Quote:
|
Is it really that simple? Work harder?
|
no.
thomas friedman is a putz. consistently a putz. sometimes i think that being a putz is his job. "hey tom, what's the putz perspective on this question?" "well, dave..."
if there's a problem at the level of disposition that i saw while teaching in university, it was intellectual passivity, a culture of generalized obsequiousness, excessive deference to authority and a reward system that encourages it. i don't know how this works on the way through primary then secondary schools, but by the time kids get to 18 and are eager little college cherubs, they're really well trained in the institutionally sanctioned modes of passivity that best allow them to get over in primary and secondary schools. alot of them run into adjustment problems in college, but the same substructure of pliant passivity sits on another of adaptability (another feature of obsequiousness) and so they adapt in the main.
what's stunning in this is that kids coming out of secondary schools aren't given the tools to think independently. not really. they're given the tools required to reproduce information that already exists. the move elements around but aren't so good at thinking about what these elements are. it seemed almost systematic to me over a decade or so of teaching. i never despaired about it.
and these were smart kids in the main, too. i taught at very good schools.
i don't think the secondary system is training kids for much of anything beyond reproduction of a static order. but nothing is static. so there's a basic dysfunction at the core of how dispositions are being shaped. i blame conservatives for it---fear of independent thinking, fear of questioning, fear of dissent. but that's in fact way way too simple.
there's alot more that could be said but i gots to go.
interesting thread.
and friedman is still a putz.