[iDC] A movement of unemployed teachers

[Paul Prueitt]

>

This discussion, copied below for reference, between Jaime and Brad  
underscores the failure scholars have had in framing the crisis in  
education.  One person or even groups of individuals cannot alter the  
nature of education.  It is the framing of the crisis, and framing  
this crisis in such a fashion that the old system's bad behaviors are  
not even mentioned.    We all know, IN THEORY, that the crisis is  
only deepened by challenging the status quo directly.    We must find  
a by-pass around it.



Every possible door to creating an analysis of the natures of the  
current system has been found and tightly closed.  This is the core  
nature of the system, since it is a system that has accomplished  
specific things.

1) The ability to protect itself and those whose are consistent with  
the "coherence" of the set of its systemic natures.
2) It maintains a complete coherence to a complex and yet simple  
social-economic-political phenomenon, something we call the "singular  
coherence".
3) Pretense, it pretends to teach and the students pretend to learn.

How these natures formed is seen as a type of induction, and yet  
because the language of induction exposes it natures, the concept of  
induction is part of what must be hidden.  To hid this real natural  
phenomenon the very nature of induction is misrepresented.  Induction  
is not a form of deduction. Computers are not capable of induction.

In The Education Bridge,  we develop the notion of mono-coherence,  
and contrast this with multi-coherence.  We also identify three  
principles that describe the natures of physical reality, and yet  
each of these principles are not part of any college or university  
curriculum.  These three principles are:

a) emergence
b) non-locality
c) induction

Understanding what is known about these three principles sets up a  
new type of frame within which educators may architect a new system  
of education, and at the same type heal the wounds caused by the  
current system.

The Education Bridge is a proposal to President Obama for an  
expenditure of one hundred million dollars (Phase I) over eighteen  
months, creating a bridge between high school and college.  This  
bridge will be completely independent from ownership or control from  
"private interests", such as corporation or existing school boards or  
colleges or universities.  The mechanism that are involved in the  
induction of a set of self serving natures will be separated from  
mechanisms that aid the individual human being in learning.

The Bridge is to be a 100% monitored dedicated immersive Virtual  
World system.  There will be a staff and governing board consisting  
of public servants, whose job and performance is to be measured based  
on outcome metrics.  However, these metrics will be created using a  
balance between the supply of curriculum and the aggregated demand of  
"all" sixteen, seventeen or eighteen year old American citizens.

The Bridge will also serve as a the first complete manifestation of  
citizen centric e-governance.

The definition of "demand pedagogy" and the reasons why the Bridge is  
designed in a specific fashion are given in The Education Bridge pdf:

www.educationWorlds.com/bridge.pdf

Given an interest in talking about this new vision, we are prepared  
to engage in this discussion.  Given grieving about the current  
system, we will remain silent.  While compassion is felt towards the  
many that are injured by our educational system, we see that grieving  
reinforces the very mechanisms through which that system protects  
itself.

The future is bright.




On Sun, 6 Jun 2010, Jaime Magiera wrote:


> I understand people are frustrated with academia right
> now. However, it's a cyclical thing. I don't think the
> mental purse-strings are being tightened forever more. If
> the system was an absolute failure, it would not have
> provided an avenue for Ricardo or anyone else with radical
> notions in the first place.
>

Right now?? I would describe academia ('tertiary education')
as a patently absurd, increasingly restrictive, exclusive,
downward, whorled societal pandemic...  (close-knit
collegial-colleagues perpetuate the professorial-ponzi:
maybe this is why lately,) I've continued to be denied
academic employment -- going on 25+ years! and have had to
scramble independently for knowledge, real-world connections
and practical/radical ideas that I was obviously mostly
missing while wasting time garnering worse than worthless
degrees.


> Giving up on academia is a bad idea -- particularly if we
> don't have systems to pick up the slack. Our future as a
> society, as a world, depends on literacy, the ability to
> reason and the ability to work with others. Academia
> provides that at various levels. Instead of dropping out
> of education, we should be dropping in. Building
> alternatives to social media and education are good -- but
> their usefulness is determined not necessarily by how many
> outside people utilize them, but how many "ordinary"
> citizens use them. If we abandon education and social
> media, we're left with alternatives that preach to the
> choir. We need the radical thought to be integrated into
> mainstream avenues. Otherwise, those who don't have a clue
> will never get one. The educational track, which middle to
> upper class citizens follow by default, will be devoid of
> any radical elements. No new people will get turned on to
> new ideas.
>

One of the many problems with academia (again, tertiary
education) is that it inevitably erects - exclusive, mostly
monetary - walls around its domain and then proclaims any
imported influence or even natural societal/cultural
undergraduate development as somehow a unique result of its
validated provenance. (You can now plaster those university
decals on your rear automobile window, and gain access to
nearly identical corporate ponzi schemes.) As if this
couldn't possible happen anywhere else. It surely does(!)
and more 'radically' and effusively than any
academia-prospectus could ever pretend to proffer.

As-to social-media: I tried that route and my 5000-friend FB
account was just disabled due to an anonymous complaint
about a depicted nipple in one of my photo-galleries! Of
course the corporation never responds to its friends or even
shareholders, but I suspect the objection was really over my
new "profile portrait museum." You can see the newly minted
project here:  http://cart.iabrace.com


> Brad, you and I had a conversation about the benefits of
> honey vs. vinegar, dropping in vs. dropping out over 10
> years ago on the Rumori list. I think that is still
> apropos.
>

Jaime, yes I remember our exchanges, but I'm (obviously) not
comfortable saying one thing in the hopes of actually,
eventually-maybe-or-probably-never, doing something else.


> Jaime Magiera






-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.thing.net/pipermail/idc/attachments/20100617/75c9e03b/attachment.html