School & Society: Ch. 8 Study Questions

1. It might be argued that James B. Conant's major educational initiatives were entirely consistent with progressive-era educational reforms and that he deepened and extended those reforms. To what degree is such a conclusion warranted by the material presented in chapters 4 and 8?

Conant advocated a pragmatic and socially-oriented approach to education. In the main, this aligns with and develops the ideals of progressivism.

2. This chapter suggests a significant connection between standardized testing in schools and what might be called cold-war ideology. What connection is being suggested - and do you believe this is a valid association to make? Explain.

As educators scrambled to combat Communism, they missed one important point, namely, that Communism is both an ideology and methodology. In their haste to stem the red ideological tide, they succumbed, at least in part, to the tempting shortcuts proffered by the use of red methodology. They couldn't trust freedom to protect itself. As Van Doren puts it so well, "Democracy when it is secure will not deny its inferiority to persons. The superiority of its persons is its only strength. To say as much is to say that democracy lives dangerously..." America had become an "insecure democracy," and an insecure democracy is no longer much of a democracy at all.

3. What are Conant's ideological and political-economic justifications for the system of tracking or ability grouping? Are these justifications consistent with what John Dewey (in Chapter 4) called the "moral meaning" of democracy, namely, that all social institutions should contribute to the "all-around growth of every member of society"? Defend your view.

The problem was largely about the varying learning rates and aptitudes among students. It bears notice that this only becomes an issue in an institutional setting - in individual or home-based education, each student is maximized without being dragged along. Conant and his colleagues were attempting to unravel this problem within the institutional context, which necessitated statistical methods such as standardized testing. Conant's approach seems a reasonable compromise between the interests of classroom and individual when considered within the flawed institutional structure.

4. To what degree does your high school experience reflect the education vision Conant expressed for the "comprehensive American high school"? Did such a school serve your educational and long-term interests well? Did it serve the interests of all students, from all social and ethnic backgrounds, equally well? Explain your position on each of these issues.

Since the question assumes an institutional background, I am unqualified to comment.

5. To what degree does the educational position argued by Van Doren constitute a criticism of vocational education as recommended by Conant? Do you consider this criticism valid? Explain.

While Van Doren's position is a noble one, he is operating from higher up in the ivory tower than Conant, who is on campus, talking to teachers, watching the action on the ground. Van Doren makes few prescriptions regarding how to actually apply his ideology in practice. This blunts his criticism, if his aim is indeed to revise the institution. I would argue that Van Doren's ideal should be pursued, but independent of the educational institution, with which it is hardly compatible.

6. Although Van Doren wrote well after the progressive revolution in American schooling, it could be argued that his educational view is significantly grounded in both Aristotelian and Jeffersonian educational ideals. Evaluate that assertion, and evaluate also the degree to which Van Doren's viewpoint is responsive to your assessment of the needs of modern society.

Van Doren favors a grassroots strategy for social success. This is basically raw Jeffersonian thinking, and perhaps even more generous, considering how Jefferson advocated a "natural aristocracy." As far as the needs of modern society are concerned, Van Doren's viewpoint is timeless, although the present institutional model makes the implementation of such ideals nigh impossible.

7. In your view, which educational thinker - Van Doren or Conant - offers an educational vision that is more likely to serve the needs of all members of a diverse society such as our own: male and female, rich and poor, European-American, Hispanic-American, African-American, Asian-American, and other groups?

If you set out to "serve the needs of all members of a diverse society" you will end up failing miserably. The quest is presented on it's head. The right approach is to set out to serve the needs of the student in front of you. In this manner, the correct methods will fall into place and the result will be a superior education for society as a whole. Both Conant and Van Doren share the same goal - indeed, we all do. Only their methods differ, and I believe Van Doren's to be the sounder one.