| Abstract: | The author has a thorough knowledge of the educational scene in the USA. His critical analyses of the “modern” educational theories developed by J. Holt, H. Kohl, Ch. Silbermann, I. Illich and others, and of their — as yet unresearched — application to institutionalized learning and socialisation processes provide very informative insights into the on-going discussion on reform, even outside his own country. Stopsky points to four factors which have had a pronounced influence on the objectives, direction and progress of curriculum reform: - The student movement and the stimuli it generated in the civil rights movement and the relations with the “Third World”.
- The subculture of youth, accompanying this protest movement and partly caused by its lack of success, with its typical phenomena of drug consumption and social disintegration.
- The disappointment at the failure of the propagated educational reform to establish, e.g., equality of chances and improve the quality of life, and the effects of raising the standards of performance demanded of under-privileged pupils by means of drastic restrictions on admission and entrance examinations implying social selection for higher educational courses.
- The development of “anti-curricula” in the form and content of “open” or neohumanist education. The favourable reports on experiments with these “pupil-centred” curricula in British schools created a fascinating response from teachers and pupils in the USA, but most colleges rejected the innovation as being anti-intellectual and decided in favour of a “competency based” or “performance based” curriculum.
In this future-oriented paper F. Stopsky attempts to free school from the odium of suffering individual oppression and the resulting fear of the pupils, and to turn it instead into a place where children and adults will work without repression. |
