Asked by
To ask His Majesty’s Government what assessment they have made of
the use of philosophy to improve the development of critical
thinking and problem-solving skills at all educational
levels.
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Department for
Education () (Con)
My Lords, the Government agree that critical thinking and
problem-solving skills are important. Our knowledge-rich national
curriculum stimulates these skills in the context of solid
subject content. Cognitive science suggests that knowledge and
skills are partners, and that attempts to teach skills without
knowledge fail because they run counter to the way our brains
work. While philosophy is not on the national curriculum, schools
have the flexibility to teach it if they want to.
(GP)
I thank the Minister for her Answer. It presents philosophy as a
voluntary subject—one available to few but not to all. Given the
quality of our public life and public debate, does she not think
that enabling people to see both sides of an argument and to take
a philosophical approach could be a step towards improving the
quality of public life?
(Con)
The noble Baroness is right that philosophy is not on the
national curriculum, but citizenship is. It equips pupils with
exactly the skills she sets out—namely, to research and
interrogate evidence, to debate and evaluate viewpoints, to
present reasoned arguments and to take informed action.
(CB)
Does the Minister agree with the work of the Philosophy
Foundation, which is already working in our prisons and schools
to sharpen people’s thinking? We are lost if our children do not
know how to think correctly.
(Con)
I am not familiar with the work of the Philosophy Foundation, but
I absolutely welcome all those charities working in our prisons
and our schools to support our children.
(Lab)
My Lords, is it not significant that philosophy is a compulsory
subject in French lycée and the basic structures of French
education? Is that not reflected in the different levels of
public service in both countries? I declare an interest: my wife
is French.
(Con)
It is difficult to make direct comparisons. I would certainly say
that the level of public service in this country, both formally
and informally through all our charities and volunteers, is of
the highest standard. Many of the basic elements included in the
teaching of philosophy are in not only our citizenship curriculum
but our religious education curriculum.
(LD)
My Lords, when I was at a French primary school many years ago,
philosophy was taught at all stages in French schools, as the
noble Lord just said. I do not think it did us any harm. With
today’s students apparently really reluctant to discuss anything
with which they disagree, might it be time to introduce
philosophy into schools to broaden minds? It could be difficult
to find teachers, but surely the plethora of PPE graduates coming
into Parliament could be encouraged to go back and teach one of
their many subjects in schools?
(Con)
In a serious vein, we know that our schools have tremendous
responsibilities in terms of catching up and supporting children,
particularly disadvantaged children, following the pandemic’s
impact on them. The Government have made a commitment not to
change the national curriculum. We need to make sure that the
curriculum works for our children.
(Con)
My Lords, I declare an interest in that my daughter is studying
philosophy at university. Much as I welcome the thrust of the
Question, philosophy is of course open to all students who seek
to read it at university. I note that the Philosophy Foundation
says that students, by studying philosophy, develop analytical,
critical and problem-solving capabilities, so are we not lucky to
have a Prime Minister who studied philosophy at university rather
than, say, law?
(Con)
I could not agree more with my noble friend.
Baroness O’Neill of Bengarve (CB)
My Lords, I think I have an interest to declare as the only
surviving professional philosopher in the House. When I joined
your Lordships’ House there were four of us, but the others are
no longer with us. So much for the interest. My question is: does
the Minister think that what we might call the A-levelisation of
philosophy teaching in schools has, on balance, been beneficial,
or not?
(Con)
If the House will forgive me, I am not sure I am entirely
familiar with the term “A-levelisation”, but what I do know is
that many more students are studying philosophy—almost twice as
many in our universities—than are taking the A-level, so whatever
we are doing at A-level is equipping our students to choose
philosophy as an option later on.
(Lab)
Is the Minister aware that many primary schools in England follow
a course and teach philosophy for children and that they achieved
some very interesting results? Would she be interested in meeting
some of these practitioners to discuss how this functions in a
primary setting?
(Con)
I would be absolutely delighted to meet the teachers that the
noble Baroness recommends. She will be aware that the disciplines
of critical thinking are throughout our curriculum, including in
the early years and foundation stages.
My Lords, it is not only about critical thinking; we need to have
a place where those ideas can be exchanged, which is about free
speech. I understand that the University of Cambridge has
recently appointed a philosophy professor, who is teaching
classes in free speech. Does the Minister think this is something
we need in all our universities, and should it start in our
schools as well?
(Con)
The right reverend Prelate will be aware of the legislation we
were debating in Grand Committee only yesterday afternoon on the
importance of free speech in our universities. The Government
think that is of critical importance, as is academic freedom, but
of course, it needs to start in our schools, and I have seen many
fantastic examples of teachers engaging with children and giving
them those skills and the confidence to debate.
of Hudnall (Lab)
My Lords, I should declare an interest as I have a degree in
philosophy—but I am not sure what that says about the value of
such a thing. I may no longer be very familiar with synthetic a
priori or logical positivism, but what I do know is that
philosophy teaches you never to be sure that you are right. Does
the Minister agree that our public discourse and political
culture could really do with a bit less certainty about
rightness?
(Con)
The noble Baroness makes a serious point, and there is an
important balance to be struck in terms of leadership, sense of
direction and the values on which that direction is based. But
the openness to listen, change and adjust is needed.
(Non-Afl)
My Lords, I wholeheartedly agree with and support the noble
Baroness, Lady Bennett of Manor Castle. In light of the deeply
unwise comments by the Home Secretary in the other place, will
the Minister and her department consider how to encourage the
promotion of a cohesive society through critical thinking, for
the well-being of our future young generations?
(Con)
Research shows that having a consistent core curriculum and a
consistent set of values, which we have in this country, are
fundamental to making sure that our young people can connect and
have a sense of mutual respect and understanding.
(CB)
My Lords, in addition to the need to develop critical thinking,
does the Minister agree that many children are held back by an
inability to articulate arguments and to express themselves
properly? Therefore, will she add her support to the many
organisations that are encouraging public speaking, and debating
in particular, in state schools?
(Con)
I am absolutely delighted to add my support. The evidence on the
value of oracy beyond simply public speaking is all important and
very clear, and the department is working on it.
(Con)
Following the point made by the noble Baroness, Lady O’Neill,
should we not have more philosophers in this House, if for no
other reason than we would be better at explaining why we
exist?
(Con)
Having once had the pleasure of having tea with the noble
Baroness, Lady O’Neill, I know that she is in another league in
her ability to explain these complex things, but having a
multidisciplinary House is probably a strong basis.
