© 2011 NewFoundations

The Educational Theory of Nel Noddings

Kevin Coleman
Lanie Depp
Kimmy O'Rourke


edited 9/27/11


Nel Noddings was born in 1929 and has worked in nearly every aspect of teaching, from elementary to secondary to post-secondary education. Along with her experience in the classroom, Noddings has also served as an administrator and a curriculum developer for public schools. She has written thirteen books and some two hundred articles. Noddings received her bachelor's degree in mathematics and physical science from Montclair State College, her master's degree in mathematics from Rutgers University, and her doctorate in educational philosophy from Stanford University. Some of her accomplishments include awards for teaching excellence and positions as Stanford's Dean of Education, Eastern Michigan University's Chair of Urban Education, president of the Philosophy of Education Society, and president of the John Dewey Society. Nel Noddings has been married for fifty-eight years and has ten children.

I.                  Theory of Value: What knowledge and skills are worthwhile learning? What are the goals of education?

Noddings believes that the "main aim of education should be to produce competent, caring, loving and lovable people."[i] Although her theory of caring seems implicitly religious, her outlook on education is nothing short of practical. Noddings believes that students should learn the knowledge and skills necessary to help them to navigate the world around them, while simultaneously caring for children, the elderly, animals and the environment. Noddings reflects on the two ways themes of care can exist in schools. In one arena, subjects in school are organized around the thematic units of care; for example, Noddings writes, "we might consider life stages, spiritual growth, and what it means to develop an admirable character; in exploring the topic of caring for intimate others, we might include units on love, friendship, and parenting; under the theme of caring for strangers and global others, we might study war, poverty, and tolerance; in addressing the … human-made world, we might encourage competence with the machines that surround us and a real appreciation for the marvels of technology."[ii] In the other arena, Noddings says that subjects in school remain the standard modern-day disciplines, but incorporate themes of care throughout; for example, "such themes as war, poverty, crime, racism, or sexism can be addressed in almost every subject area."[iii] In both examples, Noddings suggests that the schools "allow free discussion of these [topics] … with powerful stories of honesty, compassion, moderation, and chastity."[iv]

At the core of her concept of education lies a multitude of existential questions, which should be investigated by both students and teachers. This list of questions includes topics that are extensively related to religion and morality: they include "the nature of gods, belonging, feminism and religion, immortality, salvation, and pessimism, humanism and unbelief, and religious and secular ethics."[v] Noddings believes that caring teachers and students should discuss such questions about life openly and in all subjects. She writes: "Throughout most of human history questions about the existence and nature of God, about the meaning of life, about the role of religion in society … have been recognized as paramount in any examined life and [are] therefore central to education."[vi] She would encourage that these religious and spiritual lessons would not be taught, but taught about.[vii]* Perhaps one of the most important points Noddings makes is that these spiritual themes of caring and these inherently religious and moral questions that arise exist in a symbiotic relationship with reason. Alven M. Neiman explained the views of Noddings accurately when he wrote, "While caring is an emotion, it need not be contrary to reason, properly conceived. This is because there are better and worse ways to care; that is, there is intelligent or educated and unintelligent or uneducated caring."[viii] Noddings believes that teaching themes of care and discussing these existential questions in school will give students not only the knowledge but also the prudence to make spiritual decisions for themselves as individuals, separate from the public sphere.

Noddings is less concerned with achievement scores than with personal direction in gaining knowledge and skills. Noddings stresses the importance of adapting the curriculum to fit the personal interests of the students and of making the core subjects applicable to real life. In order to help students learn what they care about learning, "students and teachers [should] construct educational objectives cooperatively."[ix] In addressing personal interests, Noddings believes we might abandon the traditional college-bound curriculum and practices of specialization. She says, "If we want students to enter a relation with subject matter – to make direct, receptive contact with it – it seems reasonable to suggest that the scope of the subject matter be very broad."[x] When the subject matter is broad, it is more likely that schools will educate what Noddings calls the "whole person." Noddings remarks that scores are less important and less time-constricted than modernly viewed; she asks, "Why should a student be penalized for not learning something on the first attempt? … The effort, if learning is really our goal, is a mutual one."[xi] Along with the abandonment of society's attachment to scores, Noddings encourages an abandonment of social stigmas related to specialization. For example, an art major should be no less respected than a business major; students should find what they care about and seek practical knowledge related to their own decisions.

Noddings also believes that in a liberal/democratic society, "in which the rights and privileges of individuals are taken seriously … political education is a necessity."[xii] In other words, the students should not be forced into learning from a specific curriculum, but rather given the practical life skills to make well-informed choices. In this political education, "every child must learn something about the limits of time and money that govern our lives."[xiii] The students should also be allowed to change their minds about what they want to learn, as often people change their career directions and perspectives on things when given more opportunity and information to reflect. In addition, the students should be practice the skills needed for public participation. In accordance with her goal of creating caring individuals, Nel Noddings believes that this political education will provide students with "an education that enhances the likelihood that students will have both richly satisfying personal lives and the willingness to promote such lives for others."[xiv]

II.                Theory of Knowledge: What is knowledge? How is it different from belief? What is a mistake? What is a lie?

Nel Noddings, like Socrates, regards knowledge as "justified true belief."[xv] In schools, Nel Noddings says, "Students make claims to knowledge on what they have learned from reliable sources. [In math], they are more often asked ‘how they got it' then why their answers are true, and if they can give an account using legitimate operations, we credit them with knowledge."[xvi] Therefore, Nel Noddings separates knowledge from belief, as knowledge is something that is not just perceived, but backed up with justification.

Noddings also regards knowledge as cultural capital. Knowledge is a source of power that allows people opportunities, but a lack of what Noddings calls "privileged knowledge" can also leave people with less freedom and choice. She comments that "certain forms of knowledge – the subjects usually associated with college preparation – have been used to exclude large numbers of people from various material goods."[xvii] The groups of people Noddings is referring to include minority groups, people in poverty and generally underprivileged peoples; their knowledge may help them survive in their own right, but it is not considered important by the "dominant culture."[xviii] Noddings believes that all students should have access to "privileged knowledge," and thus, that power of opportunity. In addition, "children should not be told that their cultural knowledge is a deficit; it is a resource, sometimes even a treasure."[xix] Finally, though, Noddings accepts the fact that the people in power in a culture define what dictates privileged knowledge; concurrently, when that privileged knowledge is accessible to all people, the people in power may change what knowledge they think is important.

Knowledge, for Nel Noddings, includes our experiences and what we take from them. What we know is acquired only through experience. She defines education as "a constellation of encounters, both planned and unplanned, that promote growth through the acquisition of knowledge, skills, understanding and appreciation." Nel Noddings has argued that education from the care perspective has four key components: modeling, dialogue, practice and confirmation. Modeling encompasses educators who not only teach students how to care, but also show (modeling) students how to care through their interactions. Educators must engage their students in dialogue about caring so that it can be explored and understood through discussion. With exploring and engaging in dialogue, students are able to gain knowledge through practice. "If we want to produce people who will care for one another, then it makes sense to give students practice in caring and, more importantly, reflection on that practice." Lastly, Noddings' feels confirmation is "what sets caring apart from all other moral education. When we confirm someone, we identify a better self and encourage its development. To do this we must know the other reasonably well. Otherwise we cannot see what the other is really striving for, what ideal he or she may long to make real. Formulas and slogans have no place in confirmation."[xx]

III.             Theory of Human Nature: What is a human being? How does it differ from other species? What are the limits of human potential?

Nel Noddings believes a human being is an active participant in the world, and that the ability to think rationally and to reflect is an important characteristic that makes humans human. She says, "we human beings are in the world, not mere spectators watching from outside it,"[xxi] and that, "we live in a culture that has defined human beings as distinctly rational animals."[xxii]

Nel Noddings seems to have faith that all humans have the same basic needs; "To care and be cared for are fundamental human needs." Part of caring is not figuring out what method will work across the board, it requires address and response. The human being is someone that "need[s] to be understood, received, respected and recognized."[xxiii]

Noddings speaks of humans differing from other nonhumans in the sense that humans can discriminate while nonhuman animals cannot. "Speciesism is a prejudice or attitude of bias in favor of the interests of members of one's own species and against those of members of other species."[xxiv] The "-isms", such as sexism, racism, or classism, can only be done by humans. Nonhumans "are not capable of such discrimination."[xxv] Noddings says that it is not our place to control their species because they don't control us; "humans capable of making such a decision would protest if it were made for them… Might animals feel the same way if they were capable of making the choice?"[xxvi] Noddings thinks that the human relationship with other nonhuman species is truly incredible as we take and they give, it's rarely the other way around. Nodding says that we should start taking note of this and try to educate the society of tragedy. "Our relationship to nonhuman animals is one of the most perplexing and important problems in contemporary moral life. Perhaps people centuries from now will look back on our times as a period of incredible moral obtuseness."[xxvii]

               Nel Noddings discusses human potential in the terms that Vygotsky might have viewed his zone of proximal development. She believes that "to call forth a natural effectance motivation, the challenge must be within the optimal range [of potential]."[xxviii] In schools, if the challenge a student meets is too great, he/she may be overwhelmed and avoid the challenge; similarly, if the challenge is too slight, he/she may be bored with the challenge. Nel Noddings believes that human ability and performance should be challenged in accordance with human potential.

IV.             Theory of Learning: What is learning? How are skills and knowledge acquired?

Nel Noddings does not look at the mental processes that define learning; therefore, her views of learning are more contextual than scientific. She does, however, comment on constructivism as her preferred theory on learning. Noddings writes, "Few scholars today would reject the notion that knowers actively construct their own knowledge. A question does arise … as to whether every knower constructs his or her knowledge in an entirely idiosyncratic way or, of necessity, uses a cognitive machinery common to all human subjects."[xxix] Noddings extends the traditional view of learning; she says learning is not what we know in a particular subject or how much we know of it, but what we do with it: Have we become a better person because of it?

Noddings asserts that the majority of learning is done through the home life. Noddings agrees with E.D. Hirsch that: "In a democracy, all students should enter a grade ready to learn. True, the requisite skills, background knowledge, and vocabulary for such readiness are very unequally provided by the children's home environment."[xxx] Noddings agrees with Hirsch in her theory if incidental learning. With incidental learning, Noddings says the learning is done mainly through experiences in the home. Here, she is mainly talking about the dinner table model. Noddings says that, "Dinner table conversation has long been recognized as educational."[xxxi] Without these conversations that children have with their parents, they may be missing out on valuable life lessons or knowledge. She states, "Parent and child work together, play together, and talk to each other, a child learns all sorts of things incidentally."[xxxii]

Another type of learning that Noddings talks about is differential learning. Differential learning occurs when, "Traditionally parents and teachers try to plan strategize, instruct, correct, monitor, and control."[xxxiii] This is predominantly done at school where a teacher teaches a subject or lesson that can be interpreted in a variety of ways. "Teachers would be encouraged to read stories and poems to their students with the understanding that a great variety of outcomes might be expected."[xxxiv] This is so students aren't restricted to learn in a particular way and can come to their own conclusions which can further their learning.

Noddings makes a strong argument for field trips and teachable moments, for both home and school learning. She says, "our children learn things through visits to zoos, museums, national monuments, and the like … we often find ourselves in teaching-learning situations with our children."[xxxv]

V.               Theory of Transmission: Who is to teach? By what methods? What will the curriculum be?

Nel Noddings says that both teachers in school and parents at home should be the ones to teach. Above all, Noddings says, "it is not enough to want one's students to master basic skills," but it is also necessary to help the student become a "loving human being" as well. [xxxvi] Noddings wants parents and teacher to keep in mind that "the student is infinitely more important than the subject."[xxxvii] Therefore, teachers should be concerned with their relationships with the students.

The teachers need to be aware of the broad interests of the students, and be willing to self-educate themselves in order to gain understanding about the various topics students might choose to learn. Noddings says that teachers need "to give up the notion of teaching their subject only for its own sake, and inquire deeply into its place in human life broadly construed."[xxxviii] Teachers should also be able to answer questions about school subjects outside their own discipline; for instance, if an English teacher is unfamiliar with a math concept, he/she must be able and willing to reference other resources so the teacher and the student can gain further knowledge together. Noddings writes, "teachers should be willing to discuss matters on which they have had no specific training and help students to create and learn powerful methods of investigation."[xxxix] Every child is different and teachers need not mandate the child's learning, but instead guide the child's interests in learning. Noddings says that teachers need to "resist the temptation – or the mandate – to manipulate the child, to squeeze him into some mold…"[xl]

Noddings also claims that the home is a primary place for children's education. Homes need to create a learning environment and should include such resources to do so. She says that, "First, every child should live in a home that has at least adequate material resources and attentive love."[xli] Parents should not only look for, but also create teachable moments, or moments for incidental learning. (IV)

               As for the curriculum, Noddings suggests one that includes the broad ranges of interests of each student. This, she says, will mean more to the students than a general curriculum. "Education organized around a finite numbers of broad talents and interests, augmented and filled out by serious inquiry into common human problems, stands the best chance of achieving a meaningful equality."[xlii] Since this curriculum is centered around the student's interests, Noddings says that it only makes sense that it be developed not only by the teacher, but by the students as well. She states that the curriculum needs to be, "cooperatively constructed by teachers and students."[xliii]

Because Noddings' theories of care are inherently religious, it is imperative to consider her views on religious, spiritual, and moral education. Noddings believes it is achievable to bring spiritual education to the public sphere. For such an occasion, teachers must be knowledgeable about the beliefs and traditions of many world religious, as to give the students a comparative view of spiritual beliefs, rather than to offer a narrowed view which may restrict the spiritual views and opportunities of the students, not to mention violate federal law. Noddings argues, though, that "public school teachers even now, in much less than ideal circumstances, can encourage intelligent reflection upon such controversial topics as feminism and religion, humanism and the meaning of life, and religious versus secular ethics."[xliv]

VI.             Theory of Society: What is society? What institutions are involved in the educational process?

While Noddings comments on our current society and how it is organized and how it functions, she also offers her suggestions as to how society should be run and how we might include different possibilities according to her theories of care. For example, one aspect of society that Noddings continually challenges is the fact that our society is historically and traditionally run by males, and that the "controlling class"[xlv] does little to offer opportunities to all people. She thinks we must abandon the "masculine curriculum,"[xlvi] which emphasizes standards and objectifies intellect and deemphasizes relationships. For this reason, Noddings often denounces the college-bound curriculum and national standards. Instead, she calls for a "curriculum cooperatively constructed by teachers and students,"[xlvii] which allows for both meaningful caring relationships between teachers and students and for choice and freedom in our society.

               Noddings considers the injustices in our society when she deliberates the societal implications on education. For one, Noddings discuss her theory of "knowledge as cultural capital,"[xlviii] a concept in which those in power decide which knowledge is important, and therefore exclude groups of people (often minority groups) from resources and material goods. Noddings argues that "it is reasonable to recommend that all students have access to the [privileged] knowledge once reserved for few."[xlix] Nel Noddings demands "a differentiated curricula nonhierarchically designed."[l]

In addition, Noddings discusses national standards as unfair as they "create the illusion that everyone now has a fair chance … [yet] clearly, some children have resources (both inside and outside of schools) to make their success more likely."[li] Noddings believes that "standard setting is a complex process requiring sustained debate and sophisticated knowledge."[lii] Noddings criticizes the federal government for their biased standards, and even comments that adults should be held to standards like that society threatens students with; Noddings writes, "Perhaps a good start on national standards would require policy makers to establish defensible standards for their own contributions to the improvement of education."[liii]

Noddings calls our society a liberal/democratic society, one in which the freedom of choice is not only important but imperative. The choices Noddings is referring to include: "the choice of where to live, with whom to associate, what sort of work to do, which professionals to consult, which merchants to patronize, how to spend our leisure time, how to worship, what to read."[liv] Furthermore, Noddings believes these choices should be available not only to the teachers and parents in our society, but also to the students. She thinks that children should be given the information and decision-making skills "to choose wisely among even fine possibilities."[lv] Therefore, "the child must be led to choose for himself."[lvi] Noddings does not abandon the idea of standards altogether within this choice concept; she says: "Of course, there should be standards in any enterprise, and students should be encouraged to achieve mastery in their chosen fields of study. But the key here is choice of enterprise."[lvii]

It is important to note that in the curriculum that Noddings advocates, in which "liberal discussion is used to promote inquiry, critical thinking, reflective commitment, and personal autonomy,"[lviii] and in which students are prepared to become knowledgeable public participants, Noddings also believes students should be educated on "the many ways in which such traditions [of democracy] have gone awry, becoming involved in various forms of injustice, including sexism, racism, apoliticism and Gnosticism, intolerance, and so on."[lix]

VII.          Theory of Opportunity: Who is to be educated? Who is to be schooled?

Nel Noddings believes everyone, not only students, but teachers, especially, should be educated. Noddings feels that "to teach themes of care in an academically effective way, teachers will have to engage in projects of self-education."[lx] She feels that teachers must know beyond what the school board or textbook say they should know about the particular subject they are teaching. Noddings feels that even the most highly respected teachers are unable to discuss beyond the content matter that is provided to them, which hinders further enhancement of the students' knowledge about that subject. If teachers are able to educate themselves further and look into the material beyond what is expected of them, we will begin to really educate students; in particular, teachers should self-educate on "the history behind the subject, its relation to other subjects, the biographies of its great figures, its connections to the great existential questions, and the ethical responsibilities of those who work in that discipline."[lxi]

Noddings frequently referred to problems of social justice in her writings, while requesting the education of the homeless. Noddings feels that the homeless should be schooled in an attempt for educators to break the vicious cycle in our society. She believes that America's public school systems could push the problem off to other social agencies, or they can make a choice to solve this problem. She writes, "The school staff can contend that they can truly make a difference. Perhaps the resources can be found. Perhaps it is primarily a change in attitude that is required. Perhaps school staff can insure that today's homeless children will not be tomorrow's homeless parents."[lxii] Noddings makes it a point to declare that education will not solve homelessness alone, but it will certainly help move people along in the right direction towards a better life, once a home is obtained.

Another aspect of social injustice that Noddings comments on is minority groups and English language learners. She believes that their education is very important because they are the groups who typically do not earn the cultural capital of privileged knowledge. Traditionally, professions that require a liberal education are more respected than professions that require technical knowledge; for example, a lawyer in our society is more respected (and earns more money) than a car mechanic. However, Noddings advocates the equality knowledge should provide, she idealizes, "it does not really matter whether people have this particular [privileged] knowledge; what matters is that what they acquire is recognized as important."[lxiii]

VIII.        Theory of Consensus: Why do people disagree? How is consensus achieved? Whose opinion takes precedence?

Because the theory of consensus is thoroughly associated with who is in power and who makes educational decisions, the discussion of this theory will be closely linked to and fairly reminiscent of the discussion on the theory of society.

For example, Noddings is obviously aware of the disagreement over national standards. Noddings believes that "uniform standards may actually handicap efforts to renew democracy in schools ... by eliminating many of the legitimate choices students should be guided in making, [and] by failing to encourage the sort of rational political discussion that provides the very foundation of democracy."[lxiv]* People disagree about what children should be learning and about what knowledge is important. She writes, "Learning is sloganistic, ‘All children can learn!' Why should all children learn what we insist they ‘can' learn? Is this the stuff people really need to live intelligently, morally and happily?"[lxv] Nodding's argument is not against the content matter in each subject but against the idea that we force children to learn such a narrow-minded curriculum that does not gives the students choice to include content the care about. She argues that "coercion is incompatible with the liberal/democratic spirit"[lxvi] of our society. Instead of forcing students to abide by a limited curriculum, both parents and teachers should allow students options and opportunities for all types of experiences and intellectual stimulation; the consensus, then, would lie in an agreement between student and teacher/parent. The teacher's opinion should, however, take precedence for the guidance of the student's choice of desired subject of study. Noddings writes, "teachers should not turn over the entire matter of standards to students, but it is entirely reasonable to establish several sets of standards for a given course, each carefully constructed to match the purposes of the students who choose to take the course."[lxvii]

               Another disagreement over Nodding's themes occurs in her themes of care. She writes, "[although] most readers will agree that development of the whole person is important for both individuals and their society, … we may disagree on how and where this should be accomplished."[lxviii] Noddings offers that this can be done inside and outside of schools, and that "it is possible to include social, emotional, and ethical learning in all curricular and extracurricular activities."[lxix] Noddings believes that this can be done, most importantly, through the caring relationships established in order to make educating the whole person possible.


Neiman, A. M. (2000). Critique - Review Essay - Democracy and the Education of the Heart: Nel Noddings on Spirituality and Schooling. Religious Education. 95(2), 216.

Noddings, Nel. (1986). Caring: A Feminine Approach to Ethics and Moral Education.

Noddings, Nel. (1992). The Challenge to Care in Schools: An Alternative Approach to Education.

Noddings, Nel (1995). Teaching themes of care. Phi Delta Kappan, 76(9), 675.  Retrieved April 15, 2008, from Research Library Core database. (Document ID: 1761440).

Noddings, Nel. (1995). Philosophy of Education.

Noddings, Nel (1996). Rethinking the benefits of the college-bound curriculum. Phi Delta Kappan, 78(4), 285-289.  Retrieved April 15, 2008, from Research Library Core database. (Document ID: 10498987).

Nel Noddings (1997). Thinking about standards. Phi Delta Kappan, 79(3), 184-189.  Retrieved April 15, 2008, from Research Library Core database. (Document ID: 22080173).

Nel Noddings (1999). Renewing democracy in schools. Phi Delta Kappan, 80(8), 579-583.  Retrieved April 15, 2008, from Research Library Core database. (Document ID: 40279362).

Noddings, Nel. (2002). Starting at Home: Caring and Social Policy.

Noddings, Nel. (2004). Happiness and Education. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

Nel Noddings (2006). Educating Whole People: A Response to Jonathan Cohen. Harvard Educational Review, 76(2), 238-242,286.  Retrieved April 15, 2008, from Research Library Core database. (Document ID: 1092371311).


[i] The Challenge to Care in School, page 8.

[ii] "Teaching Themes of Care," page 676.

[iii] "Teaching Themes of Care," page 676.

[iv] "Teaching Themes of Care," page 677.

[v] "Critique: The challenge to believe in schools."

[vi] The Challenge to Care in Schools, page xiii.

[vii] Neiman, page 221.

*Indoctrination vs. Education

[viii] Neiman, page 223.

[ix] Philosophy of Education, page 196.

[x] Caring: A Feminine Approach, page 191.

[xi] Caring: A Feminine Approach, page 192.

[xii] "Renewing Democracy in Schools," page 579.

[xiii] Starting at Home, page 181.

[xiv] "Renewing Democracy in Schools," page 580.

[xv] Philosophy of Education, page 99.

[xvi] Philosophy of Education, page 107.

[xvii] Philosophy of Education, page 113.

[xviii] Happiness and Education, page 153.

[xix] Happiness and Education, page 152.

[xx] http://www.infed.org/thinkers/noddings.htm

[xxi] http://www.infed.org/thinkers/noddings.htm

[xxii] http://www.ed.uiuc.edu/EPS/PES-Yearbook/92_docs/Noddings.HTM

[xxiii] The Challenge to Care in Schools, page xi.

[xxiv] Happiness and Education, page 134.

[xxv] Happiness and Education, page 135.

[xxvi] Happiness and Education, page 134.

[xxvii] Happiness and Education, page 134.

[xxviii] Caring: A Feminine Approach, page 63.

[xxix] Philosophy of Education, page 115.

[xxx] Happiness and Education, page 153.

[xxxi] Happiness and Education, page 152.

[xxxii] Starting at Home, page 25.

[xxxiii] Starting at Home, page 26.

[xxxiv] Happiness and Education, page 123.

[xxxv] Caring: A Feminine Approach, page 61-62.

[xxxvi] Caring: A Feminine Approach, page 20.

[xxxvii] Caring: A Femininne Approach, page 20.

[xxxviii] The Challenge to Care in Schools, page 178.

[xxxix] The Challenge to Care in Schools, page 178

[xl] Caring, page 60.

[xli] Starting at Home, page 289.

[xlii] Philosophy of Education, pages 174-177.

[xliii] Challenges to Care, page 176.

[xliv] "Democracy and Education," page 220.

[xlv] Philosophy of Education, page 69.

[xlvi] Caring: A Feminine Approach, page 192.

[xlvii] Challenge to Care in Schools, page 176.

[xlviii] Philosophy of Education, page 113.

[xlix] Philosophy of Education, page 114.

[l] Philosophy of Education, page 197.

[li] "Thinking about standards," page 185.

[lii] "Thinking about standards," page 189.

[liii] "Thinking about standards," page 190.

[liv] "Renewing democracy in schools," page 579.

[lv] "Renewing democracy in schools," page 580.

[lvi] Caring: A Feminine Approach, page 64.

[lvii] Philosophy of Education, page 196.

[lviii] "Renewing democracy in schools," page 581.

[lix] "Democracy and Education," page 220.

[lx] "Teaching Themes of Care," page 5.

[lxi] "Teaching Themes of Care," page 5.

[lxii] Starting at Home, page 249-250.

[lxiii] Philosophy of Education, page 114.

[lxiv] "Renewing democracy in schools," page 579.

*Noddings believes in a Theory Y society, in which the people carry a large amount of responsibility, and make decisions for themselves.

[lxv] The Challenge to Care in Schools, page xii.

[lxvi] "Renewing democracy in schools," page 580.

[lxvii] "Renewing democracy in schools," page 581.

[lxviii] "Educating whole people," page 238.

[lxix] "Educating whole people," page 238.