Presentation on theme: "The Intractable Dominant Educational Paradigm John Hawkins Senior Consultant East-West Center September 13-24, 2010."— Presentation transcript:
The Intractable Dominant Educational Paradigm John Hawkins Senior Consultant East-West Center September 13-24, 2010
A Global Grammar of Schooling? Ethiopian paradox Emergence of a global paradigm, a meta narrative? Early forms: Confucian academy (4th Century BCE); Nalanda, India (10,000 students, 2,000 faculty) Adam Smith 18th Century; Late 19th early 20th century notions of progress.
Evolutionary Theories Darwin: Competitive & Adaptive Change dovetails with “free market” notion Levy: Modernization-- “universal social solvent” modernized societies “always penetrate and dominate” non- modernized societies Functionalism, systems theory, neo- evolutionary theories, belief in “forward progress” begin to dominate
Cyclical Theories/Rise & Fall Spengler; Decline of the West 1918; organic theory of culture China (East Asia), Dynastic Cycles, Mandate of Heaven; C.Y. Chun, R.D. Lee India (South and Southeast Asia), Buddhism, Hinduism, Karma
Equilibrium Theory Combined with evolutionary theory; Influenced functionalism, systems, cultural lag, human ecology theory Notion of homeostasis, uniform state No sooner is a reform introduced than the educational system finds a way to modulate it “nothing new ever happens in the world of equilibrium theory” (Applebaum)
Conflict Theory Marx: stability is not an option; systems are inherently unstable and seeking to transform themselves Trotsky-Mao: permanent revolution Darhendorf, Collins, Kerr, Coser and others pursued this in modern sociology; saw education as component of dialectical change Freire, education as liberation Education as knowledge generating and change oriented--student movements in 60’s; in anti-colonial struggles, etc.
Post WWII Development Lit Rostow: five stages of growth (1960s) Modernization theory begins to dominate (McClelland, “need to achieve”; Inkles, “modernity scale”; current belief about democracy) Education and curriculum are tools to promote the values to achieve modernity
Causal Links to Development Modernizing institutions: schools Modern values: curriculum promotes these Modern behaviors: school grads exhibit these All contribute to building a modern society and development Theories above identify “formal (generally ‘public’) schools” as the principal agent of social change Formal curriculum = education as a deliverable; curriculum inhibits alternatives
Education as Panacea End of WWII: Education the most critical factor for development (UNESCO; OECD; etc.) “one of the most romantic tales of the century” Don Adams, 1977 Reaffirmed by UN 1948 “Declaration of Basic Rights of Man” Truman “Point 4”
Development Decades: 60’s & 70s Architecture of dominant paradigm becomes clearer Essentially a Western model: investment in education = development Positive belief in potency of aid: it would lead to development and “prosperity for all” Tuqan 1975 Secondary goal: make people development minded
Features of Paradigm “education = economic growth” Much to recommend it but criticism in the 1970’s (too simplistic, inaccurate, applied uncritically, blindly followed) “formal schooling = more learning = greater income”; critics say; this ignores the value of NFE; more appropriate targeted education Finally, expansion of schooling = development; critics say: “diploma disease” Ron Dore 1976
The Paradigm Spreads 1960’s: Four Regional Conferences: 1961: Addis Ababa: Conference of African States and Development of Education 1962: Karachi Plan, Tokyo follow-up; 5% of GNP solution 1962: Santiago; Latin American Education Development All focused on investment in ed. for national development; faith in FE
The NFE Challenge: 1970’s Ivan Illich: Deschooling Society “the student is schooled to confuse teaching with learning, grade advancement with education, a diploma with competence, and fluency with the ability to say something new. Medical treatment is mistaken for health care, social work for the improvement of community life, police protection for safety, military poise for national security, the rat race for productive work…..” Replace schools with “learning webs”
Educational Alternatives Freire Radio schools Min ban schools in China Worker peasant colleges in other parts of Asia Women’s cooperatives in India By 1980’s these efforts had been marginalized but still exist: Farrell
1980’s: Paradigm Entrenched Authoritarian relationship at core of teacher- learner relationship Lack of teacher training; poor salaries Teaching methods not aligned with learning theory (Farrell) Textbook and rote methods Examination driven Preoccupation with certificates rather than what is taught (Dore ‘78; Oaks ‘85)
Formal Education Rules Socialization function Reproduce social elites; bureaucrats Elites have a stake in the system and resist change Education for national integration Concern about “learning” mission of education; reform movements begin
Where Are We Today Scholars Challenge the Education as Panacea Paradigm: Weiler, Bowles, Gintis, Carnoy, etc. Competing Theories: Dependency, Conflict, Neo Marxism, Post Modernism, etc. NGO’s Offer Varieties of NFE (Farrell Project at OISE)
Stand Off Illich: 1970’s: “Schools are fundamentally alike in all countries” Tyack & Cuban: 1995; “schools have remained basically similar in their core operation” Formal Education + Expansion Remains Dominant; and now privatization What About Globalization? Neoliberalism? Resurgent nationalism? Is there an emerging new paradigm; can we envision a preferred future for education?