Hey all,
Per Ken Himmelman's request, here is the information on Sir Ken Robinson. He is a major advocate for instituting creativity and the arts back into public education. He has written a few books on creativity in education (which I have coming from Amazon in a couple of days, if anyone's interested) and a couple of informational links on the web. He looks at how NCLB has narrowed the standards for intelligence and creative ability.
Sir Ken Robinson @ TED 2006
http://www.ted.com/index.php/talks/ken_robinson_says_schools_kill_creativity.html
Article/Blog in Huffington Post - January 11, 2009
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/sir-ken-robinson/transform-education-yes-w_b_157014.html
His website for his books:
http://www.sirkenrobinson.com/
Talk with you all later!
Tyler
Monday, April 27, 2009
Thursday, March 26, 2009
Hutchins, Liz Coleman, and You
Earlier this term, there was some doubt among the members of the Forum as to whether a group of 25 students, when focused on self-directed inquiry and discussion, could ever engage in discourse about big ideas in a coherent, effective way. After last Thursday's discussion on Hutchins, all doubts have vanished from my mind and from the minds of many in the Forum.
Our discussion, though initially slow, quickly gained momentum and almost everyone was able to contribute significantly. The most relevant and thought-provoking ideas in the text were weighed carefully and thoughtfully, and even when our conversation turned to doubt about the efficacy of such ideas, we hit upon some key questions that will provide important paths of inquiry.
A tough act to follow, but I at least am very confident in our ability to do so. If we can perfect the art of discussion (which we seem poised to do, given everyone's obvious talent as demonstrated last week), we can create a space where no problem is too big to tackle. We must, however, keep in mind the real-world incarnations and ramifications of these philosophies that we discuss, lest we lose the direction provided by our original question: what can we begin to do about this?
When I say we, I actually mean me, and I also mean you. You and I have to ask ourselves this question, and to be most effective, you and I should begin to see the discussions in this class in the context of this question.
So, things to keep in mind for the upcoming discussion:
-The more we abide by the high standard of objective discussion that we have set for ourselves, the more we actually weigh ideas collectively rather than adding them individually to a pile in the middle of the room, the more we can make of this.
-The power of the Forum is in the collective strength of the individual voices that exist within the Forum. Variety of opinion is our most valuable currency, so let everyone have a chance to participate and contribute. Why put 25 people in a room so they can listen to five have a conversation?
-The applications of the ideas we discuss have tangible outcomes and consequences in our world. Make yourself aware of them. Find out why these ideas matter to everyone, but also see why they matter to you. We will give you as many resources as we can, as well as relevant news, but it is up to you to read it or add your own input. We would benefit immensely from your input, so post links on the Wiki, comments on the Blog, and bring issues to the class.
This week's discussion will be on the ideas that Liz Coleman presented in her talk to the Forum, how they relate to Hutchins' ideas, and how these ideas could impact our education system as a whole. We hope to continue to discuss some questions from last week, as there were some that are essential and deserve further deliberation.
See you in Barn 209,
SF
Our discussion, though initially slow, quickly gained momentum and almost everyone was able to contribute significantly. The most relevant and thought-provoking ideas in the text were weighed carefully and thoughtfully, and even when our conversation turned to doubt about the efficacy of such ideas, we hit upon some key questions that will provide important paths of inquiry.
A tough act to follow, but I at least am very confident in our ability to do so. If we can perfect the art of discussion (which we seem poised to do, given everyone's obvious talent as demonstrated last week), we can create a space where no problem is too big to tackle. We must, however, keep in mind the real-world incarnations and ramifications of these philosophies that we discuss, lest we lose the direction provided by our original question: what can we begin to do about this?
When I say we, I actually mean me, and I also mean you. You and I have to ask ourselves this question, and to be most effective, you and I should begin to see the discussions in this class in the context of this question.
So, things to keep in mind for the upcoming discussion:
-The more we abide by the high standard of objective discussion that we have set for ourselves, the more we actually weigh ideas collectively rather than adding them individually to a pile in the middle of the room, the more we can make of this.
-The power of the Forum is in the collective strength of the individual voices that exist within the Forum. Variety of opinion is our most valuable currency, so let everyone have a chance to participate and contribute. Why put 25 people in a room so they can listen to five have a conversation?
-The applications of the ideas we discuss have tangible outcomes and consequences in our world. Make yourself aware of them. Find out why these ideas matter to everyone, but also see why they matter to you. We will give you as many resources as we can, as well as relevant news, but it is up to you to read it or add your own input. We would benefit immensely from your input, so post links on the Wiki, comments on the Blog, and bring issues to the class.
This week's discussion will be on the ideas that Liz Coleman presented in her talk to the Forum, how they relate to Hutchins' ideas, and how these ideas could impact our education system as a whole. We hope to continue to discuss some questions from last week, as there were some that are essential and deserve further deliberation.
See you in Barn 209,
SF
Thursday, March 12, 2009
Education, Citizenship, and a New Liberal Arts
I guess this blog is my attempt to answer the question I’ve been asking myself since 9:10 this evening:
What just happened?
This is not meant to preclude others from attempting to make sense of the scant two hours spent in Tishman this evening. Talking to people after the event (Class? Talk? I’m having difficulty classifying it) proved to me that some of us will be thinking about it – interpreting it – for a long time.
So: What on earth just happened?
Between forty and fifty people – students, administrators, professors; citizens all – gathered in the Tishman Lecture Hall to listen to the president of Bennington College talk about re-conceptualizing education in a way that takes into account the monumental changes taking place in our society.
Last class when we were busily recreating Luther’s 95 theses (if we translate the problems with the Roman Catholic church of the early 1500s to our contemporary education system) on the blackboard of Barn 100 one student, Tyler Baker, brought up that we may be taking the idea of ‘schooling’ and ‘education’ for granted, that maybe the structure – inside and out – needs to be rethought.
For me, tonight, Liz took a step in that direction.
Now, if you think that I’m sounding like a sad fanboy of some kind by all means make yourself heard. But please be aware that the thing I was most impressed with tonight was that together we turned Tishman from a lecture hall into a discursive classroom. And now back to my fawning over the greatness of Liz.
When Liz spoke about the intensity of the classroom, both in Chicago University and in Rethinking Education, I got it. I got it in the sense that the word ‘got’ can be used unabashedly. The life of the mind, the exposure to intellectual community have only served to create a passion that is only augmented through conversation, discussion, and writing. Ever since my freshman year when I wrote a paper on the Patriot Act for Mansour, or my sophomore year when Mac told us that he expected a level of work that could be used as research in a piece of scholarly work, that passion has fueled itself and my work. After I told Eileen that I was tired from all of the work I was doing (long before I was actually doing much work at all, in hindsight) she told me, and I’m paraphrasing here, that didn’t quite understand tired. That to be tired was a goal to strive for. That you should be tired when you allow yourself to be consumed by your passions and ambitions. That you have to earn your tiredness.
These days I crave my next class like the best minds of Ginsberg’s generation drag themselves through the negro streets at dawn looking for an angry fix. I can understand why Liz was stuck as soon as she came to this place.
The reason I have such a love affair with this place, and I’ve only begun to understand this over the past few months, is that Bennington (or at least my Bennington experience) typifies what I think education should be. There can be no doubt that in general the education system of this country is failing. One need look no further than the recent economic crisis for proof of this. Robert Beiner, author of Political Judgment, commented on Hannah Arendt’s conception of the humanist as follows, “Arendt views the humanist as a non-specialist who ‘exerts a faculty of judgment and taste which is beyond the coercion which each specialty imposes upon us’” (Beiner 18). This humanist is, for me and I think for Liz as well, the product of a liberal arts education.
I don’t fear experts. I don’t fear expertise. I love postmodernism – a domain Liz referenced as under the purview of experts. I salivate a little when I get to read social constructivist theory. I don’t fear complication. I feel like most things worth learning come with a lot of effort – and I’ll come back to that point. However, I do fear general apathy, and that is what I think Liz was saying is the result of the rule of the expert. She painted a picture that one can see if one turns on CNN or any version of NBC or FOX. (Some) experts obfuscate issues, to a degree. They do away with the big questions that they don’t have the answers to (i.e. what kind of world should we help construct?) in favor of smaller and more specific questions limited in applicable scope (i.e. what is the role of urban anthropology in confronting stereotypes?). This flies in the face of the common sense idea that social problems are interconnected. For example, talking about environmental issues without referring to economic or political dimensions of those issues cuts out important aspects of the problem.
I feel like most things worth learning require effort. Blood, sweat, and tears. Just try not to get any of it on the nice new iMacs in the computer center. For me this effort means combining thought and action. Allow me another Beiner quote:
And in the same way, it is only when we are confronted by contextual circumstances that thought is given impetus and meaning. I’m not saying that everything we do needs to be applicable. I’m saying that thought with action in the world as a goal requires the kind of effort that makes you earn your tiredness.
And the New Liberal Arts? Concentrating on problems instead of disciplines? The logic behind such a move is strong. The world is in the midst of a few crises. We are in a unique place at this institution. Our school can be a beacon of change that attempts to engage with these multifaceted crises. Gearing a liberal arts education towards the advancement of public good is a re-conceptualization not only of education, but also of citizenship.
Here, however, allow me to offer some criticism. I still cringe when I hear a phrase like, “secular church,” a phrase Liz used to describe CAPA. Even though my Facebook profile lists my religious views as “Vonnegutian,” (as Kurt Vonnegut was probably the most impressive of those that call themselves secular humanists) I dislike the idea of secular indoctrination that is conjured by the above stated phrase (the words just give me the heebie jeebies). I understand how such a (frightening) phrase can be rhetorically seductive. It has power (my visceral reaction is one example) and is a pithy phrase. I just don’t think that it is the exact idea that this college will realize. It’s just not our style.
Here’s a point of departure for further investigation if there is interest. What is the classroom? In a previous conversation with Liz she equated ideal students to ideal citizens. For Liz, it seems to me, the ideal citizen is voluntarily engaged and actively participative in politics in the Aristotelian sense of the word (as opposed to the CNN version). Like these citizens, ideal students are engaged and participating in a creative and meaningful educative context. So what does that make the classroom? If it is imbued with the virtues of citizenship, how can we (the education forum) achieve that?
Also, if this idea of a New Liberal Arts begins a re-conceptualization of education and citizenship, where can it lead?
Beiner, Robert. Political Judgment. University of Chicago Press, Texas: 1984.
What just happened?
This is not meant to preclude others from attempting to make sense of the scant two hours spent in Tishman this evening. Talking to people after the event (Class? Talk? I’m having difficulty classifying it) proved to me that some of us will be thinking about it – interpreting it – for a long time.
So: What on earth just happened?
Between forty and fifty people – students, administrators, professors; citizens all – gathered in the Tishman Lecture Hall to listen to the president of Bennington College talk about re-conceptualizing education in a way that takes into account the monumental changes taking place in our society.
Last class when we were busily recreating Luther’s 95 theses (if we translate the problems with the Roman Catholic church of the early 1500s to our contemporary education system) on the blackboard of Barn 100 one student, Tyler Baker, brought up that we may be taking the idea of ‘schooling’ and ‘education’ for granted, that maybe the structure – inside and out – needs to be rethought.
For me, tonight, Liz took a step in that direction.
Now, if you think that I’m sounding like a sad fanboy of some kind by all means make yourself heard. But please be aware that the thing I was most impressed with tonight was that together we turned Tishman from a lecture hall into a discursive classroom. And now back to my fawning over the greatness of Liz.
When Liz spoke about the intensity of the classroom, both in Chicago University and in Rethinking Education, I got it. I got it in the sense that the word ‘got’ can be used unabashedly. The life of the mind, the exposure to intellectual community have only served to create a passion that is only augmented through conversation, discussion, and writing. Ever since my freshman year when I wrote a paper on the Patriot Act for Mansour, or my sophomore year when Mac told us that he expected a level of work that could be used as research in a piece of scholarly work, that passion has fueled itself and my work. After I told Eileen that I was tired from all of the work I was doing (long before I was actually doing much work at all, in hindsight) she told me, and I’m paraphrasing here, that didn’t quite understand tired. That to be tired was a goal to strive for. That you should be tired when you allow yourself to be consumed by your passions and ambitions. That you have to earn your tiredness.
These days I crave my next class like the best minds of Ginsberg’s generation drag themselves through the negro streets at dawn looking for an angry fix. I can understand why Liz was stuck as soon as she came to this place.
The reason I have such a love affair with this place, and I’ve only begun to understand this over the past few months, is that Bennington (or at least my Bennington experience) typifies what I think education should be. There can be no doubt that in general the education system of this country is failing. One need look no further than the recent economic crisis for proof of this. Robert Beiner, author of Political Judgment, commented on Hannah Arendt’s conception of the humanist as follows, “Arendt views the humanist as a non-specialist who ‘exerts a faculty of judgment and taste which is beyond the coercion which each specialty imposes upon us’” (Beiner 18). This humanist is, for me and I think for Liz as well, the product of a liberal arts education.
I don’t fear experts. I don’t fear expertise. I love postmodernism – a domain Liz referenced as under the purview of experts. I salivate a little when I get to read social constructivist theory. I don’t fear complication. I feel like most things worth learning come with a lot of effort – and I’ll come back to that point. However, I do fear general apathy, and that is what I think Liz was saying is the result of the rule of the expert. She painted a picture that one can see if one turns on CNN or any version of NBC or FOX. (Some) experts obfuscate issues, to a degree. They do away with the big questions that they don’t have the answers to (i.e. what kind of world should we help construct?) in favor of smaller and more specific questions limited in applicable scope (i.e. what is the role of urban anthropology in confronting stereotypes?). This flies in the face of the common sense idea that social problems are interconnected. For example, talking about environmental issues without referring to economic or political dimensions of those issues cuts out important aspects of the problem.
I feel like most things worth learning require effort. Blood, sweat, and tears. Just try not to get any of it on the nice new iMacs in the computer center. For me this effort means combining thought and action. Allow me another Beiner quote:
It is only when we are confronted by the demands of action in the context of a particular set of circumstances that we get a true understanding of what our ends really are, and reassess these ends in relation to a new understanding of our life as a whole. Action in the particular circumstances of life is a continuing dialogue between what we think our life is about, and the particularities of moral and political exigency. (24)
And in the same way, it is only when we are confronted by contextual circumstances that thought is given impetus and meaning. I’m not saying that everything we do needs to be applicable. I’m saying that thought with action in the world as a goal requires the kind of effort that makes you earn your tiredness.
And the New Liberal Arts? Concentrating on problems instead of disciplines? The logic behind such a move is strong. The world is in the midst of a few crises. We are in a unique place at this institution. Our school can be a beacon of change that attempts to engage with these multifaceted crises. Gearing a liberal arts education towards the advancement of public good is a re-conceptualization not only of education, but also of citizenship.
Here, however, allow me to offer some criticism. I still cringe when I hear a phrase like, “secular church,” a phrase Liz used to describe CAPA. Even though my Facebook profile lists my religious views as “Vonnegutian,” (as Kurt Vonnegut was probably the most impressive of those that call themselves secular humanists) I dislike the idea of secular indoctrination that is conjured by the above stated phrase (the words just give me the heebie jeebies). I understand how such a (frightening) phrase can be rhetorically seductive. It has power (my visceral reaction is one example) and is a pithy phrase. I just don’t think that it is the exact idea that this college will realize. It’s just not our style.
Here’s a point of departure for further investigation if there is interest. What is the classroom? In a previous conversation with Liz she equated ideal students to ideal citizens. For Liz, it seems to me, the ideal citizen is voluntarily engaged and actively participative in politics in the Aristotelian sense of the word (as opposed to the CNN version). Like these citizens, ideal students are engaged and participating in a creative and meaningful educative context. So what does that make the classroom? If it is imbued with the virtues of citizenship, how can we (the education forum) achieve that?
Also, if this idea of a New Liberal Arts begins a re-conceptualization of education and citizenship, where can it lead?
Beiner, Robert. Political Judgment. University of Chicago Press, Texas: 1984.
Monday, March 9, 2009
Stanley Fish and Neoliberal Education
I just read a piece in the Times by Stanley Fish regarding neoliberalism and public universities. I thought it would be interesting for this course because he offers a great breakdown of the term 'neoliberal' and he offers a view which, though many of us would disagree with it, is well argued.
Check it out: Neoliberalism and Higher Education
Check it out: Neoliberalism and Higher Education
Friday, March 6, 2009
Information Session
One of the main purposes of this blog will be to make sense of our sessions— to reflect, to synthesize, and to set into motion further discussion and inquiry.
As a group, we’re certainly dynamic and a little scattered, but we’re tied together by a shared interest of wanting to understand what’s wrong with our broken system, and wanting to work on it.
During our discussion, some interesting common threads emerged. A lot of us are talking about some of the same key issues, many of which we will discuss at length throughout the term. A few examples:
We’re definitely concerned about teachers. How are teachers being evaluated? How do we recruit and train effective teachers? What do we do with bad teachers? How much should they be paid? Does this truly correlate with performance? Should they have tenure? How should this be determined?
We want explore curriculum. What’s relevant? What should be standardized? Which lessons are necessary for personal and academic growth (Latin? Health? Citizenship?), and how should they be taught? What effect does categorizing ideas into disciplines have on learning? Where do family, community, and government fit into all this?
Some other variables to continue thinking about— standards, expectations, class size, structures and design, politics… we’ve got a lot to consider.
As Ken said at the end of the session, not all of the issues on the board were of equal import. Some of them embodied others and some may not be issues at all, just symptoms of larger problems. A topic for discussion for those interested and available – what is the most important problem in our Education system right now and why is it more important than all of the others?
And finally, thanks for your support and energy! I’m excited to see where we’re headed.
Thursday, March 5, 2009
Welcome to the Blog!
Our resources (readings, notes, and syllabus) are hosted on our Wiki Page, accessible here: http://benningtonedforum.pbwiki.com.
The Bennington Education Forum is a group of students, led by students, committed to identifying problems in our education system and designing solutions based on research and discourse.
This blog is a venue in which students of the Forum and others can share their input and ideas freely and openly. Frank discussion is an important catalyst of change in our democratic society, and the purpose of this blog is to host a range of opinions and ideas regarding the provocative issues raised in the Forum.
With talk, shared knowledge, and design, we can change the world. It is your choice to contribute.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)