I have made peace with the incoherence of my thoughts and, hence,this blog post. Trying to finish the reading and think about what it said will come easier next week. For this week, I note interesting things that make me think and questions that I could probably start to answer had I not been writing on Tuesday morning. Forgive me.
Barbara K-G's article seemed to hit me the hardest with its questioning of staid institutions and the dichotomies we all face in this gosh-darned world. Folklore's struggle to bridge the gap between academy and the real world parallels my field- education. I have taught in public schools, taught those who will soon teach in public schools and, finally, closed the door to my ivory-towered office, removing myself from the trenches I purport to care about so much. In academia, there is no shortage of theory about education, rules for "best practices" (hate that term!), and calls for praxis. I follow the teachings of Brazilian educator Paolo Freire who called for praxis to be initiated by and part of the DNA of learners as well as teachers. He was advocating for adult illiterates who were caught in an endless cycle of poverty and other forms of oppression. This praxis of theory and practice is rarely brought up to new teachers because circumstances make it so. A new teacher is thrown into the fray with barely adequate apprenticeship and usually little help navigating the new waters of leadership (principal's aren't the only educational leaders!). Because of the "survival in the trenches" mentality/reality, the academy is looked at by many with much wariness and a side of resentment or jealousy. (Anyone who has taught grade school knows the meaning of exhaustion.)
Logic rarely plays a role in this uneasy relationship. Typically, the academy comes up with theories, politicians and others who think they know what's best for their childrens' education pontificate, and the lowly "folk" shut their classroom doors and do the best they can. In recent years, those doors have been forced open by a foul ideological wind- the same shaming smell that causes teachers to shut out the world in the first place. (Cliche alert!) The baby is thrown out with the bath water. Praxis has many benefits. Maybe the most important is a dialogue between the two entities in question who are unfairly positioned against each other. In folklore terms, we have theorists that compete for a slice of recognition in the academy against those who need money to preserve "folklore". I hope that folklore doesn't feel the traumatic effects of a decades-long staring match between cousins who should dine at the same table.
Dorson can talk about "fakelore", but it ends up being a pissing match. K-G takes time to mention social theorists such as Raymond Williams and Stuart Hall. In my humble opinion, those who see the hinderances to praxis have the most to say to all involved. Education rarely brings up the dispassionate scholar who might be able to instruct or mediate. Looking at media, culture, advertising, (all loaded terms) etc., the scholarship on representation is rich with theoretical umbrellas that the professor and the do-er can gather under. There is always a push-pull between the two, and our system in this country promotes that particular type of competition. We have to remember there is life beyond ideology and three seats (theory, practice, and praxis/context) can be at the table without one labeled "the head".
No comments:
Post a Comment