Related to Woj's point about gender & teaching, I thought about that as an issue, and also the public function of it. Would love to see if there's a book out there on the topic.
Schools of education have always been seen as rather secondary, sneered at, historically.. My hometown had a normal school, later converted to a state college specializing in education. They were built mainly for the instruction of women to enter teaching, which was always seen as something one did temporarily until marriage. It was treated as a form of babysitting (working class mothers worked until their kids reached school age, then they dropped out of the labor face once kids were school/work age). The big push behind public education in the late 1800s didn't get much traction until two forces got involved: unions (to keep workers out of the labor force) and industry (who wanted to spread the cost of training their workforce across the public). (Forgotten the historian of all this, Apple was his name? )
You could see this in the historical records of a company called Solvay Process, near where I used to live. They recruited immigrants from Poland, Greece, Italy (northern, hence the rumor that everyone ate cats) and, IIRC, had people speaking 17 different languages. When I was doing research in their archives, the company had not just a company store but a daycare center, small school for English, civics (cleanliness), eating, workforce instruction. Everything had to be translated into 17 different languages so workers could sign something that basically said, "you understand that working here can kill you."
Anyway, the company records also contained discussions of their entrance into the political arena, to unload some of the costs of running all those social services. This is old news to everyone here, but that schools are factories of instruction
At 11:42 AM 2/15/2012, Wojtek S wrote:
>Doug: "Also, none of the progressive education types I've interviewed
>on the radio, and I've interviewed many of the luminaries, want to
>talk about how American anti-intellectualism figures into the
>problem."
>
>[WS:] This is my impression too. Based on my experience, many of
>these progressive & liberal types with whom I rub elbows around here
>do not want to acknowledge the deeply embedded anti-intellectualism,
>it seems to offend their populist sensibilities ("the people" can do
>no wrong). Blaming schools and teachers seems like an acceptable
>cope-out to them - it is the school's fault, not the people's and
>their anti-intellectualism. On the rare occasions when I point this
>out, those progressive and liberal types get really defensive and
>upset, which tells me that it hits the weak spot. And many of them
>support the charter school approach too.
>
>Wojtek
>___________________________________
>http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk
-- http://cleandraws.com Wear Clean Draws ('coz there's 5 million ways to kill a CEO)