Applied Scholastics confusion.

Most Applied Scholastic schools, in fact every one that I know of, operate on these principles:

1) that a student should progress at his own speed, and that education should align with the purposes and interests of the child.

2) that effective education requires doingness as well as significance.

3) that schools should develop a community spirit. Schools should be a safe social environment, free of drugs and violence, where students are free from invalidation from other students or any anti-social behavior in general.

4) that the course room supervisors are to guide the students to the right materials and assist in the student’s learning. They do not generally believe that the school lessons should be rote exercises in rules and recitations.

5) that the goal of education is to help the child succeed not just in the classroom, but in life. This is progressive education.

And Applied Scholastics’ educators use the Study Technology of L. Ron Hubbard in their efforts to achieve these kind of educational environments.

But what I find interesting when talking to Applied Scholastic educators is their universal condemnation of the educational philosophy of John Dewey.

One director even told me that John Dewey was a communist spy sent to destroy American education.

This view of John Dewey comes from the book “The Leipzig Connection” and other writings of Hubbard.

The following is from the Encyclopedia Britannica entry on John Dewey. I have added the brackets to show the correlation between these and the numbers listed above.

“…the chief underlying tenets of Dewey’s philosophy of education.

[1] These were that the educational process must begin with and build up on the interests of the child;

[2] that it must provide opportunity for the interplay of thinking and doing in the child’s classroom experience;

[3] that the school should be organized as a ‘miniature community’;

[4] that the teacher should be a guide and co-worker with the pupils, rather than a taskmaster assigning a fixed set of lessons and recitations;

[5] and that the goal of education is the growth of the child in all aspects of its being.”

How strange, but how typical of Scientologists.

The Anabaptist Jacques
 

GreyWolf

Gold Meritorious Patron
Most Applied Scholastic schools, in fact every one that I know of, operate on these principles:

And, of course, they violate those principles when they get a chance.
 

VaD

Gold Meritorious Patron
John Dewey should have been their "Founder."
He never claimed to be one.

Hubbard claimed himself as such and did just that: "I'm the ONLY one who can bring literacy to this world!"

How much more of "discoveries and breakthroughs" stolen from others could Hubbard got away with?

So, folks, we see here L. Ron Hubbard's way just as "the only beautiful way" to succeed in life - steal from another (who had NO claims to "the ultimate" knowledge) and make them your own ULTIMATE KNOWLEDGE.

Hubbard is a thief! :angry:
 

rebned

Patron
Looks like what you are saying is that once again he completely copied someone else but just changed the words a bit and then tried to discredit the originator of the idea.....nice...
 

Megalomaniac

Silver Meritorious Patron
And, of course, they violate those principles when they get a chance.

Actually, my experience at Delphi Oregon was that they did follow these principles (with me).

Then I got into full-blown Scientology and struggled, couldn't get through the training. "In your recent studies, was there any word or symbol you did not FULLY :naughty: understand?" Go to Ethics, you're going by MUs. WTF? Who isn't going by MUs? What happened to the purpose? At Delphi, purpose was king.
 

programmer_guy

True Ex-Scientologist
Actually, my experience at Delphi Oregon was that they did follow these principles (with me).

Then I got into full-blown Scientology and struggled, couldn't get through the training. "In your recent studies, was there any word or symbol you did not FULLY :naughty: understand?" Go to Ethics, you're going by MUs. WTF? Who isn't going by MUs? What happened to the purpose? At Delphi, purpose was king.

If one disagreed with any part of the SCN materials then there would be word clearing on-and-on-and-on until one "caves-in" and just goes along with the materials.

No disagreement was allowed. I've been there and done that.
Never will I do that again.
 

The Clam

Patron with Honors
Dewy was a brilliant man but he sold his soul to the devil. When he went into partnership with Rockefeller and began " Teacher College" Even though he painted a nice picture of educating children. The reality of his doing was to undermine the educational process by introducing socialization and indoctrination replacing the classic educational process. So you could call him the founding father of dumbing down of America.
 
Dewy was a brilliant man but he sold his soul to the devil. When he went into partnership with Rockefeller and began " Teacher College" Even though he painted a nice picture of educating children. The reality of his doing was to undermine the educational process by introducing socialization and indoctrination replacing the classic educational process. So you could call him the founding father of dumbing down of America.

I agree that he planted the seed philosophicaly for the dumbing down of America.

But don't put too much into that Rockefellar story.

That story comes from Hubbard.

The Anabaptist Jacques
 
I agree that he planted the seed philosophicaly for the dumbing down of America.

I wouldn't. Bir was america exactly filled with "rocket scientists" prior to Dewey. P.T. Barnum made a career based on that . :no:

I consider that shortened attention spans due to excessive reliance on media and the role of consumption driven marketing have had a much greater direct influence on the decline of educational standards in the u.s. during my life. College grads with advanced degrees of today appear to me to be much more "technically competent" and much less well educated than high school graduates of my parents generation. Reading has become passe. Video is the information channel of preference.

As long as prolonged concentration or attention to detail aren't required american college grads are the best! :thumbsup:


Mark A. Baker :eyeroll:
 

programmer_guy

True Ex-Scientologist
I wouldn't. Bir was america exactly filled with "rocket scientists" prior to Dewey. P.T. Barnum made a career based on that . :no:

I consider that shortened attention spans due to excessive reliance on media and the role of consumption driven marketing have had a much greater direct influence on the decline of educational standards in the u.s. during my life. College grads with advanced degrees of today appear to me to be much more "technically competent" and much less well educated than high school graduates of my parents generation. Reading has become passe. Video is the information channel of preference.

As long as prolonged concentration or attention to detail aren't required american college grads are the best! :thumbsup:


Mark A. Baker :eyeroll:

Most of them in the U.C. system are now Asian (much different than I was there and I can see it on the campuses). And the money comes from their parents, for now. The U.C, system likes this, for now. But this will change in the next decade, back to colleges in their homelands. You watch, this will happen.
 
I wouldn't. Bir was america exactly filled with "rocket scientists" prior to Dewey. P.T. Barnum made a career based on that . :no:

I consider that shortened attention spans due to excessive reliance on media and the role of consumption driven marketing have had a much greater direct influence on the decline of educational standards in the u.s. during my life. College grads with advanced degrees of today appear to me to be much more "technically competent" and much less well educated than high school graduates of my parents generation. Reading has become passe. Video is the information channel of preference.

As long as prolonged concentration or attention to detail aren't required american college grads are the best! :thumbsup:


Mark A. Baker :eyeroll:

Mark,

While it appears true that our parents generation (neither one of mine finished high school) had a better well-rounded education, I would say that the philosophical seeds for this decay was laid in the early part of the 20th century by Dewey and school administrators.

Deweys ideas took time to filter through. But the damaging part was the idea to get away from teaching core knowledge and base education on subjective development instead of objective facts.

Around 1914 in America there was a great public debate amongs educators and administrators about changing the fundamentals of education in America.
Some labeled the two sides of the debate "Facts versus Fads."

The president of Brown Univesity wrote the following in 1914 favoring the old goals versus the new goals:

"But those studies (he was refering to study of the classics) or others devoted to the interpretaion of great thinking into modern speech and action, at least will save us from education given solely by short stories and moving pictures, and the naive conviction that our own age is the only one worth knowing."

His side lost the debate and things were changed.

So education is no longer about "interpretaion of great thinking into modern speech and action," instead it is about the subjective development of the student through entertainment.

Movies and media can be used to as a means for "interpretaion of great thinking into modern speech and action," but it isn't because the philosophy of education now says it is about "the subjective development of the student through entertainment."

The problem is not the media; the problem is the philosophical view of education. And that change started mostly with Dewey.

The Anabaptist Jacques
 

themadhair

Patron Meritorious
Deweys ideas took time to filter through. But the damaging part was the idea to get away from teaching core knowledge and base education on subjective development instead of objective facts.
I’m not sure if you can blame Dewey for the trend, but I will say that the trend you point out seems to be true in how mathematics is taught in the US. Two excellent videos which describe the issue:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ymvSFunUjx0
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wOH9gwImyXg
 
Top