Juliana suggests children won’t be able to think critically about morality, religion or other “Big Questions” until post age 11. Well, let’s have them doing it then, at least. But actually, there’s growing evidence that it’s beneficial before then.<\/p>\n
There have been a number of studies and programs involving philosophy with children in several countries. The results are impressive.<\/p>\n
One notable example is the Buranda State School, a small Australian primary school near Brisbane, which in 1997 introduced into all its classes a philosophy program. Children collectively engaged in structured debates addressing philosophical questions that they themselves had come up with, following a Philosophy in Schools programme using materials developed by the philosopher Philip Cam and others. The effects were dramatic. The school showed marked academic improvement across the curriculum. A report on the success of the program says,<\/p>\n
[f]or the last four years, students at Buranda have achieved outstanding academic results. This had not been the case prior to the teaching of Philosophy. In the systemic Year 3\/5\/7 tests (previously Yr 6 Test), our students performed below the state mean in most areas in 1996. Following the introduction of Philosophy in 1997, the results of our students improved significantly and have been maintained or improved upon since that time. <\/span><\/p>\n There were substantial payoffs in terms of behaviour too. The report indicates \u201csignificantly improved outcomes\u201d occurred in the social behaviour of the students:<\/p>\n The respect for others and the increase in individual self esteem generated in the community of inquiry have permeated all aspects of school life. We now have few behaviour problems at our school (and we do have some difficult students). Students are less impatient with each other, they are more willing to accept their own mistakes as a normal part of learning and they discuss problems as they occur. As one Yr 5 child said, \u2018Philosophy is a good example of how you should behave in the playground with your friends\u2019\u2026 Bullying behaviour is rare at Buranda, with there being no reported incidence of bullying this year to date. A visiting academic commented, \u2018Your children don\u2019t fight, they negotiate\u2019\u2026 Visitors to the school are constantly making reference to the ‘feel’ or ‘spirit’ of the place. We believe it’s the way our children treat each other. The respect for others generated in the community of inquiry has permeated all aspects of school life.<\/span><\/p>\n Of course this is a single example \u2013 hardly conclusive evidence by itself. But it\u2019s not the only example. In 2001-2, Professor Keith Topping, a senior psychologist, in conjunction with the University of Dundee studied the effects on introducing one hour per week of philosophy (using a Thinking Through Philosophy programme developed by Paul Cleghorn) at a number of upper primary schools in Clackmannanshire, including schools in deprived areas. Teachers were given two days of training. The study involved a whole range of tests, and also a control group of schools with no philosophy programme. The children involved were aged 11-12. This study found that after one year,<\/p>\n \u2022 The incidence of children supporting opinion with evidence doubled, but \u2018control\u2019 classes remained unchanged. These benefits were retained. When the children were tested again at 14, after two years at secondary school without a philosophy programme, their CAT scores were exactly the same (that\u2019s to say, the improvements that had previously been gained were retained), while the control group scores actually went down during those two years. Three secondary schools were involved and the results replicated themselves over each school. Again, this is only one study. No doubt such results should treated with caution. But, they do lend considerable weight to the claim that not only can children of this age think philosophically, it\u2019s also highly beneficial. A recent study strongly supports the view that philosophy for children provides measurable educational benefits for children even in their first year of school.<\/p>\n To sum up: there\u2019s growing evidence that children, even fairly young children, can think philosophically. And, while more research needs to be done, there\u2019s a growing body of evidence that it\u2019s good for them academically, socially and emotionally.<\/p>\n The kinds of skills such philosophy programmes foster are, surely, just the sort of skills we need new citizens to develop.<\/p>\n
\u2022 There was evidence that children\u2019s self-esteem and confidence rose markedly.
\u2022 The incidence of teachers asking open-ended questions (to better develop enquiry) doubled.
\u2022 There was evidence that class ethos and discipline improved noticeably.
\u2022 The ratio of teacher\/pupil talk halved for teachers and doubled for pupils. Controls remained the same.
\u2022 All classes improved significantly (statistically) in verbal, non-verbal, and quantitative reasoning. No control class changed. This means children were more intelligent (av. 6.5 IQ points) after one year on the programme.<\/p>\n