|
Do you think
obedience is a good thing or bad thing? Is it
important that children obey their parents, that
students obey their teachers, that employees obey
their management, that all citizens obey and
"maintain a healthy respect for" authorities? How
important is the quality of "obedience" in a
democracy?
I recently had the
chance to think about the idea of obedience when my
wife, who is a first-grade teacher here on Guam,
was "disciplined" by her school administrators
because she basically wasn't obedient enough. She
was disrespectful enough to ask questions. As a
result, the administrators put her in her
place.
When Guam's
Department of Education instructed its teachers to
fill out a questionnaire regarding teachers' jobs,
my wife felt the questionnaire was a waste of time
and wondered how it would benefit the children in
the classroom. When she met with one of the
administrators to ask this question, she was not
given an answer, but was rather told that she had
to fill it out because she had to fill it
out.
Such an
authoritarian response to a question is telling,
and not at all surprising or unusual. My wife ended
up filling out the questionnaire, but to this day
has not received even an attempt at an answer to
her question: "How will this questionnaire help the
students?" (At one meeting, the reply to her
question was, "This is not a Q&A") Instead,
she's received bureaucratic disciplinary memos
telling her that her behavior was "disrespectful"
and "unprofessional" and that she needs to become
more of a "model" teacher or there will be
consequences.
The message is
clear: teachers need to obey the orders of the
school administration, and any questioning of those
orders is considered disrespectful and
unprofessional. No discussion, input, debate, or
critical thinking on the part of the teachers is
welcomed. Teachers should be mindless drones who
have nothing meaningful to contribute to the
educational environment.
The consequences
are just as clear. Teachers are to reflect this
philosophy of obedience and discipline in the
classroom, and students are expected to obey the
teacher without questions and with respect.
Students are to follow instructions, memorize facts
given to them, and spit out those facts when tests
are administered. Students aren't expected to
think, be independent, question, criticize -- in
short, they aren't expected to be human. They
aren't treated like creative, imaginative,
wondering beings. If they dare to act differently,
they are treated as "behavioral problems" that need
to be "disciplined".
This isn't seen as
a problem, however. This is apparently how things
are supposed to be. Students need to learn to obey
and "behave", because when they grow up, they need
to know how to behave in the workplace. They need
to be obedient employees, follow orders, and not
make a fuss or question the way things are. At
least, that seems to be the prevailing view of
things. Thus schools are not centers for
imagination, exploration, or creativity, but rather
they are similar to dog obedience schools. They are
trained to heel and roll over, because that's how
they're supposed to behave under their
owners.
Finally, in society
in general, we are also supposed to be obedient.
Sure, we go to the polls to express a choice
between one pro-corporate candidate and the other
pro-corporate candidate, but beyond that, we aren't
expected to think much. The extent of intellectual
debate should be over the statistics of one
football player versus another player. Policy
decisions are supposed to be made by our leaders,
without discussion or input from us. They do the
thinking for us, and we have to foster a healthy
respect for their authority, and for the authority
of the police, military, and prison guards. We need
to unthinkingly worship the flag, the U.S.
Constitution, our hallowed national monuments, and
the glorious conquest of our armed forces over the
defenseless civilians of poor countries.
I can't help but
think there's something a little wrong with this
picture. My idea of democracy has a little less
emphasis on obedience and a little more emphasis on
critical thinking, discussion, and individual
autonomy. Unfortunately, students are not being
prepared for this kind of democracy (which may be
seen as a little too messy), but are instead being
prepared to be the ideal employee (which
incidentally is a mindless robot that doesn't ask
for a raise).
In fact, obedience
in our citizens can be very dangerous. Obedience
and fear of authorities is what allows bloody
regimes such as the Nazis to take power (that and
guns). Obedient, unthinking citizens might not even
know they were under such a regime. Wouldn't it be
strange if we were in a system that murders
thousands of people in "humanitarian" wars,
provides our tax dollars to support brutal
dictatorships, imprisons two million of our friends
and relatives, exploits the majority of its
population in the workplace, and ghettoizes the
minority population -- without our even knowing
it?
I'm in favor of
looking at alternative ways of educating our
children, ways that encourage independence,
autonomy, critical thinking, exploration, and
discussion. One approach that seems appropriate to
me is the "Constructivist" educational philosophy,
which has emerged as a positive trend over the last
few decades. Looking at different schools on the
Web, I happened across the Creative Science
School in
Portland, Oregon. From the school's website:
"The program is
based upon a Constructivist Educational Philosophy,
where students are encouraged to be independent
thinkers, learners and problem solvers. Our
students develop and demonstrate the ability to
create questions, formulate solutions and apply the
results throughout their lives.
"Children observe
and explore in all subject areas. They conduct
experiments and develop theories. They shape their
understanding through hands-on experience. They use
reading, writing, math and the arts to record and
expand upon their findings. Science is the vehicle
they use for learning. Parental participation in
the program, the classroom and their child's
educational experience is strongly
encouraged."
Now, that's the
kind of school I'd like to send my children to.
Teachers are not regarded as instructors, but
rather as facilitators. Teachers don't have
children memorize facts, but ask questions and
facilitate discussions and explorations. Teachers
don't give students a bunch of worksheets to fill
out, but encourage experiments where the students
test their ideas about a concept. Teachers don't
tell students what they need to learn, but ask
students what they are interested in, with the idea
that people put more energy into learning about
things they're interested in. Teachers don't
discipline students, but encourage them to come up
with their own classroom rules, which are open to
further discussion and change if they don't
work.
This educational
approach would instill the skills and abilities in
our citizens that are crucial to a real democracy.
This approach is ideal for fostering the natural
creativity, imagination, and desire for freedom
that is in all humans. While I know students at the
University of Guam are taught Constructivist ideas,
they aren't encouraged to apply those ideas in
actual classrooms. What's ironic is that the very
UOG professors who teach Constructivist ideas fail
to apply them to their own classrooms. I call for
adoption of this approach in the University of Guam
and in the Department of Education, from top to
bottom.
That covers an
approach to education that allows for more freedom
and creativity and less obedience, but what about
in the workplace and in a democratic society? In
the workplace, workers should be allowed more
freedom and creativity, and I think that would not
only enhance the happiness of all workers, but also
as a side benefit, lead to greater productivity.
Greater productivity should lead to shorter
workdays, instead of greater unemployment as it
always has in the past.
The problem is, the
top-down, hierarchical -- in fact, tyrannical --
structures of most workplaces aren't designed to
foster freedom and creativity. They are designed to
foster obedience, nose-to-the-grindstone
production, and profits for the owners. This is
nice for the owners, but not so nice for the
workers. I advocate a more democratic workplace,
where workers control the means of production and
are involved in major policy decisions as well as
the day-to-day operations of the workplace. Workers
who run their own workplace would be more likely
than an owner to give themselves more freedom, and
they'd be freed to be creative, imaginative human
beings.
This applies to
schools, where teachers would run the operations of
the schools instead of administrators. They would
be involved in discussions and debates about how
the schools would be run, and would have to think
on their own and not be obedient. They would be
more likely than bureaucratic administrators to
focus all resources on the classrooms, where
teachers have to work each day. They'd be more
likely, in a freer and more democratic workplace,
to apply those ideas of freedom and democracy to
their classrooms. And just think of the number of
administrators (and their support staff) we
wouldn't need, thus freeing up more resources for
the classrooms and students.
The same concept of
real, hands-on democracy can be applied to life
outside the workplace and school. A truly
democratic society would be organized so that
people are involved in the local, day-to-day
decisions (and the major policy decisions) that
affect their lives. Instead of voting for "leaders"
who make their decisions in Washington or in state
legislatures and capitols (and then being obedient
the rest of the time), they'd organize into
community councils and federations that make these
decisions. They'd be forced to think, criticize,
discuss. People in such a democratic society would
be less likely to imprison their neighbors and
would be less likely to imprison themselves in
ghettos. They'd be less likely to send themselves
to kill and be killed in wars.
Such democratic
societies, workplaces, and schools wouldn't be
perfect or utopian, of course. They might even be
messier and less "orderly" than the current system
of obedience. But I'll take messy any day if it
comes along with greater freedoms and more
participation and empowerment.
|
