Notes about school finance, as a result from the introductory debate about Governor Sanford’s refusal to accept the state’s share of the federal stimulus unless he could use the money to help pay down state debt:
• Where do the states get their revenue? The answer is through property (both on the home and auto), sales, excise, gasoline, and income tax.
• Different states have various forms of tax collection. (FYI: Texas, Florida, South Dakota, Alaska, Nevada, Wyoming, and Washington state all do not collect a state income tax.)
• Until 2006, public education in South Carolina was financed through property tax. School operations often made up a majority of the property tax collected.
• High property values often lead to lower property taxes = more money for schools, Low property values can either lead to lower property taxes = less money for schools or to higher property taxes = more money for schools. This contributes to severe disparities in funding between schools in close proximity to one another (the difference between Horry and Dillon counties, for example).
• While using sales tax to fund public education can alleviate these disparities, it is not without drawbacks. One major problem with using the sales tax to fund schools is that in tough economic times, like the current one, people will spend less money which leads towards the state receiving less revenue to spread throughout the state.
• The South Carolina Education Lottery and bonds are non-tax revenue sources for public education.
• Usually, either the state or a local government (like York County or the city of Rock Hill) will use public bonds to finance public projects like schools, parks, and more.
• LIFE and the HOPE scholarships for undergraduate students and technical education are both covered under the South Carolina Education Lottery. Two arguments against the lottery are that it can lead to a gambling addiction or those who purchase the lottery tickets are poor and are less likely to go to college.
• San Antonio v. Rodriquez (1973) argued that inequalities in education often lead to violation of fourteenth amendment rights for students. Rodriquez ends up losing since there is no mention about education in the United States constitution.
• Abbeville et al. v. South Carolina (2005) arose from a dispute about equity v. adequacy in nine school districts along the Interstate 95 corridor.
Some notes about the history of American education:
• What began as a private academy for black students led to what are now historically black colleges. The Morrill Land Grant Act provided federal lands that were sold to the states to establish agricultural schools around the country, like Penn State, Clemson, North Carolina A&T, Texas A&M, and Virginia Tech to name a few.
• No Child Left Behind represents possibly the greatest federal involvement in education in history.
Some notes about Tyack and Cuban:
• The general sense since the 1970s is that public schools are in a perpetual state of crisis. Contributing to this are the increase in focus on the individual rather than the community and the shift in need from manual labor skills to technical-based work.
• More administrations often made political decisions about public education that were political rather than beneficial to the students.
• Administrative Progressives - Progress - Science / Factories. Adminstrative Progressives consisted of Ph.D. education scholars who felt that proper management of schools made better schools. Much of what is discussed as the “grammar of schooling” can be traced back to these administrative progressives.
• Students as democratically productive citizens were the result of progressive education.
• Chapter 2 dealt with the cyclical nature of educational reform. Is educational reform cyclical? Our international competition with Germany in the 1890’s, the Soviets in the 1950’s, the Japanese in the 1980’s, and now the Chinese and Indians is indicative of the “everything old is new again” mentality of cyclical progress. Questioning the purpose of high schools also provides insight about educational reform being cyclical. The two poles in this debate are high school’s role as academic (college prep) and vocational (technical/work force prep).
• Policy talk often goes back and forth, which makes it cyclical while the institutions end up being the ones affected by it. Ideas filter down and are adapted by institutions a little at a time (“tinkering”). The primary counter-example to this is desegregation, in which policy talk combined with an outside force (government) and worked to make fast, dramatic changes.
• Schools are often subject to change as a result of policy being cyclical.
For next class: Bring two questions regarding Tyack and Cuban to stimulate discussion about the readings.
-----------------------------------------------
by: Brian Kingbird and Brian Martin
Showing posts with label class summary. Show all posts
Showing posts with label class summary. Show all posts
Wednesday, April 8, 2009
Monday, April 6, 2009
- Notes for EDUC 600 on 3/24
I. Phillips
A. Problem
1. Means of clarifying constructivism
2. Ask to critically looking at constructivism
3. Illustrates that a concept that we use and integrate it
B. Definition
1. Constructivism
a. Individual psychology vs. public discipline
· Construct knowledge construct knowledge
themselves over time due to need
b. Humans as creator vs. nature as instructor
· Knowledge is made Knowledge is discovered
c. Active vs. passive
· Knowledge is product Take in raw data
of active searching
C. Thesis
1. Clarification and organization of constructivism
2. Method of understanding
3. Knowledge is a tool to help us do better in the world
D. The good, bad and ugly of constructivism
1. Good because constructivism places a necessity for active participation by the learner
2. Bad because constructivism tends to treat the justification of our knowledge as being entirely a matter of sociopolitical process
3. Ugly because constructivism that people who use constructivism don’t really know what it is.
II. Elgin
A. Problem
1. Knowledge vs. Understanding
2. Plato’s teaching assumption “you have to know something to really teach it”.
3. Knowledge is justified by true belief
4. Most of our beliefs even though they maybe true lack the justification to be knowledge
B. Understanding
1. Doesn’t require truth
2. Holistic
3. Admits to degrees
4. Not restricted to facts
C. Understanding needs to be just above the level of our students
III. Siegel
A. Thesis
1. Principles are what you base your reasoning on
2. Reason is only a reason if it is based on a principle
3. Critical thinker is one who is moved by reason
4. Reason is based on principles in similar situations
B. Critical Thinkers are
1. Problem solvers
2. Why something happened
3. Open to new possibilities
C. Epistemology
1. Justification of belief
2. There are general rules = logic
3. There are subject specific rules
D. Students should know how & when to apply rules of reasoning to be a critical thinker & be willing to apply them with the appropriate attitude.
Saturday, March 28, 2009
Class Summary
Notes for EDUC 600 Class, March 25 Epistemology Day
Submitted by Cindy Nigro and Linda Dixon
Submitted by Cindy Nigro and Linda Dixon
Housekeeping:
1. Presentation grades are now available.
2. Schedule final activity will be at Dr. Pope’s house.
3. Today’s articles: Phillips/constructivism; Elgin/knowledge vs. understanding; Siegel/critical thinking.
1. Presentation grades are now available.
2. Schedule final activity will be at Dr. Pope’s house.
3. Today’s articles: Phillips/constructivism; Elgin/knowledge vs. understanding; Siegel/critical thinking.
The articles by Elgin, Siegel and Phillips all talk about words often used in education, but not analyzed. The Phillips article lays out the field in which constructivism is taught. They all define learning as constructivism, but the term has a spectrum of different meanings. In the Elgin article she discusses that we shouldn’t be teaching knowledge but rather understanding. Siegel writes about critical thinking, what that means and how teachers can promote it.
D.C. Phillips- "The Good, The Bad, and the Ugly: The Many Faces of Constructivism"
People can construct knowledge differently. He discusses these differences in relation to three different axes.
AXIS 1
Individual_________________________________Social/Public
AXIS 2
Human as Creator___________________________\_____Nature as Instructor
Active____________________________________Passive
The individual constructivist emphasizes that the individual takes information and constructs his or her own individual reality. Vygotsky and Piaget fall into this area. The social constructivist believes that bodies of knowledge are gained from communities. Thomas S. Kuhn stressed the role of scientific communities in the role of knowledge construction. Some of the public emphasis on knowledge has more to do with politics of the day. How can this relate to science? Isn’t the result of scientific experiments and observation just fact? Kuhn says that the scientific community does affect knowledge. Dr. Pope explained it this way:
S1 (representing scientific norm) shifts to S2 (new scientific norm)
I1, I2, I3, I4- These symbols represent ideas. Some of these ideas may not be included in the scientific norm or standard. The closer the idea matches up to what is already in the standard, the more likely it will be accepted. Occasionally an idea does not fit the norm, I4 in this case. If the idea persists but doesn’t fit, it may force a change in the structure, scientific norm. When this happens it is called a paradigm shift.
Linda Alcoff and Elizabeth Potter are two constuctivists that fall into the social category. They believed that the political and social climate has a major impact on what is considered knowledge. Political forces decide what counts as truth. When you say something that doesn’t fit in with the body of knowledge, it will be assumed as false. Who is in power (politics) has a lot of power to influence values of knowledge. Human concerns influence as much as nature.
A radical contructivist claims that scientific knowledge is constructed entirely out of social relations. Whatever is driving political and social changes will count as knowledge.
Where does knowledge originate? The second axis suggests that human beings are the creator of knowledge. The other end of the axis suggests that nature dictates knowledge. In other words knowledge is discovered not made. At some point on this spectrum
knowledge is not being made, it is being discovered.
Karl Popper falls in the middle of the second axis. His believes that the development of knowledge can be described as "man proposes, nature disposes." Man comes up with a theory tests it, then eliminates error and moves to the next theory.
The shift from Newtonian physics to that of Einstein is an example of this paradigm shift. Darwin’s evolutionary theory is also an example of the paradigm shift. Eventually the results of scientific observations and experiments change the norm.
The third axis ranges from active to passive. Climate change is an example. Some say the climate is changing, and we can do something about it. Others say that the climate is not changing. Both sides say that the individuals with the other perspective are motivated by politics. As a result what passes for knowledge is changing. Dewey and Piaget stress the active end of the constructivist spectrum. The individual through interaction with his environment is constantly changing how he interprets reality. John Locke is passive, with his blank slate perspective. You can be at different points on the spectrum.
How is this relevant to the early childhood classroom? Von Glassferfield believed that individuals construct everything. It should be free from societal influences. In the early childhood classroom we should pay close attention to the individual student and how they learn. We should also incorporate the history of the disciplines as we study. Both these suggestions are good pedagogical ideas that rest on epistemological principles.
"Education and the Advancement Understanding"-Catherine Elgin
Elgin makes reference to Plato’s Meno where he is trying to teach a slave boy geometry. What he is doing is not teaching, but helping the boy pull knowledge out (analogy of a midwife) Teaching requires knowledge. The definition of knowledge has been set very high. Elgin bases the claim that knowledge is a hard thing to obtain. Plato taught that you couldn’t teach what you do not know.
Knowledge is a justified, true belief (JTB) Truth has to have a tether, something that holds it fast. Some tethers are stronger than other.
Example- UNC beat LSU in basketball. If you saw the score on the new, you have a strong tether to believe it. If you just saw half the game, and guessed that UNC won, you have an educated guess.
What makes a good tether? There has to be a strong tether to justify your belief as knowledge. Two things make it difficult:
1. We don’t help our students have a strong enough credit for knowledge, because we tell them. We preconceive that our students know because they have been told.
2. Teachers don’t know a whole lot.
Elgin wants to move away from knowledge to understanding. It more accurately describes what happens in schools. Understanding is an approximation of the truth. It admits to degrees. It is not restricted to facts, and it is holistic. Knowledge is expressed verbally, but understanding may be expressed in other ways. Example is the young child who cannot write down what he wrote in a story; therefore it is not considered knowledge. The child may be able to draw pictures, act out or tell another student the content of the story. The student has demonstrated understanding.
Bloom’s theory is that facts are at the bottom. The theory constructed is the top of the knowledge pyramid. For Elgin this is not knowledge, but understanding.
In her summary paragraph at the end of the article, Elgin proposes that if what we do advances understanding, we are teaching and the student is learning. If we are just on the same level as our students, we are struggling together with the material, so this process is collaborative investigation.
Harvey Siegel- "The Reasons Conception"
Critical thinker is one who is moved by reasons. Reasons are based on principles, which are consistent and backed up by principles or rules. They are not arbitrary. P is a reason for "q" if and only if principle "r" renders "p" as a new reason for "r". Principles are consistent, impartial and non-arbitrary.
Example- Students who cheat get zeros. Principles apply consistency. If it is not consistent, it is not a principle. For reasons to function there has to be principles.
For reasons to function we have to have principles. For Siegel critical thinking is an educational goal. We want our students to be motivated by reasons. "…a critical thinker must be able to assess reasons and their ability to warrant beliefs, claims and actions properly."
There are two general types of principles:
1. Domain specific-good reasons for a particular area such as science and math.
2. Subject neutral-general principles that apply across a variety of contexts and subjects.
Example: Hemmingway was a drunk. For Whom the Bell Tolls is a crappy novel. There is a fallacy in this logic. Hemmingway’s personal life and behavior do not affect the quality of the product. The fallacy is subject neutral. You cold say that the novel is about man’s struggle with himself.
We want our students to value good reasoning, and to believe and act on that basis. This is the heart of the critical attitude.
In schools we should teach:
- Subject specific rules
- Subject neutral rules
- We should try to teach a critical spirit and think these things are important
- A moral component exists here too ofgetting our students to be people that value critical thinking
How do we teach critical thinking? Content, Method and Manner
- Manner-Teacher needs to model it.
- Method-We asks our students to decide knowledge and defend/justify their position.
- Content-You can teach the subject-specific and the subject-neutral principles. Subject neutral skills and domain specific skills are taught when taking certain classes.
We'll reconvene April Fool's Day; have a good week.
Wednesday, March 25, 2009
Class Notes for 3-24-09
We began class by discussing Curren 43, 45 and 49 in small groups. Each group was assigned a different article:
Group #1: Phillips—The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly (Curren 43)
Phillips wants to know “What do we mean by constructivism?” His purpose is clarification and organization or a “method for understanding constructivist thought”. Phillips offers 3 dimensions that create a framework for Constructivist thought.
a. Individual Psychology--------------------------------------------Public Discipline
Should constructivism focus on individual psychology or be based on a public discipline like science or education? As a public discipline, constructivism
b. Human as Creator------------------------------------------------Nature as Instructor
Is knowledge something that we make or something we discover?
c. Active-----------------------------------------------------Passive
Does knowledge come about by active discovery or is it something that we were destined to discover? Locke for example, believed that we took in knowledge in a passive way. In other words, our minds are a “blank slate” (tabula rosa) that is written on. We are a passive receptacle with an active element. For Dewey, our acquisition of knowledge is more active because we are searching for solutions to problems.
Key Questions:
Is knowledge made or discovered?
Phillips thinks it is made, not found. The Good is that we engage in discussion of constructivism. The Bad is that many people slide their constructivist thought toward relativism. The Ugly is that many educators wave the flag of constructivism without fully understanding it.
Group #2: Elgin, Education and the Advancement of Understanding (Curren 45)
Elgin discusses Knowledge vs. Understanding. She writes about Plato’s Teaching Assumption (PTA): the idea that to teach you must know. Elgin wants to refrain from teaching knowledge and start teaching for understanding. She does not like PTA.
Knowledge is based on belief. Elgin’s point is that most of our beliefs that might be true are not justified. So, if we focus teaching on knowledge, then we’re potentially teaching a lot of false information.
Understanding, on the other hand, does not require truth, it’s holistic and allows for degrees of understanding (student, teacher, professor).
Questions for Elgin article:
1. What does her thesis imply about teacher knowledge? Does it degrade the role of the teacher? This question refers back to Strike and Soltis’ question about ‘What is a body of knowledge?” and don’t we need to be proficient in our field in order to justify the professional status of teachers?
Group #3: Siegel, The Reasons Conception (Curren 49)
Critical thinking is based on reasons which are justified by principles.
What does it mean to be a critical thinker?
a. They solve problems
b. It implies that the person is open to new beliefs and is open to finding a new understanding of his/her own beliefs
Siegel says that critical thinkers have a certain epistemology to support their beliefs. Critical thinkers are apt to live a "life of reason" which she also calls "the critical spirit". Problems can be solved and decisions made by viewing the world through a certain epistemological lense.
Epistemology—theory of knowledge with regard to its methods and scope
Siegel’s conclusion is not that anything goes. It’s that there are rules for reasoning and that students should learn rules of reasoning so that they can become critical thinkers in order to justify their findings. But critical thinking is also knowing your own beliefs and having the audacity to apply them. This is also part of the “critical spirit”.
Group #1: Phillips—The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly (Curren 43)
Phillips wants to know “What do we mean by constructivism?” His purpose is clarification and organization or a “method for understanding constructivist thought”. Phillips offers 3 dimensions that create a framework for Constructivist thought.
a. Individual Psychology--------------------------------------------Public Discipline
Should constructivism focus on individual psychology or be based on a public discipline like science or education? As a public discipline, constructivism
b. Human as Creator------------------------------------------------Nature as Instructor
Is knowledge something that we make or something we discover?
c. Active-----------------------------------------------------Passive
Does knowledge come about by active discovery or is it something that we were destined to discover? Locke for example, believed that we took in knowledge in a passive way. In other words, our minds are a “blank slate” (tabula rosa) that is written on. We are a passive receptacle with an active element. For Dewey, our acquisition of knowledge is more active because we are searching for solutions to problems.
Key Questions:
Is knowledge made or discovered?
Phillips thinks it is made, not found. The Good is that we engage in discussion of constructivism. The Bad is that many people slide their constructivist thought toward relativism. The Ugly is that many educators wave the flag of constructivism without fully understanding it.
Group #2: Elgin, Education and the Advancement of Understanding (Curren 45)
Elgin discusses Knowledge vs. Understanding. She writes about Plato’s Teaching Assumption (PTA): the idea that to teach you must know. Elgin wants to refrain from teaching knowledge and start teaching for understanding. She does not like PTA.
Knowledge is based on belief. Elgin’s point is that most of our beliefs that might be true are not justified. So, if we focus teaching on knowledge, then we’re potentially teaching a lot of false information.
Understanding, on the other hand, does not require truth, it’s holistic and allows for degrees of understanding (student, teacher, professor).
Questions for Elgin article:
1. What does her thesis imply about teacher knowledge? Does it degrade the role of the teacher? This question refers back to Strike and Soltis’ question about ‘What is a body of knowledge?” and don’t we need to be proficient in our field in order to justify the professional status of teachers?
Group #3: Siegel, The Reasons Conception (Curren 49)
Critical thinking is based on reasons which are justified by principles.
What does it mean to be a critical thinker?
a. They solve problems
b. It implies that the person is open to new beliefs and is open to finding a new understanding of his/her own beliefs
Siegel says that critical thinkers have a certain epistemology to support their beliefs. Critical thinkers are apt to live a "life of reason" which she also calls "the critical spirit". Problems can be solved and decisions made by viewing the world through a certain epistemological lense.
Epistemology—theory of knowledge with regard to its methods and scope
Siegel’s conclusion is not that anything goes. It’s that there are rules for reasoning and that students should learn rules of reasoning so that they can become critical thinkers in order to justify their findings. But critical thinking is also knowing your own beliefs and having the audacity to apply them. This is also part of the “critical spirit”.
Wednesday, February 11, 2009
Notes for Tuesday, Feb. 10
Class on Tuesday, began with the discussion on Gutmann. The selections in our book are from her book Democratic Education, from the late 1980s, which tries to define what democratic education means and would look like at the level of policy, not necessarily the classroom; and how educational resources ought to be divided up in way that makes education democratic. During the first half of class we discussed maximization, equalization, and meritocracy.
Gutmann’s 3 Ways to talk about the purposes of education, each represents a different set of priorities of allocating resources (time, money, attention)1) maximization
2) equalization
3) meritocracy
Maximization: all about maximizing life chances
-claims that a democratic state should devote as many resources as possible to maximize a child’s life chances
-there are no assumptions of what the child is like or should be like
-allows individuals to maximize their freedom; whatever the child wants to do, they should be able to do and it’s the government’s job to help you (as long as it doesn’t hurt anyone)
What should schools do? Help you to be whatever you want to be
Example: The state should do everything they can to make Dr. Pope an astronaut and if he is not good with math, the state should keep helping him.
Problems with maximization: practically, democratically, theoretically problematic
-moral ransom-the idea of maximizing life chances is inexhaustible; it is hard to tell if and when someone has maximized their life chance
-huge commitment and obligation for the state
-Gutmann says this is “not correct” (p. 237) practical problem of finite resources: there are other things the state should be doing (making sure the community is a pleasant place to live)
Examples: Dr. Pope and his wife can arrange their lives so their daughter can do whatever she wants, but they must sacrifice other important things. By moving close to the grandparents, his daughter would have a babysitter; however he would be sacrificing his career.
Equalization: leveling the playing field
-use education to raise the level of least advantaged people to the level of most advantaged people
-not everyone has chances because of their circumstances
- John Rawls says that in our society there will be inequalities, but every now and then they should be arranged to help the least advantaged
-rationale: things that affect our life chances are simply accidents of birth; this matters a lot so those who need it are compensated
-argument that higher achieving students do not need resources because they are already doing well
-those less advantaged should not be denied by the circumstances of their birth (similar to NCLB)
What should schools do? Raise the life chances of those less advantaged by giving them more educational resources until they are at the level of the advantaged.
Example: Don’t spend anymore money on GT programs until everyone is at the same level
Problems:
-may violate autonomy-the ability for families to decide for themselves; intrude into the lives of families by getting into their business
-practically, this sort of equality is very difficult to reach—when is it going to happen? How will it be measured? How many resources would be needed?
-the drive to make everyone equal, the idea of equalization fails to acknowledge that people are different
-circumstantial problems: how do you get the student to care if the family doesn’t?
Meritocracy: based on merit
-we should give the most resources to those who are going to benefit from them the most, to those who show ability, aptitude, desire, and talent because they will eventually provide the most benefit to society
-consequentionalist/utilitarian aspects
Problems:
-talent, desire, etc. seem to be partially accidental, based on their environment which does not seem to be particularly fair or just
-like to think we don’t reward people who are lucky
Threshold debate: Gutmann says there needs to be a way in which everyone ought to be educated, thus there is the democratic threshold principle. She says that everyone needs to be brought up so that they can participate meaningfully in the democratic process and all resources must go to making sure everyone gets there.
Problems:
-how do we divide the resources
-if we give focus to the threshold, where ought education fit relative to other public goods?
-who decides the threshold? Is it just literacy? Is there a standard threshold that can be defined that people 100 years ago, today, and 100 years from now can go by?
Example: All people had to do in order to participate in a democratic society was read, but today we need to be literate, synthesize bits of information, critically analyze the source, and be technologically proficient.
-Gutmann is too narrow in her definition of a threshold
The second half of class was devoted to a mock trial from the example in the Ethics of Teaching on page 47, the banning of the books. We split into 4 groups: parents, teacher/librarians, administration, and students. Each group presented the feelings and reactions that were given in the example.
Parents: did not feel the material was age appropriate for junior high school students; the students’ maturity level is questionable and they might take fiction for reality; the parents have gone to great lengths to shield their children from these sorts of topics and do not want them to be able to access this material so easily.
Teachers/Librarians: “footloose” defense; these books are pieces of great American literature; cannot deprive every student just because a select few do not like them; the computer system is capable of censoring inappropriate books
Administrators: believe the compromise is fair which allows some control over what kids read; to put the books out altogether would be a detriment to their overall education
Students: believe it will potentially lower their GPA by being taken out of class; they can learn these things on the street, on T.V., by their friends
Conclusions:
-it is the parents job to discuss these issues with their children
-should schools have some responsibility to help filter, manage, or control it?
-Mill’s argument: 1-minority opinion may be true, 2-minority opinion may be false, then the truth remains vigorous, 3-truth lies in between
What about the other case? Pg.35, Mr. Lane publishing Eddie’s story
-this is a different kind of freedom of speech
-problematic because by refusing to publish the story, it could do harm to the kid who wrote it because he would think there is another teacher who hates him. However, this is how great art gets made because “good art is good art even if it bothers people”
-the teacher is upholding journalistic integrities because the newspaper reflects the school
-seems to be built around maturity as well-the student might be unable to see or understand the consequences
The last few minutes of class we briefly discussed the case with Paul and Tim. We can say that the teacher has exhausted all other possible resources and separating the two kids is the absolute only way to solve the problem, so which kid is sacrificed? What decisions make our ethical conscience?
Compiled by Liz M. and Melissa B.
Gutmann’s 3 Ways to talk about the purposes of education, each represents a different set of priorities of allocating resources (time, money, attention)1) maximization
2) equalization
3) meritocracy
Maximization: all about maximizing life chances
-claims that a democratic state should devote as many resources as possible to maximize a child’s life chances
-there are no assumptions of what the child is like or should be like
-allows individuals to maximize their freedom; whatever the child wants to do, they should be able to do and it’s the government’s job to help you (as long as it doesn’t hurt anyone)
What should schools do? Help you to be whatever you want to be
Example: The state should do everything they can to make Dr. Pope an astronaut and if he is not good with math, the state should keep helping him.
Problems with maximization: practically, democratically, theoretically problematic
-moral ransom-the idea of maximizing life chances is inexhaustible; it is hard to tell if and when someone has maximized their life chance
-huge commitment and obligation for the state
-Gutmann says this is “not correct” (p. 237) practical problem of finite resources: there are other things the state should be doing (making sure the community is a pleasant place to live)
Examples: Dr. Pope and his wife can arrange their lives so their daughter can do whatever she wants, but they must sacrifice other important things. By moving close to the grandparents, his daughter would have a babysitter; however he would be sacrificing his career.
Equalization: leveling the playing field
-use education to raise the level of least advantaged people to the level of most advantaged people
-not everyone has chances because of their circumstances
- John Rawls says that in our society there will be inequalities, but every now and then they should be arranged to help the least advantaged
-rationale: things that affect our life chances are simply accidents of birth; this matters a lot so those who need it are compensated
-argument that higher achieving students do not need resources because they are already doing well
-those less advantaged should not be denied by the circumstances of their birth (similar to NCLB)
What should schools do? Raise the life chances of those less advantaged by giving them more educational resources until they are at the level of the advantaged.
Example: Don’t spend anymore money on GT programs until everyone is at the same level
Problems:
-may violate autonomy-the ability for families to decide for themselves; intrude into the lives of families by getting into their business
-practically, this sort of equality is very difficult to reach—when is it going to happen? How will it be measured? How many resources would be needed?
-the drive to make everyone equal, the idea of equalization fails to acknowledge that people are different
-circumstantial problems: how do you get the student to care if the family doesn’t?
Meritocracy: based on merit
-we should give the most resources to those who are going to benefit from them the most, to those who show ability, aptitude, desire, and talent because they will eventually provide the most benefit to society
-consequentionalist/utilitarian aspects
Problems:
-talent, desire, etc. seem to be partially accidental, based on their environment which does not seem to be particularly fair or just
-like to think we don’t reward people who are lucky
Threshold debate: Gutmann says there needs to be a way in which everyone ought to be educated, thus there is the democratic threshold principle. She says that everyone needs to be brought up so that they can participate meaningfully in the democratic process and all resources must go to making sure everyone gets there.
Problems:
-how do we divide the resources
-if we give focus to the threshold, where ought education fit relative to other public goods?
-who decides the threshold? Is it just literacy? Is there a standard threshold that can be defined that people 100 years ago, today, and 100 years from now can go by?
Example: All people had to do in order to participate in a democratic society was read, but today we need to be literate, synthesize bits of information, critically analyze the source, and be technologically proficient.
-Gutmann is too narrow in her definition of a threshold
The second half of class was devoted to a mock trial from the example in the Ethics of Teaching on page 47, the banning of the books. We split into 4 groups: parents, teacher/librarians, administration, and students. Each group presented the feelings and reactions that were given in the example.
Parents: did not feel the material was age appropriate for junior high school students; the students’ maturity level is questionable and they might take fiction for reality; the parents have gone to great lengths to shield their children from these sorts of topics and do not want them to be able to access this material so easily.
Teachers/Librarians: “footloose” defense; these books are pieces of great American literature; cannot deprive every student just because a select few do not like them; the computer system is capable of censoring inappropriate books
Administrators: believe the compromise is fair which allows some control over what kids read; to put the books out altogether would be a detriment to their overall education
Students: believe it will potentially lower their GPA by being taken out of class; they can learn these things on the street, on T.V., by their friends
Conclusions:
-it is the parents job to discuss these issues with their children
-should schools have some responsibility to help filter, manage, or control it?
-Mill’s argument: 1-minority opinion may be true, 2-minority opinion may be false, then the truth remains vigorous, 3-truth lies in between
What about the other case? Pg.35, Mr. Lane publishing Eddie’s story
-this is a different kind of freedom of speech
-problematic because by refusing to publish the story, it could do harm to the kid who wrote it because he would think there is another teacher who hates him. However, this is how great art gets made because “good art is good art even if it bothers people”
-the teacher is upholding journalistic integrities because the newspaper reflects the school
-seems to be built around maturity as well-the student might be unable to see or understand the consequences
The last few minutes of class we briefly discussed the case with Paul and Tim. We can say that the teacher has exhausted all other possible resources and separating the two kids is the absolute only way to solve the problem, so which kid is sacrificed? What decisions make our ethical conscience?
Compiled by Liz M. and Melissa B.
Tuesday, February 3, 2009
February 2, 2009 Summary
Tonight’s class started with some usual housekeeping done by Dr. Pope concerning the upcoming Law Presentations and Amanda advertising two upcoming band performances by her band Tattermask. A lot of things that we discussed pertained to ethics (in general), the differences between consequentialists and non-consequentialists, and what Nel Noddings suggests about the “One-Caring Teacher”.
Some notes about ethics:
· Two types of claims: factual and personal. One example of a factual claim is the sky is blue. One example of a personal claim is vanilla ice cream is good (since this is an unproven statement, it can be subject to bias since only one person can make such a claim).
· The term normative applies to what people should or should not do in order to solve an ethical dilemma.
· There are times where one’s personal experience can not serve as grounds for what ethically based decisions teachers often make in dealing with problems such as cheating or plagiarism.
· There has to be publically accepted reasons in order to act to what we should or should not do.
Some notes about consequentialism/non-consequentialism:
· Having positive consequences is often the desired result of all ethical decisions
· Jeremy Bentham and John Stuart Mill were two followers of Utilitarianism.
· Some issues related to both consequentialism/non-consequentialism include: One needs to know all of the consequences involved (often based on decision), Giving preferential treatment to another one person or thing over another (this leads to worrying about whether a decision is fair to all or not). Example: Treating childhood cancer. Is it worth the pain and suffering of some to find a cure for others who suffer from a form of a childhood cancer?
· Consequentialism asks one to go against their rational sense or emotion. One way to look at it is that the actions of one benefit the rest of humanity. Here, the question can be asked: what will produce the most good for all?
· Non-consequentialism can be compared to the Golden Rule (do onto others as you want them to do onto you).
· Ways of showing respect : treating everyone equally, accepting all points of view, consider the welfare of others, acknowledging decisions that are made by others.
· Kant argued that what can not be done, can not become Universal Law. Example: Telling a lie
· Kant believed that all humans are on the same level since we are all capable of doing the same thing. Example: lying to protect a friend from being captured by the secret police. He also believed that we all are responsible for our own actions (a non-consequentialist argument).
· Rule Utilitarianism examines which rules apply to which situation, which ruling will make the most people happy. This is also a combination of both consequentialism and non-consequentialism.
· One should only focus on important criteria in making ethically-based decisions. This includes: a student’s performance in class, their social economic status or other possible factors outside of whether we like their families or not.
Some notes about the Nel Noddings reading:
· One large assumption that can be taken from Noddings is that we all are in relations with one another. Another is called motivational displacement or seeing things how the student sees it.
· Our role is to be the one caring for and fostering a student’s growth, being interested in why one responded the way that they did instead of what their answer was (whether they have any interest in the subject or not).
· Students will respond to the subject or class if the teacher shows that they actually do care, thus instilling interest in the student.
· Noddings defined the role of one-care teacher has more than rainbows, clouds, hugs and kisses. Her definition included an understanding of where the student is coming from.
· Good teachers are often shaped by how the good students are to them. This is done thru engaging the class in communication, probing thoughts and feelings about the teacher’s subject matter (which leads to constructivism or building new knowledge).
· Teachers should be open to allowing students to contribute to their learning, having to explain to students the consequences behind their actions, to providing a role model for the students.
· The biggest difficulty is when one party chooses not to accept the caring of the other party, in other words too much giving and not enough receiving.
· Engaging in cooperative practice is another one of Nodding’s beliefs, this does lead to both moral and physical development.Schools can make things easier for teachers in their job performance. However, there is the possibility that misunderstandings can develop thru negative connotations.
Some notes about ethics:
· Two types of claims: factual and personal. One example of a factual claim is the sky is blue. One example of a personal claim is vanilla ice cream is good (since this is an unproven statement, it can be subject to bias since only one person can make such a claim).
· The term normative applies to what people should or should not do in order to solve an ethical dilemma.
· There are times where one’s personal experience can not serve as grounds for what ethically based decisions teachers often make in dealing with problems such as cheating or plagiarism.
· There has to be publically accepted reasons in order to act to what we should or should not do.
Some notes about consequentialism/non-consequentialism:
· Having positive consequences is often the desired result of all ethical decisions
· Jeremy Bentham and John Stuart Mill were two followers of Utilitarianism.
· Some issues related to both consequentialism/non-consequentialism include: One needs to know all of the consequences involved (often based on decision), Giving preferential treatment to another one person or thing over another (this leads to worrying about whether a decision is fair to all or not). Example: Treating childhood cancer. Is it worth the pain and suffering of some to find a cure for others who suffer from a form of a childhood cancer?
· Consequentialism asks one to go against their rational sense or emotion. One way to look at it is that the actions of one benefit the rest of humanity. Here, the question can be asked: what will produce the most good for all?
· Non-consequentialism can be compared to the Golden Rule (do onto others as you want them to do onto you).
· Ways of showing respect : treating everyone equally, accepting all points of view, consider the welfare of others, acknowledging decisions that are made by others.
· Kant argued that what can not be done, can not become Universal Law. Example: Telling a lie
· Kant believed that all humans are on the same level since we are all capable of doing the same thing. Example: lying to protect a friend from being captured by the secret police. He also believed that we all are responsible for our own actions (a non-consequentialist argument).
· Rule Utilitarianism examines which rules apply to which situation, which ruling will make the most people happy. This is also a combination of both consequentialism and non-consequentialism.
· One should only focus on important criteria in making ethically-based decisions. This includes: a student’s performance in class, their social economic status or other possible factors outside of whether we like their families or not.
Some notes about the Nel Noddings reading:
· One large assumption that can be taken from Noddings is that we all are in relations with one another. Another is called motivational displacement or seeing things how the student sees it.
· Our role is to be the one caring for and fostering a student’s growth, being interested in why one responded the way that they did instead of what their answer was (whether they have any interest in the subject or not).
· Students will respond to the subject or class if the teacher shows that they actually do care, thus instilling interest in the student.
· Noddings defined the role of one-care teacher has more than rainbows, clouds, hugs and kisses. Her definition included an understanding of where the student is coming from.
· Good teachers are often shaped by how the good students are to them. This is done thru engaging the class in communication, probing thoughts and feelings about the teacher’s subject matter (which leads to constructivism or building new knowledge).
· Teachers should be open to allowing students to contribute to their learning, having to explain to students the consequences behind their actions, to providing a role model for the students.
· The biggest difficulty is when one party chooses not to accept the caring of the other party, in other words too much giving and not enough receiving.
· Engaging in cooperative practice is another one of Nodding’s beliefs, this does lead to both moral and physical development.Schools can make things easier for teachers in their job performance. However, there is the possibility that misunderstandings can develop thru negative connotations.
Sunday, February 1, 2009
Class notes from Tuesday, 1/27, Part II
During the second half of class, we discussed Dewey’s article and the first two chapters of the Ethics of Teaching. We discussed how Dewey believed Aristotle to be snobbish and his article was meant to serve as a direct response to Aristotle and an attempt at resolving dualism.
In his article, Dewey acknowledges the growing social division between the learned and the unlearned, and while Aristotle believed this social division of labor occurred naturally, Dewey argued that the division of labor was not the result of natural development but rather the result of social reinforcement – much to the detriment of the lower classes.
Dewey’s reality was marked by the presence of bosses (thinkers) and laborers. Most people at this time were under the assumption that laborers didn’t think, yet Dewey found that pride, dignity, and joy were evident in certain labors.
Dewey’s main concern is that his contemporaries had taken the idea of intelligent action out of work, that is, many laborers had been pigeon-holed into certain occupations without ever receiving the education or broader awareness of other careers that existed. Laborers were trained in the specifics of one job and were given no more education than needed for that job.
Dewey argues that the ability to form one’s own purpose is liberating and any life can be liberal if the person is aware and understands the importance of their particular occupation. Moreover, the only way to arrive at this understanding is to have been given a broad enough background in education in all facets of life to truly make an informed decision & choice of occupations. Thus, one can live a liberal life, proud of their job – even those performing the least popular labors – as long as that choice of occupation was made in an educated and informed manner.
In regards to the “Ethics of Teaching” text, we discussed two cases. The first case was one in which the teacher, Mrs. Jones had called in her student, Johnnie’s father to discuss a recent fight that Johnnie had started. Upon his arrival however, Mrs. Jones noted that Johnnie’s father was drunk and excitable and clearly intended on physically punishing his son. Reacting to the situation, Mrs. Jones, attempting to protect Johnnie from physical abuse, decided to lie to his father and tell him that Johnnie did not actually start the fight. The class debated about whether what Mrs. Jones had done was right. Many agreed that they would opt to protect the student (Johnnie) as well, and that the lie did no harm. In contrast, others argued that the lie perpetuated the cycle of violence – that Johnnie would not learn to behave and control his temper and his father could continue to abuse him. Additionally, Mrs. Jones’ lies could potentially harm her reputation as a teacher. In this case, honesty appeared to be the best policy.
The second case the class discussed was one in which a scholarship athlete, Henry, needed to do well (to get at least a C) on a final paper. His professor, Cynthia, had 48 hours to grade these papers, and upon reading Henry’s, she realized that Henry had clearly plagiarized. Cynthia was at a crossroads because if she followed school protocol and failed Henry, he would lose his scholarship and probably have to leave school. With a sick mother at home, basketball seemed to be Henry’s only chance to make a better life for himself and his family. It seemed that the consequences for Henry’s actions were far greater than the average students’. As the class discussed this situation, some felt that they could not fail Henry simply because it could have a negative impact on the rest of his life. Other classmates felt that they would fail Henry because he was aware of the consequences of his actions before he plagiarized and he should not be held to different standards or receive differential treatment simply because he is an athlete. At the close of class, I think all decided that each of these situations would have to be considered on a case by case basis. It is difficult to look at ethics in a manner of black and white – I think each situation results in a varying shade of gray.
In his article, Dewey acknowledges the growing social division between the learned and the unlearned, and while Aristotle believed this social division of labor occurred naturally, Dewey argued that the division of labor was not the result of natural development but rather the result of social reinforcement – much to the detriment of the lower classes.
Dewey’s reality was marked by the presence of bosses (thinkers) and laborers. Most people at this time were under the assumption that laborers didn’t think, yet Dewey found that pride, dignity, and joy were evident in certain labors.
Dewey’s main concern is that his contemporaries had taken the idea of intelligent action out of work, that is, many laborers had been pigeon-holed into certain occupations without ever receiving the education or broader awareness of other careers that existed. Laborers were trained in the specifics of one job and were given no more education than needed for that job.
Dewey argues that the ability to form one’s own purpose is liberating and any life can be liberal if the person is aware and understands the importance of their particular occupation. Moreover, the only way to arrive at this understanding is to have been given a broad enough background in education in all facets of life to truly make an informed decision & choice of occupations. Thus, one can live a liberal life, proud of their job – even those performing the least popular labors – as long as that choice of occupation was made in an educated and informed manner.
In regards to the “Ethics of Teaching” text, we discussed two cases. The first case was one in which the teacher, Mrs. Jones had called in her student, Johnnie’s father to discuss a recent fight that Johnnie had started. Upon his arrival however, Mrs. Jones noted that Johnnie’s father was drunk and excitable and clearly intended on physically punishing his son. Reacting to the situation, Mrs. Jones, attempting to protect Johnnie from physical abuse, decided to lie to his father and tell him that Johnnie did not actually start the fight. The class debated about whether what Mrs. Jones had done was right. Many agreed that they would opt to protect the student (Johnnie) as well, and that the lie did no harm. In contrast, others argued that the lie perpetuated the cycle of violence – that Johnnie would not learn to behave and control his temper and his father could continue to abuse him. Additionally, Mrs. Jones’ lies could potentially harm her reputation as a teacher. In this case, honesty appeared to be the best policy.
The second case the class discussed was one in which a scholarship athlete, Henry, needed to do well (to get at least a C) on a final paper. His professor, Cynthia, had 48 hours to grade these papers, and upon reading Henry’s, she realized that Henry had clearly plagiarized. Cynthia was at a crossroads because if she followed school protocol and failed Henry, he would lose his scholarship and probably have to leave school. With a sick mother at home, basketball seemed to be Henry’s only chance to make a better life for himself and his family. It seemed that the consequences for Henry’s actions were far greater than the average students’. As the class discussed this situation, some felt that they could not fail Henry simply because it could have a negative impact on the rest of his life. Other classmates felt that they would fail Henry because he was aware of the consequences of his actions before he plagiarized and he should not be held to different standards or receive differential treatment simply because he is an athlete. At the close of class, I think all decided that each of these situations would have to be considered on a case by case basis. It is difficult to look at ethics in a manner of black and white – I think each situation results in a varying shade of gray.
Wednesday, January 28, 2009
Class Summary for 1-27-09, Part I
A. Plato, Turning the Psyche
- This reading is a part of Plato's Republik in which he wrestles with the question "What is Justice?" His writing is in the form of a Socratic dialogue in which Socrates questions and discusses topics with Glaucon. The two ruminate on philosophy, education, law etc...
- Socrates poses the question "What is good?" The two decide that goodness can be pleasure though pleasure may also cause harm to others and is not always good.
- Goodness can also derive from knowledge. As light helps us to see, so does knowledge reveal goodness. There seems to be some intrinsic, human value system that determines goodness.
- Socrates describes a line divided into four parts: Imagination, Belief, Thought and Understanding. Imagination is the lowest element on the line. The difference in imagination and belief is the difference between fantasy and reality
- Thought is higher on the line than Belief because science is required to derive thought from belief.
- Finally, Understanding is the highest element on the line. Understanding is derived from thought and is only realized by the use of mathematics, quantitative logic.
- In education, the idea is to move up Plato's line in order to become more intelligent.
Plato's "Allegory of the Cave"
- The Setting: A large cave in which people are chained to the ground facing a large wall. There is a large fire behind the chained people which displays shadows on the wall for the chained people to view. Between the fire and chained people are other people carrying clay figures and talking to one another. For the chained people, all they know is their existence in this cave setting.
- Some chained people come loose of their chains and face the fire. At first it hurts their eyes. They then make their way out of the cave and are blinded by the sun. Once their eyes focus, they experience the natural world for the first time. They see trees, animals, the sun, moon, stars and are overwhelmed with their new perspective.
- The "free" people return to the cave to tell the others about what they see. Those who have remained chained to the cave floor do not believe the newly educated people. They harass them for believing in this new world.
- Plato likens the "free" people and their duty to teach others as the job of a teacher, though he/she may be rejected for attempting to educate.
Aristotle, Mechanical vs. Liberal Education
- One thing Aristotle wants to know is what is the nature of leisure time? What should leisure entail? He concludes that real leisure time is to be used to contemplate the meaning of life. Music, Art, Dance, Theater, other physical pursuits...all of these reveal something about the nature of what it means to be human. Leisure time is a chance for individuals to explore what each of these activities says about life. Leisure time liberates us by enhancing our knowledge about life. In a Platonic sense, leisure sheds light on life.
- Aristotle proposes that an education should also shed light on life in order to liberate humanity. This is the root of the term "liberal arts". The study of the liberal arts is in opposition to the idea of an education strictly for "mechanical" pursuits or in order to have a job. By having a knowledge of the reasons and overall moral and social objectives of work, one is liberated from having a job strictly to make a wage or to progress up a corporate ladder. Being liberated is also a way to be free of "death grip" oversight by a monarchical boss.
- So, education should be molded in the form of the government and should be public. Curriculum focuses should be on reading, writing, gym and music (sometimes drawing) though one subject should not be imbalanced unless the learner shows special qualities in the discipline. Overall, everyone should have at least an appreciation of each subject.
Wednesday, January 14, 2009
Class Summary for 1/13 & 1/14
Our first class was spent going over the syllabus and course requirements, as well as some "get to know you" activities that included a biographical scavenger hunt. During the last half of the class, we discussed a general social/political framework for looking at schools. Elements of this framework included the following:
Progressive vs. traditional notions of purpose
Conservative, liberal, and radical perspectives on schooling
Traditional views on the purpose of schooling see schools as existing primarily to pass on the given culture to future generations. Schools exist to transmit the accumulated knowledge, acceptable behaviors, and desired values to children with the hope that the children will grow up to be largely like the past generations of adults. Such views emphasize continuity with the past.
Progressive views on the purpose of schooling see such a degree of continuity as problematic. They note that our current culture is fraught with problems (economic inequality, environmental degradation, racism) and are concerned that overly traditional views of schooling maintain these problems. Instead, progressives want to use schools to change our culture, resolving these problems through the education of the young.
Any given school policy or practice can be understood as existing in tension between these two general poles, although some policies or practices can contain elements of both (e.g. a content module on recycling that is assessed through traditional means like standardized tests).
Conservative, liberal, and radical perspectives roughly map onto the traditional-progressive continuum, with conservative being traditional and progressive falling somewhere between liberal and radical. These perspectives are general ways of seeing the role schools ought to play in our given social sphere; they are shorthand ways of discussing the relationship between schools, society, and the individual.
The conservative perspective is dedicated to free market economics. Under such economic theory, competition is key to economic and social growth. We become better (smarter, wealthier, fitter) through competing with others for limited physical and social resources. Society should be meritocratic -- social positions are filled by the people who have shown to be the best at those positions and rewards accrue according to individual skill at those positions, how essential that position is to the overall well-being of society, and the number of people capable of filling that position (it's supply and demand). The important unit for the conservative is the individual. Each individual is autonomous, rational, and should be treated as an entity unto themselves.
For the conservative, schools exist for two primary purposes:
The liberal perspective is similar to the conservative perspective in that it also believes that market capitalism is essential to growth. Liberals, however, note that the market produces undesirable moral consequences (the exploitation of some by others) and is prone to potentially ruinous fluctuation (recession and depression). Similarly, the liberal notes that historical circumstances have loaded certain groups with baggage that makes equal participation in the market difficult (the history of slavery and disenfranchisement of African-Americans). Thus, it's the government's role to eliminate the undesirable moral consequences, mitigate market fluctuations, and compensate groups who have historically been disadvantaged. Schools are a key ingredient for all three. Schools can be used as a key compensatory mechanism to ensure everyone has a level playing field in society. Through equal educational opportunity, groups are able to overcome their historical impediments and fully participate.
The radical perspective is skeptical of the free market approach. It notes that capitalism inherently results in the concentration of wealth and power, and that such concentration is overall negative for human and social growth. This concentration is negative because it allows a few individuals to "rig the game" so that their interests are prioritized over the interests of the majority. These interests become the norm -- they aren't seen as the interests of any particular group, but rather as "the right way to do things". Schools are a key way in which this occurs; they are, in effect, rigged. Poor students are sent to poor schools that lack the resources to properly educate students for anything other than the most ruidemntary social or economic positions, while students of wealthy parents attend schools with programs designed to get them into good colleges. Wealthy folks oppose policy changes (in the tax structure, say), that would equalize resources and give more opportunity to poor students because then those students would compete with the wealthy students for jobs and status. What's more, all schools serve to socialize students to acccept this differtation of wealth as "normal" and attribute the lack of success of poor students as individual failings rather than how the social and economic system is struuctured. While they generally favor similar policy postions as liberals, radicals believe many of our educational problems aren't just problems with schools, but rather problems with our overall social and economic strucure.
Progressive vs. traditional notions of purpose
Conservative, liberal, and radical perspectives on schooling
Traditional views on the purpose of schooling see schools as existing primarily to pass on the given culture to future generations. Schools exist to transmit the accumulated knowledge, acceptable behaviors, and desired values to children with the hope that the children will grow up to be largely like the past generations of adults. Such views emphasize continuity with the past.
Progressive views on the purpose of schooling see such a degree of continuity as problematic. They note that our current culture is fraught with problems (economic inequality, environmental degradation, racism) and are concerned that overly traditional views of schooling maintain these problems. Instead, progressives want to use schools to change our culture, resolving these problems through the education of the young.
Any given school policy or practice can be understood as existing in tension between these two general poles, although some policies or practices can contain elements of both (e.g. a content module on recycling that is assessed through traditional means like standardized tests).
Conservative, liberal, and radical perspectives roughly map onto the traditional-progressive continuum, with conservative being traditional and progressive falling somewhere between liberal and radical. These perspectives are general ways of seeing the role schools ought to play in our given social sphere; they are shorthand ways of discussing the relationship between schools, society, and the individual.
The conservative perspective is dedicated to free market economics. Under such economic theory, competition is key to economic and social growth. We become better (smarter, wealthier, fitter) through competing with others for limited physical and social resources. Society should be meritocratic -- social positions are filled by the people who have shown to be the best at those positions and rewards accrue according to individual skill at those positions, how essential that position is to the overall well-being of society, and the number of people capable of filling that position (it's supply and demand). The important unit for the conservative is the individual. Each individual is autonomous, rational, and should be treated as an entity unto themselves.
For the conservative, schools exist for two primary purposes:
- To ensure the proper meritocratic distribution of social resources by providing equal access to educational resources. If everyone has the same access to education, it will really be the smartest and hardest working who will take the most advantage of what is given and rise to positions of leadership.
- Further enable the meritocracy by being a meritocracy. That is, schools should reward those who work hard and are talented to further cultivate those individuals and to ingrain such habits in the young.
The liberal perspective is similar to the conservative perspective in that it also believes that market capitalism is essential to growth. Liberals, however, note that the market produces undesirable moral consequences (the exploitation of some by others) and is prone to potentially ruinous fluctuation (recession and depression). Similarly, the liberal notes that historical circumstances have loaded certain groups with baggage that makes equal participation in the market difficult (the history of slavery and disenfranchisement of African-Americans). Thus, it's the government's role to eliminate the undesirable moral consequences, mitigate market fluctuations, and compensate groups who have historically been disadvantaged. Schools are a key ingredient for all three. Schools can be used as a key compensatory mechanism to ensure everyone has a level playing field in society. Through equal educational opportunity, groups are able to overcome their historical impediments and fully participate.
The radical perspective is skeptical of the free market approach. It notes that capitalism inherently results in the concentration of wealth and power, and that such concentration is overall negative for human and social growth. This concentration is negative because it allows a few individuals to "rig the game" so that their interests are prioritized over the interests of the majority. These interests become the norm -- they aren't seen as the interests of any particular group, but rather as "the right way to do things". Schools are a key way in which this occurs; they are, in effect, rigged. Poor students are sent to poor schools that lack the resources to properly educate students for anything other than the most ruidemntary social or economic positions, while students of wealthy parents attend schools with programs designed to get them into good colleges. Wealthy folks oppose policy changes (in the tax structure, say), that would equalize resources and give more opportunity to poor students because then those students would compete with the wealthy students for jobs and status. What's more, all schools serve to socialize students to acccept this differtation of wealth as "normal" and attribute the lack of success of poor students as individual failings rather than how the social and economic system is struuctured. While they generally favor similar policy postions as liberals, radicals believe many of our educational problems aren't just problems with schools, but rather problems with our overall social and economic strucure.
Friday, April 11, 2008
Class Notes for EDUC 600 4_8_2008
Dawn Pollanen and Audrey Gagel
The Ethics of Teaching- Kenneth Strike and Jonas Soltis
Chapter 1:
-Code of Ethics
-First Case:
-catches a student plagiarizing
· People’s reactions
o Give him a short time to correct his mistake
o University policies
o What is the student’s definition of plagiarism. Does he understand what it really means?
o He still needs to be taught a lesson
o The rules are in place for a reason
§ Turn him in and then talk to the administration to see if after losing his scholarship is there another way for him to get his tuition covered
o Things have to be fair for everyone
o Looking at his background, what kind of motivation did he have to do this?
o Why didn’t he go to the teacher before this point if he was struggling
o If you bend the rules for this one student what do you do for the next student?
· Is there a right answer to this situation?
o Integrity- of the teacher
· Are ethical claims possible?
o Factual claims are easily verified
o Ethical claims are not factual claims
o Ethical claims are also not statements of preference
o Ethical claims are normative
· If you have made the decision to fail him and then are asked to justify this decision, what do you say?
o Are ethical claims verifiable and if yes, how?
o Class discussions on plagiarism- he knew what he was doing
· What is the intent of the law or rule?
· Consequences seem to matter to most people. How does that influence your decision? This is one path to justification.
o How do we project the consequences?
o How do we decide the good or bad of a consequence?
o Based on previous experiences we can predict future consequences
o The consequentialist would most likely lean towards not failing the child because the positive immediate outcomes outweigh the negative.
CONSEQUENTIALISM:
- · principle of benefit maximization (page 11)
- · intent is irrelevant, all that matters is consequences (winning office pool)
- (Discussion: Consequences seem to matter; did the kid know/ part of reasoning, there could be negative consequences for you in the future. The decisions that are wrong and immoral have the worse consequences.)
- What’s the way to go? How do we project what the exact consequences are going to be? We can not determine all consequences.
- · Key element of consequentialism: good needs to be produced and maximized in consequentialist’s point of view. Omniscient/non-omniscient problem arise. Lean towards not failing/give second chance.
- · What good is going to come out of me failing him? If you fail the kid, it’s going to be really bad for him and his family.
- · Most well know form of consequentialism is utilitarianism…you have to decide what is good consequence and bad consequence; good is pleasure. Judge each act by individual measure; judge each rule by it maximizing the rule; if you are a rule utilitarian; FAIR does not matter. Fairness adds a moral or value, this is not a part of consequentialism.
- · There is a system for deciding on what is fair, the result will change depending on the variables
o Problem: you don’t know what the future will hold.
o Issue of quantification of good becomes an issue, what is relevant or not—hassling of students better or worse than kid getting flunked out of school?
o Can lead us into immoral territory.
Thoughts and reactions to this:
**a lot of us decide by this way; it’s hard to look at the outcome
**if I was in this situation, I’d do this, if I was doing this, etc…
NONCONSEQUENTIALISM:
- · The Golden Rule
- · Principle of equal respect of persons (p. 15)
- · Intent matters
- · Kant is the father
- · There are two ways of thinking about it: 1) you should only act in a way that you think is universal law; 2)act as a way to treat others as ends as opposed to means as an end.
o You should not treat people to cater to your own desire
o That everyone is a free agent
o All agents are any moral value; they are free, rational, and responsible moral agents—we must respect their freedom of choice (p.15)
o no one is better than the next
o Consequences are not morally important
o We must be held accountable for our own actions
**fairness of the rule, if you are following rules; do the rules promote respect for persons? Rules aren’t to be followed just because they are rules
How do we evaluate the means to an end? Consequences seem to be a part of it…
-Second Case:
-Ms. Jones, Mr. Pugnacious, and Johnnie
-group discussion
- They summarize the case
- Why did she take the path she did?
- Why did she take him to Johnnie?
- Why didn’t she call Social Services or Security?
- Was it wrong or right for her to lie?
- The security of those involved comes first but then she should tell the truth so things don’t get worst
- Johnnie wasn’t in on the lie. So when it comes out that he started the fight he is still going to get in trouble
- It was a gut reaction not a thought out process
- Instinct to protect the child and then take care of the consequences
- It does happen that irate or drunk parents come in, you have to call dss or other officials
- You need to take another step to take it from happening again
- You are given a lot of information to consider very quickly
- It is the first time she is presented with a situation like this
- Is the lie really the ethical problem here?
- How she follows up the lie and with the situation is more important
- She immediately realizes her mistake
-Comments from the outer circle:
- Most people approached it from a consequential point of view
- Initial reaction is to protect the child even if that means you lie
- This is not a situation where you are thinking things through, or where you have extra time. This is an impulse situation.
- In non-consequentialism lying would never be a good thing to do. It can not be turned into a universal law
Chapter 2:
Due process
· Case three:
Chemistry class/ Mr. Fuse
o Did the teacher react fairly?
o Punishing the entire class and the anonymous note
o Should he have left the class unattended
o Due process—moral decisions are arrived through a process; teacher’s decisions need not be arbitrary or capricious; punishment is appropriate to the situation.
o Reaction: he had a short fuse; little evidence and the kid didn’t have a chance to defend himself; no evidence of who saw what; is there enough evidence to convict Alex yet he still gets in trouble
o Kyle would ask “What would Dewey do?” and the Perry Mason, Scooby-doo approach ensued
o Mr. Fuse punishment in either situation is flawed; what would you do?
§ Get someone to confess
§ New lock
§ Nothing he can really do about it but educate students; cops do fingerprints
§ Keep whole class punished—students had to have been aware and no one stopped this from happening.. kids that don’t fess up are accomplices
§ Don’t give kid “F”, it will go on permanent record and harm their college career/future; don’t use this way as an example
§ Should whole class be punished? About ½ of class, though some hesitant, thought so; rationale: responsibility and detourant
§ You want to maximize rationale so that an incident never happens again.
§ Does Mr. Fuse deserve to be punished
Sunday, March 30, 2008
Class Notes
Class notes for 3/25/08
Introduction
-Hermeneutics – science of interpretation
-It is a branch of philosophy that argues that assumptions are unfounded and unconscious – something has to shine light on thought process to make us aware.
-Interpretation – has to be founded on data of some sort ….video tapes of behavior being repeated over and over.
-Hermeneutics says that there are some interpretations that are better than others. The ones that derive from evidence (texts) are better. Ex: interpret Huckleberry Finn being about Mark Twain’s fear of space aliens. This would not be a good interpretation-because it has some textual evidence. It has other things in text that would go against it. Other texts would counteract.
-Certain interpretations are more plausible than assumptions.
Background
-Dewey’s Democracy and Education (1917) is his robust book (sparked progressivism) – talks about how education is the socialism of children.
-What sort of socialization are we engaging in?
-Democracy is not just a system of judgment. Democracy is a way that we live together. It is not just a way we govern our self….we are free to associate with one another which is key to both social and individual growth.
-We have experiences together and we communicate them to one another.
- Educational Method – how the interest of the child is important – what children are interested in, what they need.
-Schools should take that into account. It embarked on letting kids do whatever they want. If they want to study math let them, if not don’t worry about it.
- Experience and Education (1934) – written 17 yrs. later.
-Dewey’s attempt to rest his ideas that ran in the wrong direction (Dewey’s followers were doing wacky stuff)
-Dewey critics said that his ideas were “silly” – not educational at all.
-He says that those people didn’t read him closely and if they had then they would know about traditional and progressive education.
- Almost every piece of Dewey’s work talks about either/or (his attempt to resolve some sort of dichotomy) against seeing things in terms of one or the other.
Chapter 1:
This chapter shows Dewey’s attempt to lay out Dualisms that are involved in debate about education and the beginning of trying to resolve them.
Dualisms:
Traditional / Progressive
External / Internal
Mature / Immature
Control / Freedom
Text / Experience
Static / Flexible
Experience / Relevant Experience
Product / Process
Past / Future
Culture / Nature
Teacher / Student
Positive / Negative (Standard / Reactionary)
Dull / Exciting
Passive / Active
Traditional: Subject matter is settled, and school is a different type of social thing than other sorts of social institutions.
Progressive: the complete opposite of the traditional school.
*Dewey is engaged in an attempt to define some principles that define these dualisms.
Experiences
-According to Dewey we must determine first and foremost what experience is and what we mean when we say it.
-We then see the distinction between educative and mis-educative experience.
-Not all experience is educational.
*Dewey is against Dogmatism – the acceptance of beliefs without critical examination of them and continuous critical examination.
-Dewey believes in Pragmatism – ideas have consequences and every idea needs to be examined and reexamined in light of its consequences.
-Dewey is steering things away from the traditional theory of education –like a good pragmatist – can’t afford to take things as given, but reexamine to make sure they still work like we want them to , if not we need to stop and fix them.
Chapter 2
-In this chapter, Dewey attempts to layout how experiences are either educated or not educated.
-Experiences are not educative when they do not help us grow or by learning to do something that is morally wrong.
-By engaging in illegal activities you are cutting off social ties (experience is social)
*Continuity is key to Dewey’s idea of educational experience.
-Idea of Relevance- one way experiences are connected is if we see them as relevant
-Experience is built on the experiences that we have already had. This leads to the Idea of Habit (Key concept for Dewey)
Habits
-We cannot function without habits. They allow us to have activity without thinking and we can’t think about everything all the time.
-This is important for Dewey because it is the ultimate expression of continuity.
-The way we arrive at habit is through reflection and repetition.
-Problems are also important for Dewey. We only think when we have a problem, otherwise we are just functioning according to habit.
-Basic habits are intellectual habits (language). “An experience we do and undergo.” We engage in an activity and undergo the consequences.
-When we have done the activity enough where we can anticipate the consequences, then it is a habit.
- Full prediction and control is never possible because the environment changes constantly.
-When we act and undergo we change the environment that we operate in.
-We transact with our environment and change our environment to suit our ends.
-As human beings we have radically changed our environment (roads, ridges)
-Civilized people record their experiences for other people to use (don’t have to reinvent the wheel)
- Continued growth is possible because we have funded experiences . People have done stuff before so we don’t have to undergo stuff for ourselves. (Role of teacher)
Teachers are sources of funded experiences for students (resource, not source) and a provider of problems
What is an experience?
-People think that all learning is subjective.
-Dewey says an experience is not subjective, but objective. Every genuine experience has an active side. -An experience is a transaction between self and world in which both are changed (situation).
- Our experiences are shaped and molded by the conditions in which we act they are not just our own.
*For Dewey all experience is SOCIAL.
-Language shapes every experience that we have.
-An experience becomes an experience when it is communicated to others.
-Experiences should enable students to have other experiences in the future beyond the classroom.
-It’s not just about environment, because experience is not just about environment. The environment cannot be selected unless you know something about who you are selecting it for (students)
- You must understand to the degree that it is possible. The background that students bring into the classroom, because then you can modify the environment such that the transaction will be more fruitful for the students. (This makes the job of the teacher most difficult)
Introduction
-Hermeneutics – science of interpretation
-It is a branch of philosophy that argues that assumptions are unfounded and unconscious – something has to shine light on thought process to make us aware.
-Interpretation – has to be founded on data of some sort ….video tapes of behavior being repeated over and over.
-Hermeneutics says that there are some interpretations that are better than others. The ones that derive from evidence (texts) are better. Ex: interpret Huckleberry Finn being about Mark Twain’s fear of space aliens. This would not be a good interpretation-because it has some textual evidence. It has other things in text that would go against it. Other texts would counteract.
-Certain interpretations are more plausible than assumptions.
Background
-Dewey’s Democracy and Education (1917) is his robust book (sparked progressivism) – talks about how education is the socialism of children.
-What sort of socialization are we engaging in?
-Democracy is not just a system of judgment. Democracy is a way that we live together. It is not just a way we govern our self….we are free to associate with one another which is key to both social and individual growth.
-We have experiences together and we communicate them to one another.
- Educational Method – how the interest of the child is important – what children are interested in, what they need.
-Schools should take that into account. It embarked on letting kids do whatever they want. If they want to study math let them, if not don’t worry about it.
- Experience and Education (1934) – written 17 yrs. later.
-Dewey’s attempt to rest his ideas that ran in the wrong direction (Dewey’s followers were doing wacky stuff)
-Dewey critics said that his ideas were “silly” – not educational at all.
-He says that those people didn’t read him closely and if they had then they would know about traditional and progressive education.
- Almost every piece of Dewey’s work talks about either/or (his attempt to resolve some sort of dichotomy) against seeing things in terms of one or the other.
Chapter 1:
This chapter shows Dewey’s attempt to lay out Dualisms that are involved in debate about education and the beginning of trying to resolve them.
Dualisms:
Traditional / Progressive
External / Internal
Mature / Immature
Control / Freedom
Text / Experience
Static / Flexible
Experience / Relevant Experience
Product / Process
Past / Future
Culture / Nature
Teacher / Student
Positive / Negative (Standard / Reactionary)
Dull / Exciting
Passive / Active
Traditional: Subject matter is settled, and school is a different type of social thing than other sorts of social institutions.
Progressive: the complete opposite of the traditional school.
*Dewey is engaged in an attempt to define some principles that define these dualisms.
Experiences
-According to Dewey we must determine first and foremost what experience is and what we mean when we say it.
-We then see the distinction between educative and mis-educative experience.
-Not all experience is educational.
*Dewey is against Dogmatism – the acceptance of beliefs without critical examination of them and continuous critical examination.
-Dewey believes in Pragmatism – ideas have consequences and every idea needs to be examined and reexamined in light of its consequences.
-Dewey is steering things away from the traditional theory of education –like a good pragmatist – can’t afford to take things as given, but reexamine to make sure they still work like we want them to , if not we need to stop and fix them.
Chapter 2
-In this chapter, Dewey attempts to layout how experiences are either educated or not educated.
-Experiences are not educative when they do not help us grow or by learning to do something that is morally wrong.
-By engaging in illegal activities you are cutting off social ties (experience is social)
*Continuity is key to Dewey’s idea of educational experience.
-Idea of Relevance- one way experiences are connected is if we see them as relevant
-Experience is built on the experiences that we have already had. This leads to the Idea of Habit (Key concept for Dewey)
Habits
-We cannot function without habits. They allow us to have activity without thinking and we can’t think about everything all the time.
-This is important for Dewey because it is the ultimate expression of continuity.
-The way we arrive at habit is through reflection and repetition.
-Problems are also important for Dewey. We only think when we have a problem, otherwise we are just functioning according to habit.
-Basic habits are intellectual habits (language). “An experience we do and undergo.” We engage in an activity and undergo the consequences.
-When we have done the activity enough where we can anticipate the consequences, then it is a habit.
- Full prediction and control is never possible because the environment changes constantly.
-When we act and undergo we change the environment that we operate in.
-We transact with our environment and change our environment to suit our ends.
-As human beings we have radically changed our environment (roads, ridges)
-Civilized people record their experiences for other people to use (don’t have to reinvent the wheel)
- Continued growth is possible because we have funded experiences . People have done stuff before so we don’t have to undergo stuff for ourselves. (Role of teacher)
Teachers are sources of funded experiences for students (resource, not source) and a provider of problems
What is an experience?
-People think that all learning is subjective.
-Dewey says an experience is not subjective, but objective. Every genuine experience has an active side. -An experience is a transaction between self and world in which both are changed (situation).
- Our experiences are shaped and molded by the conditions in which we act they are not just our own.
*For Dewey all experience is SOCIAL.
-Language shapes every experience that we have.
-An experience becomes an experience when it is communicated to others.
-Experiences should enable students to have other experiences in the future beyond the classroom.
-It’s not just about environment, because experience is not just about environment. The environment cannot be selected unless you know something about who you are selecting it for (students)
- You must understand to the degree that it is possible. The background that students bring into the classroom, because then you can modify the environment such that the transaction will be more fruitful for the students. (This makes the job of the teacher most difficult)
Tuesday, March 18, 2008
Interpretation of Interpretivism
3_11_08 Class Notes By Merrissa Ritch and Angie Clark
Field Trip
When we got to class Dr. Pope told us that we were going to be taking a field trip. A few of us were hoping for Discovery Place but alas we ended up outside of Withers.
Dr. Pope told us that we would have ten minutes to describe Withers. After about ten minutes we returned to the classroom. Upon our gleeful return to class a few of us were asked to read our descriptions. Each proved very different as some were more architectural, some more emotional and each pointed out different features that others may have excluded or overlooked.
What is the point?
Dr. Pope says….The key point of Interpretivism that all description is interpretation. This was an objective assignment designed to get objective results. All of which had a significant amount of variation. Interpretivism is built on the idea that interpretation is the constant. When we describe something, we are interpreting our experience. It is a contrast of Functionalism and Marxism which is based on the metaphysical assumption that there is no objective reality.
It was interesting that when we were outside once we got the assignment everyone went to work individually. A lot of people didn’t move but just looked straight in front of them. Others didn’t even look up or walk around the building. A few people moved and only a few people talked to each other. Dr. Pope didn’t specifically say that he didn’t want us to not communicate or move but we didn’t. It was funny too that most of us chose to describe the building with words while only two of us drew a picture.
When we got to class Dr. Pope told us that we were going to be taking a field trip. A few of us were hoping for Discovery Place but alas we ended up outside of Withers.
Dr. Pope told us that we would have ten minutes to describe Withers. After about ten minutes we returned to the classroom. Upon our gleeful return to class a few of us were asked to read our descriptions. Each proved very different as some were more architectural, some more emotional and each pointed out different features that others may have excluded or overlooked.
What is the point?
Dr. Pope says….The key point of Interpretivism that all description is interpretation. This was an objective assignment designed to get objective results. All of which had a significant amount of variation. Interpretivism is built on the idea that interpretation is the constant. When we describe something, we are interpreting our experience. It is a contrast of Functionalism and Marxism which is based on the metaphysical assumption that there is no objective reality.
It was interesting that when we were outside once we got the assignment everyone went to work individually. A lot of people didn’t move but just looked straight in front of them. Others didn’t even look up or walk around the building. A few people moved and only a few people talked to each other. Dr. Pope didn’t specifically say that he didn’t want us to not communicate or move but we didn’t. It was funny too that most of us chose to describe the building with words while only two of us drew a picture.
Interpretivism
Review of Functionalist, Marxist and Interpretivism views:
· Functionalist View: To sort students as accurately as possible according to ability and achievement for their social roles.
· Marxist View: Schools serve to serve the interest of the status quo and to perpetuate legitimate class distinction. Ultimately, the law governs schooling.
· Interpretivism View: A true description of social phenomena is impossible. Social Science and physical science is very different. The way people interact is very different, for example, from the neutrons an electrons interaction.
Social phenomena are radically different from natural phenomena. Choices were made in how we described the school. To highlight some areas and downplay others
Personal accounts of instances (descriptions of events) are due to their various levels of accuracy. For example, those who missed a small detail in describing Withers missed something. Therefore, all of the details that would make the description accurate are not there. Human descriptions are good according to their accuracy. Thus, an accurate description of school depends on how accurate the school is for society. Interpretivism suggests the best way to understand what schools are requires a different model of research then that of the physical sciences.
In Interpretivism there is no way it is but various ways it may be.
Interpretivism is based on the idea that research is done to understand social and natural phenomena. They should not be treated the same. Natural scientist analyze, they do a lot of experiments. The research depends on the represented observations of the same phenomena. Using the data, they can predict what happens in the future. What counts as social phenomena cannot be judged by the context of what is physically observable. Peter Winch points out that events and social interactions have different meanings depending on the accepted social norms. Social science is nothing like actual science. Winch says what natural science is determined by is doing experiments repeatedly to get the same results. Social science cannot be truly determined by what is only observed. The action having different meanings in different cultures and context, for example, raising your hand are all very similar but the meaning is different in what the context the hand is being raised is in. Meaning is different. Different words meaning different things.
The Interpretivist says social science’s job in educational research is to uncover the rules and frameworks that give physical actions their meaning. Within a classroom there is a certain set of meanings see as normal and right.
Playing the Game:
Another key point of Interpretivism is the idea of the game. (The full story is in the book on pgs. 87-93 and pgs. 105-106.) she makes decisions based on her data and physical observations and still misinterprets the game because she doesn’t understand the context. Therefore, correlations alone cannot describe an event or its context. The same is true in the context of schools. There are many possible reasons for the same event, but the actual meaning depends on the intent. Example: A child may give an incorrect answer because he doesn’t know the answer or because he doesn’t want to be seen as a nerd.
Everything that she says is accurate but completely wrong because she doesn’t know anything of the game. Doesn’t know rules, roles, terminology, point of the game, she completely misunderstands what it means to play baseball. The intent is important but it is not enough, you also need to know the context. Baseball is a great example, because it is a complex game. There is a whole lot going on within the context of the game that we do not see, especially in the majors.
Dr. Pope is a Red Sox fan. In baseball the situation changes with every pitch. Intricate game, the more you understand the rules and the context the more you can understand and enjoy the game.
Dr. Pope read the quote on pg. 90-91:
“In other words, the intention behind an individual’s behavior receives meaning in the context of a set of shared rules and goals that allows that behavior to be the activity that the individual intend it to be.”
If you are going to strike someone out, it only makes sense in the context of a baseball game. Fundamentally, social interaction is like a game.
Interaction is the key to Interpretivism. In school the interactions between:
· Teacher to Teacher
· Teacher to Student
· Student to Teacher
The teacher and student are in constant negotiation and construction of a social situation. Interpretivists are trying to understand the rules of the school classroom game which are not always explicit. The explicit rules both govern and constitute an activity. (Govern-have to play by certain rules/ Constitute-if you go by the rules you are in fact “playing the game”)
The Interpretivist believes classrooms have rules and the rules govern and constitute what a classroom is. Example: Little girl raising hand late. She gives the appearance of participating without the fear of being called on. It is an unspoken agreement between the teacher and the student.
In Interpretivism meaning merges from interactions between individuals not from individual characteristics. Functionalism and Marxism depend on individual characteristics such as ability and status. In schools the Interpretivist looks at the meaning that arises from interactions between students and teachers.
Dr. Pope read the quote on pg. 90-91:
“In other words, the intention behind an individual’s behavior receives meaning in the context of a set of shared rules and goals that allows that behavior to be the activity that the individual intend it to be.”
If you are going to strike someone out, it only makes sense in the context of a baseball game. Fundamentally, social interaction is like a game.
Interaction is the key to Interpretivism. In school the interactions between:
· Teacher to Teacher
· Teacher to Student
· Student to Teacher
The teacher and student are in constant negotiation and construction of a social situation. Interpretivists are trying to understand the rules of the school classroom game which are not always explicit. The explicit rules both govern and constitute an activity. (Govern-have to play by certain rules/ Constitute-if you go by the rules you are in fact “playing the game”)
The Interpretivist believes classrooms have rules and the rules govern and constitute what a classroom is. Example: Little girl raising hand late. She gives the appearance of participating without the fear of being called on. It is an unspoken agreement between the teacher and the student.
In Interpretivism meaning merges from interactions between individuals not from individual characteristics. Functionalism and Marxism depend on individual characteristics such as ability and status. In schools the Interpretivist looks at the meaning that arises from interactions between students and teachers.
Games
Game: Life
To further illustrate Interpretivism there is an activity: four people called to play the game of Life. They were given all of the pieces but they were not given the rules. This game was familiar to the four participants. The other students were to be interpreters and could not help out initially. There was a great deal of discussion as to where pieces went, how the order of play should be chosen, clockwise vs. counterclockwise, how much money should be given and much, much more. The second round Dr. Pope allowed everyone in class to help. A couple of people knew the rules and pointed out where things may have gone wrong. The comments that followed play were:
· The game was chaotic without knowing the rules.
· Everyone seemed to recognize the logistics of playing a game such as how to determine who goes first, follow the path and there is money therefore a banker is needed. The players used the knowledge of past game playing to try to determine how to play the new game.
· Dave violated the rules of money and everyone followed along because they benefited.
· Started out as a team then separated.
· They constantly changed the rules, negotiated.
Game: Carcassonne (German Game, Dr. Pope’s favorite)
Four new contestants were called on for this game. Everyone worked quietly at first to figure out the meanings of the pieces and then some discussion took place. This game was not familiar to anyone but Dr. Pope. The class was invited to help but no one could figure out how the game was to be played. Though everyone tried to apply prior knowledge of gaming nothing really worked because it was a different kind of game altogether.
Without the rules that governed or constituted the game, it could not be played. The meaning was lost.
Three Types of Meaning
Pg.99 in the book
1. Propositional: The truth claim; “It’s late.” The meaning is given by the actual words themselves and what they refer to; the meaning is conveyed contextually.
2. Relational: the relationship is implied by the giver and the receiver of the message. (The message conveyed says something about the relationship of the people involved.) The message is conveyed by: the action that follows, tone of voice, words used, the way the person(s) is addressed, modes of address, changes used. Example: A parent might ask their child “Don’t you think it’s time to go to bed?” (There really is no option or choice for the child. It is really more of a command from the parent who “reigns” over the child. The parent has power over the child. There is really no choice for the child.)
3. Attitudinal: How the message is suppose to be taken; this is conveyed by tone of voice (sarcasm), context, who the message is for, body language and emotion behind the words.
Relevance to Interpretivism: It is about figuring out meaning within the social context. When figuring out meaning one should consider the three types and look for multiple modes of meaning.
Interpretivists engage in qualitative research allowing people to respond in their own words to generate a view of what schools are and what they are for. There is some measure of choice and control over meaning because it is a mere objective approach. One can have knowledge of a structure without being a participant. (There is the matter of knowing or learning the rules and making the choice to play.) The better a student understands the rules, the better he/she will do in schools.
Click on this link if you are interested in purchasing Carcassonne!!!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)