Chapter Two - Broken Promises: School Reform in Retrospect
This chapter begins with a review of liberal education theory and the fact that rarely has the education system been able to promote either social equality or full human development. The authors critique the traditional education notions and in chapter ten they outline education alternatives. I am very curious to see what they have to say in this chapter and if any of their alternatives have been implemented in the past 40 years.
This notion that education could be a tool to fix all of the social ills and a form of social reform and social policy is not a new idea. This dates back to 1890. From 1890 - 1920 the U.S. shifted to the corporate based economy, much like what we see now. A man by the name of Andrew Carnegie who founded the Carnegie foundation for the advancement of teaching believed that education was the way to fix all of the issues that were plaguing society such as social unrest. This was a view point that most people believed at the time. Even Lyndon Johnson the president in power in the U.S. from '63 - '69 was backing this statement. He was quoted saying that the answer for all of our national problems comes down to single word: Education. I don't know about you but that is a pretty lofty goal to place on teachers, to fix ALL of the national problems of the U.S.
So why education? Why this notion that education can fix all of these issues that had been cropping up? Well according to the book, when capitalism is left on its own, it can produce some amazing results, but it can also create some undesirable ones as well.
*fragmentation of communities
*decrease in the quality of the environment
*inhuman working conditions
*unequal distribution of income.
This classical laissez-fair ideal was rejected for what is called progessive liberalism. To treat these undesirable conditions mentioned above, social programs were erected. It was education and government intervention that would save the day. The liberals at the time believed that both had become essential to promote and foster economic growth. It was these two factors that could rectify social problems and limit the human cost that was associated with capitalism. It seem to me that individuals were starting to see that education was not the only way to solve the social ills that were occurring.
Yet the book goes onto say that obviously education and government intervention is important yet they have still not been able to solve the big issues of inequality, class stratification, racism, sexism, fragmented jobs and destruction of the environment. People of the time could not understand why things were not getting better as the economy continued to strive and grow. Critics of capitalism believe that you do not look only at the way capitalism operates but that there is a need for enlightened social policy, and the only constraints come from technology and human nature. These will show up in any advanced society. The authors do not agree, they do not think these social issues arise from human nature but actually within the structure of capitalism.
Next the authors look into the liberal education theory by asking the question "What exactly is the theory underlying the notion of education as a panacea or a fix to all the social ills?"
There are two strands / viewpoints that must be looked at: John Dewey and the 'Democratic School' and Functionalists and neoclassical economics.
This is best understood by analyzing how these two schools of thought deal with two major questions / ideas concerning the limits of educational policy.
1. The compatibility of various functions schools are to perform
2. The power of schooling to perform these functions.
To be continued...
This notion that education could be a tool to fix all of the social ills and a form of social reform and social policy is not a new idea. This dates back to 1890. From 1890 - 1920 the U.S. shifted to the corporate based economy, much like what we see now. A man by the name of Andrew Carnegie who founded the Carnegie foundation for the advancement of teaching believed that education was the way to fix all of the issues that were plaguing society such as social unrest. This was a view point that most people believed at the time. Even Lyndon Johnson the president in power in the U.S. from '63 - '69 was backing this statement. He was quoted saying that the answer for all of our national problems comes down to single word: Education. I don't know about you but that is a pretty lofty goal to place on teachers, to fix ALL of the national problems of the U.S.
So why education? Why this notion that education can fix all of these issues that had been cropping up? Well according to the book, when capitalism is left on its own, it can produce some amazing results, but it can also create some undesirable ones as well.
*fragmentation of communities
*decrease in the quality of the environment
*inhuman working conditions
*unequal distribution of income.
This classical laissez-fair ideal was rejected for what is called progessive liberalism. To treat these undesirable conditions mentioned above, social programs were erected. It was education and government intervention that would save the day. The liberals at the time believed that both had become essential to promote and foster economic growth. It was these two factors that could rectify social problems and limit the human cost that was associated with capitalism. It seem to me that individuals were starting to see that education was not the only way to solve the social ills that were occurring.
Yet the book goes onto say that obviously education and government intervention is important yet they have still not been able to solve the big issues of inequality, class stratification, racism, sexism, fragmented jobs and destruction of the environment. People of the time could not understand why things were not getting better as the economy continued to strive and grow. Critics of capitalism believe that you do not look only at the way capitalism operates but that there is a need for enlightened social policy, and the only constraints come from technology and human nature. These will show up in any advanced society. The authors do not agree, they do not think these social issues arise from human nature but actually within the structure of capitalism.
Next the authors look into the liberal education theory by asking the question "What exactly is the theory underlying the notion of education as a panacea or a fix to all the social ills?"
There are two strands / viewpoints that must be looked at: John Dewey and the 'Democratic School' and Functionalists and neoclassical economics.
This is best understood by analyzing how these two schools of thought deal with two major questions / ideas concerning the limits of educational policy.
1. The compatibility of various functions schools are to perform
2. The power of schooling to perform these functions.
To be continued...
No comments:
Post a Comment