Molly Freeman wrote:
> Ken,
>
> I like Michael Walzer's reference to fourth and fifth and more ways in the recent issue of Dissent. There are more
> ways to be in and to view the world than are often expressed in these discussions. The challenge is for everyone to
> become more imaginative. Left wing ideologiues are often no more imaginative than their right wing antagonists.
> Of course there are wonderful, courageous, and bright teachers and of course their are good schools and of course it
> is easy to get on the bandwagon displacing uncertainties and discontents onto the education system when it is
> really the turbulence within and among all the systems that "interdepend" with the schools that is the rub. And, it is
> precisely in this environment that we can be challenged to rethink how schooling is arranged. Instead of railing
> against the Right start considering new opportunities.
>
> I don't have the answer, and there are multiple possibilities. The US body politic is learning to live with the
> possibilities of global telecommunications (anathema to many, I realize) within the context of values or concepts
> such as separation of church and state, belief in the appropriateness of distance between commerce and education
> (linkages between them from several theoretical perspectives withstanding), and the habits of one public system,
> to which David Tyack referred in his book "The One Best System." Why only one public system? What about
> collaboratives, what about teachers as independent teams working with cohorts of 12 to 20 students for several
> years off and on campus? Why schooling in a classroom? Why must teachers lose their seniority and retirement
> vestments if they change districts? Wringing hands about fears of inequity does not cut it.
> Fears of wasting minds (of teachers and students) should motivate us to at least see our ideologies for the
> belief systems they are and begin to play outside the boxes.
> And, let us not assume that all or even most new visions of schooling come from greedy capitalists
> or right wing groupies.
>
> Molly Freeman
>
> Ken Goodman wrote:
>
> > Sparks? This message is an example where contempt for teachers
> > overwhelms reason. Schools and teachers are simply baby sitters?
> >
> > Molly Freeman wrote:
> > >
> > > Eugene and responsa:
> > >
> > > I can lurk no longer. Consider the following and note the source:
> > >
> > > "Piaget was skeptical of schooling's development-enhancing properties. He argued
> > > that the asymmetrical power
> > > relations of teacher and student created an imbalance because the pressure to
> > > accommodate to teachers' views
> > > far outweighed the pressure for assimilation of instruction to the child's
> > > already existing schemas. The result
> > > was learning of a superficial kind that was unlikely to create fundamental
> > > cognitive change. He believed that
> > > fundamental change was more likely to occur in informal actions where the
> > > asymmetry of power relations was
> > > reduced, allowing for a more equal balance between assimilation and
> > > accommodation." p. 87, Michael Cole. 1996.
> > > Cultural Psychology.
> > >
> > > Commitment to increasing options for the poor and not-so-poor does not have to
> > > bind us to a "one system solution."
> > Show me an example in history where there has been any attempt to
> > provide education for the poor and not so poor without s well supported
> > system of public education.
> >
> > > Is schooling as we have known it in these United States necessary for anything
> > > but watching children while their
> > > parents are at work? Isn't this the bottom line?
> > How low can you get in this totally unsupported attack on everything
> > that has been accomplished in 100 years of education in this country and
> > the world?
> >
> > If we begin there, the field is
> > > open to all sorts of alternatives beyond
> > > the Fordist model that some of us seem so intent on preserving. The fervor for
> > > preserving the public system as it is
> > > now configured is very much akin to a "belief" system.Beginning by saying that public education is nothing results in this logic in saying that anything is better than nothing. Neither statement has any logi or basis.
> > >
> > > The public system has many teachers who have lost their own voice and who are
> > > very averse to taking risks.
> > And it has many teachers who have found their voices and are taking
> > great risks- with the right raising the ante all the time.
> >
> > In this
> > > way the public school system is not so different from the military.
> > More blatant prejudice! Is Congress smuggling pet education projects
> > into the budget? THere is no resemblance between education and the
> > military.
> >
> > Accordingly,
> > > these teachers (and sad to say the
> > > bargaining agencies) are now regressive. Substitute "imaginative," "risk
> > > taking," and "dedicated" for "entrepreneurial"
> > > and you might envision some interesting options to the one public school system,
> > > most current variations withstanding.
> > >
> > Critical theory suggest that we look for who would profit from proposals
> > for reform. Privatizing education will profit business interests in two
> > ways: They will make profits from private entrepreneurial schools and
> > they will pay less taxes to support education thereby producing more
> > docile and non-competitive unskilled workers.
> >
> > Ken Goodman
> >
> > > Awaiting sparks to fly.
> > > M Freeman
> >
> > > Eugene Matusov wrote:
> > >
> > > > Hi Diane and everybody--
> > > >
> > > > I agree with Diane that the question of what are schools for and what is
> > > > education for are very important questions and should be answered before
> > > > public/private schools.
> > > >
> > > > On the side of history, I think we should be a bit more critical about
> > > > celebrating compulsory mass education and eliminating illiteracy. I was
> > > > lucky enough to be raised (in part) by my print-illiterate grandma to
> > > > appreciate oral literacy (that I and generations after me are robbed from).
> > > > Greek poet Homer was not able to read and write. I think it is not
> > > > overgeneralization that mass print literacy killed mass oral literacy to
> > > > very high extend. IMF schools are (deliberately) responsible for destroying
> > > > many traditional societies. Also schooled print literacy is a very peculiar
> > > > as we know...
> > > >
> > > > I do not believe that current schools (both public and private) are THE
> > > > pathways to our society. But under current policies, it is very difficult
> > > > to try anything else. However, current schools establish very good
> > > > discipline regime of reproduction. David Tyack and Larry Cuban (1995, p.
> > > > 85) point out, "The basic grammar of schooling... has remained remarkably
> > > > stable over the decades." Majority schools (both public and private) are
> > > > nothing more than prison of minimum security for kids (although it is
> > > > getting more security every year specially for urban schools). Viva
> > > > schools -- no more child labor but ass abuse! Cynically speaking we should
> > > > combine together money for schools and for prisons in one budget.
> > > >
> > > > What do you think?
> > > >
> > > > Eugene
> > > >
> > > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > > From: Diane HODGES [mailto:dchodges@interchange.ubc.ca]
> > > > > Sent: Thursday, May 13, 1999 11:48 PM
> > > > > To: xmca who-is-at weber.ucsd.edu
> > > > > Subject: Re: Campaign Against Public Schools
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > At 8:04 5/14/99, MDLedoux who-is-at aol.com wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > >If we are attempting to strengthen school culture and build upon
> > > > > the cultural
> > > > > >strengths of individuals, shouldn't there be support of attempts
> > > > > at schooling
> > > > > >that enhances these areas of learning?
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > what i am not hearing in this discussion are notions of
> > > > > epistemology or the cultivation of critical social conscience or
> > > > > any kind of "what is education for?" ideas beyond the
> > > > >
> > > > > acceptance of "school" as cultural - and "school" is certainly
> > > > > the problematic manifestation of "education" - so what
> > > > >
> > > > > are other cultural manifestations of education and its relations
> > > > > to knowledge and conscience? that is, if the issue is about "schools" as
> > > > > failed institutions, then private/public domains are not
> > > > >
> > > > > the issue; but rather what is education for? is the question, isn't it?
> > > > > diane
> > > > >
> > > > > """"""""""""""""""""""" """""""""""""""""""""""""""""
> > > > > When she walks,
> > > > > the revolution's coming.
> > > > > In her hips, there's revolution.
> > > > > When she talks, I hear revolution.
> > > > > In her kiss, I taste the revolution.
> > > > > (poem by Kathleen Hanna: Riot Grrl)
> > > > > ******************************************
> > > > > diane celia hodges
> > > > > university of british columbia
> > > > > centre for the study of curriculum and knowledge
> > > > > vancouver, british columbia, canada
> > > > >
> >
> > --
> > Kenneth S. Goodman, Professor, Language, Reading & Culture
> > 504 College of Education, University of Arizona, Tucson, AZ
> > fax 520 7456895 phone 520 6217868
> >
> > These are mean times- and in the mean time
> > We need to Learn to Live Under Water