Abstract

This study compares the views of John Dewey and Israel Scheffler on the relationship of learning and inquiry. After examining key aspects of Dewey's educational theory and Logic, it examines some of Scheffler's major criticisms of how Dewey relates theory to practice, problem-solving to scientific activity and individual interest to disciplinary goals. A survey of similar critical points raised by other philosophers and learning theorists in science education is examined. Once a plausible Deweyan response to these criticisms is outlined, Scheffler's questions about Dewey's recourse to continuity as a solution to tensions between learning and inquiry are considered. A summary of the major points of convergence and contention between the two thinkers is followed by an allied debate between theorists of moral development who, like Dewey and Scheffler, conceive of the relationship between learning and inquiry in terms of which engagements are emphasized as most salient in the ongoing rhythm of experience. At the end of the study, select questions and concerns are raised about the adequacy of Deweyan and Schefflerian metaphysical assumptions for future cases that involve new learners and mature understanding