Social Class Analysis in the Early Progressive Tradition

Hlebowitsh, Peter S.; Wraga, William G.

doi:10.1080/03626784.1995.11076166

Cited by 3 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 8 publications

(7 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…He advocated for an education that expanded the capacities of all students. Until that time, Dewey concluded, “we shall never have any light upon what are the limits of intelligence set by innate qualities” (see also Hlebowitsh & Wraga, 1995). 23…”

Section: The Place Of Poverty In the New Science Of Educationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Making the Visible Invisible

Powers

Fischman

Berliner

2016

Review of Research in Education

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The year 2016 marks the 100th anniversary of the American Educational Research Association and the 50th anniversary of the publication of Equality of Educational Opportunity, known as the Coleman Report. These key moments in the field’s history ushered in important paradigm shifts in the practice of education research; in how the relationships among poverty, inequality, and schooling were understood; and in the research-policy nexus. This conceptual synthesis of the history of education research in the United States is focused on poverty knowledge in both periods. The authors trace the rise of education as a field of study, the place of poverty in the emergent science of education, and the extent to which leading researchers have acknowledged, analyzed, or contested poverty. The Coleman Report advanced a new paradigm for analysis while being firmly rooted in earlier traditions. Coleman’s analytical approach has become common sense in educational policymaking in the form of the accountability movement. The report’s fundamental insights about the relationship between poverty and student achievement too often remain unacknowledged by U.S. policymakers.

show abstract

Section: The Place Of Poverty In the New Science Of Educationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Making the Visible Invisible

Powers

Fischman

Berliner

2016

Review of Research in Education

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Social reconstructionist curriculum proposals of the 1930s were plagued by the first problem. Progressives such as Dewey and Bode attacked such proposals as advocating indoctrination at the expense of a democratic free play of intelligence on social issues and problems (Hlebowitsh & Wraga, 1995). "Traditionalists" such as Caswell and Campbell (1935) and Harap (1937) also recognized the imperative of considering local circumstances and involving local constituents when developing curricula.…”

Section: Paradoxes Of Confronting the Practicalmentioning

confidence: 99%

"Extracting Sun-Beams out of Cucumbers": The Retreat From Practice in Reconceptualized Curriculum Studies

Wraga

1999

Educational Researcher

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Reconceptualized curriculum theorizing is characterized by efforts to distance curriculum theory far from school practice. The characterization of the "reconceptualization" of the curriculum field as a shift from focus on developing curriculum to a preeminent concern for understanding curriculum and the proclivity to consider virtually all phenomena of life experience as acceptable subjects of curriculum inquiry are examples of a willingness to divorce curriculum theorizing from school practice. Rationales for explicitly distancing theory far from practice have been advanced, as well. This essay documents and explains these three manifestations of the theory-practice split in reconceptualized curriculum studies; evaluates this split against Dewey's educational theory, the obligations of professional schools to practicing professionals, and the ideal of the land-grant university; assesses selected recent proposals for reconceptualized curriculum practice; and suggests implications of the bifurcation of theory and practice for the curriculum field and for schooling. The theory-practice split advocated in reconceptualized curriculum theorizing is regarded as detrimental to the academic field of curriculum and to the prospect for improving curriculum practice in schools.

show abstract

Social Class and Social Action

Schutz¹

2010

Social Class, Social Action, and Education

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Social Class Analysis in the Early Progressive Tradition

Cited by 3 publications

References 8 publications

Making the Visible Invisible

Making the Visible Invisible

"Extracting Sun-Beams out of Cucumbers": The Retreat From Practice in Reconceptualized Curriculum Studies

Social Class and Social Action

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About