One Child -- Many Communities: Recasting the Purpose of Education
The idea that an individual is part of many communities and that an individual's
identity is derived from those communities is common to many disciplines.
This may be expressed in terms of narratives, cultures, roles, or environments,
but the underlying premise is that each of the facets has a set of values,
beliefs, expectations, and knowledge that the individual is expected to
demonstrate. In this paper the purpose of education is recast as helping
the student to reconcile the expectations of different communities and
to acquire the skills, knowledge, and attitudes expected in the communities
the student wishes to join. Subsequently, some of the implications of this
perspective for classroom practice are discussed. For instance, this framework
provides a theoretical justification for multiculturalism in schools and
other activities that reinforce a student's self-esteem.
One Child -- Many Communities: Recasting the Purpose of Education
Index
Phillips, L. (1998), "One child-many communities: Recasting the purpose
of education" Richardson, A Ed., Childhood and youth: a universal odyssey,
Edmonton, AB: Kanata Learning Co., pp. 153-160
Multiple Communities
in the School
Writers concerned with school reform and the change process have identified
communities within the school. Writing about the Self-Renewing School,
Joyce, Wolfe, and Calhoon (1993) identified three organizational structures
or spheres that act on the school: individual teachers (scholar-teachers),
faculties in the schools (communities of scholars), and the district office
(scholar-coordinators). Taking a more comprehensive approach Sergiovanni
(1996) sees the school as a moral learning community that is just one of
the many communities that an individual is part of. For instance he suggests
that the family can be considered a moral nurturing community, that churches
function as spiritual communities, that youth clubs function as friendship
communities, and that neighborhood associations function as civic communities.
This list implies a functional view of communities, but Sergiovanni's description
of communities includes those organized around relationships and ideas.
These communities are defined by their centers of values, sentiments, and
beliefs. (Index)
Individuals
as Members of Multiple Communities
One of the implications of a broad definition of community is that individuals
are members of many communities. Fasching (1997) regards individuals as
fulfilling multiple roles and having multiple personalities: the work self,
the family self, the friend self, and the civic self. There are different
expectations for these roles that may conflict with each other because
each role demands all and not part of the individual. The expectations
are conveyed through narratives that illustrate what it is to be a good
employee, a good parent, or a good friend. In a similar fashion, Swartz
and Martin (1997) see individuals functioning in multiple, multi-faceted
environments: communities, families, individuals, and schools. Understanding
the characteristics, expectation, and values of each of these communities
is important to understanding the behaviour of individuals. Because as
Demsey & McCadden (1997) found in a study of ethical decision making
at local schools the participants used a rules-based and context-based
morality expressed in terms of their everyday lives as parents, teachers,
administrators, and school advisory chairs. People bring the values of
the communities they belong to when they come to school, when they participate
on a committee, and when they join another community. To explain this the
authors cited MacIntyre who stated that the story of his life is embedded
in the story of those communities from which he derives his identity.
(Index)
Community and the
Individual Student
The students' membership in many communities, each with its particular
expectations and values, is one cause of student resistance to change and
learning. For instance, students joining a counter culture in school that
doesn't value educational achievement (Contenta, 1993) is irrational in
relation to the values of the educators in the school but is consistent
with the expectations of the student's peers. This occurs because communities
control the behaviour of their members through shared norms, shared values,
shared purpose and the socialization, interdependence, and collegiality,
that develops among the members. One aspect of the shared values is "scripts",
describing the role of the community, which prescribe the communities relationships
with other communities (Sergiovanni, T.,1996). Further, the culture of
each community embodies distinctive behavioural, linguistic, or other characteristics
associated with ethnicity, and/or a set of unwritten rules, customs, and
values that govern behaviour of the members. (Greenbaum, Martinez, and
Baber,1997). (Index)
Personal Growth
These different expectations of each community cause the student to develop
multiple personalities rooted in multiple institutional and social contexts.
Personal growth comes about as the individual learns to balance conflicting
roles, becoming more resilient, more sensitive, and better able to act
ethically (Fasching, D., 1997). The balancing process is illustrated by
Dempsey & McCadden who found in a study of ethical decision making
at local schools, that the participants used a rules-based and context-based
morality expressed in terms of their everyday lives as parents, teachers,
administrators, and school advisory chairs. The participants demonstrated
the ability to construct a moral community out of the histories and context
they brought with them to the setting. Further, building a shared history
provided the mechanism through which the participants came to understand
the constraints, language, and logic of others. This would suggest that
the student needs to integrate the morality, history, and symbols from
each of the communities to generate a sense of self. (Index)
Purpose of Education
Although, Sergiovanni (1994) is writing about developing a school community
some of the concepts are relevant to developing a purpose of education
directed to the formation of a community of the self which integrates the
roles a student is expected to play. He draws heavily on the work of Ferdinard
Tonnies (curr. 1887) in forming his ideas about community and the role
of communities in organizational development. The form of community that
Tonnies described with the term "gemeinschaft" is Sergiovanni's ideal community.
This is the pre-industrial community that is characterized by kinship (unity
of being, a sense of "we"), place (common habitat or membership), and mind
(common goals, shared values, and a shared conception of being). Tonnies
contrasted the gemeinschaft (the sacred community) to the gesellschaft
(the secular community). He saw a shift from close ties and community values
of the gemeinschaft to the contractual values and negotiated relationships
of the gesellschaft. In the gesellschaft the primary group lost its dominance
over the individual as the individual engaged in more secondary relationships.
In the process, the control over individuals exercised through shared community
values was replaced by contractual expectations. In addition, relationships
were entered into on the basis of rational will rather than kinship. Rather
than viewing the shift to gesellschaft as the individual becoming isolated
from the community, it could be viewed as the individual becoming part
of other communities. From this perspective the individuals in the gemeinschaft
were isolated, shared kinship, and purpose and as the nature of the community
changed through immigration or as members became parts of other communities
through mobility, trade, and communication, the members of the community
needed to reconcile the demands of all of the communities. This reconciliation
has lead to the contractual nature of the relationships among communities
and individuals. Sergiovanni suggest that to form a school community it
is necessary to replace the contractual obligations in the school with
a shared sense of purpose, a community of the mind. He sees this as a transformation
of an organized collection of individuals existing in a gesellschaft into
a community of the mind (1994), a gemeinschaft with purpose, values, and
culture (1996).
The development of gemeinschaft suggested by Sergiovanni can form a
template for developing a purpose of education if the purpose is cast as
helping the student become a community of the self. The individual roles
a student is expected to play (paralleling individuals) need to be brought
together to form the basis for the students' values, purpose, and sense
of self. This would suggest a that the purpose of education be: to help
students reconcile the expectations, attitudes, and values of the communities
to which they belong and to help the students acquire the skills, knowledge,
and attitudes expected by those communities in which they will satisfy
their vocational and avocational needs.
In this context, the teacher acts to introduce the student to additional
roles and role expectations. The most obvious role is that of student,
but students are introduced to values, knowledge, and expectations of various
intellectual communities (scientific, artistic, critical), athletic communities,
civic communities, and societies. Indeed, learning could be described as
becoming part of these communities. (Index)
Using the Community
Model of Education
Community is generally used to describe local or micro relationships and
the purpose of the community model of education is to help administrators,
planners, and others understand a micro situation such as a school and
its community or the political dynamics that influence decisions made in
a school system. This need to understand and consider the views of a local
school community has gained importance because the popular approaches to
school reform include making schools more responsive to the needs of the
local community, commonly through the adoption of school-based management
(Phillips, 1997). In the past, the educational needs of the local community
and students have been subsumed and displaced by the needs of the dominant
class or segment of society. This has been extensively explored by structural-functionalist
such as Parsons (1961 [1959]) who described the function of the school
in preparing students for their adult roles; and critical theorists such
as Bowes & Gintis ( 1976) who claim that the education system reproduces
society; Bernstien (1997 [1978]), who points out that the curriculum and
pedagogies used in schools benefit particular classes in society; and Apple
& Weis (1983), who argue that the schools are used to transmit ideologies
of the dominant class and that they should take a more critical approach.
That the needs of dominant groups may differ from that of the local community
has been documented by authors such as Kohl (1994) who points out that
the dominant view of history may be different than that of the local community
and Apple & Beane (1995) who document the positive impact of developing
local programming and that the needs of a school community may be different
than the needs of a school district. This process is being resisted and
it can be demonstrated that dominant groups are maintaining control of
the schools because of the inherent contradictions in the implementation
of school-based management. For instance, actions taken by senior levels
of government to maintain control and accountability (Strike, 1997; Dorn,
1998) reduce the ability of the local community to influence curriculum
and programs. However, there is agreement that the programs and curriculum
offered by the local school should reflect local, particularly student,
educational needs. If this is going to be done, then a tool for understanding
the communities and assessing the community needs and resources is necessary.
(Index)
The community model is one approach that can be used, because it postulates
that education is a process of changing a student's habitus and social,
cultural, and symbolic capital (Bourdieu cited in Bellamy, 1994). It recognizes
that students are members of many communities: family, ethnic groups, school,
class, and friends. Each of these communities has capital and habitus (a
sense of what community members do and can do). In the model personal growth
is acquiring capital and broadening habitus by becoming a member of new
communities, such as the scientific community. Therefore, the first step
in using the model is to identify the communities the student belongs to
and then. to identify the capital and habitus of each involved community.
Bourdieu identified four types of capital: economic, cultural, social,
and symbolic, but he considered cultural and social capital as the key
when explaining educational outcomes. However, all of the forms of capital
are important to builders of a school community. The economic capital of
the communities is important for two reasons: first the socioeconomic status
of the students affects their health and ability to participate in school
community activities; second, meeting school, community, and student goals
may require economic capital. Social and symbolic capital have a similar
function to economic capital, they provide the means to meet school community
needs. Social capital does this by providing a network of individuals and
organizations that have access to capital not immediately available to
the school community. Although symbolic capital is considered separate
from social capital, it is the language and symbols that will allow the
student entry into the communities that form the social network and allow
the accumulation of social capital.
Bourdieu uses the differing cultural and social capital of social groups
to explain the reproduction of social class through the education system.
His thesis is that the cultural capital of the dominant classes is valued
in the education system and converted through academic credentials to economic
capital. Because children of the dominant classes have easy access to the
valued cultural capital, they are advantaged in the education system. In
addition, the dominant classes and their children have more social capital.
However, all communities have cultural capital and social capital and local
control of programming and curriculum provides the possibility of valuing
the cultural capital of other communities. Indeed, a school community can
benefit the involved communities by providing opportunities for each of
them to share their cultural capital thereby increasing the capital available
to each group and the school community. Also, sharing the cultural capital
will reduce resistance to altering the forms of cultural capital valued
by the education system. Similarly, although social capital is not easily
transferred, identifying the social capital held by each community makes
it indirectly available to the school community and other communities.
The sharing of cultural and social capital changes the participants "habitus";
their perception of how the world works and its possibilities. This occurs
because the sharing of cultural capital involves the sharing of histories
and possibilities which changes the experience that habitus reflects. Therefore,
by accessing the cultural, social, and symbolic capital of the involved
communities a school community can develop a habitus, view of the possible,
within the students that is broader than any of the students would develop
in the absence of the school community. Further, by providing indirect
access to pooled social capital, the school community has the means to
transform possibilities into realities. This process of developing capital
and habitus as a school community facilitates the purpose of education
underlying the community model of education, which is:
The purpose of education is to help students reconcile the expectations,
attitudes, and values of the communities to which they belong and to help
the students acquire the skills, knowledge, and attitudes expected by those
communities in which they will satisfy their vocational and avocational
needs;
because the sharing of cultural capital reduces the differences in expectations,
values, and attitudes among the involved communities and provides the student
with a broader experience to use when making judgments about community
expectations and the pooled social capital provides improved access to
the technologies of other communities. (Index)
This process is illustrated by the development of the Dene Kede curriculum
in the NWT. The Dene Kede curriculum changes the cultural capital that
is valued in the school system and was developed because the educational
requirements of the minority community and the dominant community were
not being met. Aboriginal youth were leaving the school system before junior
high (grade 7) when the dominant community was being pressured to employ
aboriginals in managerial positions in both government and industry. Therefore
the dominant community needed a large pool of educated aboriginals. Concurrently,
the aboriginal community was concerned about the loss of traditional culture
and values. To meet the needs of the communities a curriculum that drew
on the cultural capital of the aboriginal community and provided a framework
for integrating the technology of the dominant culture was developed. In
the process the social capital of both communities was expanded because
the social networks within the aboriginal community were strengthened and
shared with the dominant community. This change in programs and curriculum
validated the aboriginal culture and helped the students reconcile the
values inherent in the aboriginal culture with the expectations of the
dominant culture. Ultimately, aboriginal children are expected to be able
to live and be comfortable on the land or in the city (Tatti, F., February
1997). Another example, that involves strengthening social and economic
capital of the school communities, is provided by the Swan Valley High
School. The curriculum and programs in the school allow students to work
with the business community, which introduces the students to the culture,
technology, and expectations of the organizations they may want to join
and provides the students with access to the social networks of those organizations.
In return, the students provide the community with services that are otherwise
unavailable and access to the students' capital. In addition while building
social services networks to meet student needs, the school fostered a community
network of social services agencies that benefited both the students and
the broader community (Schaffer, B., Mateika, C., & Offenburger, H.,
February 1997). These are examples of using a community model to change
the social, cultural, economic, and symbolic capital valued by the education
system and available to the students. More importantly, there is a change
in habitus; collectively the communities expanded what is possible within
their communities and for the students. (Index)
Implications for Practice
Traditionally, the education system and schools have been the mechanism
for transmitting the culture and symbolic language of the dominant class.
Students have acquired the skills, knowledge and attitudes needed to take
their place in the labour market In addition to this the community model
is concerned with expanding the symbolic, social, and economic capital
available to the students. A multiple community approach expects that the
cultural transmission that takes place in a school will be reciprocal.
Certainly, the cultural capital of the dominant community will be valued
and transmitted, but the cultural capital of other communities will also
be valued and shared. For instance in Canadian schools the development
of Canada would be taught from several perspectives, which could include:
Anglo-Canadian, French-Canadian, Irish-Canadian, Ukrainian-Canadian, Italian-Canadian,
and aboriginal. While validating the place of the students ethnic group
and family in the Canadian society, all of the students will become more
critical of their cultural capital. Also, the introduction of the cultural
capital of minority communities will be accompanied by the symbolic capital
of the communities, which will enhance communication and make social capital
more accessible. This is an important aspect of the community model because
personal growth includes the integration and reconciliation of the cultural
and symbolic capital of the communities to which the student belongs. In
addition, the increase in social capital broadens the choices available
to the students and provides the access to community members who can collaborate
with the student and the school in forming the students' goals. While increasing
the students' access to social networks can affect the students' economic
capital, this will need to be addressed directly as well. Students and
communities without adequate economic capital will need to be supported.
This will benefit the school community as a whole because the economic
support will allow the disadvantaged community to share their cultural,
social, and symbolic capital; the lack of economic capital doesn't imply
that a community has no capital.
Viewing the class as community that over the course of a school year
is expected to develop certain attitudes and values and acquire a body
of knowledge gets to the heart of the education process and social change.
Whether the students are grouped homogeneously and physically present in
a school room or dispersed geographically and demographically, a teacher
will be working with the students to help them acquire the appropriate
skills, knowledge, and attitudes to satisfy the students immediate educational
goals and prepare them to challenge their next goal. If the teacher is
successful, over the course of the school year there is an aggregate change
in the attitudes, values, and knowledge of the class. This implies that
the teacher and the class would start the year with a needs assessment,
which would take into account external expectations as well as an assessment
of values, attitudes, and knowledge of the class. This information would
be used to establish class goals. Subsequently, the community resources
(capital) would be identified and a plan of action would be developed that
uses the available capital to achieve the goals. (Index)
Summary
The student in the community model of education is a member of many communities
and the purpose of education is to help students reconcile the expectations,
attitudes, and values of the communities to which they belong and to help
the students acquire the skills, knowledge, and attitudes expected by those
communities in which they will satisfy their vocational and avocational
needs. Implicit in this approach is the assumption that personal growth
is the acquisition and integration of the cultural, social, and symbolic
capital of the communities that the student belongs to or wishes to belong
to. Further, it was suggested that this purpose could be achieved by valuing
and sharing the cultural and symbolic capital of the communities to which
the students belong, which would increase the capital of all of the communities
and enhance the potential of all of the students. (Index)
References
Apple, M., & Beane, J. (1995) Eds. Democratic Schools. Alexandria,
VA: : Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development
Apple, M. & Weis, L. (1983) "Ideology and Practice in Schooling"
in Apple, M. & Weis, L. (eds.) Ideology and Practice in Schooling.
Philadelphia, PA: Temple University (pp. 3-33)
Bellamy, L. (1994) "Capital, Habitus, Field and Practice: An Introduction
to the Work of Pierre Bourdieu." in Erwin, L. & MacLennan, D. (Eds.)
Sociology
of Education in Canada. Toronto,ON: Copp Clark Longman (pp.120-136)
Bernstein, B. (1997, [1978]) "Class and Pedagogies: Visible and Invisible."
in Halsey, Lauder, Brown, & Wells (eds.) Education: Culture Economy
Society. Oxford: Oxford University (pp. 59-79)
Bowes, S & Gintis, H. (1976) "Education and Personal Development.
The Long Shadow of Work" in Schooling in Capitalist America. New
York, NY: Basic
Contenta, S. (1993). Rituals of Failure: What Schools Fail to Teach.
Toronto, ON: Between the Lines.
Dempsey, V. & McCadden, B. (1997) "Power and the Construction of
Meaning in School Policy." In Paul, J. Berger, N., Osnes, P., Martinez,
Y., & Morse, W. (Eds.) Ethics and Decision Making in Local Schools.
(pp. 151-164) Baltimore, MA: Paul H. Brooks Publishing Co
Dorn, S (1998) "The Political Legacy of School Accountability Systems"
in Education Policy Analysis Archives, v. 6 n. 1, http://olam.ed.asu.edu/epaa/v6n1.html
(25/3/98)
Fasching, D. (1997) "Beyond Values: Story, Character and Public Policy
in American Schools." In Paul, J. Berger, N., Osnes, P., Martinez, Y.,
& Morse, W. (Eds.) Ethics and Decision Making in Local Schools.
Baltimore, MA: Paul H. Brooks Publishing Co
Greenbaum, S. Martinez, Y., & Baber, M. (1997) "Culture and School-Based
Policy Issues." In Paul, J. Berger, N., Osnes, P., Martinez, Y., &
Morse, W. (Eds.) Ethics and Decision Making in Local Schools. Baltimore,
MA: Paul H. Brooks Publishing Co
Joyce, B., Wolf, J., & Calhoun, E. (1993) The Self-Renewing School.
Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development
Kohl, H., (1994) I Won't Learn from You: and Other Thoughts on Creative
Maladjustment. New York, NY: New Press
Parsons, T. (1961 [1959]) "The School Class as a Social System" in Halsey,
Floud, & Anderson (eds.)
Education, Economy and Society. New
York, NY: Free Press (pp. 434-455)
Phillips, L., (1997) "Expectations for School Based Management." http://www.ualberta.ca/~ljp/research/597.html
(23/3/98)
Schaffer, B., Mateika, C., & Offenburger, H. (1997, February). "Using
Partnerships to Build a Center for Life Long Learning." Paper presented
at the 2nd National Congress on Rural Education, Saskatoon, Sk.
Sergiovanni, T. (1994) Building Community in Schools. San Francisco,
CA: Jossey-Bass Publishers
Sergiovanni, T. (1996) Leadership for the Schoolhouse: How is it
Different? Why is it Important? San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass Publishers
Strike, K. (1997) Centralized Goal Formation and Systemic Reform: Reflections
on Liberty, Localism and Pluralism, in Education Policy Analysis Archives,
v. 5 n. 11, http://olam.ed.asu.edu/epaa/v5n11.html (25/3/98)
Swartz, J. and Martin, W. Jr. (1997) Applied Ecological Psychology
for Schools Within Communities: Assessment and Intervention. Mahwah,
N.J. : Lawrence Erlbaum Associates
Tatti, F. (1997, February). "Small Community Involvement in Dene Curriculum
Development." Paper presented at the 2nd National Congress on Rural Education,
Saskatoon, Sk.
Whitelaw, J. (1951) The School and Its Community: A Guide for the
Development of School-Community Relations. Baltimore, MA: Johns Hopkins
Press (Index)