💾 Archived View for library.inu.red › file › abraham-p-deleon-anarchism-and-education.gmi captured on 2023-01-29 at 07:26:04. Gemini links have been rewritten to link to archived content
➡️ Next capture (2024-07-09)
-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Title: Anarchism and Education Author: Abraham P. DeLeon Date: 2009 Language: en Topics: education, history Source: Deleon, Abraham P. “Anarchism and Education.” In The International Encyclopedia of Revolution and Protest: 1500 to the Present, edited by Immanuel Ness, 117–118. Vol. 1. Malden, MA: Wiley-Blackwell, 2009.
Although many activists have embraced anarchist theory, anarchism has
been present in a variety of different academic areas as well. Anarchist
sociology has been argued for (Purkis 2004), as well as the beginning
sketches of an anarchist anthropology (Graeber 2004). But, often
overlooked is the field of education, which has had an interesting
relationship with anarchism and other radical theories of liberation.
Anarchist theory is absent in educational literature and this gap exists
in even more radical theories of education.
Anarchist theory in the context of education has influenced several key
areas, such as organizational structure, political action for teachers,
and rethinking the institution of schooling and the purposes that it
serves. Anarchism for education means embracing some key factors about
schooling. Anarchists contend that the various institutions of schooling
help to reproduce racial, class, sexual orientation, and gender
divisions sustaining classist practices that weaken working class and
poor students. Paul Goodman, in his famous 1964 tract on Compulsory
Miseducation, argued that schools benefit the rich and powerful and
serve to indoctrinate students into an ideological system rather than
serving as places of enlightenment and critical dialogue. Anarchists
contend that teachers and students should be co-creators of knowledge
and the divisions between “teacher,” “student,” and “principal” should
be restructured.
Anarchist theory in education seeks to build schools that are not
organized around rigid hierarchies and that each school should be as
free and open as possible, allowing individuals to explore their
identities, free their desires from historically oppressive social
norms, and each school should be autonomous so that it better meets the
needs of the community. Schools and the communities that they are
located in should be in a symbiotic relationship based on mutual aid,
community building, and non-coercive practices. Anarchists have played a
historic role in education and educational theory, even if a limited
one. They have created schools that resemble anarchist conceptions and
critiqued the institution of schooling itself. Francisco Ferrer, for
example, instituted a “modern school” in Spain that incorporated vastly
different ideological frameworks than schools of the time. Children were
not exposed to a dogmatic curriculum or a slew of standardized tests
that we now find in US schools; instead, the curriculum and the guiding
philosophy that Ferrer argued for was the freedom of the individual
child to pursue her/his intellectual interests in a non-hierarchical
environment. Ferrer argued that schools had to be restructured in
completely different ways to escape the colonizing and oppressive role
that schools play in indoctrinating students into the status quo. Ferrer
wanted teachers to have complete autonomy from state mechanisms so that
they could encourage students to pursue educational interests of their
choosing.
Other non-authoritarian and democratic schooling projects have existed
that have been guided by some of the values and ideas expressed by
Ferrer. A. S. Neill, one of the best-known proponents of alternative
schooling, created Summerhill, a school that stressed educational growth
based solely on the child’s interests. At Summerhill “lessons” arise
from the students themselves and children are encouraged to explore
their own interests. Although Neill’s ideas have been adopted and
reformulated from their original inception, they continue to influence
schools that wish to create educational experiences that allow the child
an open, free, and non-coercive learning environment. Although not
technically “anarchist,” Neill structured Summerhill without a rigid
curriculum or a formal timetable for learning. He recognized the freedom
of the individual child, and he rejected traditional teacher authority
(Suissa 2006: 93). Other schools have been influenced by Neill’s ideas.
In Albany, New York, the Albany Free School allows students to explore
their own interests in a non-hierarchical way by including guest
speakers and teachers in accordance with the students’ interests. At
Albany, the students are an integral part of the community around them,
while the school serves as a center for learning and community action.
Students learn to manage their own learning experiences and participate
in the school community.
Although many “free schools” do not directly attribute anarchist theory
to their ideological mission, they are comparable to what anarchists
argue is necessary for building community and inculcating the natural
spirit of learning that is non-coercive. Unlike traditional public
education, “free schools” allow students the freedom to control their
learning experiences and shape their educational goals. In traditional
education schools, curriculum, activities, and learning experiences have
been scripted, giving students limited choices in shaping their goals
and objectives. These schools are structured in a rigid and hierarchical
manner. “Free schools,” on the other hand, are the polar opposite as
they tend not to have a school-wide curriculum. They promote a community
based philosophy reflecting individual experience. Attendance is not
always mandatory and classes often emerge organically through the
inquiry and interests of the students. Student and teacher collaborate
in order to pursue individualized academic and intellectual interests.
Besides just building on the concerns of the individual students,
anarchist conceptions of schooling view community building as an
integral role in the development of children. Students must feel part of
a school community to further engage their creative and intellectual
pursuits. The main point is that the education of students should rest
in the hands of the individual, with the schools guiding that process by
providing activities and instruction which meet the goals of the
students and the community.
SEE ALSO: Anarchism ; Escuela Moderna Movement (The Modern School) ;
Goldman, Emma (1869–1940)
Antliff, A. (2007) Breaking Free: Anarchist Pedagogy. In M. Coté, R.
Day, & G. de Peuter (Eds.), Utopian Pedagogy: Radical Experiments
Against Neoliberal Globalization. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.
Chomsky, N. & Macedo, D. (2000) Chomsky on Mis-education. Lanham: Rowman
& Littlefield.
DeLeon, A. (2006) The Time for Action is Now! Anarchist Theory, Critical
Pedagogy, and Radical Possibilities. Journal of Critical Education
Policy Studies 4, 2 (November).
Goodman, P. (1971) Children Should Be Anarchists. New Schools Exchange
Newsletter 58: 5.
Graeber, D. (2004) Fragments of an Anarchist Anthropology. Chicago:
Prickly Paradigm Press.
Illich, I. (1983) Deschooling Society. New York: Harper & Row.
Purkis, J. (2004) Towards an Anarchist Sociology. In J. Purkis & J.
Bowen (Eds.), Changing Anarchism: Anarchist Theory and Practice in a
Global Age. Manchester: Manchester University Press.
Sheehan, S. (2003) Anarchism. London: Reaktion Books.
Spring, J. (1998) A Primer of Libertarian Education. Montreal: Black
Rose Books.
Suissa, J. (2006) Anarchism and Education: A Philosophical Perspective.
London: Routledge