Re: coercion

Francoise Herrmann (fherrmann who-is-at igc.apc.org)
Thu, 18 Apr 1996 11:54:26 -0700 (PDT)

Hi Betty, I'll go for 1> and 2> because It seems to me that Eugene gave
it his usual best for 3>. The model of cultural transmission that I was
referring to is from educational anthrpology in particular the Spindlers'
(George and Louise). In this model cultural transmission is a given
and it varies according to the degree of compression found in such
practices as parenting, school and intitiation rites of all kinds. The
higher the degree of compression the greater the transmission of
culture or the tighter the boundaries of that culture.

To add one point to what Eugene posted. I think that to convince educators
of the benefits of a coercion-free context of education as you
have found, it is likely useful to know what is valued by those whom you
seek to convince. There are gamuts of variables, time on task,
reading levels, complexity of vocabulary, attendance/absenteism,
portofolio methods of assessment and I foget.... My favorite however,
is body langauge: fidgety, nail biting restlessness to exitment, flutter,
gracefulness, giggles, sheer delight etc...

Francoise
Francoise Herrmann
fherrmann who-is-at igc.org

> Francoise's posting brought up a couple of questions for me.
>
> Francoise wrote:
> >Hi everyone, I wonder about coercion and enculturation or perhaps how
> >it is that coercion can be avoided given models of cultural transmission
> >where differnt degrees of compression are observed.
>
> 1. What do you mean by compression?
> 2. Does cultural transmission have to be a given?
>
> >Could a coercion-free education really exist is perhaps what I really
> >am saying?
>
> 3. This is really the most important question for me. The first and second
> grade teacher I mentioned in an earlier posting has created the most
> coercion-free classroom I have seen to date, but even she has what are called
> *have-to's* in her class. For example,
>
> Sometime today, spend 15 minutes reading with a friend.
>
> Now that is a *have to*, and so I guess technically, it qualifies as coercion.
> However, look at the choices--the child can choose when today, what to read,
> with whom, where in the class (in a corner, sprawled on the rug, etc.) So I
> have a hard time calling that coercion in the same way that assigning children
> to pairs, telling them to sit in chairs next to each other, giving them a book
> (maybe a basal reader) and telling them to read to each other for the next 15
> minutes is coercion. So, is coercion-free education possible? I think to an
> extent. However, how do you convince educators that it is a worthwhile goal to
> pursue? That's where I keep coming back to trying to find some way to quantify
> the qualitative differences that I see in low-coercion classrooms.
>
> Betty Zan
----------------------------------------------------------------------------