We have focused extensively on the importance of both information and knowledge this semester. Inevitably, any discussion of knowledge and information contains at least minor references to the role of education in the dissemination of information and the formation of good citizens within the democratic society of America. We have discussed, how despite reforms, the education system in this country remains largely unequal across social and economic groups and geographic locations.
As I read the articles this week, I could not help put question if democracy and education are at odds with one another. Perhaps we should be asking if the effects of education contradict the goals of democracy. We often hear arguments that greater education will lead to more effective participation and the emergence of a better informed citizenry. However, maybe there is an inverse relationship between education and the establishment and maintenance of a healthy democracy. I have many family members and friends who are or have been teachers--ranging from the elementary to collegiate levels. One interesting topic of conversation that arises is the curriculum taught in schools. Generally, the consensus I hear is that there needs to be a greater focus on both math and science. These sentiments are increasingly and regularly echoed and reinforced in the media and popular culture (Example: Video of how to encourage your daughter to excel in math and science http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lf5BLio6qGQ). Yet after reading Pauline Lipman’s “Politics by Other Means: Education Accountability and the Surveillance State,” I began to wonder if society’s push for math and science has minimized the emphasis on the study of subjects—like government or ethics--that allows for debate and free thought. Lipman argues that free thinking and discourse is “undermined by educational processes driven by standardized education.” To me, there seems to be an impasse between what society deems as necessary and appropriate--standardized testing and a focus on math and science—and what is required to promote democratic characteristics and effective citizens.
Additionally, Lipman addresses the role education plays in the “racialization of the enemy.” Since the attacks of September 11, 2001, Lipman argues that American authority via the government has reduced civil liberties and democratic privilege based on the platform of ensuring security. Although I believe Lipman takes her critique of government action and the American quest for unilateralism too far, I think her underlying concern about the power of education in the greater realm of American society and politics is valid. Ultimately, the domestic and international environments which shape American policy and life affect the state of public education. In part as a result of the overreliance on standardized testing and the stigmas attached to “failing schools,” the country has isolated minority children (particularly blacks and Latinos). We have been taught that education is key to participation, but from what I see, it appears that public education may be a contributor to disenfranchisement. Furthermore, the focus on passing standardized tests in order to “compete for resources” limits the bounds of education. Since teachers are scrutinized over whether their students pass state tests, they have little incentive or desire to become engaged in their profession beyond the minimum standard. Instead of shaping the future democratic leaders of our country, teachers simply cover standardized material without addressing other important issues not required by mandated tests.
Ultimately, the issues and controversies surrounding education that were addressed in this week’s readings are important to the future of American democracy. Obviously, there are some problems with the way public education addresses learning and standardized curriculum, but there are really no easy answers. The bottom line is that teachers are very influential in shaping the future leaders of our country. Yet if their state mandated practices in the classroom breed “fear, suppression…and dissent,” teachers are/will be unable to impart important lessons to the next generation of democratic citizens.
Citizen Competence in American Democracy
I wasn't in class this week, but I still want to take the chance to respond to this post. I completely agree on this topic. Last semester I took a class focused entirely upon the purpose of universities. A big problem is the question of the purpose of education: is it for commercialization and vocational growth, or a 'disinterested quest for knowledge'? I think the growing trend of focusing on the math and sciences in some ways represents a theory that perhaps education is more for vocational purposes, and not involved in political participation. Furthermore, those that do go into the realm of academia may not be particularly influential on the state; it is more the search for knowledge. Do you think lawmakers or politicians react to or even read most of the articles we are required to read for our classes?
ReplyDeleteHere's a thought regarding standardization...The state for the most part funds, organizes, and directs education. In order for a functioning state, it is the states education system's responsibility to produce "good citizens". The term "good citizen" means that the state produce citizens that will maintain its status quo of operation. The only citizens that deviate from this state-minded education are the academics. But again the influence of the academics is confined primarily within the university; it is has little effect on the actual policies of the state.