Progressives Engaged in Struggle Support Network Meeting October 24, 2004 Bellarmine Universtiy
This reflection/recap on our last gathering is, again, an evolving document for which I invite feedback/additions/other perspectives.
14 members of the Network were present and were graciously hosted by friend and colleague, Doug Gibson, along with his partners at Austins.
After turning down the AC and ordering, we, once again, introduced ourselves as a couple of new members joined us and a couple of long time members, busy with new positions and everything else that is going on in the world, returned to us. We talked about why we do what we do, as teachers and social workers, and knowingly or unknowingly talked about the change we want to be in the world, foreshadowing Milton’s theorizing regarding our need to revolutionize consciousness.
Our initial conversation focused on the upcoming vote on Tuesday and whether or not the candidates (the only two who have received any coverage) are really all that different when it comes to education. Of course, they both support NCLB—one just favors funding it. Arguments were made that perhaps Kerry could be persuaded that the legislation and the research that went into it are flawed, since he has shown a proclivity to actually think about things and shift his position based on counsel. Additionally, it was suggested that Kerry might assuage some of the peripheral injustices/hardships/issues that directly impinge on our lives as teachers and the lives of the children (and their families) in our classrooms: jobs, health insurance, security, welfare, etc. While the choices may not be all that exciting (between the two candidates), I, along with most, believed the choice to be pretty clear.
We skirted around issues of Freire’s chapter 4, but certainly dealt with the spirit of what he was after in terms of his concept of anti-dialogical action. It was pretty clear that critical thinking is generally frowned upon in schools (and society) today. While those teachers present certainly, subversively perhaps, work to bring critical thinking into their classrooms, it tends to go against the manipulative grain of focusing more on dress codes, whose going to the bathroom, and delivering the core content.
According to Freire, “People are fulfilled only to the extent that they create their world and create it with transforming labor” (p. 126 in my text, in Divide and Rule Section). Sounds like critical thinking and teaching students to “read the word and the world.” However, Freire continues, “Dividing in order to preserve the status quo, then, is necessarily a fundamental objective of antidialogical action. . . The dominators try to present themselves as saviors.” Sounds like bringing freedom to the Middle East or creating NCLB to fix all of the problems of society: jobs, healthcare, etc. Even further, Freire argues, “Since it is necessary to divide the people in order to preserve the status quo and thereby the power of the dominators, it is essential for the oppressors to keep the oppressed from perceiving their strategy. So the former must convince the latter that they are being “defended” against the demonic action of marginals (e.g., Michael Moore, activist judges, MoveOn.org, etc.), rowdies, and enemies of God” (p. 127). They do this through propagating the myths (a list of 15 of them in the Conquest section), delivering “prescriptions” (as Freire calls them), resulting in Gramsci’s “hegemony.”
And, sadly, we still also buy into some of these prescriptions, myself definitely included, because, as the middle class, we are torn between allowing the “dominators” to get away with what they get away with (maybe a $300-$1000 tax cut is pretty good, huh? Or, maybe I’ll be rich someday. Or, how else could we do things? Or, …whatever), and knowing, as part of that way less than 1% of the world’s population—Gramsci’s organic intellectuals or Freire’s revolutionary leaders—that change is necessary, can happen, and may begin with us. It’s a tough spot to be in, but our consistent striving for conscientization, our evolving revolution of consciousness as teacher, mother, father, sister, brother, partner, world’s citizen, etc. is critical to that change we want to be in the world.
We, again, returned to the idea that we need to begin implementing some of these ideas, in the form of our own school, or one that is inhabited by a critical number of us.
This said, we need to begin to look ahead to the remainder of our meetings this semester and beyond.
For our next meeting, November 10, we’ll plan to finish chapter 4 in Freire and discuss his dialogical action. For our next meeting, let’s plan to meet in Lenihan at 8:30. We’ll probably meet in the conference room, here, or a bigger room, if necessary.
For our final two meetings of the semester (December 1 in Lenihan and December 12 at Jon Lee’s house), I would really like to begin looking ahead to our action as a Network: linking up with FairTest and other organizations to challenge NCLB and standardized testing writ large, becoming a non-profit, creating a blog, forming a local educational political party, creating a full service school, letter writing campaigns, conferences, papers, etc.
In the meantime, if you haven’t checked out the latest issue of Rethinking Schools, I would highly recommend it—lots of good pieces in there. And, we should still talk about the profile of a progressive, considering, if we created or inundated a school with like-minded folks, what would those like minds/personalities/agendas be like?
Adam Renner, Ph.D
14 members of the Network were present and were graciously hosted by friend and colleague, Doug Gibson, along with his partners at Austins.
After turning down the AC and ordering, we, once again, introduced ourselves as a couple of new members joined us and a couple of long time members, busy with new positions and everything else that is going on in the world, returned to us. We talked about why we do what we do, as teachers and social workers, and knowingly or unknowingly talked about the change we want to be in the world, foreshadowing Milton’s theorizing regarding our need to revolutionize consciousness.
Our initial conversation focused on the upcoming vote on Tuesday and whether or not the candidates (the only two who have received any coverage) are really all that different when it comes to education. Of course, they both support NCLB—one just favors funding it. Arguments were made that perhaps Kerry could be persuaded that the legislation and the research that went into it are flawed, since he has shown a proclivity to actually think about things and shift his position based on counsel. Additionally, it was suggested that Kerry might assuage some of the peripheral injustices/hardships/issues that directly impinge on our lives as teachers and the lives of the children (and their families) in our classrooms: jobs, health insurance, security, welfare, etc. While the choices may not be all that exciting (between the two candidates), I, along with most, believed the choice to be pretty clear.
We skirted around issues of Freire’s chapter 4, but certainly dealt with the spirit of what he was after in terms of his concept of anti-dialogical action. It was pretty clear that critical thinking is generally frowned upon in schools (and society) today. While those teachers present certainly, subversively perhaps, work to bring critical thinking into their classrooms, it tends to go against the manipulative grain of focusing more on dress codes, whose going to the bathroom, and delivering the core content.
According to Freire, “People are fulfilled only to the extent that they create their world and create it with transforming labor” (p. 126 in my text, in Divide and Rule Section). Sounds like critical thinking and teaching students to “read the word and the world.” However, Freire continues, “Dividing in order to preserve the status quo, then, is necessarily a fundamental objective of antidialogical action. . . The dominators try to present themselves as saviors.” Sounds like bringing freedom to the Middle East or creating NCLB to fix all of the problems of society: jobs, healthcare, etc. Even further, Freire argues, “Since it is necessary to divide the people in order to preserve the status quo and thereby the power of the dominators, it is essential for the oppressors to keep the oppressed from perceiving their strategy. So the former must convince the latter that they are being “defended” against the demonic action of marginals (e.g., Michael Moore, activist judges, MoveOn.org, etc.), rowdies, and enemies of God” (p. 127). They do this through propagating the myths (a list of 15 of them in the Conquest section), delivering “prescriptions” (as Freire calls them), resulting in Gramsci’s “hegemony.”
And, sadly, we still also buy into some of these prescriptions, myself definitely included, because, as the middle class, we are torn between allowing the “dominators” to get away with what they get away with (maybe a $300-$1000 tax cut is pretty good, huh? Or, maybe I’ll be rich someday. Or, how else could we do things? Or, …whatever), and knowing, as part of that way less than 1% of the world’s population—Gramsci’s organic intellectuals or Freire’s revolutionary leaders—that change is necessary, can happen, and may begin with us. It’s a tough spot to be in, but our consistent striving for conscientization, our evolving revolution of consciousness as teacher, mother, father, sister, brother, partner, world’s citizen, etc. is critical to that change we want to be in the world.
We, again, returned to the idea that we need to begin implementing some of these ideas, in the form of our own school, or one that is inhabited by a critical number of us.
This said, we need to begin to look ahead to the remainder of our meetings this semester and beyond.
For our next meeting, November 10, we’ll plan to finish chapter 4 in Freire and discuss his dialogical action. For our next meeting, let’s plan to meet in Lenihan at 8:30. We’ll probably meet in the conference room, here, or a bigger room, if necessary.
For our final two meetings of the semester (December 1 in Lenihan and December 12 at Jon Lee’s house), I would really like to begin looking ahead to our action as a Network: linking up with FairTest and other organizations to challenge NCLB and standardized testing writ large, becoming a non-profit, creating a blog, forming a local educational political party, creating a full service school, letter writing campaigns, conferences, papers, etc.
In the meantime, if you haven’t checked out the latest issue of Rethinking Schools, I would highly recommend it—lots of good pieces in there. And, we should still talk about the profile of a progressive, considering, if we created or inundated a school with like-minded folks, what would those like minds/personalities/agendas be like?
Adam Renner, Ph.D
posted by Jon at 12:59 PM
0 Comments:
<< Home