To educationally recover something (or somebody, as the title suggests vis-a-vis Dewey) invokes at least two assumptions: (1) that it has been covered before, thus, it can be recovered; and (2) that it somehow increases perspec-tive, insight, or understanding, and is therefore educational. Clearly, the work of John Dewey permeates the literature of curriculum studies. On numerous occasions (Schubert, 1980, 1982a, 1982c, 1986a) I have discussed an experientalist tradition in curriculum discourse that stems from writings of Francis W. Parker, William James, and principally John Dewey. It is developed through the writings of Boyd Bode, Harold Rugg, George S. Counts, William H. Kilpatrick, John Childs, and L. Thomas Hopkins. While the years from 1940 and onward saw the deterioration of a Deweyan brand of progressive education (and the demise of The Progressive Education Association), I submit that the spirit of the experientalist critique has emerged time and again (often without the progressive banner and even without Deweyan citation), challenging conventional theory and practice in curriculum.
Schubert, William H.
"Educationally Recovering Dewey in Curriculum,"
Education and Culture:
1, Article 2.
Available at: http://docs.lib.purdue.edu/eandc/vol07/iss1/art2