Mike,
From conclusions I derive from the reading, it is a tall order to come up
with an institutional model that is devoid of estrangement.
For Marx, estranged labor is the disconnection between the laboring
subject and the object of labor. The direct value produced from the toil
of labor is not the laborer's to enjoy. The worker has little or no
agency in the procedures to be employed or the tools to be used and
even less ownership in the goals of the effort.
Those of us who call ourselves constructivists (probably everyone
subscribed to this list) have difficulty applying such a model to our
idealized conception of learning. Learner agency is at the cornerstone of
a constructivist model. What makes Lave and McDermott so provocative here
is that they effectively remind us that our learning institutions are
clearly not constructivist and it is a mistake for us to pretend
otherwise. Pockets of constructivism may exist within our educational
structures. But Modern Education as it has evolved over two hundred years
can neither recognize, tolerate, acommodate, or function with learners as
agentive subjects.
Marx had no illusions that the institution of capitalism could be reformed
to serve the interest of workers. To the extent that the institution was
oppressive working people, Marx predicted revolution. Lave and McDermott
are silent on this point, but they leave it for us to ask whether our
educational institutions are capable of reform or whether revolution is
the only logical extension.
Other writers, notably Jay Lemke, take the logic one step further,
suggesting a vision for a postmodern revolution in education. Is it
possible to conceive of education deviod of established curriculum,
objective assessment, competitive achievement, privileged expertise, and
the other vestiges of our 200-year old model of modern education?
Numerous members of this list have shared such visions that place
the learner squarely at the center of the learning activity, and a
community of learners as the enabling structure. Expertise in such a
vision is highly contextual and broadly distributed. The sacred cow of
"credentialing", the cornerstone of modern education, is unlikely to find
its place among the dynamic approaches to learning in the coming decades.
Until then, can we make the best of our estrangement, hoping for
some reforms here and there?
Martin
On Sun, 15 Dec 2002, Mike Cole wrote:
>
> Hi Martin--
> Your example certainly resonates with the situation in my home
> town which is generally affluent and has a high level of educational
> certification among adults. But while I spend most of my time int he
> community worrying about the kids who do not have much of a chance to
> get a high level certificate and a chance to avoid a future behind the
> automated stove at MacDonalds, I am more and more preoccupied with the
> estranged learning we offer at UCSD-- which considers itself a premier
> EDUCATIONAL institution. The problem is both theoretically and practically
> acute for me.
> A few factoids (e.g. what passes for learning with understanding around
> here):
>
> -- A course of 500 taught by a temp who does not require attendance at lectures,
> allows for profit note taking, gives multiple choice questions, has no
> sections, and where you do not have to remember material before the
> midterm on the final (scantroned, of course).
> -- A course which I am about to teach with 200 students, no sections,
> two TA's who cannot work more than 19 hours per week, students from
> two majors many of whom have no background.
>
> --- A standard question I ask graduating seniors in a "senior
> seminar" (class size in principle restricted to 25 -- the smallest
> they will ever encounter at UCSD) is to list the courses they have
> taken in their major (Communication), the name of the instructor,
> and a main idea from the course. This questionaire is routinely
> answered by a plurality of students with the NUMBER of the course.
> They cannot remember the name of the professor or an idea, but they
> know the numbers of the courses they need to graduate.
>
> -- The contrast case is our practicum courses which combine theory
> and practice, where students write until they drop, where they are
> responsibility for the well being of little kids, where they MUST
> remember ideas they care about from the get go. In these courses,
> which are an endangered species which will almost certainly disappear
> in the next few years, if not after the Gov slices up the UC next
> month, students are routinely "born again" and find a joy in learning
> that they become conscious of and articulate about.
>
> -- The parallell between alienated labor and estranged learning
> cuts very deep. It has been said before, but it is said with great
> force in the rhetoric of the lave and mcdermott article.
>
> mike
> Ps- Lets hope we can keep estangement out of our funky, not for
> profit, try to find the right url, damn the modem, international
> course! Why else bother trying?
>
>
Martin Ryder
http://www.cudenver.edu/~mryder/martin.html
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Wed Jan 01 2003 - 01:00:07 PST