Unquestions assumptions shape education
INSTITUTIONAL DISCOURSE SHAPES THINKING AND ACTING
“Thought of the Week” for June 21, 2004
“Discourse” is a shorthand term to describe how characteristic ways of speaking develop in particular social contexts. Because schools are distinctive social contexts, it is not surprising that we can talk of school discourse. We are interested in how discourse comes to shape people’s thinking and acting and in how taken-for-granted assumptions shape our experience of what happens in schools. Because they are taken for granted, it is hard to notice how these assumptions structure relations between people and even shape the functioning of institutions. For example, behind the description of someone as “gifted,” there is a discourse about intelligence that assumes many things about what it means to be called “gifted.” (p. 53)
John Winslade & Gerald Monk. (1999). Narrative Counseling in Schools: Powerful and brief. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin.
Comment:
The impact of the cultural discourse on the individual
by Reg Harris
Copyright © 2004 by Reg Harris. All rights reserved. Updated October 7, 2007. All rights reserved. Apart from properly cited quotes and short excerpts, no part of this article can be copied or used in any form without written permission from the author. For permission to use, please contact me.
One of the key themes in narrative counseling is the impact of the “cultural discourse” on an individual’s self narrative, or how the cultural view of things influences how individuals perceive of themselves and their relationships with their worlds. At the center of discourse, whether it is cultural or individual, is a guiding myth or metaphor, or a way of seeing the world. For example, the scientific revolution of the 16th and 17th century gave us a metaphor of the “clockwork” universe, a mechanical, knowable, predictable and controllable universe.
Our narratives, both individual and cultural, are guided and shaped by the metaphors we use. No where is this more evident than in public schools, which are still laboring under the 18th century industrial revolution metaphor of the factory production line. True, we have amended this metaphor a bit, but overall, we still view school as a learning factory. Think for a moment of the adjectives and values that we associate with efficient factories, and see how closely they resemble the adjectives and values we have for schools:
-
outcome-orientation,
-
standards and a standardized curriculum (students, teachers and schools must meet specific, objective standards; certain curriculum is taught at certain times, whether or not students are ready and whether or not they have mastered previous skills; teachers in many disciplines must cover certain material in a certain time, whether or students have mastered the material),
-
accountability based on externally imposed criteria (both students, products, and teachers, factory workers, must be measured and checked regularly through standardized testing–and who is making the tests, who is writing the questions that determine how we must teach students to view the world, who is controlling our guiding discourse),
-
specialization by subject (English and social science are taught as if it is they are separate disciplines; English teachers are qualified to teach only English; systems which make it difficult if not impossible for teachers from different disciplines to merge curriculum),
-
job or career orientation (whatever happened to a “well-rounded” education or an education that worked with the “whole” person),
-
efficiency (related to standards),
-
a fixation on technology to “improve” or “expedite” learning (which implies that the human mind can, in a sense, be programmed), and
-
top-down decision making.
There are more examples, of course, but the point is that until we change the metaphors which are guiding the cultural discourse of our schools, we have little hope of salvaging public education. But then, in a corporate-controlled, consumer driven culture, the schools are doing exactly what they are designed to do: create compliant, competent workers who look outside themselves for direction, validation and values. These are workers who will work overtime without compensation, who will do what they are told when they are told, who will accept the corporation’s explanations about why their health care is being cut or their vacations are being shortened.
In short, whoever controls the cultural metaphors/cultural discourse controls much of our lives, and right now we all work in factories where the human being is secondary to the curriculum and the skills being taught. This is by design. Independently-thinking humans who stand up for their rights and speak out when they are being wronged do not make “good” workers, they cannot be easily manipulated, and they will obediently substitute material consumption for a genuine experience of life.
Impact of Cultural discourse on individual
Unquestions assumptions shape education
INSTITUTIONAL DISCOURSE SHAPES THINKING AND ACTING
“Thought of the Week” for June 21, 2004
“Discourse” is a shorthand term to describe how characteristic ways of speaking develop in particular social contexts. Because schools are distinctive social contexts, it is not surprising that we can talk of school discourse. We are interested in how discourse comes to shape people’s thinking and acting and in how taken-for-granted assumptions shape our experience of what happens in schools. Because they are taken for granted, it is hard to notice how these assumptions structure relations between people and even shape the functioning of institutions. For example, behind the description of someone as “gifted,” there is a discourse about intelligence that assumes many things about what it means to be called “gifted.” (p. 53)
John Winslade & Gerald Monk. (1999). Narrative Counseling in Schools: Powerful and brief. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin.
Comment:
The impact of the cultural discourse on the individual
by Reg Harris
Copyright © 2004 by Reg Harris. All rights reserved. Updated October 7, 2007. All rights reserved. Apart from properly cited quotes and short excerpts, no part of this article can be copied or used in any form without written permission from the author. For permission to use, please contact me.
One of the key themes in narrative counseling is the impact of the “cultural discourse” on an individual’s self narrative, or how the cultural view of things influences how individuals perceive of themselves and their relationships with their worlds. At the center of discourse, whether it is cultural or individual, is a guiding myth or metaphor, or a way of seeing the world. For example, the scientific revolution of the 16th and 17th century gave us a metaphor of the “clockwork” universe, a mechanical, knowable, predictable and controllable universe.
Our narratives, both individual and cultural, are guided and shaped by the metaphors we use. No where is this more evident than in public schools, which are still laboring under the 18th century industrial revolution metaphor of the factory production line. True, we have amended this metaphor a bit, but overall, we still view school as a learning factory. Think for a moment of the adjectives and values that we associate with efficient factories, and see how closely they resemble the adjectives and values we have for schools:
outcome-orientation,
standards and a standardized curriculum (students, teachers and schools must meet specific, objective standards; certain curriculum is taught at certain times, whether or not students are ready and whether or not they have mastered previous skills; teachers in many disciplines must cover certain material in a certain time, whether or students have mastered the material),
accountability based on externally imposed criteria (both students, products, and teachers, factory workers, must be measured and checked regularly through standardized testing–and who is making the tests, who is writing the questions that determine how we must teach students to view the world, who is controlling our guiding discourse),
specialization by subject (English and social science are taught as if it is they are separate disciplines; English teachers are qualified to teach only English; systems which make it difficult if not impossible for teachers from different disciplines to merge curriculum),
job or career orientation (whatever happened to a “well-rounded” education or an education that worked with the “whole” person),
efficiency (related to standards),
a fixation on technology to “improve” or “expedite” learning (which implies that the human mind can, in a sense, be programmed), and
top-down decision making.
There are more examples, of course, but the point is that until we change the metaphors which are guiding the cultural discourse of our schools, we have little hope of salvaging public education. But then, in a corporate-controlled, consumer driven culture, the schools are doing exactly what they are designed to do: create compliant, competent workers who look outside themselves for direction, validation and values. These are workers who will work overtime without compensation, who will do what they are told when they are told, who will accept the corporation’s explanations about why their health care is being cut or their vacations are being shortened.
In short, whoever controls the cultural metaphors/cultural discourse controls much of our lives, and right now we all work in factories where the human being is secondary to the curriculum and the skills being taught. This is by design. Independently-thinking humans who stand up for their rights and speak out when they are being wronged do not make “good” workers, they cannot be easily manipulated, and they will obediently substitute material consumption for a genuine experience of life.