Talk:Core Readings in Education

From Studyplace

Contents 1 Study 1.1 Generative questions originating the article 1.2 Key points to make 2 Talk 2.1 Individual Lists 2.1.1 Matt's List 2.1.2 Aaron's List 2.1.3 Eric's List 2.2 Plato

Study

Generative questions originating the article

• What 10 to 15 books should everyone in the educational profession have read thoroughly and be able to assume that other educators will know while interacting with them?
• What are the grounds for each selection? How will it empower educators, whatever their special role might be, to work with others more effectively? What are the topics that all educators should soundly understand?
• How will a potential inclusion contribute to a body of common educational knowledge that well-grounded professionals should draw on, whatever their specialty?

Key points to make

• Let's let the list of suggestions grow and deepen with explanations for potential inclusions until our next Sprint, at which the participants should winnow the list to 12.

Let's also think carefully about the existing list before just adding to it as though it does not need to be justified. An efficient way to make a group list is to adjudicate as the group goes along, not to simply let a thousand flowers bloom, and wait until the end to have to sort through stacks of (tangentially relevant) entires.

For example, what are some good substantive reasons that the background selections by Kuhn and Barzun warrant attention over other relevant material? Perhaps there are good reasons, but at present they are not presented.

Also, is an argument presented to support texts like Freire's that see education as fundamentally intermingled with politics and power? Must all educators read such texts? Or should such texts be considered voluntary or part of elective study? In the core aspects of medical and legal education, are doctors or lawyers required to take coursework or read material that takes as fundamental the relationship between power and professional practice? It seems to me that educators far too often rely on unquestioned assumptions about the relationship between power and education. What is needed, instead, is a major, politically neutral argument in support of political texts being included in a core education curriculum. That argument, I think, will be difficult to make, for it is likely to swing to one end of the political spectrum, and in so doing, to move away from the idea of core itself. Nevertheless, I remain open to the possibility. In moving forward, I suggest we try to focus on texts that have to do with education and not with the resolution of long-standing power struggles, be they constructed or real.

Should the prior comment be under "Study" or "Talk," or as a comment, pro or con, to a particular suggested work? I would agree that probably few on the initial list should make it to a final one. I think there should be a vigorous discussion of many possibilities with a working out from that discussion what the criteria for selection probably should be. This will require some thought also about how to format the whole interaction. I suspect that each candidate selection should have a link to a page on it on which the "article" page might have a draft set of reasons, or claims, about why it should be one of the 10 to 15, and the Study page should indicate the intellectual basis for and against those claims and the Talk section should debate different elements of the for and against. Right now we just have preferences without any basis for agreeing or disagreeing that they merit that status. Robbie McClintock 19:42, 29 May 2007 (EDT)

Talk

Individual Lists

In order to move along the selection of the list, I would like to invite people to post their top 5 books that they think should be included in the core. These short lists will, hopefully, challenge people to think of their essential books and may provide some common ground to compile our list of 12 or 15. Matt 16:45, 16 November 2007 (EST)

Note: please don't feel limited to the original 15 books on the main article page.

Matt's List

There are several considerations informing this list. First, all have been personally meaningful and fruitful as I've studied them. I am sure that there are much better books to include in the core, but I'm confined to the limited scope of what I'm familiar with. Second, I think that an important part of the core is to build a foundation of common learning. While five titles do not make this foundation, I think that the five in my list touch upon and influence many current streams of thought and debate amongst scholars and practitioners interested in education. Further, each book, in my opinion, doesn't need to present a 'balanced' view, but rather the core taken as a whole should present such a view. Even though we're only listing 5 books, the end list will include 10-12 books.

1. The Republic

Not to disregard Jonah's well stated argument below, but I think that The Republic's broad influence merits its inclusion on this list.

2. Mind in Society

I haven't read Vygotsky's other work, so this might not be the best title, but he merits inclusion in my list based on his theories and the influence of his work.

3. Democracy and Education

I reverted to Democracy and Education, in part due to Robbie's challenge not to shy away from long(er) books.

4. Pedagogy of the Oppressed

see my comments in the article

5. Mirror of Language, Hakuta

I think that there is a lot of misunderstanding about language and language minority students, even within schools of education. Hakuta's book is thoughtful and would provide a 'core' to discuss this issue.

Aaron's List

Note: At this point, the only book I'd include with any certainty is Rancière, even though he's not really a big name in the canonical sense. Being less familiar with other scholars, I'm more inclined to say (something by this author) than to pick a specific book.

1. The Ignorant Schoolmaster: Five Lessons in Intellectual Emancipation by Jacques Rancière
2. Democracy and Education by John Dewey
3. Plato
4. Lawrence Cremin?

Eric's List

1. Plato, Protagoras (just to add more to the Plato fire; in it we see Socrates debate with an educator who he respects, but who nevertheless practices a different mode of education)
2. Rousseau, Emile (only introduced to it in undergrad; is one of the required texts in TC's Phil & Ed dept.)
3. Dewey, Democracy and Education (amenable to Experience and Nature also, but Dem. & Ed. incorporates arguments made in Horace Mann's The Republic and the School, which i think is indispensable for understanding the cultural establishment of public ed, but probably isn't one of our 12-15 finalists.)
4. Cremin, The Transformation of The School; Progressivism In American Education, 1876-1957
5. Bourdieu & Passerson, Reproduction in Education, Society and Culture

Also, here is an interesting article by Maxine Greene, Core Curriculum: Its Background and Objectives.

Eric Strome 11:53, 4 December 2007 (EST)

Plato

I added Plato's Republic. I also think that a text on Multiculturalism is an excellent idea. I think that there should be at least one book that takes up epistemology in some way would be of value. --Sethhalvorson 21:55, 18 May 2007 (EDT)

Jonah is going to write up an argument of why Phaedrus instead of The Republic, we were thinking that a list of 10 titles shouldn't have more than one by each author. Matt 23:31, 20 May 2007 (EDT)

Phaedrus vs. The Republic -- I think there are a few good reasons for the core curriculum to include Plato's Phaedrus over The Republic.

• It's Short. Seriously, fitting in the entire Republic into this course is a tall order, and reading only a short portion of dialog doesn't really do it justice (ba-da-bum).
• It's off the beaten path. Odds are people have encountered The Republic as an undergrad, where they either read it, or not. True, this might be the chance to them to finally come back to it, but on the other hand, it also might be a chance to hook them on Plato with something they probably haven't seen before
• In this dialog, S. explicitly draws an analogy we have been promoting here:

Soc. Rhetoric is like medicine.

Phaedr. How so?

Soc. Why, because medicine has to define the nature of the body and rhetoric of the soul-if we

would proceed, not empirically but scientifically, in the one case to impart health and strength

by giving medicine and food in the other to implant the conviction or virtue which you desire,

by the right application of words and training.

Phaedr. There, Socrates, I suspect that you are right.

Soc. And do you think that you can know the nature of the soul intelligently without knowing the

nature of the whole?

It seems to me that the argument that to implant conviction or virtue (that is, to teach) requires a deep understanding of the nature of the soul, and even moreso, the nature of the whole (i.e. society?) is precisely one of the arguments we are trying to make here. This is far more specific, actionable, and applicable than the typical journeys into The Cave.

• This is also the dialog that is often used as a point of departure in Communication and Media studies. At the end of this dialog S. discusses the impact of technology (in this case, writing) on psychology and society (here, how it will affect memory and discourse). Again, seems to me a natural opportunity to illustrate how Plato is still relevant and applicable to contemporary conversations about education.
• In my experience, The Republic is pretty tough to teach well, and often comes across as abstract and philosophical. I think The Phaedrus can actually serve as a well balanced bridge to bring philosopy into practice. Plus, it is a great little dialog that is a companion to The Symposium, and a natural lead in to later studies of The Republic.

* Disclaimer - My love for the Phaedrus did not come out of thin air. I recently spent some time with this text and wrote this paper for Todd Gitlin's class Plato and the Laptop: Prescribing Educational Technology for Society's Ills, partially in reaction to John Peter's Speaking Into the Air.

-- Jonah 01:46, 22 May 2007 (EDT)