On Holistic Education - Part 3

Why has Holistic Education not “caught on”…?

Holism appears to have the potential to profoundly motivate and inspire pedagogues, curricularists, education administrators and policymakers, but it has not succeeded in influencing significant change. I am intrigued as to why. As with critical pedagogies, holism challenges traditional teaching models, it counters “the economic-technocratic-statist worldview” (Orr, 1991) that mechanizes and commoditizes education. So, why hasn’t it caught on?

Miller (2000) states that the holistic education movement is perceived as “quasi-religious” (p. 19), “transcendent” (p. 45) and hence, has not gained serious scholarly credit. Holism’s critique of conventional educational models and its endeavour to achieve moral outcomes appears closely affiliated with critical pedagogy, which IS firmly established. Miller states though, that currently, the bridge between the two has not been built, largely because a coherent holistic theory has not been forwarded.

Miller argues that the inconsequential influence of holism could be due to the fact that its theory is based on assumptions regarded by its adherents as intuitive and implicit. If the idea of wholeness is taken for granted as rational and self-evident, its theoretical framework may be perceived as shallow. That is, much is taken for granted as “basic understanding” but in fact, is not. For instance, spiritual and religious people may see the interconnectedness of the world and their role within it, perhaps because they were raised from an early age with such an understanding. Those who did not grow up, or have not adopted a specific religious doctrine or spiritual path may simply not see such interconnections; thus an explicitly articulated theoretical framework is needed.

Elsewhere, Miller states that holism makes “grandiose claim[s]” (p. 22) that make it difficult for people to comprehend. This reasoning is not personally convincing. Complexity has not kept modern society away from adopting other theories. Rather, I believe that holistic theory threatens the utilitarian constructs of mass public schooling. It disputes campaigns like the recent “21st century skills” and “standards and accountability” movements which aim to instill competencies in our children that yield efficiency, productivity, and economic success. Holism, unlike such frameworks positioned to increase Knowledge Age output, rests on a moral foundation that seeks to increase spiritual sensitivity, integrity, and global sustainability.

As Miller seems to imply, perhaps holism can become more influential if it piggybacks on critical pedagogies in the phenomenological form of “holism-as-critical-theory” (p. 43).

Samah

References

Miller, R. (2000). Caring for new life: Essays on holistic education. Brandon, VT: Foundation for Educational Renewal.

Orr, D. (1991).What is education for? In InContext: A Quarterly of Human Sustainable Culture. Retrieved from http://www.context.org/ICLIB/IC27/Orr.htm

On Holistic Education - Part 2

In this post, I focus on the holistic framework as a source for informing and promoting teacher transformation, especially within an environment that aggressively repels spiritual consciousness and denies the multiple, fundamental interconnnectedness of life phenomena.

I have been deeply moved by Miller's work, his tone, his presentation of holism, and the objectives that appear to steer his studies. Holism can inform and assist in teacher transformation -- in the most profound of ways. At a time in history when it is taboo and can be construed as illegal to make references to religious beliefs, holism prods teachers to reconsider the importance of such themes as divinity, moral responsibility, and mortality. When technical, reductionistic epistemologies have stifled spiritual evolution (Miller, 2000, p. 12), holism offers us a chance to evaluate education against the standard of human decency and sustainability, not scientific rationalism or economic success.

In many ways, Miller's work reminds me of David Orr's speech What is Education for? (1991) in which he states:

"In most respects the Germans were the best educated people on Earth, but their education did not serve as an adequate barrier to barbarity. What was wrong with their education? In Wiesel's words: 'It emphasized theories instead of values, concepts rather than human beings, abstraction rather than consciousness, answers instead of questions, ideology and efficiency rather than conscience.' "

Holism seems to say that the part is inextricably tied to the whole, and that successful education must have an underlying theme of decency and sustainability. This can serve as a bright guiding light to teachers lost in the madness of trying to meet state/provincial standards and pass standardized tests. Holism offers a chance to weave meaningful themes through the often scattered and poorly related topics taught in schools. It also has the potential to invigorate teachers towards a new sense of purpose. This purpose is not to churn out industrious workers, but to cultivate spiritually conscious, moral beings.

References:

Miller, R. (2000). Caring for new life: Essays on holistic education. Brandon, VT: Foundation for Educational Renewal.

Orr, D. (1991).What is education for? In InContext: A Quarterly of Human Sustainable Culture. Retreived from http://www.context.org/ICLIB/IC27/Orr.htm

On Holistic Education

I will be posting a few blogs on an invaluable resource: Ron Miller’s Caring for New Life: Essays on Holistic Education (2000) which forwards a “powerful critical theory” that meets the challenges of today’s ailing U.S. school system (p. 19).

Miller (2000) makes a compelling argument for holistic education, advocating for education that is spiritually-based and life-affirming, and against a “technologically efficient, rationally standardized” (p. 9) form of education that endeavors to fulfill materialist needs. His stance clearly challenges the positivistic theoretical framework, and human capital economics ideology that dominates conventional schooling in America today.

Miller’s holism is informed by a theoretical base of constructive postmodernism, which he forwards as an attempt to infiltrate America’s school at a time when standardized testing and a push for 21st Century skills by policymakers and corporate culture is intense. Holism, in my view, is an alternative schooling methodology as well as a form of critical pedagogy which has the potential to redirect the perpetual education reform in America, and focus it on social change.

Reference:

Miller, Ron. (2000). Caring for new life: Essays on holistic education. Brandon, VT: Foundation for Educational Renewal.

Pedagogical 'Pinings': Dewey Chapter 7 - Systematic Inference

Pedagogical 'Pinings': Dewey Chapter 7 - Systematic Inference: "Thoughts?"

Dewey states that through systematic thinking, “hasty acceptance of any idea that is plausible, that seems to solve the difficulty, is changed into a conditional acceptance pending further inquiry” (p. 81). He describes the differences in thought processes and conclusions drawn from both deductive and induction reasoning. “Conditional acceptance” entails a movement from a suggested or hypothesized idea to fact confirmation. It is a methodical process of ensuring an observation made does not lead to a calcified belief, rather an observation made is suspended and juxtaposed with one fact after another, finally leading to an acceptance or refutation of the initial idea.  

Understanding the difference between deductive and inductive reasoning, I think, is key here. With induction, if a series of premises are true, they lead to a probable truth. With deduction, if the premises are true, it is impossible for the conclusion to be false. Dewey states that the inductive process is one which involves discovering a binding principle. It looks at fragmented details and tries to make from them a possible conclusion. The deductive process involves testing the details, and from this confirmation or refutation process, a truth is drawn.  

As I understand it, Dewey describes the thinking and discovery process as needing to start with induction, and not to stop there, but to lead to deduction. I’ve summarized the example of the man who observes his room in a scattered state below using the two argument methods:

The room has things strewn about.

Burglars cause things to be strewn about when they break-in.

Inductive argument: Burglars caused the items in the room to be strewn about.

The room has things strewn about.

There are missing valuables from the room.

The mischievous children were not in or around the room at the time of the change.

The property (window/doors) are compromised.

(and other facts…)

Deductive argument: Therefore, burglars caused the items to be strewn about.

In this way, Dewey states, “Belief culminates; the original isolated facts have been woven into a coherent fabric” (P. 83).    

Blog #3

It is clear that the surveys conducted for this paper (in 2004/2005 as noted by the author) were carried out before the advent or global popularity of the iPhone. Stald (2008) states, “Games and the mobile Internet are not popular possibilities among the young people we studied—the most common argument being that the mobile phone user has a much better computer a few minutes away at home, at work, at school or college. In this context the mobile must be seen as one of a broader ensemble of media” (p. 148). In fact, the iPhone has radically changed the ‘low quality and high price’ reasons recorded by Stald for youth not using the Internet on their mobiles. The iPhone is a media ensemble on its own – allowing users to access the Internet (free in Wi-Fi areas), up-to-the-minute e-mail, news, social networking messages and podcasts, record notes and audio, along with enabling users to read texts, listen to music, take pictures, and play advanced and engaging games. All these features are now available in a visual format, speed, and storage space that competes with the average PC.

    

One of the themes of Stald`s chapter is the indispensable tool that is the mobile phone. Had the study been conducted post iPhone popularity (and Research in Motion`s Blackberry, which followed suite), the degree to which adolescents would admit their reliance on it would surely be more significant. More features, speed, reliance, and storage capabilities translates into the ability to broadcast and receive various forms of information that shape adolescent ideas and, hence, their identities. This latter point of Stald is one I contemplated quite a bit on. That is, that the mobility and accessibility of the mobile phone has made it possible for youth to negotiate and co-construct meaning of the world around them: ”Exchange between friends is an important part of the development of identity, because it supports the testing of cultural, social, and individual codes and makes ongoing, mutual reciprocity possible. In this context, being movable, agile and ready to march means being ready to move as a person, too” (p.146). In the upcoming years, as these mobile devices increase in advanced communication features (e.g. Skype camera enabled iPhones), I suspect we will continue to see studies like Stald`s, and conclusions which point to the power of digital devices in molding youth identities.

Reference

Stald, G. (2008). Mobile identity: Youth, identity and mobile communication media. In D. Buckingham (Ed.), Youth identity and digital media (pp. 119-142). Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.

Blog #2

Boyd’s chapter “Why Youth Social Network Sites: The Role of Networked Publics in Teenage Social Life" in Youth, Identity, and Digital Media (2008) was an enlightening read into the effects of digital literacy on – primarily – the Millennial generation. The author states that the motivation behind her study is “simply to unveil some of the common ways in which teenagers now experience social life online” (p. 121). The study provides a powerful look at the formidable effects a social network site such as MySpace has on the personal lives of our youth. Trilling and Fadel’s (2009) ideas advocate digital literacy as a critical skill school systems ought to develop as part of a 21^st century education sure to secure global competiveness and economic prosperity in the nation. Boyd’s chapter provides insight, a troublesome one at that, not into the economic contributions of digital literacy – but the social impact of technology on the social interactions, identity “construction,” of our children. Who precisely has forged this path? Who has so widely opened this media channel for thirteen to eighteen year olds to navigate through? In a capitalist society, perhaps I ought to ask: Whose market research has profited from this “service”?

I did some digging and came upon an interview on a Canadian program (the Canadian Broadcasting Channel’s “The Hour”) with the founder of MySpace, Tom Anderson:  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-yWpnto-hqQ&feature=fvw  . It is a fascinating watch, sure to provide a back stage look at the site Boyd based her research on.

When asked why he created the social networking site, Anderson stated ‘to compete with a pre-existing site.’ Asked if his development team foresaw interests in their venture by media corporations, he answered: “Yeah, we thought that a media company would come and buy it someday. And we wanted the big money injection to help grow it, make it international, and to pay for all the equipment in the beginning. That was sort of the plan.” News Corp, both the study and the video indicate, bought the site, and so capitalized on the riches 175 million users would surely bring. This, apparently, is not unusual. Boyd states, “Microsoft, Yahoo!, AOL, and Wal-Mart have all created social network sites, but these have not been particularly successful. In 2005, Fox Interactive Media (a division of Murdoch’s News Corporation) purchased MySpace for US $580 million” (p. 121).

Put together with Trilling and Fadel’s contentions, Boyd’s study says a sad lot about the corporate influence on the means of our educational system, and the intended goals of education itself.

We will surely see research into the disastrous impact of such control grow.

Samah

Blog #1

I frame Stern’s chapter “Producing Sites, Exploring Identities: Youth Online Authorship” as an answer to a not-so-new argument iterated by those who approach the infiltration of technology into our society and education systems with trepidation. More technology, this argument posits, is not synonymous with wealth, increased knowledge, or a superior society. As environmental educator, David Orr, states: “There is a myth that our culture represents the pinnacle of human achievement: we alone are modern, technological, and developed. This, of course, represents cultural arrogance of the worst sort” (Orr, 1991). He continues to critique modern American curricula for its emphasis of fragmented bits of information – often mistaken for knowledge – that is devoid of spirituality, nobleness, gentleness, and life affirmation. As a result, “most students graduate without any broad integrated sense of the unity of things.”

How is Stern’s analysis of youth online authorship of personal sites, such as websites and blogs, a reply to a culture that aggressively promotes  technology as a superior instrument through which our world may be managed? One of the most evident of Stern’s findings is that personal sites allow adolescents opportunities to “[manage] the complex situations and shifting self-expectations that characterize adolescence” (p. 97). She further states that, “expressing oneself online becomes a way for them to explore their beliefs, values, and self-perceptions, and thereby to help them grapple with their sense of identity” (p. 102).

Within a cultural context that places such heavy emphasis on harnessing technology for success in the 21st century – all too frequently, in my opinion, at the expense of other ways of cultivating imagination and sensitivities, other knowledge, instruments of production, and sources of potential societal contribution – Stern’s scrutiny seems to make an offer we as educators should not pass up. The popularity and attraction of personal sites, and the talent with which adolescents construct them, is a magnificent opportunity to employ technology as a means for youth to make sense of their world. The empowerment of authorship, the potential limitless audience, the accessibility and increased tools of personal sites provide a chance for adolescents to integrate the bits of fragmented information thrown at them from every which way, to personalize and humanize them when they are static and technocratic…to chew, savor or spit them out. Ultimately, I believe they offer a modest approach to countering the danger David Orr warns against – a population of graduates “without any broad sense of the unity of things” to potentially help develop citizens who are highly reflective, more spiritual, and more in tune with their identities as a result of contemplation and self-inquiry.

Samah