Advertisement

What You Don’t Know Is Hurting You and the Country

  • Joe L. Kincheloe

Abstract

As a writer I strive to avoid overstatement—but in the middle of the first decade of the twenty-first century, discussions about education lend themselves to dramatic proclamations. Take this one, for example: public education in the United States is facing the greatest threat to its continued existence in its 150-year history. Right-wing groups enjoying more power than ever before are constructing a crisis in education that can be solved, they argue, only by ridding ourselves of so-called government schools. Because public education is deemed to be “beyond hope,” only the creation of a system of corporate-run private schools can assure quality education. As right-wing think tanks and conservative composed governmental reports manipulate data to indicate that thousands of schools are failing, “qualified” teachers are in perilously short supply, and schools are indoctrinating students with “radical” ideas, Americans are being convinced that government-supported schools cannot deliver what the nation needs. Most Americans do not know about such tactics and if such public unawareness continues, we could soon witness the end of universal public schooling for our young people.

Keywords

Educational Research Bush Administration Educational Science Standardize Test Score Heritage Foundation 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Apple, M. (1993). The Politics of Official Knowledge: Does a National Curriculum Make Sense? Teachers College Record, 95, 2, pp. 222–241.Google Scholar
  2. Aratani, L. (2004). States Criticize Bush Education Plan. http://www.mercurynews.com Google Scholar
  3. Berkowitz, B. (2001). Public Schools Open for Business. http://www.workingforchange.com/article.cfm Google Scholar
  4. Bogle, C. (2003). Cuts in Education Funding Will Improve Academic Performance. Honest. http://www.wsws.org/articles/2003/aug2003/educ-a28.shtml Google Scholar
  5. California Educator (2002). Scripted Learning: A Slap in the Face? 6, 7. http://ww.cta.Org/californiaeducator/v6:7feature_4.htm
  6. Coles, G. (2003). Learning to Read and the “W Principle.” Rethinking Schools, 17, 4. http://www.rethinkingschools.org/archive/17_04/wpri174.shtml
  7. Coontz, S. (1992). The Way We Never Were: American Families and the Nostalgia Trap. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
  8. Doumani, B. (2004). Personal Voices: The End of Academic Freedom. AlterNet. http://www.alternet.org/storyl8426 Google Scholar
  9. Eisenhart, M. and L. Towne (2003). Contestation and Change in National Policy on “Scientifically Based” Education Research. Educational Researcher, 32, 7, pp. 31–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Fleischman, S., J. Kohlmoos, and A. Rotherham (2003). From Research to Practice: Moving Beyond the Buzzwords. http://www.nekia.org/pdf/ed_week_commentary.pdf Google Scholar
  11. Foley, A. and R. Voithofer (2003). Bridging the Gap? Reading the No Child Left Behind Act against Educational Technology Discourses. http://www.coe.ohio-state.edu/rvoithofer/papers/nclb.pdf Google Scholar
  12. Garan, E. (2004). In Defense of Our Children: When Politics, Profit, and Education Collide. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.Google Scholar
  13. Gonzalez, R (ed.) (2004). Anthropologists in the Public Sphere. Austin, TX: University of Texas Press.Google Scholar
  14. Gresson, A. (1995). The Recovery of Race in America. Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press.Google Scholar
  15. Gresson, A. (2004). America’s Atonement: Racial Pain, Recovery Rhetoric, and the Pedagogy of Healing. New York: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
  16. Hartman, A. (2002). Envisioning Schools beyond Liberal and Market Ideologies. Z Magazine, 15, 7. http://www.zmag.org/amag/articles/julang02hartman.html Google Scholar
  17. Hellstrom, T. and S. Wenneberg (2002). The “Discipline” of Post-Academic Science: Reconstructing the Paradigmatic Foundations of a Virtual Research Institute. http://www.cbs.dk/departments Google Scholar
  18. Hursh, D. (2001). Standards and the Curriculum: The Commodification of Knowledge and the End of Imagination. In J. Kincheloe and D. Weil (eds.), Standards and Schooling in the United States: An Encyclopedia, pp. 735–744. Santa Barbara, CA: ABC-Clio.Google Scholar
  19. Karp, S. (2002). Let Them Eat Tests. Rethinking Schools. http://www.rethinkingschools.org/special_reports/bushplan/eat164.shtml Google Scholar
  20. Kincheloe, J. (1983). Understanding the New Right and Its Impact on Education. Bloomington, IN: Phi Delta Kappa.Google Scholar
  21. Kincheloe, J. (2004a). The Knowledges of Teacher Education: Developing a Critical Complex Epistemology. Teacher Education Quarterly, 31, 1, pp. 49–66.Google Scholar
  22. Kincheloe, J. (2004b). The Bizarre, Complex, and Misunderstood World of Teacher Education. In J. Kincheloe, A. Bursztyn, and S. Steinberg (eds.), Teaching Teachers: Building a Quality School of Urban Education. pp. 1–50. New York: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
  23. Kincheloe, J. and S. Steinberg (eds.) (2004). The Miseducation of the West: How Schools and the Media Distort Our Understanding of the Islamic World. Westport, CT: Praeger.Google Scholar
  24. Kincheloe, J., S. Steinberg, and A. Gresson (eds.) (1996). Measured Lies: The Bell Curve Examined. New York: St. Martin’s Press.Google Scholar
  25. Kitts, L. (2004). Keep Special Interests out of America’s Classrooms. http://www.hoodrivernews.com/lifestyle%20stories/067%20special%20interest%20opinion.htm Google Scholar
  26. Lather, P. (2003). This IS Your Father’s Paradigm: Government Intrusion and the Case of Qualitative Research in Education. http://www.coe.ohio-state.edu/plather/ Google Scholar
  27. Metcalf, S. (2002). Reading between the Lines. The Nation. http://www.lindaho.yt.com/titie%20I.htm Google Scholar
  28. Miner, B. (2004). Why the Right Hates Public Education. The Progressive. http://www.progressive.org/jan04/miner0104.html Google Scholar
  29. Murray, A. E. (2002). Reading’s New Rules: ESEA Demands a Scientific Approach. Education Update. http://www.ascd.org/publication/ed_update/200208/murray.html Google Scholar
  30. Ohanian, S. (1999). One Size Fits Few: The Folly of Educational Standards. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.Google Scholar
  31. Steinberg, S. and J. Kincheloe (eds.) (2004). Kinderculture: The Corporate Construction of Childhood. 2nd edn. Boulder, CO: Westview.Google Scholar
  32. Street, B. (2003). What’s “New” in New Literacy Studies? Critical Approaches to Literacy in Theory and Practice. Current Issues in Comparative Education, 5, 2.Google Scholar
  33. Van Manen, M. (1990). Researching Lived Experience: Human Science for an Action Sensitive Pedagogy. Albany, NY: State University of New York Press.Google Scholar
  34. Vinson, K. and E. Ross (2001). Social Studies—Social Education and Standards-Based Reform: A Critique. In J. Kincheloe and D. Weil (eds.), Standards and Schooling in the United States: An Encyclopedia, pp. 909–928. Santa Barbara, CA: ABC-Clio.Google Scholar
  35. Weil, D. (2001). Functionalism—From Functionalism to Neofunctionalism and Neoliberalism: Developing a Dialectical Understanding of the Standards Debate through Historical Awarenss. In J. Kincheloe and D. Weil (eds.), Standards and Schooling in the U.S.: An Encyclopedia. Santa Barbara, CA: ABC-Clio.Google Scholar
  36. Wisconsin Education Association Council (WEAC) (2004). The American Board and Fast Track Certification: An Attack on the Teaching Profession. http://ww.weac.org/pdfs/2003–2004/certification_research.pdf Google Scholar
  37. Yatvin, J. (2002). Babes in the Woods: The Wandering of the National Reading Panel. Phi Delta Kappa, 8, 5, pp. 364–369.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Shirley R. Steinberg and Joe L. Kincheloe 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  • Joe L. Kincheloe

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations