Noddings and Aristotle: Ethics of Care in Education

Introduction

When it comes to pedagogy — the art of teaching — there are many different interrelationships among theories of knowledge, theories of learning, conceptions of curriculum, and approaches to broad inquiry for the purposes of schooling. Every teacher faces the challenge of effectively conveying knowledge and inspiring today's youth. It takes a certain amount of passion and consistency to pursue such a career.

This paper argues the validity of Nel Noddings' groundbreaking work on the notion of care, with particular attention to her book Caring: A Feminine Approach to Ethics and Moral Education. The thesis also draws on her other works. To pursue a just argument that the notion of care remains relevant today, the paper also examines Aristotle's Ethics. By considering his work alongside Noddings', the discussion below conducts a theoretical conversation between the two educators, exploring their different ideas about ethics and morality and examining how those ideas apply to education today. More specifically, it looks at examples of inner-city experiences at the elementary school level in the Los Angeles Unified School District. By providing these samples of leadership in the classroom, one can argue that a blend of theories is used on a daily basis. Is this method successful? What kind of impact do these theories have in the classroom?

Much of Noddings' and Aristotle's ideas are rooted in basic human nature, and it is reasonable to assume both can be used together. But is this at all possible? Is Noddings' theory too liberal and modern? Is Aristotle's point of view outdated and archaic? Are his ideas too masculine-centered while Noddings' are too feminist? Will each of their arguments stand as theory, or will only one emerge as the stronger position? What are the possibilities, and are there limitations to each idea? This paper attempts to answer many of the questions that arise from placing these works in juxtaposition.

Noddings and Aristotle: A Hypothetical Conversation

If these two great thinkers were to meet today for quiet conversation, what would they say to each other? What kind of dialogue, debate, or argument would result? It is clear that each thinker would clarify their stance on educational theories used for schooling. They might even agree on some points, but each would likely stand at opposite ends of the spectrum from the other. How does this concept shift our thinking about education? Does the literature need further elaboration? Are there new concepts born out of the reading experience? Does this complicate the original assumptions or expand upon them?

Noddings' Argument

Nel Noddings is closely identified with the promotion of the ethics of care — the argument that caring should be a foundation for ethical decision-making. Her first major work, Caring, explored what she described as a woman's approach to ethics and moral education. Her argument starts from the position that care is basic to human life: all people want to be cared for (Noddings, 2002, p. 11). She holds that while both men and women are guided by an ethic of care, natural caring — a form of caring that does not require ethical effort to motivate it (although it may require considerable physical and mental effort in responding to needs) — can have a significant basis in women's experience. Natural caring is therefore a moral attitude, a longing for goodness that arises out of the experience or memory of being cared for. On this basis, Noddings explores the notion of ethical caring and defines it as a state of being in relation, characterized by receptivity, relatedness, and engrossment.

It is not easy to decide what caring actually means to each person. Her approach is to study the caring that is actually experienced. She asks simple questions like "what are we like" when we interact in caring situations. This question initiates an element of self-discovery: we are receptive to new ideas and emotions. Receptive attention is an essential characteristic of a caring encounter. The carer is open to what the cared-for is saying and might be experiencing, and is able to reflect upon it. There is also something else at work here — motivational displacement. In other words, the carer's motivational energy flows toward the cared-for, and the carer responds in ways that are, hopefully, helpful. For this to be called "caring," a further step is required: there must be some recognition on the part of the cared-for that an act of caring has occurred. Caring involves connection between the carer and the cared-for and a degree of reciprocity — both gain from the encounter in different ways, and both give.

A caring encounter, according to Noddings, has three elements:

1. A cares for B — that is, A's consciousness is characterized by attention and motivational displacement; and
2. A performs some act in accordance with (1); and
3. B recognizes that A cares for B. (2002, p. 19)

With this in mind, there are important differences between caring-about and caring-for. One learns to care-about from experiences with caring-for. Noddings states, "learning first what it means to be cared for, then to care for intimate others, and finally to care about those we cannot care for directly" (2002, p. 31). Caring-about is essential and significant in societal change. Smith writes that "caring-about is something more general and takes us into the public realm" (2004, par. 4), while caring-for holds more personal connotations for the individual.

Conclusion

This hypothetical conversation has explored different ideas about ethics and morality as they apply to education. The thesis argued that both theories — Noddings' ethics of care and Aristotle's virtue-based moral framework — can coexist and be used together in the modern classroom. Examples of inner-city experiences in the Los Angeles Unified School District support this argument, illustrating how caring relationships, cultural belonging, and the formation of moral habits each play a role in shaping student learning and engagement.