about thoughts of vocational, professional, technical education (essentialist with understandings of principles as promoted in perennilialist education).Pay particular attention to the discussion of the very technical nature of curriculum as espoused by Spencer (on page 318 through 319).

Mill, J. S. (1984). Inaugural address delivered to the University of St. Andrews 1867. In Robson, J. M. (Ed.)The collected works of John Stuart Mill, volume XXI: Essays on equality, law, and education. Toronto: University of Toronto Press. Retrieved from

Aquinas / Mill / Spencer
Studies in rhetoric allowed him to review the writings of Augustine and Plato. His research into Manichaeanism and Neoplatonism helped him to understand the struggle between good and evil and man’s place in the Universe. These experiences led him to believe in the strength of education in the humanities as foundational to the Christian learner (Gutek, 2011, p. 86). / The strength of liberalism in the British 19th Century left if open to new ideas. Mill’s constructs of humanizing the industrial complex were fresh and well received (Gutek, 2011, p. 286). Mills constructs of justice and generosity were well heeded in the new field of utilitarianism. He presented an educational theory that encouraged everyone to learn. / Contrary to Aquinas, Spencer’s educational focus was on math and science. His rigid individualism came from his father’s willingness to include young Spencer in family and community engagements and, contrary to the norm, allow his son to speak his ideas and defend his own opinions (Gutek, 2011, p. 314). His educational theory disregarded the awards system and encouraged students to learn for the sake of knowledge.

Aquinas, Mill, and Spencer all believed in education, but each had a differing focus though there was some overlap. Most of their equanimity came from being in a world of industrialization where the dramatic class difference was so readily apparent.

Studies in rhetoric allowed Aqunias to review the writings of Augustine and Plato. His research into Manichaeanism and Neoplatonism helped him to understand the struggle between good and evil and man’s place in the Universe. These experiences led him to believe in the strength of education in the humanities as foundational to the Christian learner (Gutek, 2011, p. 86).

The strength of liberalism in the British 19th Century left itopen to new ideas. Mill’s constructs of humanizing the industrial complex were fresh and well received (Gutek, 2011, p. 286). Mills constructs of justice and generosity were well heeded in the new field of utilitarianism. He presented an educational theory that encouraged everyone to learn.

Contrary to Aquinas, Spencer’s educational focus was on math and science. His rigid individualism came from his father’s willingness to include young Spencer in family and community engagements and, contrary to the norm, allow his son to speak his ideas and defend his own opinions (Gutek, 2011, p. 314). His educational theory disregarded the awards system and encouraged students to learn for the sake of knowledge.