The career of American-bred Progressive Education 1 as a distinct movement in Republican China has been well described, most notably by Barry Keenan, 2 to the point that the story and its interpretation have become standardized in the literature of the period. From a distance, the channel of its course in clear, the lines of development sharp and distinct. As we move closer in, however, things are not so well defined — the shoreline tends to dissolve into bogs and marshes, the direction of flow becomes more uncertain, the source of the current more obscure. This is particularly true if we turn from Keenan’s interpretation of Progressivism as a quasi-political movement, trying through education to shape the political development of the fledgling Chinese republic, and examine instead Progressivism as an educational movement, more diffuse in its effects and yet more persistent.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Hubert O. Brown (2017) studied this question.