168
I think I’ve posted this video before, but it’s worth posting again. If you are hesitant to believe that the original model of public school began with a dangerous agenda, J.T. Gatto details the proof and origin of that agenda.
Interestingly, though his book and this interview took place years ago, we can see all the more clearly the truth of his claims in our current system.
Remember the post the other day about “doing away with traditional family ideals”? This was the very intent from the beginning–“family structure is a hindrance to a Utopian society and children have to be separated from it”.
PLEASE listen, ponder then pass it on–don’t be afraid!
4 comments
Kelly,
Excellent video.
Excellent.
Thank you for having this available for others to see it and form an opinion.
Deanna
No this, I can relate to a lot more than the post from yesterday. I have always been astounded that parents seem to ask no questions of the persons who will be in charge of molding their children for the majority of the day, 3/4 of the year. Besides which, Gatto is quite right, teachers do not have enough time with any individual child during those hours to tailor learning to that child’s needs. Some schools (such as the Waldorf model) are attempting to correct this by having a single teacher move with a class from first grade through eighth grade, but of course, those are private schools.
And, while I’m not sure that I thought it likely that the creators of the public school system wanted to crank out “dumb” people (it’s just a little too conspiracy theory for me, and the motives seem questionable at best), I do recognize that the Henry Ford mass production mentality was a driving force behind nationalized education–and that it doesn’t do any better for education than it did in the quality of craftsmanship of products. Our country has too long valued quanitity over quality, and our public education system is no different.
Thanks for an informative video, Kelly.
~Bethany
Kelly, I can’t believe John Taylor Gatto thinks that Jerry’s Farber’s classic essay “Student as Nigger” was good. Surely I’m misunderstanding, and he doesn’t.
I saw the first article about public schooling advertised on your sidebar and clicked on it. In the article, John Taylor Gatto extolled the virtues of the classic 60’s essay “Student as Nigger.”
I well remember “Student as Nigger.” My husband, who was then my fiance, was told to write a report on “Student as Nigger” for his college English class in 1968.
His mother found his copy of the essay “Student as Nigger” when he brought it home and thought HE wrote it and gave him a royal chewing out. “Student as Nigger” is classic 60’s crap (for lack of a nicer word), and was considered incredibly subversive. It was first seen a Los Angeles paper. My husband (then fiance) was able to convince his mother that he didn’t write such filthy garbage and she quit yelling at him.
Now I am confused. John Gatto thinks “Student as Nigger” was a beautiful essay? Click on it and read it. Don’t faint at the language.
Don’t get old. You remember too much. Surely John Gatto is not saying that Jerry Farber’s essay “Student as Nigger” is good. Maybe I’m missing something or not getting the point. Read it. Click on your sidebar article. Google Jerry Farber. Click on the place where you can see the original article “Student as Nigger.”
What is John Gatto proposing?
@Civillia: Have you ever read the essay? I had never heard of it until I came across this blog post. It is more of an un-schooling argument than anything else. It can be found here: http://www.soilandhealth.org/03sov/0303critic/030301studentasnigger.html