tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14594755.post112670966315941982..comments2024-03-18T03:45:35.390-07:00Comments on Highered Intelligence: Values Education, Indoctrination, and MethodsMichael E. Lopezhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09099375303426465228noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14594755.post-50891799165298373772011-06-07T07:09:26.554-07:002011-06-07T07:09:26.554-07:00Cedar,
I think you're probably right about th...Cedar,<br /><br />I think you're probably right about the efficacy of explicit instruction. But as best I can tell, KIPP's methods aren't limited to simply telling the kids "Thou shalt X". It is, and I'm operating on hearsay here so I may just be wrong, a regimented, immersive experience that sort of takes over your life. <br /><br />You might compare it to a less-intense version of boot camp, which is remarkably effective at instilling certain decision-making values. DI's use explicit instruction, yes, but that's only part of the story (and the least important part); they also use various forms of coercive and manipulative social control to inculcate the various values they are trying to impart.Michael E. Lopezhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09099375303426465228noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14594755.post-1931378840255999342011-06-06T12:37:01.396-07:002011-06-06T12:37:01.396-07:00Interesting take on the matter.
First, I think par...Interesting take on the matter.<br />First, I think part of what Rachel is objecting to (and what I strongly object to) is the specific context of Yglesias' argument. No one is disagreeing that poor kids would benefit from valuing education, or believing that education will benefit them.<br />My disagreement is with two of Yglesias' points. <br />First: that this study of KIPP's effectiveness speaks to the efficacy of one aspect of their approach (the aspect that teaches bourgeois norms) rather than any of the other differences between KIPP and traditional public schools.<br />Second, that these bourgeois norms (or modes of behavior, or whatever) can be explicitly taught. <br />I think your post mostly addresses the second point. I think the educational evidence, as well as the evidence in basic psychology (my field) shows that explicit values instruction is remarkably ineffective by itself. <br />If we took the literature on academic cheating, or on organ donation, or charitable donations, or political judgments, explicit instruction on what to value would rank near the bottom. <br />When Yglesias says "They’re irresponsible, they’re impulsive. They need to be taught. They learn from their parents and their peers and their peers’ parents" this shows to me a certain view of being "taught" to be less impulsive and irresponsible. I am dubious of any class of people being better able to teach their children these things than others. And I am very skeptical that any of KIPP's effectiveness in raising reading and math scores is due to explicit instruction in this regard.<br />But glad to see you are blogging, and I am curious to see your perspective as an educational philosopher.Cedarhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13935627443458025397noreply@blogger.com