Fish also makes some bad points.
Because my 'theme' for the semester centers around debate and systems of oppression like whiteness, the biggest points/arguments throughout "Save the World on Your Own Time", I wholeheartedly disagree with. Take for example page 29 - if Fish's model were implemented universally, there would not be debates about segregation in the 1950's because it is a political issue. Fish says that political issues should stay out the classroom because things that are mired with ideology, that are then 'taught' my educators are co-opting the space provided to them to use as a soapbox.
I take issue with this because it means classrooms would never provide the critical thinking skills necessary to question assumptions, authority and power. Critical thinking skills are the single most important thing we can take from school. Introducing students to bodies of knowledge and providing them with analytical skills to perform well in their decided disciplines is important - but if an education's purpose is not to create a "sustained influence on the way someone feels, acts or thinks" (Bain, 2014), Fish's pedagogical philosophies are woefully inadequate. They are not only inaccessible to certain populations (most POC), but also makes it difficult for students to provide contributions to their field.
So, global warming is probably gonna kill us all.
Face it, we're passed the tipping point, all CO2 emissions around the globe could stop TODAY and we MIGHT prevent the worst parts of it. BUT because there is conflicting evidence concerning whether or not climate change is actually 1) making the earth warm vs cool, 2) whether warming is anthropogenic vs natural and 3) whether CO2 emissions are the cause - this debate has become ideological and political. 97% of scientists are in agreement - global warming is real, the implications are disastrous, and humans are the cause of it. Because the debate has become political, does that mean we would never discuss these issues in the classroom? That they would never be taught because the political debate surrounding it isn't over yet? This model of education perpetuates the ignorance surrounding the global warming debate and ensures we don't act before it's too late. If people are apathetic or uninformed about the technical aspects surrounding climate change, change in consumption patterns never occur and it's not the elite that suffer - it's populations that are less equipped to deal with rising sea levels, less drinkable water, less farm land for food and an increase in resource scarcity/natural disasters.
One of the few arguments he makes that I agree with is that the idea that we should respect everyone's opinions is ridiculous. Not all opinions are neutral - there are good and bad opinions. An opinion must be informed, but students must learn when those opinions are indefensible. Opinions must be able to change when new evidence is available and must not be dogmatic. Opinions must be backed by facts and evidence.
Remember to #staywoke cuz they tryna catch us sleep but we #wokeaf
#teaching
Danny
Fish, S. (2008). Save the world on your own time. New
York: Oxford.
Bain, Ken. (2004). What The Best College Teachers Do. Cambridge,
MA: Harvard University Press.
I am in agreement with your post, when it comes to agreeing with some elements and not agreeing with others. I would argue that in order to make an opinion "educated" it needs to be heard by those that can help you become educated. Are some arguments indefensible? Absolutely. But to silence a voice because it is an uneducated opinion is not the way to make a more educated society. I read a book once, Just Walk Across The Room by Bill Hybels, where he talks about the idea of "planting a seed" with regard to encouraging someone to change their opinion. I believe the same can be done, diplomatically, in the classroom. Unfortunately, if we follow most of what our friend Fish is telling us, that concept would be completely lost to us as instructors.
ReplyDeleteBeing #wokeaf is super important, especially in regard to stating opinions. I totally agree with Danny that there are some opinions that are just not good. However, I also agree with Becca that students need to have the opportunity to voice their opinions to become more educated.
ReplyDeleteHowever, what happens when people have a platform to state uninformed, uninspired opinions for the masses to see? (*cough cough* social media) I think that adding in the mediated aspect to the discussion of opinions is important as well. Especially when we often teach classes that are blended with online and in-person content, we need to know how to allow our students freedom to state opinions without being completely uninformed in that particular space. Convergence is also very important here, especially in our more technological world.
I like where you are expanding this discussion Taylor. Part of the reason I like our current COMM 1010 text is the focus on convergence. Research on social media supports that we tend to self-select others voices that are already like us on social media rather than seek out different voices. So if you are uninformed (not talking opinion here just facts) and make conclusions without proper evidence and everyone you also engage with is also uninformed. . . well it simply spins out of control. The amount of misinformation, flat out lies, and misleading truths are difficult to wade through even if someone wanted to seek out different voices.
Delete