Category Archives: Education theory & research

Call for Manuscripts: “Marxism and Education: International Perspectives on Education for Revolution”

CALL FOR MANUSCRIPTS

Special Issue of Cultural Logic

http://clogic.eserver.org/

“Marxism and Education: International Perspectives on Education for Revolution”

Issue Editors: Rich Gibson & E. Wayne Ross

FOCUS OF THE SPECIAL ISSUE

The core issue of our time is the reality of the promise of perpetual war and escalating color-coded inequality met by the potential of a mass, activist, class-conscious movement to transform both daily life and the system of capitalism itself. In this context, schools in the empires of the world are the centripetal organizing points of much of life. While the claim of capitalist schooling is, in the classics, education, “leading out,” the reality is that schools are segregated illusion factories, in some cases human munition factories. Rather than leading out, they encapsulate.

Mainstream educational and social research typically ignores, disconnects, the ineluctable relationships of what is in fact capitalist schooling, class war, imperialist war, and the development of varying forms of corporate states around the world.

At issue, of course, is: What to do?

The long view, either in philosophy or social practice is revolution as things must change, and they will.

Connecting the long view to what must also be a long slog necessarily involves a careful look at existing local, national, and international conditions; working out tactics and strategies that all can understand, none taken apart from a grand strategy of equality and justice.

GUIDELINES

The editors are seeking manuscripts that explore education for revolution and are informed by Marxist perspectives. We are particularly interested in manuscripts that explore and examine:

local/regional contexts and educational activism linked to global anti-capitalist movements;
broad foundational and historical themes related to education and revolution (e.g., philosophy, social movements, community organizing, literacy, popular education, etc.); and
organizational and practitioner perspectives.

The editors are also interested in reviews of books, film, and other media related to education for revolution.

Article manuscripts should be approximately 5,000-10,000 words in length (20-40 pages), although we will consider manuscripts of varying lengths. The editors prefer that manuscripts be prepared using either APA or Chicago styles. Manuscripts should be submitted as email attachments (Microsoft Word or RTF) to the both editors: rgibson@pipeline.com and wayne.ross@ubc.ca.

Authors interested in submitting manuscripts should email manuscript title and a brief description to the editors by December 1, 2011. Final manuscripts are due April 1, 2012.

ABOUT CULTURAL LOGIC

Cultural Logic, which has been online since 1997, is a non-profit, peer-reviewed, interdisciplinary journal that publishes essays, interviews, poetry, and reviews (books, films, and other media) by writers working in the Marxist tradition.

Special report on Atlanta Public Schools cheating scandal

In the wake of the recent Atlanta Public Schools test cheating scandal, Critical Education has just published a special report examining the performance of Atlanta students on the National Assessment of Educational Progress.

The report, written by Lawrence C. Stedman, an Associate Professor in the School of Education at the State University of New York at Binghamton and an expert on historical and contemporary student achievement trends, analyzes Atlanta students’ performance on the NAEP during the 2000s to assess the contention of former Superintendent Beverly L. Hall that students made “real and dramatic” progress during her tenure.

Critical Education
Vol 2, No 9 (2011)
Table of Contents

http://m1.cust.educ.ubc.ca/journal/index.php/criticaled/issue/view/30

Special Report

——–

A Preliminary Analysis of Atlanta’s Performance on the National Assessment of Educational Progress

Lawrence C. Stedman, State University of New York at Binghamton

Abstract

The Atlanta Public Schools system has been rocked by a series of reports documenting widespread cheating on the Georgia state tests. Its reputation, and that of its leaders, has come into question. In response, former superintendent Hall asserts that, despite any cheating, the city’s students made “real and dramatic” progress during her tenure and cites the district’s trends on NAEP as part of her evidence (Hall, 2011). In this report, I analyze Atlanta’s performance on NAEP during the 2000s to assess this contention. I use diverse indicators: district trends, national comparisons, grade equivalents, and percentages of students achieving proficiency. My preliminary assessment is that Atlanta’s progress has been limited and, in many cases, slowed. In spite of a decade of effort, Atlanta’s students still lag 1-2 years behind national averages and vast percentages do not even reach NAEP’s basic level. Less than a fourth of its 4th and 8th graders achieve proficiency, a key national goal; in some subjects and grades, it is as few as a tenth. At current rates, it will take from 50 to 110 years to bring all students to proficiency. Such findings raise profound questions about current approaches to school reform, including No Child Left Behind and Race to the Top. The emphasis on targets and testing is failing and has contributed to cheating across the nation. More fundamentally, it has greatly distorted teaching and undermined authentic learning. While test tampering is a serious problem, we need to re-conceptualize what we mean by cheating. Every day, test-driven, bureaucratically controlled institutions are cheating tens of millions of students out of a genuine education. That is the real scandal.

Editors’ Note

From time to time, Critical Education will publish time sensitive and topical field reports that analyze issues challenging the existing state of affairs in society, schools, and informal education. Our first field report is Lawrence C. Stedman’s analysis of student achievement in Atlanta Public Schools subsequent to the investigation that revealed widespread cheating on state tests. In spite of the findings of the investigation that cheating was widespread, then school superintendent Beverly Hall claimed schools had made significant real progress in student achievement. Stedman’s field report investigates this claim.

Cheating scandals in schools have become almost commonplace. Campbell’s Law is often invoked as the explanation: “The more any quantitative social indicator is used for social decision-making, the more subject it will be to corruption pressures and the more apt it will be to distort and corrupt the social processes it is intended to monitor.” No Child Left Behind has led American schools down a path seeking ever higher test scores, aspirations that are unreasonable and, based on the best judgment of measurement experts, unattainable. In spite of the unreasonableness and unattainability of the goals set by distant policy makers and capitalist corporate interests, educational professionals are pulled down this path and do what they can or what they are told to do to demonstrate improvement in learning. Anyone paying attention to the ever increasing importance of standardized testing as the main means of evaluating students, schools, teachers, and principals will understand how cheating could be come widespread. Indeed, the investigation of the cheating scandal in Atlanta revealed a culture of fear, intimidation, and retaliation, which created a conspiracy of silence among educational professionals fostering deniability with respect to cheating. That teachers and administrators cheat should come as little surprise when educational policy creates unreasonable demands and then holds those educators to account through threats and intimidation. Cheating of this kind is not about trying to hoodwink any one; it is entirely about seeking to avoid the wrath of a system that will assuredly blame teachers and administrators for perceived failure to perform. It is about gaming the system, not about harming children. We should be left wondering why we have an educational system that backs educators into a corner that leaves them with little choice but to engage in actions even they find unethical.

The public is outraged by cheating, especially in its obvious forms, like in Atlanta where teachers and school administrators altered student test results by changing wrong to correct answers. Most people would agree that changing answer sheets is cheating, even if there are good explanations for why it might be done. But there are softer, maybe even acceptable forms of cheating, ones that reasonable people would argue may or may not actually be cheating. Is it cheating when schools and districts manipulate the pool of test takers by excluding groups of students? Is it cheating when teachers are exhorted to focus on students who are on the cusp of moving to ‘proficient’ at the expense of time spent with other students, either those who are failing miserably or obviously succeeding? Is it cheating when instructional time becomes intensive test preparation? Is it cheating when the subjects that are tested push out subjects that are not tested?

What counts as cheating is contextual and necessarily dependent on our perception of who or what is being cheated. When teachers and administrators change answers it isn’t students who are cheated, it is the system. (Stedman’s analysis clearly demonstrates that whether the students’ answer sheets were changed or not, NAEP results show a school system in which children are not doing very well.) The response to this sort of cheating is ever increasing surveillance and policing of test administration and scoring. Increased monitoring is less likely to prevent cheating and more likely to alienate teachers, principals, and students. Whether answers are changed or not, students are cheated by the much larger context of test driven teaching that limits what they know and can do. It is the test driven educational reforms and simplistic notions of what a good school is that cheat students out of a quality education.

CFP: Children’s Human Rights and Public Schooling in the United States

Call for Chapters/Chapter Proposals

Book: Children’s Human Rights and Public Schooling in the United States

Editor:

J. Hall, Associate Professor of Sociology

D’Youville College, Buffalo, NY USA

Under Contract with Sense Publishers

Foreword by Christine Sleeter

Book Description

This volume draws attention to serious human rights violations taking place among children in the US, and the fact that public schools are in many cases implicated in these breaches. The definition of “children’s human rights” under consideration is taken directly from the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child [CRC]. More countries have ratified the CRC than any other human rights treaty in history, with only Somalia and the United States yet to ratify this agreement. The CRC is critiqued for its Judeo-Christian bias, and like most conventions put out by the UN, it is not enforceable, and is routinely violated by ratifying nations. The refusal of the US to ratify the CRC has weakened the efforts of those who advocate for children’s human rights as a political concept, both worldwide and in the US (e.g. Ensalaco & Majka, 2005).

The premise behind the CRC is that there are significant vulnerabilities related to childhood that require a special set of protections, especially when it comes to the young from marginalized groups. As outlined in the convention, all children have the right to protection from physical and mental violence and mistreatment. It is also contended that schools be free of violence, and that school discipline be based on the dignity of the child. This volume will address the incongruence between these specific state responsibilities in the CRC and the realities of life in public schools in the US.

Clarifying ways in which US public schools are in direct violation of the high profile CRC may help draw more interdisciplinary attention to already existing work on education inequality. A coalition of those in education, government, NGOs, non-profits, human rights advocacy, law, health care, social work, child development, and those who care about preserving the public must push back against the UN P5, IMF/World Bank, and transnational policy networks (e.g. World Economic Forum, World water Forum) that protect markets instead of human rights (Goldman, 2006). This volume provides a way to enter this conversation.

Contributing chapters –- from a broad range of interdisciplinary perspectives — are sought in the following two areas, each of which are directly reflective of specific protective promises made to children in the CRC (the editor will be responsible for making particular connections to the CRC):

*Schoolchildren as Vulnerable Populations. Seeking research on the schooling experiences of US children who are impoverished, live in isolated urban/rural areas, those from culturally marginalized groups, those with transient lifestyles, those who are migrant workers, refugees, those with disability, those engaged with issues related to sexual orientation, etc.

*Violence, Punishment, and the Juvenile Justice System among Schoolchildren. Seeking research on the schooling experiences of US children who bear witness to domestic and street violence; the school to prison pipeline; the juvenile justice system; metal detectors, zero tolerance policies, searches in schools, and other forms of surveillance and criminalization; the militarization of schooling; types of punishments experienced by children in schools, etc.

Process for Chapter Proposals
Submit the following:

a) Proposed title of chapter

b) Authors, with complete addresses and 150 biography for each author

c) 300-word outline of proposed chapter, including, where applicable, theoretical, methodological, and conceptual considerations

d) To J. Hall jhalledu@yahoo.com

e) By October 1, 2011.

*final chapter requirements: times new roman 12 pt. font., APA 6^th edition, and approx. 25 pp. double-spaced, by January 1, 2012

For questions or queries, contact J. Hall at <a href=:mailto:jhalledu@yahoo.com”>jhalledu@yahoo.com</a>

CFP: The Fourth World Curriculum Studies Conference

The Fourth World Curriculum Studies Conference
Rio De Janeiro, Brazil
June 18-21, 2012

Conference website: http://www.periodicos.proped.pro.br/iviaacs/

The International Association for the Advancement of Curriculum Studies
(IAACS) is a worldwide consortium of those with an interest in the field
of curriculum studies. It is established to support a worldwide – but not
uniform – field of curriculum studies. At this historical moment and for
the foreseeable future, curriculum inquiry occurs within national borders,
often informed by governmental policies and priorities, responsive to
national situations. Curriculum study is, therefore, nationally
distinctive. The founders of the IAACS do not dream of a worldwide field
of curriculum studies mirroring the standardization and uniformity the
larger phenomenon of globalization threatens. Nor are they unaware of the
dangers of narrow nationalisms. Their hope, in establishing this
organization, is to provide support for scholarly conversations within and
across national and regional borders about the content, context, and
process of education, the organizational and intellectual center of which
is the curriculum.

The Fourth World Curriculum Studies Conference will have no official
language.

Our theme for this Conference is Questioning Curriculum Theory.
Proposal Deadline: January 31, 2012

Contacts:

E-mail: 2012IAACS@gmail.com
Twitter: @2012IAACS
Facebook: IAACS Brazil

CFP: An International Examination of Teacher Education: Exposing and Resisting the Neoliberal Agenda

The Journal of Critical Education Policy Studies
Special Issue: Spring 2012
An International Examination of Teacher Education: Exposing and Resisting the Neoliberal Agenda

Chief Editor: Professor Dave Hill, Chief/Managing Editor and Founding Editor, Professor Dave Hill, Professor Peter L. McLaren Editor, North America, Professor Pablo Gentili Editor, Latin America

Guest Editors: Dr. Brad Porfilio, Lewis University & Dr. Julie Gorlewski, SUNY at New Paltz

In recent decades, the transnational capitalist class has wielded power and influence to gain control over elements of social life that were once considered vital domains to fostering the social welfare of global citizens. Affected public domains include natural resources, health care, prisons, transportation, post-catastrophe restoration, and education. The chief linchpin in the elite’s corporatization over social affairs is its effective propaganda campaign to inculcate the global community to believe that neoliberal capitalism ameliorates rather than devastates humanity. According to political pundits, free-market academics, and corporate leaders, economic prosperity and improvements in the social world emanate from “unregulated or free markets, the withering away of the state as government’s role in regulating businesses and funding social services are either eliminated or privatized, and encouraging individuals to become self-interested entrepreneurs” (Hursh, 2011). Since neoliberalism is a term rarely uttered is most dominant (mainstream) media outlets, most citizens are not cognizant of how it is linked to many deleterious economic and social developments at today’s historical juncture, such as massive unemployment, the swelling of home foreclosures, homelessness, militarism, school closings, maldistribution of wealth, and environmental degradation (Hill, 2008; Hursh, 2011; McLaren, 2007; Ross & Gibson, 2007; Scipes, 2009). Equally important, many global citizens fail to recognize how the transitional elite have spawned a McCarthy-like witch hunt to eliminate academics, policies, and programs that have the potential to engage citizens in a critical examination of what is responsible for today’s increasingly stark social world – as well as what steps are necessary to radically transform it.

In this special issue of The Journal of Critical Education Policy Studies, we call on progressive scholars from across the globe to provide empirical research, conceptual analysis, and theoretical insights in relation to how corporate policies, practices, and imperatives are structuring life in schools of education. Since the impact of neoliberal capitalism on programs, policies, relationships, and pedagogies in schools of education is not uniform, as local histories and politics structure how macro-forces come to impact people in local contexts (Gruenwell (2003), the issue will be integral in understanding and confronting the social actors and constitute forces gutting the humanizing nature of education. Additionally, we call on critical scholars and pedagogues who have found emancipatory fissures amid corporatized schools of education to share policies, pedagogies, and cultural work that have the potency promote critical forms of education, democratic relationships, and peace, equity and social justice across the globe.

Manuscripts are due by December 1, 2011 and should be submitted as email attachments to porfilio16@aol.com and gorlewsj@newpaltz.edu.

Papers submitted for publication should be between 5,000 and 8000 words long. While we would hope that papers would be submitted in accordance with the Harvard Referencing Style, we do accept those written in any commonly accepted academic style, as long as the style is consistent throughout the paper.

Please direct all inquires about this special issue to the guest editors at Porfilio16@aol.com and gorlewsj@newpaltz.edu.

INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON CRITICAL EDUCATION—Athens, Greece (12-16 JULY 2011)

INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON CRITICAL EDUCATION
ATHENS
12-16 JULY 2011

Organized by the journals:

JOURNAL OF CRITICAL POLICY EDUCATIONAL STUDIES (UK)
CULTURAL LOGIC (USA/CANADA)
KRITIKI (GREECE)
RADICAL NOTES (INDIA)

Conference and Local Organizing Committee Coordinators:
Dave Hill, (Middlesex University, UK)
Peter McLaren, (UCLA, USA)

Program details here [pdf].

International Conference on Critical Education: Keynote Speakers and Participants
Keynote Speakers
Peter McLaren (UCLA, USA), Amrohini Sahay (Hofstra University, New York, USA), Dave Hill (Middlesex University, UK), Aristides Baltas (National Technical University of Athens), Ravi Kumar (Jamia Milia Islamia University, Delhi, India), John Preston (University of East London, England), Chrysoula Papageorgiou (Secondary education).

Confirmed Participants (as on 6th Dec 2010)
Fayaz Ahmad (JMI Central University, Delhi, India), Dennis Beach and Anna-Carin Johnsson (University of Boras, Sweden), Sarah Carpenter and Shahrzad Mojab (Ontario Institute for Studies in Education, University of Toronto, Canada), Namita Chakrabarty (University of East London, England), Domingos Leite Lima Filho (Federal Technological University of Paraná -UTFPR, Brazil), Morgan Gardner (Memorial University, Faculty of Education, Newfoundland and Labrador, Canada), Sara Hauftman (Achva Academic College of Education, Israel), Steven Hales, (University of Toronto, Ontario, Canada), Petar Jandric (Polytechnic Graduate School in Zagreb, Croatia), Nathalia Jaramillo (Purdue University, USA), Anastasia Liasidou (European University of Cyprus), Vicki Macris (University of Alberta, Canada), Alpesh Maisuria (Anglia Ruskin University, Chelmsford, England), Spyros Themelis (Middlesex University, London, England), Gabor Pallo (Academy of Sciences, Hungary), Periklis Pavlidis (Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, Greece), Peter Perikles Trifonas (Ontario Institute of Studies in Education, University of Toronto, Canada), Nosheen Rachel-Naseem (Middlesex University, London, England), Debbie Toope (Memorial University, Faculty of Education, Newfoundland and Labrador, Canada), Paul Welsh (ChristChurch Canterbury University, England), Sara Zamir (Ben-Gurion University, Eilat, Israel)

CFP: Critical Theories In the Twenty First Century: A Conference of Transformative Pedagogies

Call for Papers

Critical Theories In the Twenty First Century: A Conference of Transformative Pedagogies

West Chester University of Pennsylvania

Conference Founders:

Curry Malott, John Elmore, and Brad Porfilio

November 18th and 19th 2011

Proposals for papers, panels, performances, workshops, and other multimedia presentations should include title(s) and names and contact information for presenter(s). The deadline for sending prooposals is August 31, 2011. The Steering Committee will email acceptance or rejection notices by September 8, 2011. The proposal formats available to the presenters are as follows:

The general purpose of the West Chester Critical Theory Conference is to promote and support critical scholarship within students, and to advance critical theory and pedagogy more generally. By “advance” we mean to expose more people to critical practices and understandings as part of the process of the development of theory. Through this focus we hope to work toward unifying and strengthening the sub-genres of critical pedagogy from Marxism, critical race theory, to critical neo-colonial studies. This goal is approached through the conferences internal pedagogy and therefore through a horizontal rather than a vertical organizing structure; by including students and classroom teachers in the critical pedagogical work dominated by professors; and by attempting to create a space where criticalists who do not usually work together can create meaningful unity, respect, and common goals. Since the dominant form of power in the twenty first century—neoliberal capitalist power—is both multicultural and global, critical pedagogy must too become more multicultural and global if it is to pose a significant challenge to it for a more democratic life after capitalism.

Because critical theory is concerned with not only understanding the world, but with transforming it, the conference is focused on not only understanding the consequences of an unjust social and economic system (i.e. corporate take-over of schools, high stakes testing and behaviorist pedagogy, micro classroom aggressions and bullying, poverty, racism, sexism, white supremacy, homophobia, perpetual war, ableism, etc.), but with transforming or dissolving their root causes (i.e. neoliberal capitalism and settler-state, Euro-centric oppression and their patriarchal, homophobic, racist, etc. hegemonies). As part of this goal the conference will hopefully provide introductory discussions and presentations on critical pedagogy and critical theory.

SUBMISSIONS
Proposal Formats
Individual Proposal: (45 minutes)
The conference committee welcomes individual paper proposals, with the understanding that those accepted will be grouped together around common or overlapping themes, Presenters will have approximately 45 minutes to present or summarize their individual papers. Individual paper submissions will be considered for panels with the same topic/theme. If you would prefer to present your paper/research individually you should consider the alternative format proposal. A 300-500 word abstract of the paper will be peer reviewed for acceptance to the conference.

Symposium Proposal: (90 minutes)
Presenters are also welcomed to submit proposals for a symposium. A symposium is typically composed of a chair and discussant and three to five participants who present or summarize their papers. Each symposium is organized around a common theme. Each participant will have between 15 and 45 minutes to present their papers, depending upon the number of participants involved in the symposium. A 300-500 word abstract of the symposium will be peer reviewed for acceptance to the conference.

Panel Proposal: (90 minutes)
A panel discussion is another venue available presenters. A panel discussion is typically composed of three to six participants who discuss their scholarly work within the context of a dialogue or conversation on a topic or theme related to the conference theme. Typically, each panelist is given 10-15 minutes to discuss the topic, present theoretical ideas, and/or point to relevant research. A chair should be identified who introduces the panel and frames the issues and questions being addressed. In addition to the chair, we encourage (but do not require) organizers of panels to include a discussant who responds to the comments of the panelists. Individual proposal submissions will be combined into panels with the same theme/topic. A 300-500 word abstract of the panel discussion will be peer reviewed for acceptance to the conference.

Alternative Format and Special Interest Groups (90 minutes)
Alternative proposals that do not fit into the above categories, such as workshops, performances, video and multimedia presentations, and round-table dialogues, are encouraged. We also welcome proposals for the organization of special interest groups. A 150-250 word abstract of the panel discussion will be peer reviewed for acceptance to the conference.

Email proposals to conference coordinators Brad Porfilio (porfilio16@aol.com) and Curry Malott (currymalott@hotmail.com) by August 31, 2011.