Comments on: Schools of the Future

Comment by: daniela

2009-10-13T13:26:43Z

Thanks for your post Dethe.

here i did a bit of blogging alongside:

http://strangeplaces.livingcode.org/2009/10/13/if-not-schools-then-what/

daniela

Comment by: Winslow17

2009-10-19T08:11:57Z

It’s important to keep in mind that Illich was interested in much more – something much more radical – than merely replacing traditional schools with, for instance, computer-based “learning networks” – a scheme he describes that gets a great deal of attention today from the Web crowd. Nor was he calling for homeschooling – bringing traditional curricula into the home and making parents into teachers, which is the homeschooling model most prevalent today.
Rather, he was calling for a world, for an organization of tools and production and society, in which knowledge itself would be less scarce, in which there would be less need for schooling by professionals. Tools would not be of the kind, as they are today, that constantly change and evolve willy-nilly and therefore constantly demand further training of their users. (The computer industry is a prime example of this, if you think about it.) Tools would be fixable and understandable by their average users and not require highly specialized and highly capitalized repair crews. Think VW Beetle vs. today’s hi-tech Prius or BMW, whose workings nobody but a few understand well enough to work on successfully. Think typewriter vs. PC.
What’s more, these tools would be of a kind – convivial, he called them – that would be of such a scale that one person’s using them would not infringe on others’ ability or opportunity to use them. Thus, the bike proves convivial while the car is not. We cannot all have cars and drive them at high speeds, for that will cause a huge traffic jam – within a community, I mean. But everyone can use a bike and not worry about pushing anyone else off the road, and especially not others who prefer to walk. My using a bike does not push the nodes of everyday life further apart, making it impossible for people to walk between them, but the car does exactly that: With all the highways, parking lots and garages, fueling stations, repair shops, pollution (gases, used tires, oil, highway on-ramps, etc.) that nobody wishes to live near, etc., the car acts to spread the landscape apart, pushing school, home, office, park, shops, etc. further and further from each other, until neither bike nor foot is useful anymore. Exhibit No. 1: the U.S. suburbs.
Apply this model to the rest of the modern industrial toolset and you may be able to imagine a much-different world. Soon, of course, you run into questions like, Would there be trained doctors? Yes, but we might, through political choice, decide that a great deal of what they now do could be done by less-trained practitioners and at much less expense. In a society that forgoes the latest miracle transplants and computer-aided limbs and hugely expensive pills (a society that doesn’t fight death at every turn, that is), to pick a couple of easy targets, we might not need the high-cost medical system as it now exists. And let’s not forget that it is cleaner air and water, not doctors and high-technology, that have contributed most to life expectancy.
Anyway, Illich’s critique was much deeper than simply reorganizing schools. He valued schools – places where pupils may gather to learn from a teacher – greatly. He just did not think they should be institutionalized they way they are, with people having to invest in diplomas. Just as no one is allowed to ask about your religion, no employer should be permitted ask about the brand name on your credentials, either. And he urged a radical rethinking of tools, or technology, and a deep questioning of the widely-accepted idea of progress. Ultimately, he saw that scarcity of tools and knowledge defeat the notion of democracy. Only by putting limits on tools – starting with compulsory schooling, which (today, anyway – before, it was the Church) is the model for all other service industries – is it possible to make them available to more people and thereby enable more people to be happy and well-fed and so forth.
It’s also important not to forget that while those of us in the industrialized world listened keenly to Illich, he understood that those with the best chance of finding a new path along the lines he was sketching out were the so-called undeveloped nations. They had a much greater chance, he stated, to learn from the mistakes that were so obvious in the American and European model – a model that was being shoved down their throats by Peace Corps, IMF, etc. – and thereby avoid those mistakes. Alas, that moment is now vanished, as seen, perhaps most starkly, in China’s wholesale adoption of the auto at the expense of the bicycle for which it was so well known until recently.
Finally, I would urge you – especially as a computer guy – to read Illich’s book Tools for Conviviality in conjunction with Deschooling. It will make the argument I have attempted here in a much more compelling manner. Luckily, it is available here and there on the Web, in full, at no charge.

Comment by: Dethe

2009-10-19T08:36:30Z

All good points. I could easily have written a much longer post just about Illich and how he used school as a metaphor and jumping off point for discussing the wide range of our industrial and institutionalized society. I had read “Towards a History of Needs” earlier, and have Tools for Conviviality (and most of his other books) on my bookshelf in the “to read” pile. I will move that one to the top of the pile and get to it shortly.

Another interesting essay (interesting to write, anyway) would be to compare and contrast Illich and Buckminster Fuller. They had radically, almost diametrically opposed views, yet I find that each has a lot of good ideas.

I agree with you, and Illich, that there is a place for schools as “places where pupils may gather to learn from a teacher,” and a place to collectively share resources. I’m not sure that we should call them schools at that point. And I’m not arguing that what is needed is simply to reform schools or replace them with computers. I think the crux of what I’m trying to get at is that we have many expectations from schools: a place to be educated academically and as a citizen, a place for kids to be stored safely while their parents work, a place for socializing, a place for sports, a place for workshops and tools, etc., and that both these expectations and the role of schools as the primary means of addressing the expectations, are about to explode in interesting ways. The expectations themselves are being reassessed with an eye toward increasing human freedom rather than rote following of a canon, and addressing real human needs rather than Platonic ideals. Further, the means of addressing the expectations will involve community centres and other school-like, but more open, physical arrangements as well as computer-mediated learning (incl. using computer to arrange to meet teachers in person).

I find the argument for conviviality convincing, but I would include a webpage or blog as a convivial tool, even though most people cannot build or repair their own computer. Making the computers themselves more useful and usable (and user-serviceable) is also a worthy goal, but that’s another topic.

Comment by: Winslow17

2009-10-21T16:39:12Z

Re Fuller and Illich, you might want to know about this paper:

http://www.claudionaranjo.net/pdf_files/festschrift/bucky_ivan_claudio.pdf

As I recall, Illich, in Deschooling, makes some critical remarks about Fuller, or at least about the people who were inspired by him to rely heavily on technology

Yes, Tools for Conviviality is a must read, especially for anyone in computing. Also worth looking for are the Canadian radio programs, called The Corruption of Christianity, which are based on long interviews with Illich towards the end of his life. He does not address schooling, per se, but he does display an amazing range of intellect and analysis about how the modern got to where it is; and in one of the 5 programs, he explains his method of teaching, which is radically different from that found most elsewhere in the university. (Bootleg MP3s of these programs are available here – http://www.altruists.org/ivan_illich – but you didn’t hear it from me.)

On this page, you will find a large assortment, essentially complete, online-wise, of his papers and books. One, there, is specifically concerned with schools and their effects: The Educational enterprise in the Light of the Gospel
Don’t let the whiff of Christianity put you off if it’s not your thing. (It’s not mine, particularly.) Illich is not one to quote the Bible to support this arguments. In fact, he is very critical of the Church, which he sees as the (corrupted) model for the modern world of service institutions. Schooling simply inherited the Church’s role and methods. Etc. etc.

Comment by: Winslow17

2009-10-21T16:42:39Z

Ooops, I neglected to supply a certain URL in my last post. The second to last paragraf should have mentioned this quite comprehensive page of Illich papers and recordings:

http://www.davidtinapple.com/illich/

Comment by: Dethe

2009-10-21T21:08:25Z

I actually have Corruption of Christianity on CD, I enjoyed it, but haven’t finished listening yet. Now that you’ve reminded me, I may revisit them that tonight. I’m not religious, quite the opposite, but I find Illich’s attitude toward the church rather refreshing. Thank you for the links, I will explore them at some point.