What do you think of Freire? I think his perspectives on education take Dewey's progressive education foundations and adds on the crucial aspects of critical analysis, social understanding, greater awareness of historical and present circumstances, and so on. One of the fundamental ideas behind Critical Pedagogy is guiding the student out of the sort of systematic complacency and stagnancy of education that I think the Common Core continues. Dewey, even with his great contributions to pedagogy, seems to still work from the idea that as educators our job is to give or guide students towards knowledge -- importantly, this knowledge is almost always the already-extant, accepted "knowledge" that students should have (standards); instead, we should look at the job of the educator as creating radical, critical, and active citizens that are socially aware and directed towards enacting change.
But the common core is not about memorizing facts. It is not about being given pieces of information. It is about students discovering this information for themselves. It is about students using logic and facts to defend their own perspectives, not about being force fed specific ideas. The common core standards do not test specific factual knowledge, they pressure students to think critically and use their higher reasoning skills. Standards are not piece of information that students should have memorized, they are tasks that students should be able to accomplish. The common core introduced higher level tasks, like creating and evaluating which are the bread and butter of progressive education, while it eliminated standards relating the the memorization of specific facts. We want students that are able to argue intelligently with the system using data, not ones that blindly restate what they are taught. The Common Core does this. Many teachers are critical of the common core because it does not focus enough on memorization of facts, that students no longer are learning times tables, but rather learning strategies to understand multiplication on a deeper level. Deep critical analysis of systems is central to Friere, and it is taught by the Common Core.
@@CarneadesOfCyrene If you are referring to a particular incarnation of the Common Core that is reformed from the past Common Core, I think the person you are replying to is talking about the Common Core in a more generic sense as traditional education and meant something different to what you reply.
Thank you for this video. The Common Core State Standards Initiative has the potential to transform our country by changing how most public school students are educated. If we want to know how it will make our country more or less democratic, then we ought to have this conversation using Dewey's framework and ideas. That is what I do in a forthcoming article in The Journal of Politics entitled "Democracy and National Education Standards." I won't make a response to every point made in this thoughtful video. My main response, though, would be to look at the details of the Common Core rather than the claims made on the homepage. For instance, we all understand the difference between standards and curriculum. Supposedly, the CC enables teachers to use their own discretion about how to reach the standards. And yet the architect of the Common Core, David Coleman, worked with the NY State Department of Education to create engageNY modules that literally tell teachers what to do to the minute. Because of high-stakes testing, administrators all around the country are forcing teachers to use these dreadful modules that could not be more at odd with Dewey's vision. I describe the modules here: www.huffingtonpost.com/nicholas-tampio/why-are-parents-revolting_b_4590041.html
I would agree that standardizing such a curriculum and forcing teachers to use it is a mistake. However, this is a decision that is made at the school level. In my personal experience, many school administrators choose completely different curriculum that supports the standards, work with teachers to create new curriculum that supports the standards and serves the population, or even adapt the provided curriculum to allow for much more teacher and student choice. Any administrator that uses this curriculum as a dictum and not a set of tools is doing a poor job (and the target of critique should be any administrator you find that demands such strict adherence to the curriculum). My central point, however, would be that while Dewey's philosophy would surely be against the forced adoption of a standardized curriculum, that is something which the standards do not require, is a choice of particular schools, and can be implemented in such a way that only certain useful elements are taken from the curriculum. Teaching well is about stealing good lesson plans and activities from others. So long as teachers are not forced to implement particular curricula to the t (as I have seen no policy suggest), it does not seem harmful to provide overworked educators with more tools to draw from (even if many of these tools are not useful).
This whole debate is not about whether or not the CC standards dictate the day to day curriculum, but whether their Federal, Big Data approach to "gaming" education is one we should follow. This, I would argue, is against the spirit of Dewey, although not necessarily against the letter, since he was writing before the notion of massive aggregation of knowledge by large institutions was put into discourse. I agree that the CCS makes teaching easier for teachers, but I'm not certain it is the best move to make if you're a die-hard Dewey-ite (Dewey-ist). Thanks for making the video, tho. Pretty sweet.
I think that the implementation of the Common Core Standards, with high stakes testing and so on is problematic for the supporter of Dewey, but the standards themselves are actually in line with a lot of his ideas.
"Dewey supports common core in comparison to what it followed". A little weak but checks out. The real question is what is Dewey's ideal? That is what I was wanting to know by the end of the video. Common core is more or less a specific policy, so what about it would Dewey improve on?
Great question. Dewey would probably change a lot of things about the initiative (high stakes testing to start). For the standards, I bet that he would balance the high concentration on evaluate and judge standards, with some more synthesis and create standards. He would probably also focus some of the apply and analyze standards on creative problem solving.
Conceptually standards are opposed to Dewey's central concept of "Interest". If a student isn't interested in mathematics, then any mathematics standard is anti-Deweyan. No exploration. Tampio is right. Dewey's lab schools, the expression of Dewey's theory he created in his life, and those still in action, Deweyan lab schools have been and are against standards. It is a myth that standards have always existed. Standards in education are relatively new, occurring starting with Sputnik, well after Dewey's greatest decades of influence. Standards exist for standardized testing. A standard cannot exist without standardized testing. This is where you are mistaken, I think, because standards haven't existing without measuring them, and broad standards have only used the tool developed during WW1, the multiple choice test, reducing the goals of education to standards, and limiting student interest.
I consider John Dewey as one of the primary reasons for the failure of the public school system. His influence upon modern education is without question but it is a bad influence and goes against the Biblical view of man, sin, redemption and the very basis for good and evil which is to be found in God's grace and not the "Great Society." Let me explain. Dewey was a socialist who made such idiotic statements as these: "The state can do no wrong, for right is determined by what the state does." Contrast this fallacious thinking where Dewey as a good Hegelian ascribes divine attributes to the state. Hear the truth of the matter: Let God be true and every man a liar. God can do no wrong, for right is determined by what God says and does. Dewey believed in "stimulus response" psychology where man is seen as an animal rather than a sinful creature under God and subject to Divine laws and commandments. Man will never attain freedom under the system John Dewey sought to create but only in terms of finding liberty in Jesus Christ who said "If the Son therefore shall make you free, ye shall be free indeed." John 8:36
Interesting claim. First, do you have a primary source for that quote? I found many spurious sources which fail to reference where it came from, so it seems that it may be legitimate, I'm just curious in what book or article Dewey said this. Furthermore, I'm unclear what your objection to Dewey's philosophy is. Are you saying that only religious institutions should teach morality, and schools should stick to wrote memorization? Are you claiming that Dewey's ideas about questioning dogma were dangerous to religion and therefore should be avoided? Or are you claiming that secular morality is impossible and therefore any attempts to teach it cause harm?
Brother Carlton I would say anything that deters away from the Bible is good. Men can be good and then it’s good without the constriction and fallacy of the Bible. Religion is not the common good and will not dictate what is good.
@@WhirlOmar Regardless of the appeal to biblical authority, what Brother Carlton is talking about is the nature of man. What is a person? Or what does it mean to be human? Is a person a blank slate? Is a person only an animal? When our framework is to think and look at the material world without any conception of something we may not understand, at least as of yet, or the idea of a metaphysical or perhaps what the ancients may have called a “spiritual” world, it frames our understanding and eventually our explanations for the world we see. So perhaps you are right that the Bible is not the proper framework to understand reality properly, but I posit that the limiting ideas of everything we know and understand having to come through the human senses as the only pathway to truth is limiting and flawed.
I believe no-body knows much more than about an inch wide and an inch deep, basically not much, so mostly we rely on feeling our truth. Didn't Mr. Dewey promote experiencing practical education to help a person get what they want. is this keeping it narrow but digging a little deeper, probably for me it is as I see life but interdisciplinary always seems like a temptation to move towards. It is interesting how Jesus, Buddha, etc. maybe went way deep but had a profound long lasting effect on others. were they the best at disrupting the standard curriculum, and for the benefit of all? If you experience certain events that help your understandings please share, a good life story is always appreciated, by kids and adults, right?
But that is more often based on the practices of a particular teacher, or the policy implemented around high stakes testing. It is not the Common Core Standards which pull us away from his ideals.
Thank you for this reminder of Common core of education, choice of learning, " depth creates choice."
What do you think of Freire? I think his perspectives on education take Dewey's progressive education foundations and adds on the crucial aspects of critical analysis, social understanding, greater awareness of historical and present circumstances, and so on. One of the fundamental ideas behind Critical Pedagogy is guiding the student out of the sort of systematic complacency and stagnancy of education that I think the Common Core continues. Dewey, even with his great contributions to pedagogy, seems to still work from the idea that as educators our job is to give or guide students towards knowledge -- importantly, this knowledge is almost always the already-extant, accepted "knowledge" that students should have (standards); instead, we should look at the job of the educator as creating radical, critical, and active citizens that are socially aware and directed towards enacting change.
But the common core is not about memorizing facts. It is not about being given pieces of information. It is about students discovering this information for themselves. It is about students using logic and facts to defend their own perspectives, not about being force fed specific ideas. The common core standards do not test specific factual knowledge, they pressure students to think critically and use their higher reasoning skills. Standards are not piece of information that students should have memorized, they are tasks that students should be able to accomplish. The common core introduced higher level tasks, like creating and evaluating which are the bread and butter of progressive education, while it eliminated standards relating the the memorization of specific facts. We want students that are able to argue intelligently with the system using data, not ones that blindly restate what they are taught. The Common Core does this. Many teachers are critical of the common core because it does not focus enough on memorization of facts, that students no longer are learning times tables, but rather learning strategies to understand multiplication on a deeper level. Deep critical analysis of systems is central to Friere, and it is taught by the Common Core.
@@CarneadesOfCyrene If you are referring to a particular incarnation of the Common Core that is reformed from the past Common Core, I think the person you are replying to is talking about the Common Core in a more generic sense as traditional education and meant something different to what you reply.
Thank you for this video. The Common Core State Standards Initiative has the potential to transform our country by changing how most public school students are educated. If we want to know how it will make our country more or less democratic, then we ought to have this conversation using Dewey's framework and ideas. That is what I do in a forthcoming article in The Journal of Politics entitled "Democracy and National Education Standards."
I won't make a response to every point made in this thoughtful video. My main response, though, would be to look at the details of the Common Core rather than the claims made on the homepage.
For instance, we all understand the difference between standards and curriculum. Supposedly, the CC enables teachers to use their own discretion about how to reach the standards. And yet the architect of the Common Core, David Coleman, worked with the NY State Department of Education to create engageNY modules that literally tell teachers what to do to the minute. Because of high-stakes testing, administrators all around the country are forcing teachers to use these dreadful modules that could not be more at odd with Dewey's vision.
I describe the modules here: www.huffingtonpost.com/nicholas-tampio/why-are-parents-revolting_b_4590041.html
I would agree that standardizing such a curriculum and forcing teachers to use it is a mistake. However, this is a decision that is made at the school level. In my personal experience, many school administrators choose completely different curriculum that supports the standards, work with teachers to create new curriculum that supports the standards and serves the population, or even adapt the provided curriculum to allow for much more teacher and student choice. Any administrator that uses this curriculum as a dictum and not a set of tools is doing a poor job (and the target of critique should be any administrator you find that demands such strict adherence to the curriculum).
My central point, however, would be that while Dewey's philosophy would surely be against the forced adoption of a standardized curriculum, that is something which the standards do not require, is a choice of particular schools, and can be implemented in such a way that only certain useful elements are taken from the curriculum. Teaching well is about stealing good lesson plans and activities from others. So long as teachers are not forced to implement particular curricula to the t (as I have seen no policy suggest), it does not seem harmful to provide overworked educators with more tools to draw from (even if many of these tools are not useful).
This whole debate is not about whether or not the CC standards dictate the day to day curriculum, but whether their Federal, Big Data approach to "gaming" education is one we should follow. This, I would argue, is against the spirit of Dewey, although not necessarily against the letter, since he was writing before the notion of massive aggregation of knowledge by large institutions was put into discourse.
I agree that the CCS makes teaching easier for teachers, but I'm not certain it is the best move to make if you're a die-hard Dewey-ite (Dewey-ist). Thanks for making the video, tho. Pretty sweet.
I think that the implementation of the Common Core Standards, with high stakes testing and so on is problematic for the supporter of Dewey, but the standards themselves are actually in line with a lot of his ideas.
This is something I've never considered. Thank you.
No problem. Thanks for watching.
"Dewey supports common core in comparison to what it followed". A little weak but checks out. The real question is what is Dewey's ideal? That is what I was wanting to know by the end of the video.
Common core is more or less a specific policy, so what about it would Dewey improve on?
Great question. Dewey would probably change a lot of things about the initiative (high stakes testing to start). For the standards, I bet that he would balance the high concentration on evaluate and judge standards, with some more synthesis and create standards. He would probably also focus some of the apply and analyze standards on creative problem solving.
I pray for all parents in PARMA OHIO to see this.
Have they had particular problems with the common core?
Conceptually standards are opposed to Dewey's central concept of "Interest". If a student isn't interested in mathematics, then any mathematics standard is anti-Deweyan. No exploration. Tampio is right. Dewey's lab schools, the expression of Dewey's theory he created in his life, and those still in action, Deweyan lab schools have been and are against standards. It is a myth that standards have always existed. Standards in education are relatively new, occurring starting with Sputnik, well after Dewey's greatest decades of influence. Standards exist for standardized testing. A standard cannot exist without standardized testing. This is where you are mistaken, I think, because standards haven't existing without measuring them, and broad standards have only used the tool developed during WW1, the multiple choice test, reducing the goals of education to standards, and limiting student interest.
Now I see why our educational system has gone bonkers.
I consider John Dewey as one of the primary reasons for the failure of the public school system. His influence upon modern education is without question but it is a bad influence and goes against the Biblical view of man, sin, redemption and the very basis for good and evil which is to be found in God's grace and not the "Great Society." Let me explain. Dewey was a socialist who made such idiotic statements as these: "The state can do no wrong, for right is determined by what the state does." Contrast this fallacious thinking where Dewey as a good Hegelian ascribes divine attributes to the state. Hear the truth of the matter: Let God be true and every man a liar. God can do no wrong, for right is determined by what God says and does. Dewey believed in "stimulus response" psychology where man is seen as an animal rather than a sinful creature under God and subject to Divine laws and commandments. Man will never attain freedom under the system John Dewey sought to create but only in terms of finding liberty in Jesus Christ who said "If the Son therefore shall make you free, ye shall be free indeed." John 8:36
Interesting claim. First, do you have a primary source for that quote? I found many spurious sources which fail to reference where it came from, so it seems that it may be legitimate, I'm just curious in what book or article Dewey said this.
Furthermore, I'm unclear what your objection to Dewey's philosophy is. Are you saying that only religious institutions should teach morality, and schools should stick to wrote memorization? Are you claiming that Dewey's ideas about questioning dogma were dangerous to religion and therefore should be avoided? Or are you claiming that secular morality is impossible and therefore any attempts to teach it cause harm?
Brother Carlton I would say anything that deters away from the Bible is good. Men can be good and then it’s good without the constriction and fallacy of the Bible. Religion is not the common good and will not dictate what is good.
@@WhirlOmar Regardless of the appeal to biblical authority, what Brother Carlton is talking about is the nature of man. What is a person? Or what does it mean to be human? Is a person a blank slate? Is a person only an animal? When our framework is to think and look at the material world without any conception of something we may not understand, at least as of yet, or the idea of a metaphysical or perhaps what the ancients may have called a “spiritual” world, it frames our understanding and eventually our explanations for the world we see.
So perhaps you are right that the Bible is not the proper framework to understand reality properly, but I posit that the limiting ideas of everything we know and understand having to come through the human senses as the only pathway to truth is limiting and flawed.
I believe no-body knows much more than about an inch wide and an inch deep, basically not much, so mostly we rely on feeling our truth. Didn't Mr. Dewey promote experiencing practical education to help a person get what they want. is this keeping it narrow but digging a little deeper, probably for me it is as I see life but interdisciplinary always seems like a temptation to move towards. It is interesting how Jesus, Buddha, etc. maybe went way deep but had a profound long lasting effect on others. were they the best at disrupting the standard curriculum, and for the benefit of all? If you experience certain events that help your understandings please share, a good life story is always appreciated, by kids and adults, right?
Please can Jeff jr hated by his own people come and hang out today I feel like he is being left out of the dubs
Please please gpa dad and mom
I did not go through years and years of teacher education to be a 'facilitator'.
we dont follow Deweys ideas... at all... :/
But that is more often based on the practices of a particular teacher, or the policy implemented around high stakes testing. It is not the Common Core Standards which pull us away from his ideals.
Carneades.org will you ever cover anything to do with SJW and/or feminist things since that is all the rage? (and makes people rage lol) ?