An Analysis of John Dewey’s Notion of Occupations: Still Pedagogically Valuable?

John Dewey lived and worked in an environment where the manual training movement was ever present. For Dewey, his own unique version of manual training is labeled “occupations.” Nevertheless, over the years, what Dewey meant by occupations has been either misinterpreted or ignored for a plethora of reasons. Th is manual training climate that Dewey was a part of was dominant and Dewey could not and did not ignore it. He did, however, transform it. Later on, published sources used Dewey’s notion of occupations and in many cases misinterpreted what he meant by occupations as a method. Finally, what Dewey actually says about occupations is found in his Early Works and Middle Works. Th is analysis of Dewey’s concept of occupations, seeing its complexity, value, and thereby its distinction from ideas about vocational education, gives clarity to what Dewey believed about his concept but also shows its value for teaching and learning in schools today. Finally, a part of the confusion of Dewey’s notion of occupations may be found in the various ways Dewey employed the term. At the end of the nineteenth century, the manual training (MT) movement was a major concern for educators, industrialists, and politicians, and this included John Dewey. For Dewey. his unique version of MT, or “occupations,”was a method of learning by doing that was at the center of the curriculum and had equal weight with other studies. It was also a key component of a pedagogy that considered the psychology of the child,1 liberal studies, and the social dimension of learning; however, it was not trade or vocational education.2 Nevertheless, over the years what Dewey meant by occupations has been either misinterpreted or ignored for a plethora of reasons and, at times, seen as synAn Analysis of John Dewey's Notion of Occupations 83 Volume 26 (1) 2010 onymous with vocational education. Much of what has been written about Dewey’s occupations and vocational education is confusing.3 Although some may believe Dewey’s concept of occupations has been extensively discussed, a review of the literature shows that very little has been written about Dewey and occupations as opposed to Dewey’s notion of vocational education.4 Th is paper examines 1) the MT climate that Dewey was a part of, 2) selected publications that show the various ways Dewey’s concept of occupations has been interpreted, and 3) what Dewey actually says about occupations in his Early Works and Middle Works. Th is analysis of Dewey’s concept of occupations, showing its complexity, value, and distinction from ideas about vocational education, will not only give clarity to what Dewey believed about concept but will also show its value for teaching and learning in schools today. The Ubiquitous Manual Training Movement MT 5 is not now and never has been a common, shared concept. Usually MT refers to vocational or industrial education, and it is seen as necessary for job preparation. However, its lack of adherence to a common defi nition has in no way deterred its ubiquitous presence. As early as 1897 in the New York City public schools, MT was seen “as a part of the system.”6 Th e MT movement had a number of versions, and it had supporters as well as detractors. Even in the early stages of development in the schools, some saw MT as no longer an experiment but one aspect of the reform movement. As early as 1891,7 MT included better teacher training so that it could be taught more eff ectively in the schools. In 1884, the Industrial Education Association8 (IEA) started in New York City, and it aimed to introduce industrial education into the curriculum. Th e IEA planned to introduce elementary school children to MT so they could become self-supporting. In addition, the IEA defi ned MT as industrial training as opposed to technical training.9 Th e IEA wanted industrial training to exist for two years on the elementary level and two years in the special branches schools. Th e organization saw MT as a way to stimulate the child’s constructive ability and creative force.10 In addition to the IEA’s, other versions of MT were off ered. At Teachers College in 1896, the American Manual Training Association discussed having a variety of activities and off ered its version of MT. It included: clay modeling, cardboard, scissors and needle work, paper folding, mat weaving, book covering, and bent wire work. Th e New York City Board of Education in 1887 off ered a version of MT that was vocationally focused. Th eir Committee of Study and School Books wanted instruction on MT in the primary schools for boys to consist of construction “by the use of splints, wire, thread, paper, pasteboard, and clay.” For boys from fi rst to fi ft h grades, some “wood turning,” metal work, and carpentry work would be off ered.11 For girls in grades four to eight, sewing would be taught and cooking in second and third grades.