tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9539359.post110874919889096908..comments2023-10-24T10:06:05.391-05:00Comments on Instructivist: NCATE story catches fireInstructivisthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01652458042291988959noreply@blogger.comBlogger5125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9539359.post-1117648856325843462005-06-01T13:00:00.000-05:002005-06-01T13:00:00.000-05:00Dispositions at work:http://www.nysun.com/article/...Dispositions at work:<BR/>http://www.nysun.com/article/14604Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9539359.post-1108954558347825322005-02-20T20:55:00.000-06:002005-02-20T20:55:00.000-06:00"Social justice" is not some harmless thing.
See ..."Social justice" is not some harmless thing.<br /><br />See here: http://discoverthenetwork.org/viewGroups.asp?catId=12Instructivisthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01652458042291988959noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9539359.post-1108766853999953922005-02-18T16:47:00.000-06:002005-02-18T16:47:00.000-06:00I fully agree that NCATE should discourage ideolog...I fully agree that NCATE should discourage ideological litmus tests in certification programs.<br /><br />The issue just doesn't get under my skin too much. I see several example dispositions and a demonstration statement that anyone would find acceptable...and then that one phrase, "social justice." I must have been fortunate in my career to date, but I not seen social justice employed as an ideological cudgel. If I had to pick an objection, it would be to question the utility of applying criteria whose assessment is inherently subjective, regardless of any ideological freighting. <br /><br />Yet, it seems to me that technical competence is not enough. There should be some professional ethical standard guiding us in our vocation. A committment to challenging standards and teaching all students well strikes me as mandatory. To me, that's social justice. If others would apply it as something closer to critical pedagogy, then I would part company.<br /><br />It would be ironic if FedEd objected to "social justice" as one of the primary justifications for NCLB is that civil rights is a federal issue with NCLB being a social justice policy instrument.<br /><br />I enjoy your blog very much. Always thoughtful and often provocative.Stileshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16029062337353099616noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9539359.post-1108762026943201022005-02-18T15:27:00.000-06:002005-02-18T15:27:00.000-06:00"Is the problem really NCATE, which is only trying..."Is the problem really NCATE, which is only trying to advance the expectation that ed schools assess their stated objectives? Or should the scrutiny fall on institutions that have dispositions criteria that are essentially ideological litmus tests?"<br /><br />Your argument has surface plausibility but I think misses a key point.<br /><br />NCATE as an accrediting agency is in the business of telling ed schools what to do. One thing it should definitely tell ed schools is that an ideological litmus test is forbidden.<br /><br />Instead, NCATE and the interlocking organizational ed complex keeps dangling the "social justice" lure in front of the schools' noses. Hint, hint: don't forget "social justice".<br /><br />"Social justice" is a highly charged ideological code word and has no business being a criterion for teacher competence.Instructivisthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01652458042291988959noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9539359.post-1108761190995412882005-02-18T15:13:00.000-06:002005-02-18T15:13:00.000-06:00Isn't the correspondent stretching the meaning of ...Isn't the correspondent stretching the meaning of "definition" quite a bit? I look at the NCATE unit standards and the glossary definition is <br /><br />"Dispositions. The values, commitments, and professional ethics that influence behaviors toward students, families,<br />colleagues, and communities and affect student learning, motivation, and development as well as the educator’s own<br />professional growth. Dispositions are guided by beliefs and attitudes related to values such as caring, fairness, honesty,<br />responsibility, and social justice. For example, they might include a belief that all students can learn, a vision of<br />high and challenging standards, or a commitment to a safe and supportive learning environment."<br /><br />Yes, the term social justice is included. But who would object to the example statement provided?<br /><br />As I read the assessment document, NCATE is stating the obvious. If a department has identified a program criteria, it should be prepared to assess it. It doesn't read to me as an recommendation to have a litmus test. <br /><br />Is the problem really NCATE, which is only trying to advance the expectation that ed schools assess their stated objectives? Or should the scrutiny fall on institutions that have dispositions criteria that are essentially ideological litmus tests?Stileshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16029062337353099616noreply@blogger.com