1. The Intractable Dominant Educational Paradigm
John Hawkins, Professor Emeritus, UCLA
Co-Director APHERP
APHERP Leadership Institute
August 8-17, 2016

2. 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.
APHERP Leadership Institute NCCU

3. Competing Theories of Social Change
Evolutionary Theories
Cyclical Theories (Rise and Fall)
Equilibrium Theories
Conflict Theories
APHERP Leadership Institute NCCU

4. 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
APHERP Leadership Institute NCCU

5. 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
Social cycle theory; China: five stages: new ruler unites China; brings about prosperity, golden age; corruption sets in; revolts occur; loss of mandate of heaven; it all starts over again. Hinduism, cyclical forces of nature, physical world, human souls, go through cycles and are reborn, endlessly; history repeats itself
APHERP Leadership Institute NCCU

6. 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)
APHERP Leadership Institute NCCU

7. 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.
APHERP Leadership Institute NCCU

8. 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; debate about “values”, are they relative, not absolute?)
Education and curriculum are tools to promote the values to achieve modernity
Safe to say that by WWII dominant ways of thinking clustered around evolutionary and equilibrium theory
APHERP Leadership Institute NCCU

9. 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
APHERP Leadership Institute NCCU

10. 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”
APHERP Leadership Institute NCCU

11. 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 (Japan & Germany as exemplars): it would lead to development and “prosperity for all” Tuqan 1975
Secondary goal: make people development minded
APHERP Leadership Institute NCCU

12. Features of Paradigm “investment in 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 (Schumacher—Small is Beautiful)
Finally, expansion of schooling = development; critics say: “diploma disease” Ron Dore 1976
APHERP Leadership Institute NCCU

13. 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
APHERP Leadership Institute NCCU

14. 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”
APHERP Leadership Institute NCCU

15. 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 Archive at OISE
APHERP Leadership Institute NCCU

16. 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; Hawkins 2014)
Entrenched but had several features that were problematic
APHERP Leadership Institute NCCU

17. 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
APHERP Leadership Institute NCCU

18. Dominant HE Paradigm Selective Features
More is better: faculty, students, disciplines, departments, imitative research model, ORUs, research funds etc.
Face to face instruction
Faculty self-governance
Long summer recess
Graduate schools atop the college of L&S
APHERP Leadership Institute NCCU

19. More Curricular distribution (GE), and concentration (majors)
Up or out tenure system, rank and salary distinctions
Selective admissions
All of which results in Carnegie Creep; mission creep; everyone wants to be a RU; presages what will become the rankings competition
APHERP Leadership Institute NCCU

20. Where Are We Today
Scholars Challenge the Education as Panacea Paradigm: Weiler, Bowles, Gintis, Carnoy, Smith, Christensen, Eyring,etc.
Competing Theories: Dependency, Conflict, Neo Marxism, Post Modernism, Neoliberalism, etc.
NGO’s Offer Varieties of NFE (Farrell Project at OISE)
APHERP Leadership Institute NCCU

21. Stand Off
Illich: 1970’s: “Schools are fundamentally alike in all countries”
Tyack & Cuban: 1995; “schools have remained basically similar in their core operation”; Christensen 2012: dom DNA
Formal Education + Expansion Remains Dominant; and now privatization
What About Globalization? Neoliberalism? Resurgent nationalism? Rankings bind it together?
Is there an emerging new paradigm; can we envision a preferred future for education?
APHERP Leadership Institute NCCU

22. Are We Ripe for Disruptive Innovation? What Will It Be?
Keep this question in mind as we go through this week together!
APHERP Leadership Institute NCCU