[NLA] Science & Ideology at the USDE

[George E. Demetrion]

Colleagues:

Yesterday the US Dept. of Education Published a draft version of its
Strategic Plan 2002-2007 ( www.ed.gov) which consists of 6 goal. The 
Goal  on Postsecondary and Adult Education (5) includes modest support
for adult literacy.  For the purposes of this message, I concentrate on
Goal Four:  Transform Education Into an Evidence-Based Field (pp. 48-52,
but then offer brief commentary on other aspects of the plan.. 

 The following are the first three sentences that open up this section of
the plan:

"Unlike medicine, agriculture, and industrial production, the field of
education operates largely on the basis of ideology and professional
consensus.  As such, it is subject to fads and is incapable of cumulative
progress that follows from the application of the scientific method and
from the systematic collection and use of objective information in policy
making" (p. 48).

The first sentence contains several assumptions that are far from
evidence-based.  First, it's interesting that the author(s) would link
"good" research on education favorably with medicine as in curing the
disease of illiteracy; agriculture as in planting seeds of knowledge into
the fertile minds of students, and industrial production as in preparing
human resource capital for the workforce of tomorrow.  Secondly, the
assumption is that since these applied research areas are based on the
discipline of the hard sciences, so should the field of education since
they all focus on the need for technical proficiency.  Anything beyond
that, say in the realm of values or culture is merely a form of the
bogeyman ideology or reduced to that of an educational fad. The Plan
provides no hard evidence that this has been the case, simply that it is
so and you, the discerning reading public are expected to believe it, or
at the least, the inevitability of the department's transformative reform
initiative and are not to make a lot of waves about it.

 I think it's important to reiterate that what is stated is merely an
assertion as there is no discussion of the vast array of educational
scholarship which has characterized the field of educational studies at
all levels for the past century.   Thus 100 years of educational
scholarship is swept aside in three short evidence-less sentences that is
intended to put a neo conservative ideology of truth in place.  Unless
educational scholarship is based on the scientific method as defined by
the USDE, it is mere ideology and needs to be swept away by the new
transformation into an evidence-based field.

What's interesting as well is the peer review process the Department
proposes to set up for projects that articulate "clear standards."  The
USDE will "enlist...(get the military metaphor?) only those qualified
scientists who have high levels of methodological and substantive
expertise pertinent to the projects being reviewed" (p. 49). Thus, though
the field is education and there are more than a profusion of educational
scholars upon whom the USDE could draw, it's going to depend on
"scientists" to assure methodological rigor.  That is, since the
educational professionals are prone to ideology and fads, they need to be
supervised  by those who are better in the know, the hard research
scientists based on standards "applied by the most respected research
journals and scientific research agencies" (p. 49).  

The document then refers once again to "an independent panel of qualified
scientists" as well as the funding of projects "that employ randomized
experimental design" (p. 50), presumably as a research methodology of
higher validity than say, in-depth case study analysis or (God forbid)
theoretical-based critical analysis that provides prisms through which to
examine and interpret the "data."

The document points to "external factors" that might stand in the way of
this great transformation:

"The department's ability to set research priorities to revamp its peer
review process, and demand greater quality and rigor from grantees is
limited by the statues authorizing the Office of Educational Research and
Improvement and the Office of Special Education and Rehabilitative
Services.  We need support from Congress and reauthorized laws to make
sweeping changes needed" (p. 49)

It's interesting that the document opens up with the quote from GWB that
"In this great land called America, no child will be left behind" (p. 2).
 First, In a document eschewing ideology and basing itself on the
objective evidence of the scientific methodology, one wonders why the
document would open up with an ideological statement. Some might refer to
this as a manifestation of "false consciousness" or a reflection of the
"hidden curriculum" of the USDE, terms that can no longer be used because
they are ideologically grounded.  Second, whether in fact, no child will
be left behind is an empirical question to be determined.  The facts will
speak for themselves, except for how they might be spinned.

Then we go to Strategic Goal 3, which includes a focus on building
"strong character."  Character?  How can character be defined through the
prism of an objectively based scientific methodology?  Have we not
entered the realm of values here, and if so, that of ideology?  Also,
depending upon how one defines character education, this might even enter
into the realm of a fad.  Note, too on the opening page of Strategic Goal
3 (p. 42), the American flag is planted in the middle.  One is beginning
to wonder if ideology is not parading as science here in the patriotic
embrace of science, capitalism, phonics as the American way of life.

Then there is the objective (3.1) that I support of promoting tobacco
free schools.  Yet, to be consistent on this, the Bush administration
might encourage Congress to eliminate federal subsidies and tax breaks
for the tobacco industry, work toward preventing the export of US
cigarettes, and even, perhaps, to work for the gradual abolition of
tobacco products say 25 years out, given ample time for the tobacco
industry to further diversify.  To the extent that the Bush
administration does not take on this reform agenda and to the extent that
it is a friend of the tobacco industry, might not this call for
tobacco-free schools be viewed as a manifestation of false consciousness
or of a hidden curriculum.  One might argue thusly, except to do so would
be a form of ideological faddism and therefore needs to be eradicated in
the great transformation.

As stated, in #3, there is a strong emphasis on "patriotism,"
"traditional American history," and "the teaching of American ideals and
democratic principles."  It's not that I'm against all this, far from it.
I even have a curriculum coming out on the US Constitution which places
Madison in a central and highly favorable (though not uncritical light). 
Yet, in a document favoring science over ideology, one wonders what role
such Americanization plays in the USDE's hidden curriculum, except, of
course, we can no longer talk about the hidden curriculum because it is
an exemplification of ideology.

Finally, for the purposes of this post, there is in Strategic Goal 5,
brief mention of support for adult literacy in which the "Department will
invest in rigorous [that word comes up a lot, you might think it's a
symbol or metaphor, or a code word] research on adult reading strategies,
English language acquisition, and learning disabilities" (p. 66). 
There's no mention here of EFF, though the document talks about the
collaboration between NIFL and the National Institute of Child Health and
Human development (NICHD).  

What is not talked about is any collaboration between NIFL and NCSALL,
even though the Harvard-based agency is the one that received the OERI
grant to conduct federally-supported research for the field of adult
literacy, ESOL & life long learning.  One wonders why the USDE is
supporting the collaboration with the agency focusing on children instead
of adults.  Would that be because the NICHD is more research-oriented
based upon the favored methodologies of the Department or are there even
more insistent ideological factors at work?  Inquiring minds very much
want to know, though such questions are beyond the purview of the
research focus of the great transformation.

George Demetrion
Public Intellectual
Speaking for self, only
(it's sad that I feel the need even to say this)

________________________________________________________________
GET INTERNET ACCESS FROM JUNO!
Juno offers FREE or PREMIUM Internet access for less!
Join Juno today!  For your FREE software, visit:
http://dl.www.juno.com/get/web/.
_______________________________________________
NLA mailing list: NLA at lists.literacytent.org
http://lists.literacytent.org/mailman/listinfo/nla
LiteracyTent: web hosting, news, community and goodies for literacy
http://literacytent.org