I am headed off to a conference and so wanted to get this done. As I post this, we don’t have a topic/question posted on the blog, so I apologize if my ramblings are completely off base!
Our assignment was to read Dewey’s Democracy and Education chapters 1 – 4, so I am going to share some general thoughts/questions that have arisen for me in relation to an issue in the Hanover schools. The ongoing debate in Hanover relates directly to many of the questions which Dewey raises; I was struck by how relevant his questions/observations remain when we think of modern day society and our educational goals.
Recently in Hanover County (where I live) and beyond (Michael Williams wrote a piece on the debate in the Richmond Times), there has been a big “to do” over several Hanover teachers sharing with their classes a documentary on 9/11. The film (Thomas L. Friedman Reporting: Searching for the Roots of 9/11 originally shown on the Discovery channel) attempts to understand 9/11 from different Muslim perspectives. The chairman of the Hanover Board of Supervisors publicly condemned the showing of the documentary and claims that his phone has been “blowing up with folks who are glad I spoke to this issue.”
How do you think Dewey would respond to this debate? In chapter 1 he states: "Society exists through a process of transmission...Transmission occurs by means of communication of habits of doing, thinking and feeling from the older to the younger. Without this communication of ideals, hopes, expectations, standards, opinions, from those members of society who are passing out of the group life to those who are coming into it, social life could not survive" (p. 3). Do schools have an increased responsibility to address controversial issues in order to provide true educational equity? Do we, as a society, have a responsibility to introduce students to different cultures and ways of thinking? Should schools be a place where we cultivate critical thinking and champion free speech even by those with whom we may disagree?
Dewey reminds me of how desirable and yet difficult it is to form community and how necessary community is for establishing a successful education system designed to pass on society’s values from one generation to the next. He speaks of having a common end and a shared purpose through communication and by developing relationships with others, (without abuse of power dynamics), in order to really get to know others. I recognize the Vermonter in his writings, in terms of how scale and size impact a community. I’m reminded of how some of the constraints of our present day lives can hinder versus foster community. People living in large metropolitan areas come into contact with so many people and exist simultaneously in so many different communities. I travel in the circles of several communities such as VCU, Randolph Macon College, Chesterfield County, the neighborhood of Charter Colony, Greenfield Elementary School, and Crestwood Presbyterian Church just to name a few. Within each of these communities there are many different values and it’s easy to understand how difficult it becomes to work towards a shared purpose within any of these communities, let alone within the larger society. What does Dewey have to say about how our schools address this issue of our times where we live in disparate communities? “One code prevails in the family; another, on the street; a third, in the workshop or store; a fourth, in the religious association. As a person passes from one of the environments to another, he is subjected to antagonistic pulls, and is in danger of being split into a being having different standards of judgment and emotion for different occasions. This danger imposes upon the school a steadying and integrating office.”
Meg’s story about the Hanover County official up in arms over the 911 lesson is an example of how difficult it is for a community to reach consensus, and how power relations and fear of the other and so much more, comes into play despite what is supposed to be a shared common purpose of “educating children.” On the one hand, it all seems so simple: educate our children to be able to reason and to be open-minded to ideas outside their own (I hear Dewey’s advice on how it takes relationships and communication to be able to see things from another’s perspective). On the other hand it becomes so complicated because people want to nail down the exact knowledge that is to be passed on to future generations. Which brings us to situations like the Hanover County 911 lesson. The longer I’m around the more I’m convinced that folks like the Quakers/Friends have the right take… gather together with a community small enough so that everyone’s voice can be heard in determining how things should be done (including what should be taught) in that community. It certainly seems as though the school system the size of Hanover County is small enough to allow voice for parents, teachers, and all those in the community interested in determining what to share with today’s youth. If the answer to “what to teach” (as opposed to how) is interwoven with the issue of scale, then I’m not sure where that leaves the U.S. as we are in the midst of a national standards movement. I wonder what Dewey would say about the idea of Common Core knowledge for a country of our size.
One of my favorite passages from the readings: “To formulate requires getting outside of it, seeing it as another would see it, considering what points of contact it has with the life of another so that it may be got into such form that he can appreciate its meaning. Except in dealing with commonplaces and catch phrases one has to assimilate, imaginatively, something of another's experience in order to tell him intelligently of one's own experience. All communication is like art.” These are obviously the seeds of progressive education.
More Dewey that applies to the Hanover situation….
“But in some cases as in commands, prohibitions, approvals, and disapprovals, the stimuli proceed from persons with a direct view to influencing action. Since in such cases we are most conscious of controlling the action of others, we are likely to exaggerate the importance of this sort of control at the expense of a more permanent and effective method.”
“The basic control resides in the nature of the situations in which the young take part. In social situations the young have to refer their way of acting to what others are doing and make it fit in. This directs their action to a common result, and gives an understanding common to the participants.”
“This common understanding of the means and ends of action is the essence of social control. It is indirect, or emotional and intellectual, not direct or personal. Moreover it is intrinsic to the disposition of the person, not external and coercive. To achieve this internal control through identity of interest and understanding is the business of education.” (Emphasis added)
In a past life, I was training to become a linguist. And while now I have switched focus a little bit, I am still fascinated by how philosophers talk about language. (Partly why I love Wittgenstein so much – although his dissertation, which I hadn’t seen before, is pretty epic!) Dewey says the following about language:
“The importance of language in gaining knowledge is doubtless the chief cause of the common notion that knowledge may be passed directly from one to another. It almost seems as if all we have to do to convey an idea into the mind of another is to convey a sound into his ear. Thus imparting knowledge gets assimilated to a purely physical process. But learning from language will be found, when analyzed, to confirm the principle just laid down. It would probably be admitted with little hesitation that a child gets the idea of, say, a hat by using it as other persons do; by covering the head with it, giving it to others to wear, having it put on by others when going out, etc. But it may be asked how this principle of shared activity applies to getting through speech or reading the idea of, say, a Greek helmet, where no direct use of any kind enters in. What shared activity is there in learning from books about the discovery of America?” (chapter 2)
Language is important, but when we are first born (tabula rasa?), language really only is a bunch of sounds. Meaning is attached later from experience (and observing). This resonates with me as a prime example of why education is so important. In order to learn meaning, children are watching. This is why “do as I say, not as I do” is such an absurd comment. Children have grown up watching what people do, and learn the social cues to imitate it. This is how they have learned just about everything, including the meaning of language.
But what meaning do we want our children to learn? Tami brings up some very important points about how hard it is for society to come to a consensus. With some many circles and so many beliefs, what is what we want taught to children? I think this is partially more of any issue now with our globalizing society. With people being so mobile, different societies have different traditions. This is even more of a macro issue. Tami has given her various circles, and we all have our own as well. How do we negotiate these circles, especially when values or customs are so drastically different? I know that I have to wear different hats when I’m at VCU vs. the community college vs. my family. Not that I have to change my essence, but I know that the people of each of the different circles expect different things. “There is more than a verbal tie between the words common, community, and communication.” (chapter 1) Negotiating that is the issue.
I want to continue with topic of transmission. This may come off as a bit of a tangential rant, but I was just reading the Style Weekly piece about limited English proficient (LEP) students in Richmond schools, and I feel strongly about the issue. There are currently no substantial resources available to help this growing student body learn about their new cultures. These students lack the ability to communicate with teachers, school administrators, and other students. How on earth are they supposed to learn what is expected of them and what help is actually available to them?
Dewey writes in Chapter 1 “that these immature members be not merely physically preserved in adequate numbers, but that they be initiated into the interests, purposes, information, skill, and practices of the mature members; otherwise, the group will cease its characteristic life.” Dewey claims that “education, and education along, spans the gap” between a lack of awareness of the norms of the social group and a working knowledge of them. In the Richmond case, the education for these students is an isolating and often punitive experience that transmits not the information they need to interact effectively with the social groups in their schools and larger communities but rather a sense that they do not belong and they are unwanted (drains on public resources).
I appreciate Dewey’s attention to the purpose and function of education, beginning with the end in mind. I think in some situations, like the situation of immigrant populations in Richmond, the end is not always easy to articulate. And without an end in mind, how do teachers and school administrators (or even students, for that matter) interact in ways that are mutually beneficial?
I am headed off to a conference and so wanted to get this done. As I post this, we don’t have a topic/question posted on the blog, so I apologize if my ramblings are completely off base!
ReplyDeleteOur assignment was to read Dewey’s Democracy and Education chapters 1 – 4, so I am going to share some general thoughts/questions that have arisen for me in relation to an issue in the Hanover schools. The ongoing debate in Hanover relates directly to many of the questions which Dewey raises; I was struck by how relevant his questions/observations remain when we think of modern day society and our educational goals.
Recently in Hanover County (where I live) and beyond (Michael Williams wrote a piece on the debate in the Richmond Times), there has been a big “to do” over several Hanover teachers sharing with their classes a documentary on 9/11. The film (Thomas L. Friedman Reporting: Searching for the Roots of 9/11 originally shown on the Discovery channel) attempts to understand 9/11 from different Muslim perspectives. The chairman of the Hanover Board of Supervisors publicly condemned the showing of the documentary and claims that his phone has been “blowing up with folks who are glad I spoke to this issue.”
How do you think Dewey would respond to this debate? In chapter 1 he states: "Society exists through a process of transmission...Transmission occurs by means of communication of habits of doing, thinking and feeling from the older to the younger. Without this communication of ideals, hopes, expectations, standards, opinions, from those members of society who are passing out of the group life to those who are coming into it, social life could not survive" (p. 3). Do schools have an increased responsibility to address controversial issues in order to provide true educational equity? Do we, as a society, have a responsibility to introduce students to different cultures and ways of thinking? Should schools be a place where we cultivate critical thinking and champion free speech even by those with whom we may disagree?
Dewey reminds me of how desirable and yet difficult it is to form community and how necessary community is for establishing a successful education system designed to pass on society’s values from one generation to the next. He speaks of having a common end and a shared purpose through communication and by developing relationships with others, (without abuse of power dynamics), in order to really get to know others. I recognize the Vermonter in his writings, in terms of how scale and size impact a community. I’m reminded of how some of the constraints of our present day lives can hinder versus foster community. People living in large metropolitan areas come into contact with so many people and exist simultaneously in so many different communities. I travel in the circles of several communities such as VCU, Randolph Macon College, Chesterfield County, the neighborhood of Charter Colony, Greenfield Elementary School, and Crestwood Presbyterian Church just to name a few. Within each of these communities there are many different values and it’s easy to understand how difficult it becomes to work towards a shared purpose within any of these communities, let alone within the larger society. What does Dewey have to say about how our schools address this issue of our times where we live in disparate communities? “One code prevails in the family; another, on the street; a third, in the workshop or store; a fourth, in the religious association. As a person passes from one of the environments to another, he is subjected to antagonistic pulls, and is in danger of being split into a being having different standards of judgment and emotion for different occasions. This danger imposes upon the school a steadying and integrating office.”
ReplyDeleteMeg’s story about the Hanover County official up in arms over the 911 lesson is an example of how difficult it is for a community to reach consensus, and how power relations and fear of the other and so much more, comes into play despite what is supposed to be a shared common purpose of “educating children.” On the one hand, it all seems so simple: educate our children to be able to reason and to be open-minded to ideas outside their own (I hear Dewey’s advice on how it takes relationships and communication to be able to see things from another’s perspective). On the other hand it becomes so complicated because people want to nail down the exact knowledge that is to be passed on to future generations. Which brings us to situations like the Hanover County 911 lesson. The longer I’m around the more I’m convinced that folks like the Quakers/Friends have the right take… gather together with a community small enough so that everyone’s voice can be heard in determining how things should be done (including what should be taught) in that community. It certainly seems as though the school system the size of Hanover County is small enough to allow voice for parents, teachers, and all those in the community interested in determining what to share with today’s youth. If the answer to “what to teach” (as opposed to how) is interwoven with the issue of scale, then I’m not sure where that leaves the U.S. as we are in the midst of a national standards movement. I wonder what Dewey would say about the idea of Common Core knowledge for a country of our size.
One of my favorite passages from the readings:
“To formulate requires getting outside of it, seeing it as another would see it, considering what points of contact it has with the life of another so that it may be got into such form that he can appreciate its meaning. Except in dealing with commonplaces and catch phrases one has to assimilate, imaginatively, something of another's experience in order to tell him intelligently of one's own experience. All communication is like art.” These are obviously the seeds of progressive education.
More Dewey that applies to the Hanover situation….
ReplyDelete“But in some cases as in commands, prohibitions, approvals, and disapprovals, the stimuli proceed from persons with a direct view to influencing action. Since in such cases we are most conscious of controlling the action of others, we are likely to exaggerate the importance of this sort of control at the expense of a more permanent and effective method.”
“The basic control resides in the nature of the situations in which the young take part. In social situations the young have to refer their way of acting to what others are doing and make it fit in. This directs their action to a common result, and gives an understanding common to the participants.”
“This common understanding of the means and ends of action is the essence of social control. It is indirect, or emotional and intellectual, not direct or personal. Moreover it is intrinsic to the disposition of the person, not external and coercive. To achieve this internal control through identity of interest and understanding is the business of education.” (Emphasis added)
In a past life, I was training to become a linguist. And while now I have switched focus a little bit, I am still fascinated by how philosophers talk about language. (Partly why I love Wittgenstein so much – although his dissertation, which I hadn’t seen before, is pretty epic!) Dewey says the following about language:
ReplyDelete“The importance of language in gaining knowledge is doubtless the chief cause of the common notion that knowledge may be passed directly from one to another. It almost seems as if all we have to do to convey an idea into the mind of another is to convey a sound into his ear. Thus imparting knowledge gets assimilated to a purely physical process. But learning from language will be found, when analyzed, to confirm the principle just laid down. It would probably be admitted with little hesitation that a child gets the idea of, say, a hat by using it as other persons do; by covering the head with it, giving it to others to wear, having it put on by others when going out, etc. But it may be asked how this principle of shared activity applies to getting through speech or reading the idea of, say, a Greek helmet, where no direct use of any kind enters in. What shared activity is there in learning from books about the discovery of America?” (chapter 2)
Language is important, but when we are first born (tabula rasa?), language really only is a bunch of sounds. Meaning is attached later from experience (and observing). This resonates with me as a prime example of why education is so important. In order to learn meaning, children are watching. This is why “do as I say, not as I do” is such an absurd comment. Children have grown up watching what people do, and learn the social cues to imitate it. This is how they have learned just about everything, including the meaning of language.
But what meaning do we want our children to learn? Tami brings up some very important points about how hard it is for society to come to a consensus. With some many circles and so many beliefs, what is what we want taught to children? I think this is partially more of any issue now with our globalizing society. With people being so mobile, different societies have different traditions. This is even more of a macro issue. Tami has given her various circles, and we all have our own as well. How do we negotiate these circles, especially when values or customs are so drastically different? I know that I have to wear different hats when I’m at VCU vs. the community college vs. my family. Not that I have to change my essence, but I know that the people of each of the different circles expect different things. “There is more than a verbal tie between the words common, community, and communication.” (chapter 1) Negotiating that is the issue.
I want to continue with topic of transmission. This may come off as a bit of a tangential rant, but I was just reading the Style Weekly piece about limited English proficient (LEP) students in Richmond schools, and I feel strongly about the issue. There are currently no substantial resources available to help this growing student body learn about their new cultures. These students lack the ability to communicate with teachers, school administrators, and other students. How on earth are they supposed to learn what is expected of them and what help is actually available to them?
ReplyDeleteDewey writes in Chapter 1 “that these immature members be not merely physically preserved in adequate numbers, but that they be initiated into the interests, purposes, information, skill, and practices of the mature members; otherwise, the group will cease its characteristic life.” Dewey claims that “education, and education along, spans the gap” between a lack of awareness of the norms of the social group and a working knowledge of them. In the Richmond case, the education for these students is an isolating and often punitive experience that transmits not the information they need to interact effectively with the social groups in their schools and larger communities but rather a sense that they do not belong and they are unwanted (drains on public resources).
I appreciate Dewey’s attention to the purpose and function of education, beginning with the end in mind. I think in some situations, like the situation of immigrant populations in Richmond, the end is not always easy to articulate. And without an end in mind, how do teachers and school administrators (or even students, for that matter) interact in ways that are mutually beneficial?