Since this is a high-profile commentary on our schools/colleges of education, this rather unflattering portrayal merits a response from those of us who teach in such schools to the NYTimes.
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/07/31/education/edlife/hartocollis31.html?pagewanted=2&ei=5070&en=b4d362e2c71864d2&ex=1123646400
July 31, 2005
Who Needs Education Schools?
BY ANEMONA HARTOCOLLIS
"With the ambition of producing educators rather than technicians, in the words of Hunter's acting dean, Shirley Cohen, schools have embraced a theoretical approach. But critics say that ill prepares teachers to function effectively in the classroom."
This is a long piece so I won't reproduce it all here.
-Angela
I am posting this on behalf of Professor Pete Farruggio:
ReplyDeleteAngela,
Curious about Dr Steiner, I searched and found this little essay at the Hoover Institute's site (coincidence???). My quick summary:
Educated in England, he thinks the A-level exams are peachy keen for "creating a national vocabulary"
Along these lines, he is a strong proponent of a national curriculum
His entire focus is on high school and curriculum. No mention of K-8, nor of pedagogy. Therefore, I surmise that he is interested in public ed as an ideological tool. He takes ED Hirsch as a given. What Hirsch says is important is therefore important. I call this "passing on the ruling class ideology"
He criticizes US multiculturalism as vague and too dismissive of the core national culture
By the way, his faculty profile at Boston University's site says he is involved in the Paedeia movement. Given the elitist values espoused in his essay, I see that he is one of those Paedeia-ites who view that program model as a social reproductionist instrument for the chosen few, a way to "pass on the culture" to upper class whites and some of the "talented tenth"
Pete Farruggio
PS: Heaven help the poor ed students at Hunter College!