Newsgroups: bit.listserv.edpolyan
Date:         Wed, 6 Jan 1993 14:22:04 CST
              <EDPOLYAN@ASUACAD.BITNET>
From:         stan kulikowski ii <STANKULI@UWF.BITNET>
Subject:      re: classic education books

>>  From:  Bob Stonehill  Director, ERIC Program    <RSN@NIHCU.BITNET>

>>
>>  The ERIC program is considering trying to assemble some lists--
>>  arranged by thematic area--of the indispensable, classic
>>  education books.  These would be the books that, at least in the
>>  judgment of eminent educators, any education student would
>>  absolutely have to be familiar with.
>>

  well, this list will be remarkably short.

  i have long asserted that education is presently an undisciplined area
of scholarship.  by that, i mean there are no principles which constrain
practice that all teachers will adhere to.

  any statement with complete teacher agreement is so general that it will
either (1) contain all possible practices, or (2)  exclude only obviously
unreasonable procedures.  an example of (1) might be "classrooms should
have proper lighting and ventilation" and of (2) "the electric cattle prod
is not a proper instructional tool for most elementary students".

  you might be successful in getting most professional teachers to agree
on contemporary policies, like the role of corporal punishment or positive
self concept, but these will not be universal nor hardly more than
platitudes when it comes to implementation.  our recent discussions here
with the spiritualists ought to demonstrate that very adequately.


>>
>>  1.  Is this activity worth doing?
>>  2.  Are you familiar with such lists that have already been
>>      developed?
>>  3.  Is it possible to reach agreement on who the most eminent
>>      scholars in a given education field are, so they could be polled
>>      as to their nominations for such reading lists?
>>

  as stated, i doubt the activity is worthwhile.  perhaps downsizing to
something like a list of books with which education students might find
helpful (rather than absolutely necessary).  this will allow in the mostly
inspirational literature on educational practice, and perhaps some of the
older technical material (like thorndike's _teachers' word book_ or
bloom's _taxonomy of educational objectives_).  but there will be nothing
that is universally used or even accepted by all teachers.

  i have asked around today of some knowledgeable faculty in our teaching
college, and no one can suggest the name of anyone they would accept to be
an 'eminent educator' or even as an 'authority in the field of education'.
there are plenty of people who have published long resumes full of
peer-reviewed material, but the general consensus is that it is all pretty
much useless stuff, created for academic or self promotion.  we learn
teaching like an apprentice, mostly copying the practices we saw in
schools as children.  anyone who says otherwise is trying to sell you
something.

  we are living in educational dark age by which even the 12th century
looks bright.
             stan

    .                  stankuli@UWF.bitnet
   ===
         when a thraskin puts fingers in its ears, it is polite to shout
   ---                                          -- old venusian proverb
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU