Where did people get the idea that schooling was neutral anyways?
On my newsletter, I succinctly suggest that schooling was never neutral. In recent times, I wrote about English Language Arts and all that comes with the term “literacy.” I wrote about Math because I do this. What’s the idea behind this writing? Simple. We can’t talk about schooling without dissecting the ways we operate in it. Our policies and practices are written in thinly veiled language that suggests impartiality.
We keep using words like “achievement gap,” “equity,” and “growth mindset” to put the onus on the people on the ground level doing the most work (students, teachers, parents) and not on the system upon which the schools sits. At some point, if the results of the game never change, we have to critically analyze the game. We can talk about the players, the referees, the coaches, and the managers. But after all that’s done, we may want to ask how the game gets played, what we’re using to play it, and whether we need to play a new game entirely.
Also, this was my way of saying I’ve been busy writing. I hope you’ll join me wherever you can:
Schooling is not and never was neutral. There is no subject, policy, or pedagogy that’s absent from the whims and conscience of the humans enacting it. We do our best to stay objective but even objectivity is not neutral. We have lots of work to do in and out of the classroom. Let’s get to work on creating just, caring schools.
Thanks for following my work. We got this.