[Platt] (Notice on this site how Arlo, an academic, attempts to impose a "correct" way of thinking by insulting anyone who strays from his dogma.)
[Arlo] Arlo does no such thing, but Arlo does expect you to substantiate your claims. If that is, to you, a coercive attempt to impose a correct way of thinking, then I suppose I am guilty. I mean, I would imagine substantiation and support of one's argument IS thinking, plain and simple, but gauging by what passes for "thinking" on "talk radio", its no wonder you'd be frustrated when asked to substantiate your vapid assertions. Shall I repost the now half-dozen or so questions about your assertions that you've evaded through distortion and deception for the better part of a year? Would you care to explain to Paco how that's considered "thinking" in your world? [Platt] I think the MOQ would be appalled at what passes for education these days if for no other reason than its goal -- "to breed and train a standardized citizenry, to put down dissent and originality" --smothers responses to Dynamic Quality." [Arlo] As if on cue you provide a brilliant example of the types of distotrive rhetoric you are now trying to pass as "thinking". The "purpose" you deride here was from a criticism of public schools written by HL Mencken in 1924. Condemnations of public education are not new. They are the proverbial dime a dozen. But I do share (as you could read in the archives) the central point of this article. Namely, we as a country have no idea what the purpose of our public education is. We oscillate between "to prepare on for a career", and "an informed citizenry", a babystitter and psychologist's office and a notion of Renaissance elegance, but often do none particular right. Nonetheless, I find complaints by armchair pundits to be dismissible, for the true to solution is involvement. The true problem is that the "public schools" exist at the edge of community, rather than within. As has been repeated here often, Platt, if you have an issue with the schools, volunteer some time, get in there and help. By simply bemoaning the issue here, you are expecting others to do you work. Gatto would be wise to look to the very successful public schools in Finland and Japan to balance the claims he makes. For example, one of his complaints revolve around the "rote" mannerisms of education rather than the creative, constructivist, and collaborative models that foster critical thinking (as in these other locations). In the past, many have commented on how the educational model in America follows the beat of the production model in our industry. The popular view of kiddies all sitting quietly in rows at their desks, hand held in silence, while the teacher lectured at length from the front of the room came into popularity alongside Fordist approaches to mass production. Schools adopted this "assembly line" approach to cranking out each year's "model". In post-Fordist times, this has begun to be replaced by learning environments that foster collabortion, as the mode of production became more distributed. Perhaps Gatto should take a closer look at places like Finland and ask why public education there does not only NOT cripple their kids, but instead gives them a foundation where they excel. It may give him more clear insights into possible solutions. Moq_Discuss mailing list Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc. http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org Archives: http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/ http://moq.org.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/
