Book Review Section 1

Educational Studies

ISSN: 0013-1946 (Print) 1532-6993 (Online) Journal homepage: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/heds20

Book Review Section 1 AMY GRATCH , DOUGLAS W. DOYLE , MAX A. ECKSTEIN , QUIRICO S. SAMONTE , MIGUEL DE LOS SANTOS , V. JANE MILLAR , TINA McREE , NORMA JACKSON , PETER JACKSON , D. G. MULCAHY , ANNE MEIS KNUPFER & E. WAYNE ROSS To cite this article: AMY GRATCH , DOUGLAS W. DOYLE , MAX A. ECKSTEIN , QUIRICO S. SAMONTE , MIGUEL DE LOS SANTOS , V. JANE MILLAR , TINA McREE , NORMA JACKSON , PETER JACKSON , D. G. MULCAHY , ANNE MEIS KNUPFER & E. WAYNE ROSS (1999) Book Review Section 1, Educational Studies, 30:1, 19-69, DOI: 10.1207/s15326993es3001_3 To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1207/s15326993es3001_3

Published online: 17 Sep 2010.

Submit your article to this journal

Article views: 18

View related articles

Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=heds20 Download by: [The University of British Columbia]

Date: 10 May 2016, At: 13:42

64

BOOK REVIEWS

or sociological complexity of Dewey's ideas and practices. While critical of contemporary school practices, she is largely uncritical of Dewey and the laboratory school. Despite these shortcomings, Dewey's Laboratory School is an exciting book and one that should be read by all concerned with educational reform today.

Downloaded by [The University of British Columbia] at 13:42 10 May 2016

Notes 1. This term is taken from Robyn Muncy, Creating A Female Dominion in American Reform, 1890-1935 (New York: Oxford University Press, 1991). 2. Elizabeth Ewen, "City Lights: Immigrant Women and the Rise of the Movies," Signs, 5 (Spring 1980): S45-S65. See also Stuart Ewen and Elizabeth Ewen, Channels of Desire. Mass Images and the Shaping of American Consciousness (New York: McGrawHill Book Company, 1982); Lizabeth Cohen, Making A New Deal. Industrial Workers in Chicago, 1919-1930 (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1990).

Perspective on Democracy and Education Making Progress: Education and Culture in New Times. Dennis Carlson. New York: Teachers College Press, 1997. Pp. xi, 156.

E . WAYNE ROSS State University of New York at Binghamton In his recent book, Achieving Our Country, Richard Rorty (1998) describes the supreme achievement of John Dewey's philosophy as conceptualizing "truth"not in a relation to some antecedently existing thing-but as an expression of "satisfaction at having found a solution to a problem: a problem which may someday seem obsolete, and a satisfaction which may someday seem misplaced" (28). Rorty argues that this treatment of truth changes our account of progress. "Instead of seeing progress as a matter of getting closer to something specifiable in advance, we see it as a matter of solving more problems" (28). A Deweyan notion of progress then is measured not by increased proximity to a specified goal, but by the extent to which we have made ourselves better than we were in the past. Dennis Carlson's Making Progress: Education and Culture in New Times embodies this Deweyan notion of progress in an attempt to construct a discourse of democratic progressive educational policy and practice. Carlson believes that one of the most effective ways to "make progress" as individuals and a society is to

EDUCATIONAL STUDIES

65


stay open to possibilities. "Rather than construct grand plans in which every step is neatly predetermined and the outcome is clear and fixed, it is best to take one step at a time" (vii). Carlson aims to advance the project of democratic progressive educational policy and practice by articulating responses to an unsettled time, in which established beliefs and practices are being questioned as never before, in which marginalized groups are no longer accepting their marginalized status, and in which calls by those on the political right to return order and discipline to society, and to roll back the gains made by workers, women, African Americans and Hispanics, gays and lesbians, and others have a strong appeal. (ix)

In an effort to accomplish this goal, each chapter examines an aspect of current practice in public education, such as tracking, multicultural education, gayness and sexuality education, and postcolonial education. Of the seven chapters, four have previously appeared in print in some modified form. The first two chapters establish the conceptual foundation for the balance of the book. In Chapter 1, "Progress, Progressivism, and Postmodernism in Education," Carlson explores the notion of progress as a modernist construct inextricably linked to the belief that reason and scientific method will lead us to the "good society." Carlson argues that the modernist idea of progress has not always, or even primarily, served democratic interests, which prompts the question of "whose vision of progress will prevail as we enter into an uncharted new century?" (5). Mainstream educators have, for the most part, stopped referring to themselves as progressives because of the "stigma" associated with the term. Carlson chooses, however, to describe mainstream reform discourses as "progressive" since they are "oriented toward finding ever more effective methods of increasing student achievement levels and linking education to the reconstruction of society according to particular visions of the 'good society' " (5). This allows him to highlight the fact that contemporary reform discourses (driven by "economic," "disciplinary," and "process" progressivism) remain organized around the same basic stories of progress-stories that contribute to the construction of social inequities and that privilege some voices while silencing others. Democratic progressivism is offered as the alternative conception. This conception of progressivism integrates a number of diverse perspectives and traditions, most notably the democratic pragmatism of John Dewey and social reconstructionism. Carlson's strategy here, as in each of the following chapters, is to lay out currents of thought in broad strokes, expose their limitations, then mark the first few yards of a trail that readers might follow on a journey of democratic progressive school reform in postmodern times. Democratic pragmatism reminds us that progress must be built one step at a time, while social reconstructionism reminds us that we must not lose sight

BOOK REVIEWS


of our vision. Democratic pragmatism reminds us that through dialogue we can become more "reasonable" and better able to appreciate the perspectives of others, and social reconstructionism reminds us that dialogue alone cannot build a democratic society and that there is a time to "take sides." (18)

In interweaving and articulating these two traditions Carlson acknowledges the tensions between them and suggests that a new democratic progressive discourse might be able to overcome problems that limited the influence of democratic pragmatism and social reconstructionism in the twentieth century. "If democratic pragmatism has too often lost sight of its vision by emphasizing pragmatic reformism, social reconstructionism too often has failed to develop a pragmatic politics and tended to get bogged down in critique" (17). Carlson's "politics of cautious hope" is grounded in Freire's admonition that we must avoid both the illusion of an ideal that ascribes too much power to education and the mechanistic objectivism that denies any value to education until after there is a revolution (Freire 1970). In Chapter 2, "Public Education in Changing Times," Carlson explores the implications of three different strands of postmodern theory for the formulation of a democratic progressive discourse on educational reform. The first of these includes theorists of the "new social movements" who emphasize the growing importance of relatively autonomous social movements of identity and lifestyle. These movements can be found across the political spectrum and represent the empowerment and civil rights agendas of groups marginalized by racial, gender, sexual, and other identities (Laclau and Mouffe 1985; Melucci 1989; Touraine 1988). Some social movement theorists argue that a primary role of the democratic, postmodern state should be to provide space for various social movements to organize and represent their interests and concerns directly and to participate in negotiating state policy with other interest groups. Carlson is intrigued by the idea of making public policy more open and broadly representative, breaking free of the centralized, bureaucratic decision-making associated with progressivism in the twentieth century. Creation of public space for policy debates would allow for dialogue across difference on issues of educational policy, something that is quite foreign in an age of standards-based reforms.' New social movement theorists move politics and policy beyond a narrow focus on class, however, Carlson is quick to note that many of these theorists "fail to see the close connections between class oppression and race and gender oppression" (24). Carlson is interested in tapping a variety of postmodern theorists in constructing a democratic progressive discourse in education, but is reluctant to deemphasize the interests of the economically disenfranchised. [Not] all progressive struggles are of equal significance in defining a given situation or in challenging given structures of domination. It is clear that economic forces and class struggles are deeply implicated in the construction of

EDUCATIONAL STUDIES


inequality. At the same time, struggles organized around gender, race, and sexuality are also central to understanding current cultural dynamics. (39)

Drawing on "New Times" theorists, such as Stanley Hall and Martin Jacques (1990), Carlson attempts to balance the shortcomings of identity politics as represented in new social movement theory. The expansion of leftist politics by "new times" theorists to embrace social movements of race, gender, sexuality, and environmentalism allows connections to be made between postmodernism in culture and the structural and material transformations occurring in capitalism (e.g., postfordism). Carlson analyzes three clusters of post-fordist changes in education: (a) new organizational and management styles (e.g., devolution of responsibility as in sitebased management); (b) new consumerism (e.g., choice plans such as vouchers and charter schools); and (c) restructuring of the labor force and education into two tiers. Carlson illustrates how these changes create a new playing field in which the old left and right power blocs have to reposition themselves. The upshot of post-fordist analyses is that democratic progressive education discourse must incorporate the broader issues of restructuring work around high-quality jobs. The final strand of postmodern discourse explored in this chapter is the work of Foucault. Carlson's concern is limited to Foucault's analysis of "normalization," and the use of the examination as one of the primary instruments of disciplinary power. Rather than focus this analysis on mandated high-stakes testing, Carlson uses the turn toward "authentic" assessment to illustrate how the normalizing regimes of public education are becoming more pastoral, individualizing, and totalizing (Foucault 1970). It is clear that postmodern democratic progressivism in education as conceptualized in these opening chapters has to contend with a variety of tensions, ambiguities, and contradictions, which Carlson admits may not be fully resolvable. As a result of these tensions, democratic progressive discourse in education "must always be in the process of being 'made' through an inclusive dialogue on the meaning of progress" (39). In the next five chapters Carlson begins to fashion this dialogue by examining issues of tracking, multicultural education, sexuality education, gayness, and postcolonial education. In each chapter-except the last, which is primarily apersonal narrative-Carlson teases out the tensions and contradictions among currently dominant reform discourses and poses questions intended to evoke a persuasive new discourse that is consistent with the changing times we live in. These chapters are successful for the most part. The discussion of tracking explores how "new vocationalism" and magnet schools lead to re-tracking, and offers the provocative conclusion that de-tracking in not necessarily an unbridled good. Carlson's analysis of multicultural education employs a neo-Gramscian framework to illustrate


68

BOOK REVIEWS

the ways in which multicultural education has been institutionalized on the margins of the curriculum and the treatment of identity has been essentialized, thus limiting the potential of multicultural education to empower students. Two chapters address the battles being waged over sexuality education in U.S. schools. The first of these examines the cultural politics of sexuality educationthe intersection of various cultural theories of sexuality, interest groups, and politics. Carlson argues that elements of libertarianism (with its emphasis on individual rights) and "postconventional" theory, which explicitly links sexuality to culture and power relations, need to be blended in a democratic progressive response to issues of sexuality education. The following chapter focuses on how the oppression and marginalization of gays and lesbians in public education can be challenged through a reconstruction of community that is guided by a moral vision grounded in critical and feminist pedagogies. The closing chapter includes two personal narratives around the theme of colonial and postcolonial education, making it rather anomalous. The stories-one of life in a Navajo boarding school in the late 1960s and the other of an inner-city middle school in the 1990s-are about how education disempowers colonial Others, yet incipient postcolonial discourses and practice can be found. Carlson urges a postcolonial education that involves more than critique and resistance of colonialism. "Postcolonial education implies a particular form of multicultural education, involving a shift away from seeing racial or cultural identities as separable and distinct categories of difference and toward seeing them as interrelated and informed by one another" (135). A strength of this volume is its concise treatment of a variety of reform issues under the unifying theme of democratic progressivism. The other side of this, however, is a book that floats above the surface of progressive, grassroots, democratic reform efforts in education. Little is said about concrete efforts to build effective coalitions to promote progressive democratic reforms in schools. As I read Carlson's account of Foucault's argument for democratic projects advanced through individual and collective "refusals" of the power of state agencies to normalize us, I was reminded of the current resistance to state mandated tests in Michigan (Gipson 1998). Many people are actively engaged at the grassroots in reshaping educational policy and practice in terms consistent with the brand of democratic progressivism described in Making Progress, such as The Whole Schooling Consortium in Wisconsin and Michigan (Peterson, Beloin and Gipson). Concrete examples of this kind would have been a useful addition to the book. The project of democratic progressivism in education is to create a dialogue in which all voices are heard and all truths are understood as partial and positioned. The objective of this discourse is not to achieve a consensus on a single depiction of reality, "but rather to clarify differences and agreements, work toward coalition building across difference when possible, and build relationships based on caring and equity" (1 18). Making Progress effectively repositions the dominant school

EDUCATIONALSTUDIES

69

reform discourses in light of democratic progressivism in ways that are sometimes surprising, always accessible, and consistently challenging to the status quo.


Note 1. Standards-based curriculum reforms and the high-stakes tests that accompany them serve to undermine democracy by creating one-size-fits-all reforms conceptualized by policy elites. See for example, Ross, E. Wayne. "Diverting Democracy: The Curriculum Standards Movement And Social Studies Education," International Journal of Social Education, 11 (Spring 1996): 18-39; and Ross, E. Wayne, "Redrawing the Lines: The Case Against Traditional Social Studies Instruction." In Democratic Social Education, edited by David W. Hursh and E. Wayne Ross. Mahwah, NJ: Garland, in press.

References Foucault, Michele. 1970. Discipline and Punish: The Birth of the Prison. New York: Vintage. Freire, Paulo. 1970. Pedagogy of Hope: Reliving Pedagogy of the Oppressed. New York: Continuum. Gibson, Rich. 1998. "The Impact of Race, Class, and Nationality on the Michigan Social Studies Exam," paper presented at the College and University Faculty Assembly of National Council for the Social Studies annual meeting, Anaheim, November 18. Hall, Stanley and Jacques, Martin. 1990. New Times: The Changing Face of Politics in the 1990s. New York: Verso. Laclau, E. and Mouffe, C. 1985. Hegemony and Socialist Strategy. London: Verso. Melucci, A. 1989. Nomads of the Present: Social Movements and Individual Needs in Contemporary Society. Philadelphia: Temple University Press. Peterson, Michael, Kim Beloin, and Rich Gibson, Whole Schooling: Education for a Democratic Society. Available on-line: http://www.uwsp.edu/acad/educ/specprojlwsc/). Rorty, Richard (1998). Achieving Our Country: Leftist Thought in Twentieth-Century America. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Touraine, S. 1988. The Return of the Actor. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.

Classroom Discipline in American Schools: Problems and Possibilities for Democratic Education. Ronald E. Butchart and Barbara McEwan, Editors. Albany, NY: State University of New York Press, 1998, Pp. 287.

JAN PRICE GREENOUGH University of California, Berkeley In this aptly named book, Butchart and McEwan reopen the dialogue surrounding classroom management and discipline in an interesting and provocative manner. In his introduction, Prof. Butchart cites three goals for the book: to restore a