Here's a great blog entry
about Social Justice Teaching, by Eduwonkette. I read this post and the guest bloggers' (Bill Ayers
' and Sol Stern's
) replies to the post, and then the readers' replies to each section. Can not get enough of it. What a debate. Thank you, Eduwonkette--this is the sort of essential question that deserves a lot of thought. Bill Ayers: pro SJT. Sol Stern: anti SJT.
from the guest blog by Sol Stern on Eduwonkette's site:
"So it seems to me that the question isn’t precisely how widespread social justice teaching is right now (although more studies would be welcome) but rather what public school leaders – state education commissioners, teachers union leaders and district superintendents – might do to make sure that intrusion of left wing or right wing political ideology into the classroom doesn’t spread any further. We need a professional code of ethics for teachers, a Hippocratic Oath if you will, that makes clear that our public school classrooms are not laboratories for social and political change, with the kids serving as guinea pigs. Perhaps Stanley Fish put it best: 'Teachers should teach their subjects. They should not teach peace or war or freedom or obedience or diversity or uniformity or nationalism or antinationalism or any other agenda that might properly be taught by a political leader or a talk show host.'”
Personally, I can't decide where I am on this issue. I don't think people should teach subjects as much as teach children, if you know what I mean. But I can't decide how much "activism" to impart to the students, how much experience they should have with "making a difference," and what sorts of experience. Then I also wonder how Nel Noddings
' Ethics of Care figures in--is caring political? Is it "off-subject"?
What's your view about teaching for transmission, teaching for social justice, teaching for caring?