Gene,
Thanks, you've provided the exact ethnographic example of the way academic
institutions voluntarily submit to governments and other foci of funds and
support.
"Last year, during a faculty discussion of two job candidates who had high
appeal for the faculty, one of my colleagues argued that we need to take
into account "grant getting potential" of each of the candidates. (Guess
what: this job
candidate used "medical model" while the other job candidate used
ethnographic approaches.) My colleague continued that since the scholarship
one of the candidates was more in line with Bush's educational policies, we
had to give preference to this candidate because the candidate would have
higher possibility to get grants from federal agencies with further tenure
consequences.... "
I might add that the attraction of personal participation in the exercise of
power and the obvious financial advantages of serving as advisors to
powerful agencies - governmental and private - is another powerful
motivation for conformity to "party lines." I recall a lecture of one
anthropologist advisor to the U. S. Army in Vietnam who came to the
interesting conclusion that the perception of the Vietnamese people was so
warped by their ideological militance that they were completely unable to
distinguish between actual events and their own political biases. Just
another small nail in the coffin of American war policy in Vietnam.
Regards,
Victor
----- Original Message -----
From: "Eugene Matusov" <ematusov@udel.edu>
To: <xmca@weber.ucsd.edu>
Sent: Wednesday, December 24, 2003 7:50 PM
Subject: RE: Democracy, Federal Government, and Education
> Dear Victor-
>
> As I see what is going now in the US, the issue here is not activism vs.
> status quo but about different types of activism. Bushist activism is
about
> making privileged even more privileged at expense of everybody else. To do
> that they need to convince people who vote that this activism is done in
> their interests. Of course, I agree with Victor that critical inquiries
are
> on the way of this activist agenda.
>
> Bushists become more and more active in shaping US academia. Last year,
> during a faculty discussion of two job candidates who had high appeal for
> the faculty, one of my colleagues argued that we need to take into account
> "grant getting potential" of each of the candidates. (Guess what: this job
> candidate used "medical model" while the other job candidate used
> ethnographic approaches.) My colleague continued that since the
scholarship
> one of the candidates was more in line with Bush's educational policies,
we
> had to give preference to this candidate because the candidate would have
> higher possibility to get grants from federal agencies with further tenure
> consequences.... Although this argument was not very strong for ears of
the
> faculty last year, it is getting stronger this year with closing ERIC...
>
> What do you think?
>
> Eugene
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Oudeyis [mailto:victor@kfar-hanassi.org.il]
> > Sent: Wednesday, December 24, 2003 7:55 AM
> > To: xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
> > Subject: Re: Democracy, Federal Government, and Education
> >
> > Jay,
> > Francis Bacon is most commonly referred to as the originator of the
Notion
> > that "knowledge is Power." Less often quoted is his, "Nothing doth more
> > hurt in a state than that cunning men pass for wise."
> >
> > The power of knowledge and its misuse and mismanagement by those in a
> > position to fund the accumulation of knowledge is one of the more
ancient
> > contradictions that bedevil humanity. It is not hard to visualize a
> > frustrated and angry Plato dashing off that disaster that is now called
> "The
> > Republic" in response to the long chain of foolishly nearsighted
decisions
> > that characterize the Athenian Democracy in the last years of the
> > Pelopennesian War and thereafter. Naturally, all attempts to realize
"The
> > Republic" created even worse misuse and mismanagement of knowledge than
> the
> > kind of rule it was to replace. Gene has indicated the calamity
visited
> > upon large sectors of Russian science by the wise directorship of the
CPSU
> > from the 1930's till its self-abdication in the 1990's.
> >
> > Social philosphy - social science if you will - is the most vulnerable
of
> > all sciences to the interferences of the powerful - be they wealth,
> > politicians or the well-placed intellectual. After all, the difference
> > between social science and ideology is infintisimal if measureable at
all.
> > So, it is not surprising that much of the most interesting social
science
> is
> > done by exiles: e.g. Confucist, Hobbes, and Marx and by marginalized
> > intellectuals: e.g. Machivelli, Veblen, and Ilyenkov. The history of
> social
> > science in Israel is an excellent case in point. Martin Buber, the
> founder
> > and first chairman (1948-1950) of Hebrew University's Sociology
> department,
> > was a srong advocate of continual critical review and reconstruction of
> > government. He was, among other things, one of the most outspoken and
> > active critics of government policies regarding the Palestinians during
> the
> > first years of the State of Israel. After only two years of
chairmanship
> of
> > the department he was replaced by his student, S. N. Eisenstadt
(chairman
> of
> > the dept. from 1950-1968) whose sociology was a particularly dry and
> > unimaginative version of the Functionalism of Homans, Merton, and
Parsons.
> > No less an important feature of Eisenstadt's academic success was his
> > silence on some of the more critical issues of Israel's national
policies
> -
> > like the Palestinian question. The non-critical, indeed, anticritical
> > functionalist paradigm became - and to some degree still is (Parsons
> > Functionalist Theory is still a mandatory subject for soc. majors
here) -
> > the dominant sociology of Israel academia up to the 1990s. The result,
> was
> > and is the virtual neutralization of the very institutions that were, in
> > principle, to specialize in scientific analysis of Israel's social and
> > political condition.
> >
> > One of the first jobs I had here was to research marginal youth culture
in
> a
> > development town as part of a project for "solving the Black Panther
> > problem." The project was more or less invented by an Israeli youth
> > movement politruk, financed by a major funding organization, and
> researched
> > by a combined effort of the Hebrew U's sociology department and the
> Ministry
> > of Education. The research project was to be what you so aptly call "the
> > medical approach;" an ethnological examination of the target population
> > before and after institution of the project. Actually, this kind of
> > research more resembles the before and after advertisement trick used to
> > sell tooth paste and facial creme than it does rigorous medical
research.
> > Even the most cursory investigation showed
> > 1. that the target population was virtually indefinable whatever the
> > measures used,
> > 2. that the project, developed by politicians and intellectuals from
> > metropolitan Israel, was unlikely to be realized in any way similar to
the
> > intents of its inventor and of its funders since it took no account of
> local
> > social and political conditions, and
> > 3. that the project had taken on a "life of its own" and had become the
> > arena of a faction fight between established town government and a group
> of
> > young turks - the real Black Panthers - who wanted to turn it into an
> > instrument for mobilizing popular support.
> > This last development was a particularly sensitive one since it directly
> > challenged well-established local institutions for bringing in the vote
in
> > local and national elections. So we were entertained by an interesting
> and
> > sometimes exciting set to between various local and national arms of the
> > government regarding the fate of the project.
> > In short, the whole "medical" approach was irrelevant to the actual
issues
> > involved in the introduction of the project, and the project failed,
> after
> > a few years of pathetic efforts to establish and revive it. It certainly
> did
> > not solve the "Black Panther problem" or have much influence on the
youth
> of
> > the town.
> >
> > Significant social science and serious education must be subversive
since
> > they treat states that are transient and complex and thereby challenge
all
> > those with vested interests in keeping things "as they are." To expect
> > that wealthy funders, politicians, and administrators will recognize the
> > importance - to them and their policies - of a critical approach to
> social
> > analysis is really asking too much from what are usually people with
very
> > real fears of the future and with an amazing capacity to ignore and
reject
> > any data or even research into material that contradicts their hopes of
> what
> > will be.
> >
> > For a better 2004 than was 2003.
> >
> > Victor
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Jay Lemke" <jaylemke@umich.edu>
> > To: <xmca@weber.ucsd.edu>
> > Sent: Tuesday, December 23, 2003 10:23 PM
> > Subject: RE: Democracy, Federal Government, and Education
> >
> >
> > >
> > > The current US administration _is_ trying to interfere in social
science
> > > research, especially in education, mainly because they do not want to
> see
> > > funding going to any sort of research that is likely to come up with
> > > findings that contradict their politically expedient (or ideologically
> > > motivated) policies.
> > >
> > > I have heard credibly from various people who have talked informally
> with
> > > administration policy people that they are quite candid about this.
They
> > > just don't see why their agencies should fund research that goes
against
> > > adminstration policy. The same attitude was behind the edict to remove
> all
> > > elements of official Dept of Ed websites that went against
> administration
> > > policy, and the efforts to remove the ERIC database system in all
> respects
> > > in which it represented an independent mode of access to research
along
> > the
> > > same lines. There have been numerous protests from education
> > organizations,
> > > library organizations, etc.
> > >
> > > There is, I think, a very close parallel with some unfortunate Soviet
> > > precedents. One way of seeing all research as political is to consider
> > > research primarily in terms of its potential political effects, and to
> act
> > > as politicians generally do, to support their friends and screw their
> > > enemies. The present US administration is very much a product of the
> > > "culture wars", the right-wing reaction against the modest gains of
the
> > > left in academic circles since the 1960s. The doctrine of the culture
> > wars,
> > > from the right, was that the left was using its academic power (slight
> as
> > > it was) to push a political agenda, and that therefore it was
perfectly
> > > fair to use political influence to counter them/us. The US
> administration
> > > takes the same position.
> > >
> > > The attempt to define legitimate methodology in social science
research
> > has
> > > nothing to do with an interest in research methods. It has to do with
> > > concerns about the outcomes of the research. By and large it is
> > > ethnographic and discourse-based research about what actually happens
in
> > > schools and classrooms, what teachers and students and parents really
> > think
> > > and value, etc. that best shows the emptiness and dysfunctional
effects
> of
> > > administration policies and rhetoric about educational reform. I
suppose
> > it
> > > is possible that large-scale quantitative studies could and someday
will
> > > come to the same conclusions, but meanwhile the administration can
> direct
> > > massive research funding to its friends, who will produce the kind of
> > > research that once "proved" that smoking tobacco was not harmful, that
> > > marijuana damaged your chromosomes, that global warming was not a
> problem,
> > > and that more money would not improve overcrowded urban schools with
> leaky
> > > roofs.
> > >
> > > Merry Christmas!
> > >
> > > THE CARLYLE GROUP
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > At 02:05 PM 12/23/2003 -0500, you wrote:
> > > >Dear everybody-
> > > >
> > > >I'm worry that Federal government is a business of defining what
> science
> > is
> > > >in general and what science is in educational research in specific.
> ERIC
> > has
> > > >become the first (??) victim of such interference. Michael Castle,
the
> > > >Republican congressman from Delaware (there is only one congress
person
> > from
> > > >this tiny state), defined "scientific research" in education as
> following
> > > >the rigid medical model (i.e., pre- and post-test with control
groups).
> > He
> > > >plays the clue role now in defining Bush's policies in area of
> education
> > and
> > > >research. I wonder if this Republican revolution is the second wave
of
> > > >Lysenko-type of management of Science by the State. In my view, the
> State
> > > >has to be separated from discussions of what is scientific - the
> question
> > > >that has to be left to the fields of science practices themselves -
as
> > part
> > > >of separation of power.
> > > >
> > > >What do you think?
> > > >
> > > >Eugene
> > > >PS Lysenko was an academician (not a congressman although) appointed
by
> > > >Stalin to define "the scientific" biology and agriculture resulted in
> > > >physical persecutions of Soviet scholars who studied genetics that
was
> > > >defamed as "bourgeois pseudo-science". The US style of Lyseknoanism
is
> > to
> > > >cut federal funding to so-called "unscientific research" and suppress
> > public
> > > >access to publications of research the current government does not
> like.
> > > >
> > > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > > From: N*** [mailto:vygotsky who-is-at nateweb.info]
> > > > > Sent: Tuesday, December 23, 2003 1:31 PM
> > > > > To: xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
> > > > > Subject: Re: Democracy, Federal Government, and Education
> > > > >
> > > > > Bill,
> > > > >
> > > > > I think that one has to read it very liberally is the
> > > > > key. It is not straight forward like the federal role
> > > > > in commerce and capital. In fact, I believe many New
> > > > > Deal programs and the 1960's increasing role in
> > > > > education was argued on such premises. It was not the
> > > > > federal goverments "authentic" role in these domains,
> > > > > but rather their analogy to the federal goverments
> > > > > role in regulating commerce and capital.
> > > > >
> > > > > I think Jesse Jackson Jr.'s approach to "rewriting"
> > > > > the consitution is right on. Note your quote on
> > > > > "general welfare" in contrast to "specific" welfare.
> > > > > Specific welfare's such as the right to healthcare,
> > > > > housing, jobs, education etc.
> > > > >
> > > > > There of course is the age old liberatarian argument
> > > > > of the relationship between the federal goverments
> > > > > role in education and Dewey's thoughts on democracy. I
> > > > > think this tension is felt all over the country with
> > > > > implementing the LACBA (Leave All Children Behind Act)
> > > > > and local values about education.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > --- Bill Barowy <wbarowy@attbi.com> wrote:
> > > > > > [This posting apparently did not go through
> > > > > > yesterday, hence my earlier test.
> > > > > > Could not be sure until the archives proved so this
> > > > > > morning. Here's a second
> > > > > > try.]
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Concerning the role of the Federal Government in
> > > > > > Education, and whether it
> > > > > > should be considered "interfering" or "doing it's
> > > > > > job", I think a little
> > > > > > historical analysis might help. (CHAT to the
> > > > > > beckoning?) In its preamble,
> > > > > > the US Constitution establishes the object to
> > > > > > "promote the general Welfare,
> > > > > > and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves
> > > > > > and our Posterity". If we
> > > > > > interpret this statement inclusively and liberally ,
> > > > > > the US gov role in
> > > > > > education appears secured, "our Posterity" arguably
> > > > > > encompassing our
> > > > > > children.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Dewey in "Democracy and Education" does argue so:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > "Upon the educational side, we note first that the
> > > > > > realization of a form of
> > > > > > social life in which interests are mutually
> > > > > > interpenetrating, and where
> > > > > > progress, or readjustment, is an important
> > > > > > consideration, makes a democratic
> > > > > > community more interested than other communities
> > > > > > have cause to be in
> > > > > > deliberate and systematic education. The devotion
> > > > > > of democracy to education
> > > > > > is a familiar fact. ... A democracy is more than a
> > > > > > form of government; it is
> > > > > > primarily a mode of associated living, of conjoint
> > > > > > communicated experience.
> > > > > > The extension in space of the number of individuals
> > > > > > who participate in an
> > > > > > interest so that each has to refer his own action to
> > > > > > that of others, and to
> > > > > > consider the action of others to give point and
> > > > > > direction to his own, is
> > > > > > equivalent to the breaking down of those barriers of
> > > > > > class, race, and
> > > > > > national territory which kept men from perceiving
> > > > > > the full import of their
> > > > > > activity. ... A society which is mobile, which is
> > > > > > full of channels for the
> > > > > > distribution of a change occurring anywhere, must
> > > > > > see to it that its members
> > > > > > are educated to personal initiative and
> > > > > > adaptability" (p. 87-88)
> > > > > >
> > > > > > There is more to read before, after, and in between
> > > > > > what's quoted , which I
> > > > > > find fascinating in its considerations of education
> > > > > > and democracy.
> > > > > > Personally, within any given duration I might not
> > > > > > agree with the means and
> > > > > > ways with which the Federal Government invests
> > > > > > itself in education, but in
> > > > > > understanding democracy at a fundamental level I
> > > > > > *cannot* hold this
> > > > > > investment itself to be invalid.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Oh yeah, on a similar note -- we will have some
> > > > > > opportunity soon to review a
> > > > > > second draft constitution for CHSIG, which has gone
> > > > > > through a first draft and
> > > > > > commentary by some SIG officers past and present.
> > > > > > It'll appear some time in
> > > > > > the next week or so on a web site and perhaps also
> > > > > > in email for discussion by
> > > > > > the membership. Stay tuned. I'm open to
> > > > > > suggestions for this process.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > --
> > > > > > -----------------
> > > > > > bb
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > =====
> > >
> > >
> > > Jay Lemke
> > > Professor
> > > University of Michigan
> > > School of Education
> > > 610 East University
> > > Ann Arbor, MI 48104
> > >
> > > Tel. 734-763-9276
> > > Email. JayLemke@UMich.edu
> > > Website. www.umich.edu/~jaylemke
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Jan 01 2004 - 01:00:10 PST