ejs
©
2003 Edwardsville Journal of
Sociology, Volume 3:2 back to ejs volume 3:2
mark hedley
Academia is an
insular world. This is not at all
surprising. Academia is a social
institution and, like all social institutions, must insulate itself from the
world outside if it is to control and reproduce the behavioral patterns upon
which its structure is founded. If you like the structure, then you appreciate
the insulation. If, however, you have
problems with the structure, then you find the insulation to be a frustrating
barrier to social change.
From the point of view of a
sociology student in a sociology classroom, several layers of institutional
insulation Aprotect@
the learner from the outside world. The
given class is insulated by the norms of the department, the department by the
norms of the college, and the college by the norms of the university. Every level, in turn, is further insulated
by broader disciplinary, bureaucratic, cultural, economic, and political norms. Finally, as if this weren=t enough insulation, information from the outside is
filtered through existing theoretical and methodological conventions and
constrained by the norms and values of the academic publishing industry before
it ever reaches the classroom. By the
time this information enters the student=s
brain via the filtering mechanisms of her own consciousness, can we really
assume that the sum total of the sociology that academia has provided her
represents a valid and reliable picture of social reality?
I don=t think we can.
But we academic sociologists do the best we can, and I think we do a
pretty good job. I like to believe that
most sociology students leave their classes having a more valid and reliable
picture of social reality than they possessed when they entered them. Of course we could do better if we could
overcome all that insulation, but there=s
so much of it. What else can we do?
According to the theory of
the social system developed by Niklas Luhmann (1995), the modern (postmodern?)
social system is global. The academic
system Aembodied@ by
Southern Illinois University Edwardsville represents, in Luhmann=s terms, a societal system which exists within the
larger societal system of academia in the United States. As the social system is a system of meaning,
the basic unit of any societal system is the act of communication. Through communication within a societal
system, meaning is created that is relevant to that system. Without such communication, there exists no
relevant meaning. Therefore,
information from the outside world does not exist within a societal system as
relevant unless and until it is translated and communicated as relevant to that
system.
While this idea is quite abstract,
perhaps overly so, the point is that social reality is relevant in the
sociology classroom only to the degree that it has been defined as relevant by
the system. Currently and for the most
part, that reality has been defined as relevant only in a heavily filtered
form. Students= direct experience of much of that reality has not
been defined as relevant. Student
internship programs, such as the Employment Relations Program that is
currently in place in the SIUE sociology department and the program that is in
the works in the Criminal Justice wing, do succeed in making relevant
the direct experience of the workplace by student interns. But workplaces represent limited areas of
social space. Further, these areas
exist within social institutions that are themselves more or less insulated
from the world outside. Can we make
students= direct experience of the non-institutionalized social
world relevant to academic sociology?
Can we translate meaning from this Aoutside@ and communicate its relevance to a formal education
in sociology?
I think we can. Quite simply, all we need to do is define
such experience as worthy of academic credit towards a degree in
sociology. By providing academic credit
for the direct experience of non-institutional social reality, we translate
that experience as sociologically valuable in the academic sense. In recognizing such credit on student
transcripts, we communicate the academic value of the experience. In one fell swoop, we move the structural
boundaries of our societal system outward to include the non-institutionalized
world that previously existed only on the outside.
Now, let me qualify the above
paragraph. I am not suggesting that the
direct experience of non-institutionalized social reality, in and of itself,
can be meaningfully translated into academia simply by providing it academic
credit. In order to be academically
meaningful, it must be bounced against the institutionalized reality of
sociological theory and research. By
combining such experience with more conventional teaching methods that
encourage structured reflection, students might leave the classroom with a more
valid and reliable picture of social reality that they otherwise would.
So, if you agree with me so
far, you agree that we can pursue the endeavor. But should we? And if we
should, what non-institutionalized experiences should we value as Aworthy@ of academic
credit?
The following argument is
overtly ideological. It is founded upon
the belief that educators should embrace the reality of social change and
strategically target their efforts at empowering students to become informed
and motivated agents of social change. One version of the argument, founded
upon the educational philosophy of John Dewey (1944; 1938; 1935), emphasizes
the important role that experience-based education plays in promoting
democratic progress. Another version,
founded upon the educational philosophy of Paulo Freire (1994; 1987; 1973;
1970), emphasizes the critical role that community-based education plays in
empowering individuals to pursue social justice. I will begin with Dewey.
According to Dewey, the
central function of a democratic society is to embrace social change as
motivated by the interests of a populace to improve its condition. Not surprisingly, Dewey views education as
informing a populace of what its condition is and how it may be improved. Therefore, education in a democratic society
serves a unique role:
Particularly it is true that a society which not only
changes but which
has the ideal of such change as will improve it, will
have different
standards and methods of education from one which aims
simply at
the perpetuation of its own customs. (1944; p.
81)
The educational process of a
truly democratic society should be distinct.
It should not only be organized to teach students to successfully
maneuver within the prevailing environment, but also to create an environment
within which A...the powers of individuals shall not be merely
released from mechanical external constraint but shall be fed, sustained, and
directed@ (1935; p. 51).
How can education feed,
sustain, and direct the power of individuals?
According to Dewey, it cannot do so by simply providing textbooks,
lectures, and assignments. In addition,
it must provide students with specific experiences that inform them as to the
condition of the populace and how that condition might be improved. Since such improvement involves
institutional change, AThe educational task cannot be accomplished merely by
working upon (wo)men=s minds,
without action that effects actual change in institutions@ (1935; p. 61).
In experiencing passive elements of a curriculum, students learn
things. In experiencing active elements
of a curriculum, students learn relations between and among things. In learning these relations, students may
comprehend their consequences. In
comprehending these consequences, students are motivated to participate in
efforts to create progressive change.
For Dewey, a truly
progressive educational system must provide students with the opportunity to
actively experience learning rather than simply Aundergoing@ it (1944, p. 139).
While the passive act of undergoing a curriculum is a necessary element of
the learning process, especially in providing a grounding in theory upon which
students= praxis may be based (Hironimus-Wendt and Lovell-Troy,
1999), it is not sufficient in and of itself.
In order to sufficiently promote democratic learning, the passive
definition of things must be complimented by the active experience of relations
between and among things as well as structured reflection on the consequences
of these relations.
If it is institutional change
we are seeking, then why is non-institutional experience so valuable? From a systems theoretical perspective, they
are valuable because the meaning communicated within social institutions is
reflexively oriented towards system maintenance. Within the institution, inequality is justified as valuable,
necessary, or inevitable. Institutional
meaning is hegemonic. It is only from
the outside that a clearly counter-hegemonic meaning is available.
In terms of a sociological
curriculum, the academic validation of the direct experience of non-institutional
social reality may further the educational process by complimenting what is
already going on in our classrooms.
Classrooms provide ample opportunities to teach the definitions of
things and to provide examples that illustrate these definitions. They also provide suitable contexts for
structured reflection. However,
classrooms are structurally limited in their ability to teach students about
relations between and among things.
Experiential learning compensates for this inadequacy by placing
students into the truly empirical world of relations. It provides grist for the mill of the classroom and, in addition,
allows students to reflect upon this grist given knowledge gained in the
classroom. According to Dewey (1935, p.
27)., the ultimate goal of this experiential pedagogy is to motivate students
to become active participants in society fighting Ato establish the conditions under which the mass of
individuals can possess actual as distinct from merely legal liberty.@
The educational philosophy of
Paulo Freire mirrors Dewey=s justification
of experiential education without relying on an educated class=s willingness and ability to Afree@ the
masses. Friere=s perspective is grounded upon a concerted focus on
education=s ability to develop in all learners a critical
consciousness, one that A...would enable (wo)men to discuss courageously
the problems of their context B and to
intervene in that context@ (1973, p. 33).
This critical consciousness does not exist as the intellectual property of
the privileged. Rather, it is
organically generated among the masses by the experience of self-empowerment.
Freire is clear that the
experience of critical consciousness will not be fostered by traditional
curricula alone. Traditional curricula
are designed for classrooms and, thus, are A...disconnected
from life, centered on words and emptied of the reality they are meant to
represent, lacking in concrete activity@
(1973, p. 37). Like Dewey, Freire does
not suggest that classroom-based curricula are either unproductive or
unnecessary. They are simply
insufficient if the attainment of critical consciousness is the goal of
education.
Unlike Dewey, however, Freire
argues forcefully for an academic institution that does not take on a
paternalistic position in relation to the mass of individuals in society. Individuals are treated as equally capable
of critical consciousness regardless of their economic or educational
status. Freire=s is a popular education, an escola popular. It aims at uniting the school and the
community by bringing the masses to the school and the school to the masses.
...regardless of what society we are in, in what world
we find
ourselves, it is impermissible to train engineers or
stonemasons,
physicians or nurses, dentists or machinists,
educators or mechanics,
farmers or philosophers, cattle farmers or biologists,
without an
understanding of our own selves as historical,
political, social, and
cultural beings B without a comprehension of how society works.
And this will never be imparted by a supposedly purely
technological
training. (1994, p. 133)
Given prevailing historical,
political, social, and cultural contexts, the institution of Southern Illinois
University Edwardsville has done a commendable job at bringing the masses of Anon-traditional@
students into the school. The sociology
department has done a commendable job of adapting itself to the needs of these
students and providing more than a purely technological training in sociology. However, have we been as effective in terms
of bringing the school to the masses? As long as the community is viewed as the
Aoutside@ by
our institutional arrangements, we fail to export sociology and the critical
consciousness it generates beyond our Aivory
towers.@ Consequently,
it remains the legitimate Aproperty@ of sociologists.
In encouraging students to Ado@ their
sociology on the outside, we encourage them to bring the meaning of sociology
to the people as well as to bring the meaning of the people to sociology. Because of its lack of paternalism, Friere=s educational philosophy views experiential learning
as empowering both to the institution and to the community. The student, because of her position as the
mediator of critical consciousness, is especially empowered.
Before concluding, I would
like to recognize the fact that much of what both Dewey and Friere have
suggested is already being accomplished by many faculty, staff, and student
sociologists on a voluntary basis. While
this voluntary application of academic sociology in non-institutionalized
community settings is noteworthy, the reliance on purely voluntary application
does not nearly maximize its potential.
This is true simply because there are only twenty-four hours in a day,
and every hour that one is required to spend Afunctioning@ in an institutional setting is an hour that one is
unable to devote to sociologically informed community action.
But what if the institutional
commitments required of students by academia incorporated students= community action?
What if students were awarded institutionally recognized credit for
bouncing what they experience in their communities against what they learn in
their classrooms? Further, how much
benefit would be experienced by communities if the intentional actions of their
student members was specifically informed by what they had learned in their
sociology classes? Imagine a classroom
of twenty-five students that was given an extra-credit assignment to devote 3
hours of community service and to write an essay interpreting that service
within a given sociological frame. Even
if only five students complete the assignment, that=s fifteen hours of community service. Imagine if that assignment was
required. That=s 75 hours of community service. Now, imagine if a sociological internship
class of ten students required 80 hours of community action per student. That=s
800 hours in one semester.
Dewey, John. 1944. Democracy and Education. New York: The Free Press.
___________ 1938. Experience and Education. New York: Collier Books.
___________ 1935. Liberalism and Social Action. New York: G. P. Putnam=s Sons.
Freire, Paulo. 1994.
Pedagogy of Hope. New
York: Continuum.
___________ 1987. A Pedagogy of Liberation. South Hadley, Massachusetts: Bergin &
Garvey Publishers, Inc.
___________ 1973. Education for Critical Consciousness. New York: The Seabury Press.
___________ 1970. Pedagogy of the Oppressed. New York: Herder and Herder.
Hironimus-Wendt, Robert J.
and Larry Lovell-Troy. 1999. Grounding Service Learning in Social
Theory. Teaching Sociology
27(October):360-372.
Luhmann, Niklas. 1995.
Social Systems: Outline of a General Theory. Stanford: Stanford University Press.
Mark Hedley is
Assistant Professor of Sociology at Southern Illinois University
Edwardsville. His email is mhedley@siue.edu
ejs