The restriction of information and the construction of authority - schools

[jake williams]

I recently posted this as a note on Facebook:


I think one of the most significant (and easily observable) features of schools is an aspect of the dynamic between, on one hand, students, and on the other, teachers and administrators. Particularly, the obsessive secretiveness of the latter. Much work goes into ensuring that students do not know relatively trivial information about the nature of their schools - the relationships between individual teachers, certain policies, administrative structure, etc. This of course not to mention taboo subjects, taboo words, and so on. It's obvious to everyone who can remain sane that it goes way beyond what makes sense - in most cases, schools disallow the sort of discussion that goes on in normal environments, as it were, years earlier.

In fact, most classrooms are sites of permanent discomfort, permanent tension between the more liberated aspirations of students and the persistent restrictiveness of the generalized authority (as typically put against students, this authority is teachers, whether or not they use administration, potentially worried parents, law, culture etc. to justify it). While this tension can be productive, it's the sign of a very dysfunctional environment.

Why this obsession over the control of information? There are a number of interesting symbolic examples - the hysteria about cellphones could well be about removing information streams outside of control. At my school there are phone handsets that teachers pick up to communicate with the office privately. They are bulky and entirely conspicuous. The vast majority of time, nothing spoken about is relevantly confidential (as I've had confirmed on a number of occasions), and there's no argument about convenience. The most obvious favourite-pickers of teachers often insist that marks be kept "private" - even by people willing to share theirs.

The only sensible explanation - particularly considering the types of information proscribed - is that it's a central part of the structure of authority (often depersonalized, as mentioned) that forms the backbone of modern schools as institutions. Schools are about authority. Then, what characterizes the hierarchical relationship between older people and younger people, or teachers and students, is the restriction of information held by the former from the latter. And I think, certainly not coincidentally, vice versa - what characterizes the restriction of information is the way in which it constitutes a hierarchical relationship. This deserves further analysis.

The trouble with all this is that the restriction of information is antithetical to the whole concept of the ideal "school". If you actually want to teach people, you do the opposite of what schools do.Thoughts?

[AnthArmo]

The primary problem with typical schools is the very fact that they are created off of the assumption that children don't want to learn. As a result information is forced down the throats of students. And in many cases, its information that kids don't want nor care for.

I think perhaps the restriction of information is because the teacher's role isn't so much to teach, but to ensure that the student is ready for whatever test or examination is needed to be taken in order for the student to get their score. It doesn't matter if the student completely forgets everything afterwards, so long as the student can pass whatever examinations are needed in the short-term.

I absolutely love the concept of of Democratic schools.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democratic_schools
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Summerhill_School

[jake williams]

The primary problem with typical schools is the very fact that they are created off of the assumption that children don't want to learn.
I think this is a big part of it. It's a totally irrational assumption too, for anyone who's spent any time around any children ever.



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Summerhill_School
I actually read the guy's book about Summerhill, and while there were some interesting ideas, especially for its time, there were some things that weirded me out a bit. Like his assertion that none of his students were ever gay because he raised healthy students.

[scarletghoul]

Urgh, school really sucks. They stole a massive chunk of my life and are destroying our youth systematically

[choff]

While we're on the subject of the senseless restriction of information outlets I'd like to point out that I was just blocked by our school's "security settings" when trying to access your Wikipedia link. I'm going down to Tech Services now to complain.

[Killfacer]

we obviously had different upbringings and times in school.

[Pirate turtle the 11th]

I always quite liked school to be honest.

[jake williams]

I always quite liked school to be honest.
In what sense?

Also, I think even if you happen to luck out that's good, but I think it's really silly either to deny that school is awful for a lot of people, and that it's a major element of capitalist state control.

[AnthArmo]

I always quite liked school to be honest.

I'm lucky enough to be in a position were my skills and interests mean that I am fully able to enjoy school as well. But that doesn't necessarily mean its the same for everyone. And that by no means the system in which our schools work are perfect

[Pirate turtle the 11th]

I never said thatperfect it was , but id rather kids attended my old school even if it was run stupidly and by jesus freaks because simply the alternative would be working their tits off from the age of eight or around that.

[NecroCommie]

School in itself is always needed, as we need to know and study as a society in order to advance. The quarrel should be with the method of education, and thats what I disagree with. This authoritharian "telling of truths" spirit has to end. Science should be discussed in classes, not told. If all scientists were to take these theories for granted, sciences would never improve. Questioning is needed, and that can only be born through a healthy culture of discussion.

Also, the school system is based on these inaccurate tests, and is made to fit students who learn by hearing/reading. I happen to learn by doing, so I am by that very nature at disadvantage. There should be no categorizing students into "good" and "bad" students, but they should all simply "pass" or study more until they reach the level required.

[jake williams]

I never said thatperfect it was , but id rather kids attended my old school even if it was run stupidly and by jesus freaks because simply the alternative would be working their tits off from the age of eight or around that.
It really irks me when folks assume people who criticize education in capitalist societies think schools shouldn't exist period.

[Lynx]

The education system is a ruling-class institution and must be reformed. My experience with it ended in 1984. Perhaps educational methods have improved, perhaps rusted plumbing gets better with age - I wouldn't know.

[Aeval]

I think the biggest problem with schools, in the UK at least, is that teachers in state schools have to follow the national ciriculum to the letter. Most of the one I know (and had) hated this, but what are they going to do? Let kids pick what ever they want to learn and thus utterly fail, because the rest of society isn't exactly set up in a way which supports people doing their own thing. It was alright with the top sets, you could give them the freedom to learn whatever they liked and know they'd still be able to blag the exams, but letting everyone would just leave the 'less able' students without any qualification, basically making them screwed. All the stupid rules like not wearing bracelets or having to tuck your shirt in or not being allowed to say certain words, the ones which we spent literally hours of our lives arguing about, weren't there because of the teachers, it was senior management and the governors who came up with them and made the teachers enforce them even though they protested that it was an absolute waste of their time and that having purple hair or a piercing or swinging on their chair didn't effect learning half as much as sending people home. (I'll admit there were some who were just angry angry people who liked having others do as they were told but they were few and didn't last long)

I guess maybe I was just really lucky but upon leaving school I realised just how good my teachers were, considering all the stress and shit they had to put up with from above. And I feel bad for my part in making their job even more difficult, schools would be better if the kids didn't automatically presume the teachers were out to get them and if the government, whinging parents and especially senior management just stayed out of it and let the teachers actually teach.

[WhitemageofDOOM]

The primary problem with typical schools is the very fact that they are created off of the assumption that children don't want to learn.

Which is complete bullshit, learning is fun. And i mean that literally, fun is the brains reward system for learning. If your not having fun your not learning.

The problems with schools really stem from the our notions of kids not being people, but the property of there parents. There a method to control unruly pets, not a method of intellectually strengthening the future rulers of the world.

[jake williams]

Which is complete bullshit, learning is fun. And i mean that literally, fun is the brains reward system for learning. If your not having fun your not learning.
This is the thing. It's true for children especially. Anyone who's spent any time around children - except, apparently, teachers - realize children love learning.

[Bitter Ashes]

I definatly see what you mean about construction of authority. I mean, it's even the norm in the UK for school kids to wear uniforms. Ever since Section 28 (which believe me, really was hell!) was repealed, my biggest issue with the education has been the whole indoctorination and curriculum.

By law, every school must teach at least the national curriculum, which is currently:



Key Stage 3 compulsory National Curriculum subjects are:


English
Maths
Science
Design and technology
Information and Communication Technology (ICT)
History
Geography
Modern foreign languages
Art and design
Music
Citizenship
Physical education



Schools also have to provide:


Careers education and guidance (during Year 9)
Sex and Relationship Education (SRE)
Religious education



Source: http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/Parents/Schoolslearninganddevelopment/ExamsTestsAndTheCurriculum/DG_10013877

Parents can opt to withdraw thier kids from the RE lessons, but the kids themselves get no say. They do get more of a say in the other subjects with thier choices at year 9, although there is still rules. When I was in school each pupil had to choose like this:
- You must take English, Maths and Science, Welsh and RE (I had been put in a Welsh Catholic school)
- A choice of either History, Geography, or humanities
- A choice of one technology from the list; ICT, Systems and Control, Design tech, home economics (cookery)
- A choice of one "art" subject; Art, Drama, Music, GCSE PE
- A choice of one more language: French, German, ICT, Buisness Studies (I know the last two seem strange!)

I had particular issues in school because of the curriculum. For example, I'd only moved to Wales when I was 13 and was put in Welsh classes with kids that had been learning the language since primary school and actualy used to get a lot of abuse from the teacher in that subject who used to yell and throw stuff at me and another English pupil when we couldnt keep up.

I remember one incident in particular where I'd actualy gone home that weekend determined to learn the basics so I wouldnt feel so lost with the advanced stuff we were bieng taught. I came back and stated to the teacher that I'd spent the weekend learning colours, basic grammer, animal names and stuff like that in an attempt to get on track. She flew into a fit of rage and threw a board eraser at me and called me a "stupid queer English ****", saying that I was wasting my time learning the basic stuff when I was bieng tested on the advanced stuff. By law I had no escape from that woman and had to endure stuff like that on a weekly basis and thanks to Section 28, all she had to do was make sure her insults included refference to my sexuality to make them perfectly acceptable.

I also remember the RE classes very well as in all the mock exams I was failed for giving my knowledge of religions in a 3rd person perspective as an atheist. When it actualy got to the exam I was given a B, despite bieng very open and upfront about my atheism, which I'd been assured would lead to my failure by the RE teacher. Not suprisingly, I had quite a lot of abuse from teachers in that subject too.

It does bug me the hell out of me that there was no eject button from these and that it was legislated that either myself, or my parents, would be committing criminal offences for me not attending.

The whole thing just seemed like a 12 year excercise in conformity.

[Killfacer]

This is the thing. It's true for children especially. Anyone who's spent any time around children - except, apparently, teachers - realize children love learning.

Most kids i knew, myself included, would much rather spend time playing and chatting than learning.

Although, this may have as much to do with the format that the learning takes as it does with any dislike of learning.

[jake williams]

Although, this may have as much to do with the format that the learning takes as it does with any dislike of learning.
This has a whole lot to do with it. Healthy kids like learning, period. Most play is about learning, for that matter.

There are a number of reasons kids might stop enjoying learning:



They get taught not to ask questions (Stop asking "why", don't ask about sex, you'll learn about it when you're older, etc.). This has everything to do with the control of information, which is the whole point of my OP
The things they get "taught" are useless and/or uninteresting (grammar that doesn't match the way actual humans communicate, math that's useless with pocket calculators), or in the case of a lot of political messages, explicitly against their own interests. For example, working class children will rightly begin to detest a system that ignores working class history while giving a picture of history based on the achievements of great leaders. Or black children resisting racist teaching
Teaching is explicitly associated with unpleasantness. Learning is something you do in an uncomfortable seat in a stuffy room and if you don't understand the right way right away you're a bad person. If that's what you think learning is, you'll hate learning. When I was six or so, I LOVED learning how to grow peas, how to read, how to make scrambled eggs, how to do multiplication, how to play card games, how to use a computer, how to draw pictures, how to ride a bike, how to buy groceries, how to vacuum. Useful things, fun things, interesting things. Teach me this, mom, all the time. I hated school, and my grade 1 teacher angrily complained to my mom at one point that I couldn't add single-digit numbers. I could, my teacher was just useless and boring.

[Dooga Aetrus Blackrazor]

I don't think all children like learning to the same capacity. The idea that healthy kids like learning, I would suggest, is rather presumptuous. That doesn't mean a child would enjoy learning "enough" to obtain the necessary information.

There are many problems with the education system. The know this is the typical offense card. When we criticize police, people get upset. When we criticize soldiers, people get upset. In this case, though, I'm not sure the education system is the same. In that case, educators (in my experience) seem to be motivated by the right reasons.

Police, military, et cetera, seem to have members who want more authoritarianism and move towards the right. Teachers seem to spread reformism. I'll take reforms when I have no idea when the revolution is coming.

[jake williams]

They both work for the state.

[Bitter Ashes]

I've just remembered two other absolutly infuriating things about school.
1) When you're told to learn quadratic equations, or something else abstract like that and you're NEVER given an example of why you should learn it. No practical use for a quadratic equation was ever offered to me. However, when I was told how to measure the volume of a cylinder I could immediatly see the possibilities for its use and it stuck like glue to my memory. Why is it that useless stuff like those quadratic equations are taught without any practical reason?
2) Science lessons that would teach you one thing, tell you that they'd told you a fairy tale version 2 years later, you go to to college and you're told both versions of what you were taught were fairy tales and given a 3rd explanation and then at uni it happens again as you're handed your 4th explanation. It bugs the hell out of me to think that there's a bunch of kids who left thier science education at 16 who although have a perfect recolecction of what they were taught at school, are carrying around scientific theories that are completly and utterly wrong. You have to pay college and uni fees to learn what really happened and even then, you're left wondering if what you just learned at uni level was also a lie. Gah!

[Dooga Aetrus Blackrazor]

I've just remembered two other absolutly infuriating things about school.
1) When you're told to learn quadratic equations, or something else abstract like that and you're NEVER given an example of why you should learn it. No practical use for a quadratic equation was ever offered to me. However, when I was told how to measure the volume of a cylinder I could immediatly see the possibilities for its use and it stuck like glue to my memory. Why is it that useless stuff like those quadratic equations are taught without any practical reason?
2) Science lessons that would teach you one thing, tell you that they'd told you a fairy tale version 2 years later, you go to to college and you're told both versions of what you were taught were fairy tales and given a 3rd explanation and then at uni it happens again as you're handed your 4th explanation. It bugs the hell out of me to think that there's a bunch of kids who left thier science education at 16 who although have a perfect recolecction of what they were taught at school, are carrying around scientific theories that are completly and utterly wrong. You have to pay college and uni fees to learn what really happened and even then, you're left wondering if what you just learned at uni level was also a lie. Gah!

To be fair, scientific theories apply to context. Newtonian physics can be used in particular contexts and be replaced by a better theory. A typewriter can still be useful when computers exist.

It's a difficulty of simplifying abstract ideas for the purpose of education and, ultimately, partially reliant on the assumption that we can't understand the abstract ideas to begin with.

Math I'm with you 100%. The problem is part of education is designed to give you an overview of "everything." Most of the students will never use the math they learn. However, children in the education system are in developmental stages. They aren't significantly developed to know if they'll like math, so we teach them it anyway. They could give them that explanation, perhaps, but schools don't like moral or ethical explanations.

[jake williams]

To be fair, scientific theories apply to context. Newtonian physics can be used in particular contexts and be replaced by a better theory. ... It's a difficulty of simplifying abstract ideas for the purpose of education and, ultimately, partially reliant on the assumption that we can't understand the abstract ideas to begin with.
But we're not told that this is going on. Again, this is my whole point. The context of the lesson is not communicated. It wouldn't be difficult at all. "You don't have the math to understand X theory exactly yet. That's okay. Here's a slightly simplified version that can help you get at least an idea, and solve some problems." That's not done because the school as an institution is dedicated to not being honest to students.

It's not that it's sadistic - it's not that teachers or even the abstract institution are trying to be unhelpful. They think they're helping, but the institution as a whole as such characteristics that one of the things it does - a lot - is keep important information from students while giving unimportant or misleading information to them.

[ZeroNowhere]

It really irks me when folks assume people who criticize education in capitalist societies think schools shouldn't exist period.
Well, that depends on how they use the term 'school'. For example, many refer to 'free schools' as 'free skools' in order to differentiate them from the usual schooling system.


I never said thatperfect it was , but id rather kids attended my old school even if it was run stupidly and by jesus freaks because simply the alternative would be working their tits off from the age of eight or around that.That's an amusing assumption. Or perhaps a generalization that all children come from poor families.

[jake williams]

Well, that depends on how they use the term 'school'. For example, many refer to 'free schools' as 'free skools' in order to differentiate them from the usual schooling system.
The schools I criticize are the schools that actually exist in Western countries, public state schools. Free schools have basically been dead for 30-some years. I think it's reasonable, however, to also use the term "school" to talk about what we would like to see the present institutions become.

[ZeroNowhere]

The schools I criticize are the schools that actually exist in Western countries, public state schools. Free schools have basically been dead for 30-some years. I think it's reasonable, however, to also use the term "school" to talk about what we would like to see the present institutions become.As far as I am aware, there still are a decent amount of Sudbury 'schools'. According to Wikipedia, there are currently 23 in the US, so it would seem that they do actually exist.

[jake williams]

As far as I am aware, there still are a decent amount of Sudbury 'schools'. According to Wikipedia, there are currently 23 in the US, so it would seem that they do actually exist.
They "exist" in secluded spaces, but with nowhere near the amount of theoretical support or political momentum behind them as they had a time in say the late 60s and early 70s, where they were not necessarily as widespread but when the analyses that contributed to them were more radical, and the political movements supporting them were... better.

[ZeroNowhere]

They "exist" in secluded spaces, but with nowhere near the amount of theoretical support or political momentum behind them as they had a time in say the late 60s and early 70s, where they were not necessarily as widespread but when the analyses that contributed to them were more radical, and the political movements supporting them were... better.Sure, but I don't really see how this would make them 'dead', and certainly not non-existent.

[jake williams]

Sure, but I don't really see how this would make them 'dead', and certainly not non-existent.
I'm just very cynical. It's possible there are very good projects, but I haven't seen them. I'd very much like to though.