Notes from the Editors, June 2015

2015 ◽  
Vol 67 (2) ◽  
pp. 2
Author(s):  
The Editors
Keyword(s):  
Public Schools ◽  
The United States ◽  
Control Mechanisms ◽  
High Stakes ◽  
Back Issue ◽  
Community Resistance ◽  
Corporate Groups ◽  
Monthly Review ◽  
The Face ◽  
First Time

<div class="buynow"><a title="Back issue of Monthly Review, June 2015 (Volume 67, Number 2)" href="http://monthlyreview.org/back-issues/mr-067-02-2015-06/">buy this issue</a></div>In two <em>Monthly Review</em> special issues, "<a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.14452/MR-063-03-2011-07" target="_blank"><span class="hyperlink">Education Under Fire: The U.S. Corporate Attack on Students, Teachers, and Schools</span></a>" (July-August 2011) and "<a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.14452/MR-065-02-2013-06" target="_blank"><span class="hyperlink">Public School Teachers Fighting Back</span></a>" (June 2013), we sounded an alarm regarding the rapid restructuring and privatization of U.S. K&ndash;12 public schools. In terms of the scale of nationwide restructuring, the corporate takeover of education is unprecedented in modern U.S. history. The closest comparison we can come up with is the destruction of the street car systems across the United States and the building of the interstate highway system&mdash;in which freeways went right through cities for the first time, often in the face of neighborhood and community resistance. With respect to K&ndash;12 education, unimaginable amounts of private funds have gone into pressuring and corrupting government at every level, while the control mechanisms of the new educational system are increasingly left in private, not public, hands. The Common Core Standards and related high-stakes tests are at the center of this new system, and are the product of private corporate groups outside the direct reach of government.<p class="mrlink"><p class="mrpurchaselink"><a href="http://monthlyreview.org/index/volume-67-number-2" title="Vol. 67, No. 2: June 2015" target="_self">Click here to purchase a PDF version of this article at the <em>Monthly Review</em> website.</a></p>

Feminine Beauty, National Identity and Political Conflict in Postwar Italy, 1945–1954

1999 ◽  
Vol 8 (3) ◽  
pp. 359-378 ◽  
Author(s):  
Stephen Gundle
Keyword(s):  
Political Leadership ◽  
The United States ◽  
Political Conflict ◽  
Consumer Society ◽  
Beauty Contests ◽  
Feminine Beauty ◽  
The Face ◽  
Postwar Italy ◽  
First Time

After 1945 the Italian tradition of feminine beauty was redefined in a democratic context in which women, for the first time, became full citizens. Faced with a far-reaching challenge from Hollywood, traditional criteria of beauty were first strenuously defended and then modified and commercialised. Beauty contests proved to be a vital vehicle in this transition, since they acted both as a forum for the reassertion of Italian beauty and as a vehicle for the displacement of old ideas centred on the face with a new concept based on the eroticised body. This transition became bound up with the ongoing political conflict between Catholics and the left for the moral and political leadership of the country. While both, with different emphases, championed ‘natural’ at the expense of American-style ‘manufactured’ beauty, competition led them to engage with, and in some way adopt, the sexualised beauty that was the hallmark of the role of the United States in furnishing new models for the consumer society that would develop rapidly in the later 1950s.

“We Find Ourselves Preoccupied with the World of the Present”: Humanist Resistance to Progressive Education in Ontario

2015 ◽  
Vol 55 (3) ◽  
pp. 294-318
Author(s):  
Theodore Michael Christou
Keyword(s):  
Public Schools ◽  
Progressive Education ◽  
School Organization ◽  
The United States ◽  
Curriculum Theory ◽  
The Public ◽  
Faculty Psychology ◽  
Rapid Social Change ◽  
The Face ◽  
The Subject

The work here explores the voices of Ontario's humanist educators, who advocated for the preservation of a curriculum theory rooted in faculty psychology, mental discipline, and the classics in the face of progressivist revisions to the province's public school organization. A great deal of scholastic sweat has been poured over the subject of progressive education, its meanings, and its purposes. Much less has been said about the critics of progressivist reform, who are referred to here as humanists; this term follows from the work of Herbert Kliebard, who characterized humanists as one of four competing interests in an epic struggle over the curriculum in the United States. Theodore Christou dubbed humanists “foils” to the progressivist reformers who succeeded in overturning Ontario'sProgrammes of Studyfor the public schools. Kliebard defined this group as:the guardians of an ancient tradition tied to the power of reason and the finest elements of the Western cultural heritage… to them fell the task of reinterpreting, and thereby preserving as best as they could, their revered traditions and values in the face of rapid social change and a burgeoning school system.

scholarly journals The Future of School Social Work Practice: Current Trends and Opportunities

10.18060/89 ◽  
2005 ◽  
Vol 6 (1) ◽  
pp. 167-181 ◽  
Author(s):  
Cynthia Franklin
Keyword(s):  
Public Schools ◽  
Social Work ◽  
Standardized Testing ◽  
Work Practice ◽  
School Social Work ◽  
The United States ◽  
Social Work Practice ◽  
High Stakes ◽  
School Based ◽  
The Future

This article discusses the information on school social work practice in the United States and summarizes recent trends and their implications for the future of school social work. The number of school social workers and current infrastructure available for the development of school social work practice is reviewed. Five sociocultural trends are summarized that are affecting public schools as well as important school-based practice trends such as standardized testing, and high stakes accountability measures. The emerging practice trend of evidence-based practices is discussed in light of its standards and implications for school-based practice. Finally, essential knowledge for strengthening practice competencies to meet the future challenges of school-based practice is highlight.

Reframing School Culture through Project-Based Assessment Tasks: Cultivating Transformative Agency and Humanizing Practices in NYC Public Schools

2021 ◽  
Vol 123 (4) ◽  
pp. 1-38
Author(s):  
Maria Hantzopoulos ◽  
Rosa L. Rivera-Mccutchen ◽  
Alia R. Tyner-Mullings
Keyword(s):  
New York ◽  
Public Schools ◽  
School Culture ◽  
School Reform ◽  
Research Question ◽  
The United States ◽  
Assessment Process ◽  
Historical Inquiry ◽  
High Stakes ◽  
Assessment Tasks

Background/Context In the last two decades, high-stakes testing policies have proliferated exponentially, radically altering the broader educational landscape in the United States. Although these policies continue to dominate educational reform agendas, researchers argue that they have not improved educational outcomes for youth and have exacerbated inequities in schooling across racial, economic, geographic, and linguistic lines. Alternative project-based assessments, like ones used by the New York Performance Standards Consortium (Consortium) are one type of practice to have shown promise in aiding in the creation of humanizing and transformative educational spaces. Purpose/Objective/Research Question/Focus of Study This article examines how teachers and students make meaning of their experiences transitioning away from high-stakes standardized tests to project-based assessment tasks (PBATs) and specifically considers the role that PBATs might play in shaping school culture. Drawing from three years of data collection at 10 New York City public high schools new to the Consortium, we discern how students and teachers negotiate this shift, paying attention to the ways in which PBATs fostered transformative and humanizing pedagogies and practices. We raise the following questions: How can schools that use project-based assessment reinvigorate school culture to address enduring inequities that persist in schools? How might PBATs reframe schools to be more humanizing and transformative spaces? Research Design We used multiple methods to understand how project-based assessment shapes school culture and curriculum in these transitioning schools, and drew from qualitative and quantitative traditions. The research involved: (1) a historical inquiry into the role of the Consortium in school reform; (2) a broad investigation of the 10 schools transitioning into the Consortium (including three rounds of annual surveys with teachers and administrators); (3) three in-depth focal case studies of transitioning schools (including observations, interviews with teachers, and surveys with students); and (4) surveys with experienced teachers new to established Consortium schools. Conclusions PBATs are a useful tool to engage students and teachers more actively as participatory actors in the school environment, particularly when overall school structures collectively support its integration. Although there were inevitable challenges in the process of transition, our data suggest that the school actors mediated some of these tensions and ultimately felt that PBATs helped create more dignified spaces for youth. By anchoring the assessment process in the concept of transformative agency, we consider how the transition to PBATs might reinvigorate school culture, redress harmful systemic injustices, and serve as a necessary part of school reform and education policy.

Introduction

2003 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jennifer L. Hochschild ◽  
Nathan Scovronick
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Public Schools ◽  
American Dream ◽  
School Funding ◽  
High Stakes Testing ◽  
The United States ◽  
Education Policies ◽  
High Stakes ◽  
Good Citizen ◽  
The Individual

THE AMERICAN DREAM IS A POWERFUL CONCEPT. It encourages each person who lives in the United States to pursue success, and it creates the framework within which everyone can do it. It holds each person responsible for achieving his or her own dreams, while generating shared values and behaviors needed to persuade Americans that they have a real chance to achieve them. It holds out a vision of both individual success and the collective good of all. From the perspective of the individual, the ideology is as compelling as it is simple. “I am an American, so I have the freedom and opportunity to make whatever I want of my life. I can succeed by working hard and using my talents; if I fail, it will be my own fault. Success is honorable, and failure is not. In order to make sure that my children and grandchildren have the same freedom and opportunities that I do, I have a responsibility to be a good citizen— to respect those whose vision of success is different from my own, to help make sure that everyone has an equal chance to succeed, to participate in the democratic process, and to teach my children to be proud of this country.” Not all residents of the United States believe all of those things, of course, and some believe none of them. Nevertheless, this American dream is surprisingly close to what most Americans have believed through most of recent American history. Public schools are where it is all supposed to start—they are the central institutions for bringing both parts of the dream into practice. Americans expect schools not only to help students reach their potential as individuals but also to make them good citizens who will maintain the nation’s values and institutions, help them flourish, and pass them on to the next generation. The American public widely endorses both of these broad goals, values public education, and supports it with an extraordinary level of resources. Despite this consensus Americans disagree intensely about the education policies that will best help us achieve this dual goal. In recent years disputes over educational issues have involved all the branches and levels of government and have affected millions of students. The controversies—over matters like school funding, vouchers, bilingual education, high-stakes testing, desegregation, and creationism—seem, at first glance, to be separate problems.

Notes from the Editors, May 2015

2015 ◽  
Vol 67 (1) ◽  
pp. 2
Author(s):  
The Editors
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Vietnam War ◽  
The United States ◽  
Back Issue ◽  
Japanese Occupation ◽  
Monthly Review ◽  
Office Of Strategic Services ◽  
The Cost ◽  
Indochina War ◽  
The U.S

<div class="buynow"><a title="Back issue of Monthly Review, May 2015 (Volume 67, Number 1)" href="http://monthlyreview.org/back-issues/mr-067-01-2015-05/">buy this issue</a></div>As we write these notes in March 2015, the Pentagon's official Vietnam War Commemoration, conducted in cooperation with the U.S. media, is highlighting the fiftieth anniversary of the beginning of the U.S. ground war in Vietnam, marked by the arrival of two Marine battalions in De Nang on March 8, 1965. This date, however, was far from constituting the beginning of the war. The first American to die of military causes in Vietnam, killed in 1945, was a member of the Office of Strategic Services (a precursor of the CIA). U.S. intelligence officers were there in support of the French war to recolonize Vietnam, following the end of the Japanese occupation in the Second World War and Vietnam's declaration of national independence as the Democratic Republic of Vietnam. The French recolonization effort is sometimes called the First Indochina War in order to distinguish it from the Second Indochina War, initiated by the United States. In reality, it was all one war against the Viet Minh (Vietnamese Independence League). By the time that the Vietnamese defeated the French at Dien Bien Phu in 1954, the United States was paying for 80&ndash;90 percent of the cost of the war.<p class="mrlink"><p class="mrpurchaselink"><a href="http://monthlyreview.org/index/volume-67-number-1" title="Vol. 67, No. 1: May 2015" target="_self">Click here to purchase a PDF version of this article at the <em>Monthly Review</em> website.</a></p>

Notes from the Editors, December 2015

2015 ◽  
Vol 67 (7) ◽  
pp. 2
Author(s):  
The Editors
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Communist Party ◽  
Index Volume ◽  
The United States ◽  
Back Issue ◽  
Monthly Review ◽  
Military Equipment ◽  
Mass Killings ◽  
The U.S

<div class="buynow"><a title="Back issue of Monthly Review, December 2015 (Volume 67, Number 7)" href="http://monthlyreview.org/product/mr-067-07-2015-11/">buy this issue</a></div>In this issue we feature two articles on the 1965&ndash;1966 mass killings and imprisonments in Indonesia. The army-led bloodbath was aimed at the near-total extermination of members of the Indonesian Communist Party (PKI), then a highly successful electoral party with a membership in the millions.&hellip; In all, an estimated 500,000 to a million (or more) people were murdered. Another 750,000 to a million-and-a-half people were imprisoned, many of whom were tortured. Untold thousands died in prison. Only around 800 people were given a trial&mdash;most brought before military tribunals that summarily condemned them to death.&hellip; The United States&hellip;was involved clandestinely in nearly every part of this mass extermination: compiling lists of individuals to be killed; dispatching military equipment specifically designated to aid the known perpetrators of the bloodletting; offering organizational and logistical help; sending covert operatives to aid in the "cleansing"; and providing political backing to the killers.&hellip; [T]he mass killings&hellip;[were carried out with the active] complicity of the U.S. media.<p class="mrlink"><p class="mrpurchaselink"><a href="http://monthlyreview.org/index/volume-67-number-7" title="Vol. 67, No. 7: December 2015" target="_self">Click here to purchase a PDF version of this article at the <em>Monthly Review</em> website.</a></p>

Notes from the Editors, October 2015

2015 ◽  
Vol 67 (5) ◽  
pp. 2
Author(s):  
The Editors
Keyword(s):  
Vietnam War ◽  
Turning Point ◽  
The United States ◽  
Right Wing ◽  
Back Issue ◽  
Monthly Review ◽  
Major Turning Point ◽  
History Of ◽  
Close Cooperation ◽  
The Military

<div class="buynow"><a title="Back issue of Monthly Review, October 2015 (Volume 67, Number 5)" href="http://monthlyreview.org/product/mr-067-05-2015-09/">buy this issue</a></div>Fifty years ago this month, beginning in early October 1965 and extending for months afterwards, the United States helped engineer a violent end to the Communist Party of Indonesia (PKI). Between 500,000 and a million Indonesians were killed by conservative factions of the military led by General Suharto and by right-wing Muslim youth&mdash;all with the direct involvement of the CIA, the close cooperation of the U.S. Embassy and State Department, and the guidance of the Johnson administration's National Security Council.&hellip; In forthcoming issues of <em>Monthly Review </em>we are planning to publish work on the Indonesian genocide, which, alongside the Vietnam War, constitutes a major turning point in the history of Southeast Asia in the period, and one of the most brutal acts of mass carnage inflicted by imperialism in the twentieth century. The dire implications of this carry down to the present day.<p class="mrlink"><p class="mrpurchaselink"><a href="http://monthlyreview.org/index/volume-67-number-5" title="Vol. 67, No. 5: October 2015" target="_self">Click here to purchase a PDF version of this article at the <em>Monthly Review</em> website.</a></p>

The Cafeteria as Great Equalizer

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Amy L. Best
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
High School ◽  
School Lunch ◽  
The United States ◽  
System Of Care ◽  
Social Value ◽  
High Stakes ◽  
Public System ◽  
The Social ◽  
The Face

This chapter examines the lunch menu at Thurgood High School, focusing on the work of food director Brenda, with the aim to deepen our understanding of the complexity of school lunch as a high-stakes public good. Brenda had a no-nonsense style about her; she rarely minced words, but was warm in her demeanor, knowledgeable, and accessible. She made the best of what she was given but hoped for a better food future and in this sense was both pragmatic and aspirational. She held her ground in the face of outside scrutiny, and acknowledged the social value in her work and its link to a public system of care. She recognized that a larger number of students she fed each day were part of the growing number of those who are food insecure in the United States, and her efforts to prepare food that kids wanted to eat expressed a deep commitment to addressing both health and hunger.

Notes from the Editors, November 2015

2015 ◽  
Vol 67 (6) ◽  
pp. 2
Author(s):  
The Editors
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Soviet Union ◽  
Middle East ◽  
Former Soviet Union ◽  
The United States ◽  
Gulf War ◽  
Islamic State ◽  
Back Issue ◽  
Quarter Century ◽  
Monthly Review

<div class="buynow"><a title="Back issue of Monthly Review, November 2015 (Volume 67, Number 6)" href="http://monthlyreview.org/product/mr-067-06-2015-10/">buy this issue</a></div>To understand why the Middle East is now in shambles, with the United States currently involved simultaneously in wars against both the Assad government in Syria and the Islamic State in Iraq, generating the greatest refugee crisis in Europe since the Second World War, it is necessary to go back almost a quarter-century to the 1991 Persian Gulf War. The Gulf War, unleashed by the United States in response to Iraq's invasion of Kuwait, was made possible by the growing disorder in the USSR followed by its demise later that same year. The USSR's disappearance from the world stage allowed the United States to shift to a naked imperialist stance&mdash;though justified in the manner of the colonial empires of old as "anti-terrorism" and "humanitarian intervention"&mdash;not only in the Middle East, but also along the entire great arc that had constituted the perimeter of the former Soviet Union.<p class="mrlink"><p class="mrpurchaselink"><a href="http://monthlyreview.org/index/volume-67-number-6" title="Vol. 67, No. 6: November 2015" target="_self">Click here to purchase a PDF version of this article at the <em>Monthly Review</em> website.</a></p>

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document