From Dewey to Freire: Revisiting the Foundations of Progressive Education

In contemporary debates on pedagogy and educational reform, the term progressive education often serves as a slogan or rallying cry for human-centered schooling. However, its conceptual roots are frequently glossed over. To grasp what progressive education entails, it's crucial to revisit the foundational ideas of its most influential architects: John Dewey and Paulo Freire. Despite their differing contexts their shared commitment to progressive instruction is vital for the future of education.

John Dewey: Learning as Experience

John Dewey (1859–1952), philosopher, psychologist, and educational reformer, viewed education not as a preparation for life but as life itself. In Democracy and Education (1916), he argued that learning should emerge from lived experience and that schools should function as mini-democracies, not authoritarian institutions. For Dewey, education had to be rooted in the natural interests of the child. Knowledge was not something to be transmitted but reconstructed through inquiry, reflection, and action.

Dewey’s vision opposed the rigid, transmission-based education prevalent in his time. Instead, he championed a model that placed learners at the center of meaning-making. His emphasis on experiential learning has echoed through contemporary practices such as project-based learning, inquiry-led classrooms, and democratic schooling. Importantly, Dewey understood that education is not value-neutral—it is inextricably linked to the kind of society we aim to create.

“The ideal school is a small community... in which learning is a mode of life and work, not a preparation for life.” – Dewey

Paulo Freire: Consciousness and Liberation

Decades later and thousands of miles away, Paulo Freire (1921–1997) brought a revolutionary edge to progressive pedagogy. In Pedagogy of the Oppressed (1970), Freire introduced the concept of conscientização—critical consciousness. He rejected what he called the banking model of education, where learners are treated as passive recipients into whom knowledge is deposited. Instead, Freire proposed a dialogical model, where teacher and student co-create knowledge through shared inquiry and reflection on their socio-political realities.

For Freire, education was inherently political. Its goal was not merely literacy, but liberation. The oppressed must be empowered to read not just words, but the world—to recognize structures of domination and become agents of change. His pedagogy challenged both the form and function of education, arguing for a radical transformation of the relationship between teacher, student, and knowledge.

“Education either functions as an instrument which is used to facilitate integration of the younger generation into the logic of the present system... or it becomes the practice of freedom.” – Freire

Dewey and Freire in Dialogue

Though their vocabularies differed, Dewey and Freire converge on key principles. Both believed in education as a participatory process, rejected passive forms of instruction, and emphasized the learner’s experience and agency. Where Dewey framed education as a cornerstone of democracy, Freire framed it as a vehicle for emancipation. Dewey focused on cultivating habits of inquiry within democratic communities; Freire on awakening critical consciousness to resist oppression.

Their ideas suggest that progressive education is not merely a style of teaching, but a philosophical stance—one that views learners as subjects, not objects, of their own learning. It resists standardization and control, instead embracing complexity, dialogue, and moral purpose.

Contemporary Relevance

As education systems around the world face calls for equity, inclusion, and relevance, the work of Dewey and Freire offers a potent antidote to test-driven, technocratic models. Their theories challenge us to ask not just how we teach, but why and for whom. In a world of rising authoritarianism, educational inequity, and cultural fragmentation, progressive education’s emphasis on critical thinking, participatory democracy, and social justice feels more urgent than ever.

In practice, this means:

• Designing curricula that connect to students’ lives and social contexts.

• Valuing dialogue and co-construction of meaning over top-down delivery.

• Recognizing the classroom as a political space with the potential for transformation.

  
  

Revisiting Dewey and Freire is not an exercise in nostalgia. It is an act of reclamation—a reminder that education can be an engine of freedom, not just function. Their legacies invite educators today to resist conformity, cultivate curiosity, and insist on the full humanity of every learner.

If education always shapes the world, what kind of world is your classroom preparing students to build? Let us know in the comments below.