Educology

Contributing Paper 1.1
in History and Philosophy of Educology

(A paper used as the basis for a series of seven lectures to faculty and doctoral students in educology at Vytautas Magnus University (VMU) in December, 2001.
It is published in Pedagogika, Vytauto Didziojo universiteto leidykla, Kaunas, 2001)

This paper contributes to the account of: (1) the history of the word 'educology'; (2) the significance of the meaning of the word 'educology', as it is used to refer to knowledge about the educational process; (3) the features of the educational process, and the phases of the educative experience that ought to be better integrated into the educational process, making, then, the educational process the reference, territory (object) of experiential educology; (4) the constitution of knowledge that references education, i.e. the constitution of educology, and; (5) the conduct and discipline of knowledge that references education, i.e. the conduct and discipline of educology,
 

The purpose of this paper is to introduce, in outline form, the universal and unifying research methodology of the disciplined thinking for and in the testing for truth experience to be practiced by graduate students in educology, through the meaning, reference, and significance of ‘educology’, in three parts.

Part I: A general history and justification of the meaning, reference, and significance of the term ‘educology’ will be presented in Part I.

Part II: This part is an outline of the domain of educology as knowledge that references education as it is formed and produced through the disciplined, unified, and universal experience of using the methodology of thinking for testing and thinking in testing for truth in reference to education.

Several aspects of the universal, unifying, and disciplined experience of thinking for and in testing for truth in reference to education, i.e. of thinking for and in testing for truth in educology, are not widely understood and practiced by graduate students in educology. To introduce graduate students in educology to an outline of aspects of the logic of eduction, involving the logic of induction, abduction, and deduction, in thinking for and in testing for truth in reference to education, is the essential purpose of this outlined introduction to the domain of educology.

The logic of eduction involves: (i) a Field Map of regions and areas depicted by features in the scope of education as social conduct, as the reference of educology; (ii) the theory of case type educological questions that guide the formation of the funds of knowledge that constitutes educology; and (iii) the theory of phases in the unified and universal thinking in and for testing for truth in reference to education, as the conduct and discipline of educology.

Part III: An important aspect of educological research is the knowledge that references education, i.e. the educology, that it produces, being published and disseminated. Presented in Part III will be journal and internet publication opportunities for graduate students through ERA/USA. (2)

The term ‘educology’, and the significance of the reference of its meaning, originated from the work of several scholars in Europe, North America, and Australia. Professor Elizabeth Steiner of Indiana University, Bloomington, used the term in a presentation to the Philosophy of Education Society (U.S.A.), Logic of Education and Educatology: Dimensions of Philosophy of Education, in 19964 at Lawrence, Kansas. Although she spelled the term as ‘educatology’, in her original paper, in response to criticisms and recommendations made at the Philosophy of Education Society meeting, she corrected the spelling to ‘educology’. Her subsequent work, in explicating the significance of the meaning of ‘educology’, to more clearly reference knowledge about education, included her articles: Towards Educational Theorizing Without Mistake (1970); Philosophy of Education as Philosophy of Educational Science (1961); The Nonidentity of Philosophy and Theory of Education (1972); and Educology: Thirteen Years Later (1977).

Although unknown to Steiner, the term ‘educology’ was coined thirteen years earlier than her coinage in 1964, and introduced into the literature about education. Professor Lowry W. Harding of Ohio State University (Columbus, Ohio) coined, used, and introduced the term as early as 1951. In fact, Harding had published four books (1951, 1956, 1964, 1965) using the term, and he played the role of principal figure in a loosely formed organization which he named, “The Association for the Study of Educology,” at Ohio State University. To qualify for membership, one had to contribute a witty story or a joke that related to education. In all of Harding’s work on educology, he treated it as a joke. He used the meaning, reference, and significance of ‘educology’ as a format for witty anecdotes about education, although there was the occasional suggestion that underneath the wit, Harding was serious about the idea of developing a fund of knowledge about education, meant by ‘educology’. His books were of limited edition and they were never intended to be widely distributed. Consequently, awareness of them was confined largely to Harding’s students and friends at Ohio State.

In contrast to Harding, Steiner was serious in her writings about the meaning, reference, and significance of ‘educology’. She coined the term independently of Harding and without knowledge of his treatment of the term. Moreover, her meaning of ‘educology’ explicitly referenced significant problems of how to conduct inquiry about education in a disciplined manner and of how to substantiate knowledge claims about education, i.e. her meaning explicitly referenced significant problems in the philosophy of educology.

Others who worked independently of Steiner, on these problems in the philosophy of educology, included Professor John B. Biggs of Newcastle Univesity (Australia), Professor Rachel Elder of Pepperdine University (Los Angeles, California), Professor Wolfgang Brezinka of Konstanz University (Konsanz, Federal Republic of Germany), and Professor Anon Monshouwer of the Institute of Philosophy and History of Education, University of Nijmegen (Nijmegen, The Netherlands).

Biggs used the term in a paper presented to the Annual Conference of the South Pacific Association for Teacher Education (Macquarie University, Sydney, Australia): Professional Development or Practice (1975). He also used the term in a subsequent article: Educology: The Theory of Educational Practice (1976). Elder had coined the term in the late 1960’s while working at the University of California, Berkeley, California, and she used it in a paper written for the Far West Laboratory for Educational Research (San Francisco, California): Three Educologies (mimeographed, 1971). In Europe, Brezinka explicated the significance of the meaning of ‘educology’ in his book, Metatheorie der Erziehung (Munich: Ernst Reinhardt, 1978). Also in Europe, Monshouwer used the significance of the meaning and reference of ‘educology’ in his treatment of the problem of what constitutes scientific knowledge about education: Educational Theory as Science of Education (1978, 1979).

Stimulated by Steiner’s work on the significance of the meaning and reference of ‘educology’, many other scholars have worked on extending the meaning and its significance in the construction of solutions to educologically related problems. Persons engaged in this work have included George S. Maccia, David Denton, James E. Fisher, James E. Christensen, William E. Eaton, Gregory J. Pozovich, Jerome A. Popp, Russel Ames, John Martin Rich, Richard Snow, Kenneth Strike, Edmund Short, Charles W. Reigeluth, M. David Merrill, Diana Buell Hiatt, Marian Reinhart, and John Walton.

In the late 1960’s Professor George S. Maccia of Indiana University, Bloomington, Indiana collaborated with Steiner on a number of important works, and one of the outcomes was his Science and Science of Education (1967). At the same time, Professor David Denton of the University of Kentucky, Lexington, Kentucky, published A Call for a Society of Educologists (1967).

Christensen and Fisher’s work on the significance of the meaning and reference of ‘educology’ began in the mid 1970’s. Working in relation to the previous achievements of Steiner and Maccia, Christensen and Fisher co-authored a series of papers and articles: The Logical Structure of Educational Studies (Educology) as an Organization for Curriculum and Administration in Colleges of Education, a paper presented to the Annual Conference of the American Educational Studies Association (AERA), New York City, New York 1974 Educational Research as Educology (1975); A ‘Knowledgeable’ Approach to Organizing a College of Education (1977); and An Organizational Theory for Schools of Teacher Education and Faculties of Education (1978). Another educological work which Christensen developed in the late 1970’s was A Conversation about Education as Educology a paper presented to the Annual Conference of the American Educational Studies Association (AESA) (Cincinnati, Ohio, 1979).

In 1975, Professor Fisher organized a symposium at the Annual Conference of AESA (San Francisco, California). The symposium addressed the question of whether the AESA should change its name from the American Educational Studies Association to the American Educology Association. Papers included in this symposium were: The History of the Term, ‘Educology’ (William E. Eaton and Gregory J. Pozovich of Southern Illinois University, Edwardsville, Illinois); Educology and the Categories of Educational Studies (James E. Fisher): and A Conversation about Education and Comparative Education (James E. Christensen).

Two years later, in 1977, Professor John Martin Rich of the University of Texas, Austin, Texas, presented a paper to a joint meeting of the Society for Professors of Education and the Philosophy of Education Society entitled, The Moral Domains of the Education Professoriate. In this paper, Rich offered criticism of Steiner’s work on the significance of the meaning and reference of ‘educology’ and he also made efforts to delineate the moral significance of the meaning and reference of ‘educology’.

Also, in 1977, at the Annual Meeting of AERA in New York City, a symposium was held on the question of “Whither or Wither Educology?” The session was chaired by Professor George S. Maccia, and the papers of the symposium included: Educology: Its Origin and Future (Elizabeth S. Maccia); Educology and Educational Theory Construction (Professor Richard E. Snow of Stanford, University, Palo Alto, California): The Relevance of Educology for Educational Practice (Professor Russell Ames, Purdue University, West Lafayette, Indiana); Educology and Educational Policy Making (Professor Kenneth Strike of Cornell University, Ithaca, New York).

In 1979, Colgate University (Hamilton, New York) invited Elizabeth Steiner to accept the A. Lindsay O’Connor Professorship of American Institutions for the Spring Semester. In that capacity, Steiner delivered a series of lectures which were published as Educology of the Free (1981). Also, in 1979, Chrisensen and Fisher published their first educological book: Analytic Philosophy of Education as a Subdiscipline of Educology.

The 1980’s saw further advances in the development of the significance of the meaning and reference of ‘educology’. In 1981, Perspectives on Education as Educology (James E. Christensen, Ed.) was published. This work included contributions from John Biggs (Educology: The Science of Effective Education), Wolf Brezinka (Meta-Theory of Education: European Contributions from an Empirical-Analytical Point of View), James E. Christensen (Educology and Some Related Concepts), David E. Denton (A Renewed Call for a Society of Educologists), James E. Fisher (The Concept of Educology and the Classification System used in Educational Studies), James E. Fisher and Marian Reinhart (Educology and the Teaching of Mathematics), Dianna Buell Hiaatt (Teaching for Alternative Frames of References), George S. Maccia (The Genesis of Educology), Charles M. Reigeluth and M. David Merrill (Instructional Science and Technology: Their Context within Educology and Some Ideas for Their Future Development), Edmund C. Short (Analysis of Educology and Educational Inquiry), Elizabeth Steiner (Educology: Thirteen Years Later), and John Walton (Educology: An Academic Discipline).

Also, in 1981, Educology Research Associates/Australia (ERA/Aus) was formed by James E. Christensen from an international consortium of scholars who shared a common interest in the development of research with an educological perspective. Publications produced by ERA/Aus include Education and Human Development; A Study in Educology (1981), Curriculum, Education, and Educology (1981), and Organization and Colleges of Education: An Educological Perspective (1983).

In 1986, ERA/Aus published Educology ’86: Proceedings of a Conference on Educational Research, Inquiry and Development with an Educological Perspective, University House Australian National University, Canberra, ACT, July 10-12, 1986, edited by Christensen.

In 1987, Seymour Papert published A Critique of Technocentrism in Thinking About the School of the Future, a paper based on a talk presented at Children in an Information Age: Opportunities for Creativity, Innovation, and New Activities (Sofia, Bulgaria, May 1987) in which he warned against technocentrism and scientism while developing a vision of the significance of the meanings of educology and constructionism. In this paper, Papert cites that he has borrowed the term ‘educology’ from Jonas Salk, the “great American thinker and the inventor of the Salk polio vaccine.”

In 1989, Educology Research Association/USA (ERA/USA) was founded in Columbia, South Carolina, by James E. Fisher, with the expressed mission of advancing home, school, and community education and their academic and practical studies in educology. To-date, home and community educational development programs in a USA school, in a USA county township, and in Guinea, West Africa have been designed and implemented, as well as an academic discipline of educology development program being designed and implemented in the Department of Educology, Vytautas Magnes University, Kaunas, Lithuania.

Books in progress to be published by ERA/USA, as being written by James E. Fisher, are Toward a Semiotical Pragmatic Philosophy of Educology, Philosophy of Educology, and A Logic of Eduction for Educology and Education. Articles for publication in the International Journal of Educology, published by ERA/USA, as being written by Fisher, are: Semiotics, Philosophy of Language, and Philosophy of Educology; An Educological Analysis of a Direct Study of the Education of Oppressed and an Indirect Study of the Education of Affluent People (A Semiotically Oriented Study in the Philosophy of Educology) and The I-It and I-Thou Relations in Educology: Toward an Integration of Phenomenology into the Reflective Thinking Experience as Engaged in the Phases of Educological Inquiry.

As did Vytautas Magnes University, Kaunas, Lithuania in 2000, Stockholm University, Stockholm, Sweden, in its Department of Educology, began offering studies covering the range of the domain of Educology.

In the twenty-first century ‘educology’ and its meaning, reference, and significance continues to be developed through ERA/USA, in both practical and academic international settings, including universities in the world.

The point of going into the origins and future of the significance of the meaning of ‘educology’ is to show that it has a history and future among a set of scholars and that there is a mounting fund of literature associated with it. However, this is not sufficient justification for the use of the meaning and reference of ‘educology’, for developing its significance.

Justification of the Meaning, Reference, and Significance of ‘Educology’

The justification for the term ‘educology’ and the significance of its meaning and reference relate to whether its meaning is used to function for the purpose of thinking for knowing in reference to education, when forming a fund of knowledge meant to truly refer to education. When established terms and their meanings begin to significantly malfunction referentially, i.e. begin to reference something ambiguously, when meant to refer for the purpose of knowing the something, then, the creation of a new term and endowing meaning on it, for more clearly referentially knowing the something, is needed and justified.

This is the case with the meaning of the term ‘educology’, a term, with meaning conceptually endowed on it, that can be used without ambiguity to name the fund of knowledge that references the total scope of education. The term ‘educology’ means ‘knowledge that references the total scope of education’. Its significance is that its meaning clearly functions to name a complete domain of knowledge that truly references education.

Other terms and their meanings, presently being used, do not clearly function in this significant way, considered as follows.

The Term ‘Education’: The meaning of the term ‘education’ malfunctions for the purpose of thinking for knowing about education, i.e. for the purpose of naming the knowledge meant to truly reference education, in that it has been endowed with both a “process of” meaning’ and “knowledge about” meaning’, as shown below.

“Process of” Meaning: ‘education’ means ‘the process intentionally conducted by
someone(s) teaching someone(s) to study and learn something in some setting’.

“Knowledge about” Meaning: ‘education’ means ‘the knowledge that truly references the
process of education’.

One aspect of the significance of these two meanings of ‘education’ is that there is one word with two meanings, i.e. there is one word that is ambiguous by equivocation, in that at one time the word has the meaning to reference the scope of the process of education, as conducted in some setting, and another time to name a domain of knowledge that references the scope of the process of education. The significance of the equivocation of the meaning of ‘education’ is demonstrated in the following sentence.

“Through the department of education in a university, arrangements are made for students to be taught courses in education, mathematics, history, language, and science in their post secondary education setting so as to complete a degree in education and to acquire a certificate to teach in pre-elementary, elementary, and/or secondary school education settings.”

In the phrase ‘department of education’, the term ‘education’ is being used with the “knowledge about” meaning, as it is being used in the phrases ‘to be taught courses in education’, and ‘to complete a degree in education’. However, in the phrase ‘in their post secondary education setting’, the “process of” meaning is being used, as it is in the phrase ‘in pre-elementary, elementary, and/or secondary school education settings’.

A critical significance of this equivocation of meaning is that it causes confusion in the minds of educologists trying to think clearly and truly about education to form knowledge about it. Because of this critical significant malfunction of the meaning of ‘education’, thinking intended to form knowledge that truly references the process of education becomes obstructed.

Thinking for knowing about, i.e. truly referencing, the scope of the process of education, then, can be, and is, obstructed by the equivocation of meaning, however, it is also limited by the under-extension of meaning, as with the meaning of the term ‘pedagogy’.

The Term ‘Pedagogy’: ‘Pedagogy’ is a term that has been endowed with a meaning that has been significantly used since the eighteenth century. The meaning of the term ‘pedagogy’ is univocal, hence unambiguous, in its “knowledge about” meaning, as shown below.
.
“Knowledge about” Meaning : ‘pedagogy’ means ‘the knowledge that truly references the
process of the intentional conduct of the education of only children’.

The meaning of ‘pedagogy’, then, is unambiguous, in that it has only a “knowledge about” meaning, however, the meaning is limited by narrowing, hence under-extending, the reference to a “process of” meaning for ‘pedagogy’, as the process of education for children only. This meaning is shown below.

“Process of” Meaning for ‘Pedagogy’: ‘education’ means ‘the process intentionally conducted by
someone(s) teaching only children to study and learn something in some setting, as truly referenced by the knowledge meant by ‘pedagogy’’

Thinking for knowing about education, then, though not obstructed by the ambiguity of equivocation of meaning, it is under-extended by narrowing the meaning to truly reference the scope of the process of education to include the education of only children.

Thinking for knowing about, i.e. truly referencing, education, then, can be obstructed by the ambiguity of equivocation of meaning and by the under-extension of, i.e. by narrowing, meaning, however, it can also be obstructed by the over-extension of, i.e. by broadening, meaning, as with the meaning of the term ‘ethology’.

The Term ‘Ethology’: Whereas the meaning of ‘pedagogy’ is too narrow to the point of being under-extended, for the purpose of thinking for truly referring to the scope of the process of education, the meaning of the term ‘ethology’ is too broad to the point of being over-extended for this purpose.

‘Ethology’ was proposed by J.S. Mill in the nineteenth century (Systems of Logic, 1846, Book VI, Chapter V, Paragraph 4). Mill was concerned with the problem of knowing, i.e. truly referencing, how different nations developed distinct national characters and to how the process of learning mass character formation was conducted.

The meaning of the term ‘ethology’ is univocal, hence, its meaning is unambiguous and unobstructive, as shown below.
.
“Knowledge about” Meaning: ‘ethology’ means ‘the knowledge that truly references the process
of the intentional and unintentional conduct of education for character formation of someone’

The meaning of ‘ethology’, then, is univocal, in that it has only a “knowledge about” meaning, however, its meaning is broadened, hence over-extended, to refer to the educational process, as shown below.

“Process of” Meaning for ‘Ethology’: ‘education’ means ‘the process intentionally and
unintentionally conducted in which someone learns character formation, as referenced by ethology’’

Thinking for knowing about education, then, though not obstructed by the equivocation of the meaning or the under-extension of the meaning, it is obstructed by the over-extension of the meaning of ‘education’, by broadening the meaning to refer to both (i) intentional and (ii) unintentional conduct involved in the educational process, as referred to by the meaning of ‘ethology’.

Education, as referred to for knowing by the meaning of ‘ethology’, then, involves someone learning something, whether child or adult, however, the learning by the someone does not, by reference of the meaning of ‘ethology’, signify only knowledge about the process of learning by intentionally being taught by someone and intentionally studying something by someone. The meaning of ‘ethology’ signifies knowledge that refers to all learning about the something of character formation, whether intentional or unintentional, deliberate or non-deliberate, guided or unguided, hence is an over-extended meaning for truly knowing the scope of the reference of the meaning of ‘education’ as ‘the process intentionally conducted by someone(s) teaching someone(s) to study and learn something in some setting’.

As the meaning of ‘pedagogy’ was shown to be under-extended to properly signify the fund of knowledge referring to the scope of the educational process, to include only children’s education, hence being obstructive for the purpose of truly knowing the full scope of education, the meaning of ‘andragogy’, as proposed to include only adult education by M. S. Knowles in The Modern Practice of Adult Education: Andragogy versus Pedagogy (New York: Association Press, 1970) is so under-extended. Knowles argues that the meaning of ‘andragogy’ is appropriate for naming knowledge referring to adult education. The term is derived from the Greek ‘andr-‘, meaning ‘man or male’. Etymologically, then, the meaning of ‘andragogy’ names knowledge meant to refer to the education of men or males, in particular, rather than to adults, in general, however, it has historically been taken in its general meaning, as follows.

“Knowledge about” Meaning : ‘andragogy’ means ‘the knowledge that truly references the
process of the intentional conduct of the education of only adults’.

The meaning of ‘andragogy’ is univocal, as is the meaning of ‘pedagogy’, in that it has only a “knowledge about” meaning, however, the reference of its meaning is narrowed to the point of being under-extended to refer to the process of only that of the education of adults, as shown below.

“Process Meaning” for ‘Andragogy’: ‘education’ means ‘the process intentionally conducted by
someone(s) teaching only adults to study and learn something in some setting, as referenced by ‘andragogy’’

The significance of the meanings of ‘education’, ‘pedagogy’, ‘ethology’, and ‘andragogy’, as presented above, is that they obstruct, by the equivocation, under-extension, and over-extension of meaning, in ways that improperly name knowledge that references the scope of the process of education.

The meaning of ‘educology’, however, properly names knowledge that references the scope of education.

“Knowledge about” Meaning : ‘educology’ means ‘the knowledge that references the process of the
intentional conduct of the education of someone’

The process of meaning for ‘educology’, then, is:

“Process Meaning” for ‘Educology’: ‘education’ means ‘the process intentionally conducted by
someone(s) teaching someone(s) to study and learn something in some setting, as referenced by ‘educology’’

The significance of the meaning of ‘educology’ is that it does not obstruct thinking for truly referencing the process of education, i.e. it does not obstruct thinking for knowing about the scope of the educational process, hence, it is justified as the proper name for the domain of knowledge that references the intentional conduct of education in any social setting.

As with a domain of knowledge that references anything, the domain of educology, as the domain of knowledge that references education, can be understood to be instituted through the three essential aspects of the domain of educology. These aspects are; (i) the reference of knowledge that references education, i.e. the reference of educology; (ii) the constitution of knowledge that references education, i.e. the constitution of educology; and (iii) the conduct and discipline of knowledge that references education, i.e. the conduct and discipline of educology, as outlined in order in Sections A, B, and C.

The reference of educology can be represented by six regions and five areas as depicted by the twenty-five features, shown in the Field Map below.

Field Map of the Referential Territory of Educology (3)

The scope of education as a social process involves:

Region I Who Feature a Someone and 1
Feature b Someone else 2

Region II Why Feature c Meeting 3
Feature d to manage and 4
Feature e to teach someone 5
Feature f to study or 6
Feature g through study 7
Feature h to learn 8

Region III What Feature I to attend or 9
Feature j through attention 10
Feature k to know by 11
Feature l educatively experiencing 12
Feature m something of value 13
Feature n judged by some criteria 14
Feature o competently 15
Feature p judged by some criteria 16

Region IV How by using Area A Meeting [1]

Feature q approaches 17
Feature r methods 18
Feature s aids 19
Feature t language arts forms 20
Feature u body language forms 21
Feature v groupings 22
Feature w manners and 23

by using Area B Managing [2]

Feature q approaches 17
Feature r methods 18
Feature s aids 19
Feature t language arts forms 20
Feature u body language forms 21
Feature v groupings 22
Feature w manners and 23

by using Area C Teaching [3]

Feature q approaches 17
Feature r methods 18
Feature s aids 19
Feature t language arts forms 20
Feature u body language forms 21
Feature v groupings 22
Feature w manners and 23

by using Area D Studying [4]

Feature q approaches 17
Feature r methods 18
Feature s aids 19
Feature t language arts forms 20
Feature u body language forms 21
Feature v groupings 22
Feature w manners and 23

by using Area E Learning [5]

Feature q approaches 17
Feature r methods 18
Feature s aids 19
Feature t language arts forms 20
Feature u body language forms 21
Feature v groupings 22
Feature w manners and 23

Region V When Feature x for some amount of time 24

Region VI Where Feature y in some situation 25

Knowledge that references aspects of the regions, areas, and features depicted in the Field Map is constituted in accord with the following theory of case type educological questions.

Case 1: What was the case about education, as described and explained in educological inquiry?
Case 2: What is the case about education, as described and explained in educological inquiry?
Case 3: What might be the case about education, as predicted and explained in educological inquiry?
Case 4: What ought to be the case about education, as prescribed and explained in educological inquiry?
Case 5: What should be the case about education, as prescribed and explained in educological inquiry?

The fund of knowledge that answers the Case 1 type of educological question is that named “historical educology” or “history of education.”

The fund of knowledge that answers the Case 2 type of educological question is that named “scientific educology” or “science of education.”

The fund of knowledge that answers the Case 3 type of educological question is “futuristic educology” or “science of future education.”

The fund of knowledge that answers the Case 4 type of educological question is that named “axiological educology” or “axiology of education.” (4)

The fund of knowledge that answers the Case 5 type of educological question is that named “praxiological educology” or “praxiology of education.” (5)

The funds of educology, through the logic of eduction, form the constitution of educology.

The constitution of educology is formed through theoretical thinking, as thinking for testing for truth and practical thinking, as thinking in testing for truth in reference to education, by using the logic of eduction.

Theoretical thinking is that thinking using statemental meaning for thinking for testing for truth and practical thinking is that thinking using statemental meaning in thinking when testing for truth, as considered in the theory of phases in the unified, universal, and disciplined reflective thinking experience outlined below.

The Phases Involved in the Thinking for Testing for Truth Experience as Theoretical Thinking in Feference to Education are:

Phase 1: Use of Statemental Meaning to Form Observations
in Reference to Education Conducted in a Situation: thinking for testing for truth experience

Phase 2: Use of Statemental Meaning to Form Feelings
in Reference to Education in a Situation: thinking for testing for truth experience

Phase 3: Use of Statemental Meaning to Form Case-Type
Problem in Reference to Education in a Situation: thinking for testing for truth experience

Phase 4: Use of Statemental Meaning to Form Plausible
Solutions in Reference to Education in a Situation: thinking for testing for truth experience

Phase 5: Use of Statemental Meaning to Form Imagined
Consequences in Reference to Education in a Situation: thinking for testing for truth experience

Phase 6: Use of Statemental Meaning to Form Choice of
a Plausible Solution in Reference to Education
in a Situation: thinking for testing for truth experience

Phase 7: Use of Statemental Meaning to Form Planning
Procedures for The Enactment of Choice in Reference
to Education in a Situation: thinking for testing for truth experience

The Phases Involved in the Thinking in Testing for Truth Experience as Practical Thinking in Reference to Education are:

Phase 8: Use of Statemental Meaning in the Enactment of
Choice in Reference to Education in a Situaton: thinking in testing for truth experience

Phase 9: Use of Statemental Meaning in the Observation of
the Adherency and Correspondency Relationships
in Reference to Education in a Situation: thinking in testing for truth experience

Phase 10: Use of Statemental Meaning in the Evaluation of the
Adherency and Correspondency Relationships
in Feference to Education in a Situation: thinking in testing for truth experience

Phase 11: Use of Statemental Meaning in the Formation of the
Coherency Relationship in the Fund of Knowledge
in Reference to Education in a Situation: thinking in testing for truth experience (6)

A graduate student in educology, using the logic of eduction, involving these eleven phases of thinking for and in testing for truth in reference to the features, areas, and regions in the scope of education, disciplines his/her mind for successfully conducting universal and unified educological inquiry.

Graduate students in educology, with disciplined, unified, and universal minds, that are practiced in accord with the logic of eduction, are invited to submit manuscripts for publication in paperback and electronically produced journals through Educology Research Associates/USA (ERA/USA).

The paperback produced journal is the International Journal of Educology (IJE) and the soon-to-be electronically produced journal is the e-International Journal of Educology (e-IJE). Graduate students in educology, interested in publishing in these journals and/or in acquiring a copy of the book in progress, A Logic of Eduction for Educology and Education, should consult the web-site address of www.erausa.org on the internet. Graduate students in educology, confirmed by a letter from a professor in educology, will receive a special discount on the cost of the book and other publications through ERA/USA.

1. Article (i), The Territory of Educology, appeared in the IJE, 1991, Volume 5, Number 1, pp. 18-45; Article (ii), Mapping Observations about Education in the Home, An Educology of the Home, appeared in the IJE, 1993, Volume 7, Number 2, pp. 139-196, under the title, An Introduction to Home Educology and Home Education in the U.S.A. (This was an editorial mistake. The correct title should have been Mapping Observations about Education in the Home, An Educology of the Home.) Article (iii), also published under the title, An Introduction to Home Education and Home Educology in the U.S.A., appeared in the IJE, 1992, Volume 6, Number 2, pp. 170-207. (Due to an editorial error, Article (iii) was published before Article (ii).); and Article (iv), The Domain of Educology, appeared in the IJE, Volume 10, Number 1, pp. 66-143.

Toward a Theory of Language for Educology and Education, appeared in Educology 86: Proceedings of a Conference on Educational Research, Inquiry and Development with an Educological Perspective, Canberra, July 10-12, 1986, Educology Research Associates, Sydney, 1986.

Analytic Philosophy of Education as a Sub-Discipline of Educology: An Introduction to its Techniques and Application, University Press of American, co-authored with James E. Christensen, 1979.

2. ERA/USA (Educology Research Associates/USA) is a foundation founded by James E. Fisher, Ed. D, President, in 1989 in Columbia, South Carolina for the purpose of promoting the interconnection of home, school, and community education and its universal and unifying body of knowledge as formed in the constitution of educology. ERA/USA has a range of programs described on its home website of www.erausa.org.

3. This Field Map is taken from the article The Domain of Educology, as modified from its original presentation in The Territory of Educology. In The Domain of Educology the field map was named “Field Map of the Territory of Educology,” whereas, in this article it is named “Field Map of the Referential Territory of Educology.” The latter name, including the word ‘referential’, suggests more clearly that the map represents the scope of education as the reference of educology, i.e. as that to which knowledge about education is intended to attend, i.e. to refer.

The Field Map is based on and is an extension of the meaning formed as “education is the social process of someone teaching someone something somewhere” that was conceived and used by Elizabeth Steiner Maccia. She made this meaning significant as being the essence of education in her philosophizing about educology.

4. The term ‘axiology’ is being used to mean ‘the philosophical study of value as what ought to be the case’. Axiology is the philosophical study in which ends are prescribed and explained. Graduate students in educology, interested in further study of the meaning, reference, and significance of ‘axiology’, should read philosophers listed in the text of this article as educological philosophers prescribing and explaining the ends for education.

5. The term ‘praxiology’ is being used to mean the ‘scientific study of effective and efficient human conduct’, i.e. the study of what should be the case to realize the value, as ends, established by axiological philosophical study of what ought to be the case. Praxiology is the scientific study in which means are prescribed and explained to realize axiologically established ends that are prescribed and explained. Graduate students in educology, interested in further study of praxiology, as praxiology of education, i.e. educological praxiology, can follow the links to Tadeusz Kotarbinski, a Polish Philosopher who established the meaning, reference, and significance of ‘praxiology’, using the web-site address of Polish Philosophy Page, ed. by F. Coniglione http://www.fmag.unict.it/polhome.html.

6. These eleven phases of thinking for and in testing for truth experience are educed from Dewey, John: How We Think; Great Books in Philosophy; Prometheus Books, New York, 1991, especially the chapter on A Complete Act of Thought.