In his provocative PhysLnrR post of the above title, Seth Rosenberg
(2004) wrote (bracketed by lines "RRRRRRRRR. . . ."]:
RRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR
. . . . The elements that are under attack in CA . . .[see e.g. Woolf
& Hake (2004), Hake (2004)]. . . are things that Dewey knew about
100 years ago - why are they under attack now? Why, after 100 years,
is only a tiny fraction of science courses taught in a meaningful and
progressive way? Well, it could either be that everyone before us did
it wrong, and we're going to do it right, or maybe there are
systematic resistive mechanisms that are keeping education in a
transmissionist model. . . . . .
I claim that all these resistive factors . . . are simply aspects of
a highly complex, stable system that moves back to equilibrium when
perturbed (it may find new stability points - equally
non-progressive). What is the equilibrium point? Our educational
system is directly tied to our economic system: schools prepare
children to be workers - however, the primary preparation is not
skills or knowledge - it is social. The majority of jobs in America,
and the world, involve fragmented repetitive tasks in a hierarchical
and authoritarian environment. The very few control nearly all of
the economic resources and set the rules for our economy - they
determine production, how the jobs are done, and how the workplace is
run. . . . Research has shown that workers in these workplaces are
rewarded if they are obedient, and are not if they are independent
and creative. Guess what - the exact same correlation was found in
the schools as well! . . . .
Societies evolve - and therefore they must develop and evolve
stabilizations mechanisms that keep the society running - that stop
dissent, and quell revolt. Education is one of the primary mechanisms
to do this in our society.
However, the evolution is not simply random - it works around a
center of insuring a system that will profit the few at the expense
of the many. How else could a society with such extreme differences
between rich and poor, with the most unbalanced concentration of
wealth in history, continue to exist - unless there are mechanism,
like education, to make people (both workers, and people like us feel
that it is normal and sensible? . . . our community has tended to
push for reform without studying the history of what has been tried
before, without considering our goals, without considering the fact
that there may be systematic resistive forces - unless we begin to
look at our reform efforts in a large context, we can have little
hope of success.
RRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR
Similar points have been made by Rosenberg (2003) and Mahajan et al. (2003).
I agree with Seth that we should study the sad history of attempted
reforms in the U.S. educational system, but (IMHO) his thesis that
its massive inertia is due to systematic resistive forces exerted by
a privileged class may be somewhat problematic.
In "Lessons from the Physics Education Reform Effort [Hake (2002)] I wrote:
HHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH
Lesson #13: THE MONUMENTAL INERTIA OF THE EDUCATIONAL SYSTEM MAY
THWART LONG-TERM NATIONAL REFORM.
The glacial inertia of the nearly immovable U.S. educational system
is not well understood. A recent issue of Daedalus (1998) contains
essays by researchers in education and by historians of more rapidly
developing institutions such as power systems, communications, health
care, and agriculture. The issue was intended to help answer a
challenge posed by
physics Nobelist Kenneth Wilson:
"If other major American 'systems' have so effectively demonstrated
the ability to change, why has the education 'system' been so
singularly resistant to change? What might the lessons learned from
other systems' efforts to adapt and evolve have to teach us about
bringing about change - successful change - in America's schools?" .
. .[see, also Wilson & Barsky (1998)]
As far as I know, no definitive answer has yet been forthcoming.
HHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH
If Seth is correct, Robert Sternberg's (2001) attempt to "teach
children to think wisely" may well be doomed. Does Walmart need wise
workers? Do the CEO's on the California Board of Education
<http://www.cde.ca.gov/board/bio.htm> want wise citizens?
Sternberg explains his program in the November "Educational
Researcher" <http://www.aera.net/pubs/er/toc/er3208.htm>, devoted to
the theme of 'Expertise" (well worth perusing). Sternberg writes (see
the article for references other than Sternberg (2002, 2003):
SSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSS
In our most recent work, we have attempted to go beyond conventional
notions of expertise to teach children not only to think well, but
also wisely (Sternberg, 2001). This work is motivated by the fact
that many of today's current leaders are very intelligent and well
educated, but foolish at the same time. Fiascoes such as Enron,
Adelphia, and Worldcom arise not because people are inexpert in a
traditional sense, but because they are inexpertin a broader sense.
They are unwise. . . . The results of three sets of studies suggest
that the theory of successful intelligence serves as a potentially
useful way to teach in school. This way of teaching differs from that
emphasized by some other conceptions of expertise, such as of
Ericsson (1996) or Gardner (1993, 1999). Ericsson (1996) and
Ericsson, Krampe, and Tesch-Römer (1993) emphasize the role of
deliberate practice in acquiring expertise. Such practice is indeed
important in many fields, especially in performance-based domains
such as music, athletics, or chess. It appears, however, to be
necessary but not sufficient in other kinds of domains. BECOMING AN
EXPERT PHYSICIST, COMPOSER, OR TEACHER, FOR EXAMPLE, SEEMS TO REQUIRE
A BLEND OF CREATIVE (GENERATE IDEAS), ANALYTICAL (EVALUATE THE
IDEAS), AND PRACTICAL THINKING (MAKE THE IDEAS WORK AND CONVINCE
OTHERS
OF THEIR WORTH) THAT GOES SUBSTANTIALLY BEYOND DELIBERATE PRACTICE
(Sternberg, 2003).
SSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSS
That educational preparation for the technical-age workplace may not
be all that bad is suggested in Hake (2003a,b).
I trust that the issues raised by Seth will among those discussed in
the upcoming AAPT sessions "Multiple Goals in Physics Education &
Physics Education Research: The Origins of Incommensurabilities,"
[AAPT Announcer (2003a] and "Considering Education and Educational
Reform Through a Social/Political Lens" [AAPT Announcer (2003b].
Hake, R.R. 2002. "Lessons from the physics education reform effort,"
Conservation Ecology 5(2): 28; online at
<http://www.consecol.org/vol5/iss2/art28>. Conservation Ecology is a
free
"peer-reviewed journal of integrative science and fundamental policy
research" with about 11,000 subscribers in about 108 countries.
Hake, R.R. 2003b. "Workers Can't Think and Work on Their Own (was The
Bad Effects of Physics First)," PhysLrnR post of 28 Nov 2003
22:30:37-0800; online at
<http://listserv.boisestate.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A2=ind0311&L=physlrnr&P=R6354&I=-3&X=47E6642F060039FFBB&Y=rrhake@earthlink.net>.
Unfortunately, one must subscribe to PhysLnrR to access its archives,
but it takes only a few minutes to subscribe by following the simple
directions at
<http://listserv.boisestate.edu/archives/physlrnr.html> / "Join or
leave the list (or change settings)" where "/" means "click on." If
you're busy, then subscribe using the "NOMAIL" option under
"Miscellaneous." Then, as a subscriber, you may access the archives
and/or post messages at any time, while receiving NO MAIL from the
list!
Hake, R.R. 2004. "Re: The End of Hands-On Science Activities in
California's K-8 Classrooms?", online at
<http://lists.psu.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A2=ind0401&L=physhare&O=D&P=5286>.
Post of 14 Jan 2004 21:28:25-0800 transmitted to (a) the discussion
lists AERA-K, ap-physics, BIOPI-L, Chemed-L, PHYS-L, PHYSLRNR; and
(b) to the members and staff of the California Curriculum Development
and Supplemental Materials Commission.
Mahajan, S., S. Rosenberg, & M. Dancy. 2003. "Empowering Not
Employing Students: Goals for Physics Education and Physics Education
Research,"
AAPT Announcer 33(4): 112.
Rosenberg, S. 2003. "Reclaiming the Role of Education and Education
Reform Using Social Reproduction," AAPT Announcer 33(4): 119.
Rosenberg, S. 2004. "Re: The End of Hands-On Science Activities in
California's K-8 Classrooms?" PhysLnrR post of 15 Jan 2004
01:52:26-0500; online at
<http://listserv.boisestate.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A2=ind0401&L=physlrnr&O=A&X=6C53681AF0AA7D5BB0&Y=rrhake@earthlink.net&P=4006>.
Unfortunately, one must subscribe to PhysLnrR to access its archives,
but it takes only a few minutes to subscribe by following the simple
directions at
<http://listserv.boisestate.edu/archives/physlrnr.html> / "Join or
leave the list (or change settings)" where "/" means "click on." If
you're busy, then subscribe using the "NOMAIL" option under
"Miscellaneous." Then, as a subscriber, you may access the archives
and/or post messages at any time, while receiving NO MAIL from the
list!
Sternberg, R. J. 2001. Why schools should teach for wisdom: The
balance theory of wisdom in educational settings. Educational
Psychologist 36(4): 227-245.
Sternberg, R. J. 2003. "Wisdom, intelligence, and creativity synthesized."
Cambridge University Press.
Wilson, K.G. & C. Barsky. 1998. "Applied Research and Development:
Support for Continuing Improvement in Education," Daedalus 127(4):
233-258: "Given the role that we see for education R & D, we next
turn to consider the new applied research discipline that would
support it. We have given the discipline the temporary name of
'change science,' believing that one of its major challenges will be
to determine how to bring continuing change to education. It will
also be extracting lessons from the history of continuing change in
sociotechnological systems, education itself, or other arenas, some
as distant as classical music."
Woolf, L. & R.R. Hake. 2004. "The End of Hands-On Science Activities
in California's K-8 Classrooms?" online at
<http://lists.psu.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A2=ind0401&L=physhare&O=D&P=4583>. Post of
12 Jan 2004 16:57:42-0800 transmitted to (a) the discussion lists
AERA-K, ap-physics, BIOPI-L, CHEMED-L, PHYS-L, PHYSLRNR; and (b) to
the members and staff of the California Curriculum Development and
Supplemental Materials Commission.