Smelly Knowledge

Daniel Cho and Tyson Lewis wrote a wonderful critique of both the hyper-accountability movement and constructivism, “Education and Event: Thinking Radical Pedagogy in the Era of Standardization” in the May 2005 edition of SIMILE. It’s one of those articles that really made me think and consider. A few of the main points:

• Accountability claims to be about equity.
• Constructivism, with an emphasis on creative and flexible thinking in novel situations, claims to prepare learners for the new economy.
• Accountability and constructivism are two sides of the same coin where those without the “basic skills” (often the same ones without power, resources, and money) are locked in an endless cycle of high-stakes tests, while those with (often the same ones with power, resources, and money) succeed. The status quo is successfully maintained.
• Educators need to learn to recognize the “horizon of the event” (via Alain Badiou), the possibility of new possibilities, to break the cycle and encourage a path of self-actualization and empowerment.

Drawing on the idea of Freirean dialogue, the authors posit that “truth” is not found within the teacher-student relationship, as both the accountability movement (teacher imparts truth to students) and constructivism (truth is co-constructed by teacher and students), but students and teachers must agree to seek truth out in the world and by doing so, transform the world.

I close with the authors’ last sentence:

…We must rehabilitate the revolutionary kernel found within the old cliché “I am a student of life”: insofar as being a student is to pursue truths in the world, and so the openness of being a student is living out the possibility of new possibilities.