Overview

Mark Garrison, outside the Albright-Knox Art Gallery, Buffalo, New York / Portrait by Pete Lund

This site grew out of inspiration from those who have worked to counter disinformation. There is a growing effort to counter disinformation, and to use the Internet as a means for building this opposition. I have for some time wanted to (and for brief instances began) to “blog” but lacked a clear sense of where I might contribute. There is so much information and analysis to sort through already.

I’ve concluded that I may add to the discussion by focusing on disinformation in terms of thinking (the alternative tag line for this site was, “forget the box … just think”). Many talented, knowledgeable and intelligent people do an excellent job of blowing the whistle on factual errors, misrepresentations, and so on, though by no means is this work complete. But what of the thinking that informs much of the discussion about education in the United States and elsewhere?

The question for me is: how do problems pose themselves? The etymology of problem is “a thing thrown or put forward”, it is something that must be contended with. Understanding a problem is key to contending with it, though understanding does require contending.

Disinformation

Disinformation is particularly aimed at misidentifying or improperly identifying a problem. For example, President Obama, in his March 10 speech before the Hispanic Chamber of Commerce, rendered “bad” teachers as a key problem and, so, many will debate how many teachers are bad, and sometimes even why bad teachers exist (although this amounts to blaming other teachers, including parents). Fix the “bad” teachers or parents or students is not exactly a fresh call to action, nor has it contributed to resolving any of the problems we confront.

Most efforts to solve social and educational problems are in fact directed at “fixing” individuals. Rarely are the social origins of problems identified, although “reformers” and “philanthropists” will target an aspect of the system when it suits them: eliminate public control and elected governance and the “free” market is sure to bring superior results.

But what if “bad” teachers aren’t really the problem, what if they are symptoms and not causes? Put another way, what if teachers, however bad, are not the actual thing “thrown” in our way, the main thing blocking some form of progress? Solutions premised on addressing symptoms of social problems are not likely to benefit society.

Symptoms rendered as causes disorients, blocking people from seeing how to gain meaningful control over their lives. Thus, disinformation has a political function. It serves to block people from developing a coherent vision that serves their interests. And, confronting and combating disinformation is also a political project, and I recognize it as such.

Rights and Democracy

Underlying this work are broad presuppositions with respect to conceptions of rights and democracy. I focus on presupposition required for intellectual and social coherence.

Much of the talk about schools, colleges and other institutions is premised on definite understandings of the roles and legitimate claims of individuals and collectives vis-a-vis society (shorthand for this is the problem of rights and democracy). These all-to-common presentations block investigation of what the actual rights and responsibilities are in any given instance. Often, arguments are presented that suggest “people have too many rights” or that it is the existence or expression of some right that is the root of a problem. In these situations, extant rights, privileges, and responsibilities are all confounded. Situations are one-sidedly examined with “individual rights” presented as superseding any social claim, while the other extreme demands individuals be subordinate to societal claims: “ask not what your country can do for you, but what you can do for your country.”  This is where Obama is headed and it is not a positive development. But it cannot be contended with by harkening back to “individual liberties” of yeoman.

Discussions focusing their energy on harmonizing the interests and claims of individuals, collectives and society are needed to solve problems. For this to take place, conceptual clarity on the reality of rights and responsibilities, on how these two claims cannot be separated without distortion to either, is required.

This points to the problem of decontextualization as a method of disinformation. To talk about responsibilities without talking about rights is itself disinformation. It imposes an irrational understanding by emphasizing one aspect of a phenomenon than cannot, in fact, be readily grasped without reference to the other. It is based in part on denial of the fact that the society has developed and changed and is not the same as it was during the eighteenth century when much of dominant thinking about rights was forged.

The hyper-Americanized notion of opportunity plays an important role here, hence my insistence on careful examination of political speeches is in order to break through the ideological operation of the “American Dream” and the way it distorts our understanding of our legitimate claims on society, blocking the resolutions of pressing social problems. There is great danger in seemingly well-meaning efforts to address serious problems with “character education” or “violence prevention” or “job training” initiatives, which dismiss rights as their starting point and assert “national interests” as the only legitimate claims.

Rights are neither based in ideology nor value systems, but instead originate in requirements of existence in natural and social terms. Rights are valid, legitimate claims. Claims are made on society because humans are born to society and depend on society for their existence. Rights cannot be bought, sold or otherwise transfered. One has the right to education by virtue of being a human being and no other consideration whatsoever. This is the case because human beings require education as a condition of their social existence.  The demand for education as a right represents the consciousness that education is required to perform one’s social duties including participation in the cultural and political life of the society and that, in turn, society is duty bound to provide education consistent with the level of development of the society. (Presidential calls to educators to train people so they can can find a job and speeches lauding math and literacy scores as some Holy Grail are aims inconsistent with the level of development of our society.) Individuals and collectives are in turn duty bound to pursue this education. This pursuit is not understood as against “individual freedom” but rather as a necessary condition of the realization of the full development of the human person, which includes active, affirming participation in society.

People have a legitimate claim in all decisions that affect them, and thus, people have a legitimate claim to political power, in addition to human rights such as healthcare. Political and civil rights are not contingent on claims regarding what decisions “data” instruct “decision-makers” to make. For example, teachers have the right to association (form unions and collective bargaining units) irrespective of research studies linking union membership to test scores, attendance, and so on. Parents and members of a community have the right to participate in the governance of education because education affects their lives and the lives of their children. This right does not hinge on test scores, measures of efficiency, or any other consideration. This is not to say resources are not wasted, that corruption is not a problem, et cetera, but rather it is to say that attacking rights will not solve these problems and that affirming rights will. The best way to improve education (to counter corruption for example) is through democratic renewal, not corporate-imposed reforms by Wall Street swindlers and their hit men who should all be in prison.

Themes

There are five major themes or “sections” to the site, and each focuses on different aspects of and plays different roles in countering disinformation. They are:

Opinion: This section takes clear stands in favor of or against some educational happening, but is used in the sense of “a formal statement of advice by an expert on a professional matter” and less “a view or judgment formed about something, not necessarily based on fact or knowledge.” I struggled over calling this section “Essay” but found that word connotes more of an analysis and I wanted to be more explicit in this section, saving that kind of work for other sections. Since this is not exactly a newspaper or magazine, “Editorial” seemed out of place too, and possibly pretentious.

Research: Here readers will find my notes and other forms of “works in progress” that contribute to answering some general question, such as how the public/private division informs education policy, and how that division is changing in the face of charter schools or the rise of for-profit colleges and universities.

Theory: This section operates to identify what guides (correctly or incorrectly) thinking and action in the sphere of education. Theory is often obscured in the course of the operation of disinformation, especially as the fanatical pragmatism of “data-driven decision making” takes hold of otherwise rational minds (the short-hand critique is that data don’t drive anything, let alone decisions). Thus, theory is, in my view, a key and undervalued component of the operation of (and fight against) disinformation. Theory is key for delineating cause from effect (as well as appearance from essence) and the complex dynamic as effects become causes in themselves.  Confusing these two aspects of reality is a hallmark of disinformation.

Reviews: This is fairly straightforward. I read a book or article, and either review it in full, or make some extended comment about a feature or section of the article or book.

Blog: Posts to this section identify and track developments in need of attention or of assistance in elaborating already identified themes. The benefits of the Internet are such that much of this work is already being done; priority is given to those developments and sites that seem significant and require more attention. News posts often inform posts in the other sections.