Steve,

Thanks for the thought provoking insight.  We each get to make choices in this world and as such we each have an individual responsibility for shaping the world in which we live.  Your reference to the holocoust is a stark reminder of how denying this responsbility can have horrific consequences. 

That said, I am cautious about denying the power of "social forces" to shape individual decision making.  I think it is rare that parents, teachers (and mostly even school adminstrators) make decisions that they believe are not in the best interest of their  students and/or children in the micro lived context of how their immediate world is structured.  This is why I think it is so important to to talk about the macro structural forces that shape society and education. We must name the oppressive structures in the hopes of changing the oppressive structures in the hopes of creating communities where inidivudal are rewarded instead of penalized for living in a more socially conscientious and just way. 

At least that's what I think I think.....

Still pondering,

Andrew

Hmm....  So do social forces not matter?  Do structural inequities not matter?  Does all responsibility lie equally on every individual?

When I talk about structural responsibility, I do not see it as an innaminate force. I see social forces as disproportionately manipulated by people in power to serve people in power. 

I think you are saying : To the extent that we all have power then anyone who submits to unjust social forces has contributed to the injustices of our world and should not be excused.  I guess I agree, in that I would not suggest we excuse any individual who acts in unjust ways. 

But to the extent that some people have more power to control and shape these forces than others, then in my mind some people are more guilty than others...  Or is this not true?  Is there no difference between people's level of power?  I think there is...

Does that make sense?

Andrew

steve and andrew. . .this is an important conversation and key distinctions. . .i write Op-Eds often in a local and state paper and at least one neocon/free-market advocate accuses me (and distorts my points) to mean that acknowledging social forces' impact on students is simply giving excuses for poor performing schools. . .this claim is followed by accusing me of supporting the status quo. . .of course i am a strong critic of the status quo. . .having on this site challenged Obama/Duncan as little better than the Bush regime for education. . .i think it would benefit school reform if we could tease out to what degree parents and teachers (along with students) are victims of these social forces and/or complicit with those forces. . .i currently teach in an exclusive private college where students WANT banking-education because it has worked for them. . .feedback from a graduate course recently actually had a comment from a student stating that a weakness of the program was allowing students to teach each other instead of the teacher doing it. . .i believe i lean strongly toward adnrew's concern for the failure of the rugged individualism myth driving most of the discourse and behavior in the US. . .i reject blaming the victim. . .but i also feel frustration when admins, teachers, parents, and students see the inequities and know the "norms" but APPEAR to choose to maintain the status quo. . .such as the popularity of Ruby Payne's deficit approach to "training" teachers to address poverty. . .teachers overwhelmingly believe Payne is right. . .paul

I thought that this blog was very informative. I do believe that the blame game on America's educational downfall is the responsibility of everyone who is involved in a child's life from infancy to adulthood, especially parents and teachers.

Parents are the first teachers in their child's lives. When a parent decides that outside issues are more important than the basic needs of a child; the child become lost. Some outside issues can be over-involment of a relationship, promiscuity, lack of caring, too much time into work or even trying to be a friend instead of a parent. What happened to when people were a collective and cohesive unit in the community?  What happened to parents being actively involved in thier childrens' education? What happened to having an adult conversation with the teacher without jumping to the side of the child before the entire story has been told? What happened teaching the child respect towards thier elders?

Teachers are more like second parents to children when its time for them to attend school. Teachers should reienforce what should have already been established in the home as far as behavior and education. Being a teacher, you are taking the child further in the education process so that they would be ready for the real world once they are to reach adulthood. Since children come into a school system that has been under  mismanagement, underrepresentation, and inequality;having a teacher that is "burnt out",  the child then becomes even more lost in the struggle for educational growth. Some teachers are now in the system to "get a check" and not to educate. Few teachers are stuck in the past from when they first started teaching and think that the curriculum should not be altered in any way just because the kids are not the same. Some teacher think that children are "bad" or "uneducationable" so instead of working with the student so that they can master a course, they are just passed along to the next grade.

Teachers and parents need to work together and become a cohesive unit back into the community again. Parents need teachers' support and vice versa. Without the help from each other, the child is doomed for destruction.The child will enter into a situation in which the lack of education and support from the parent and teacher will lead them to another system: institutionalization of incarceration!

Needless to say, excellent discussion thus far.  I would like to jump right to my question, which springs from Fanon's writings "On Violence" in Wretched of The Earth, Saul Alinsky's "Of Means and Ends" in Rules for Radicals, and J. Krishnamurti's The Only Revolution.  Where do we draw the line when we are fighting?  When we are prepared to fight, when we are organized, will our actions suffice if they spring from conflict?  Must they spring from love?  As I see that life is a reflection of our internal nature, conflict is without because it is within.  What would happen when there ceases to be conflict within? 

Conscientization over blame addresses this point, but I wonder how one orients him/her/zerself when they're breathing down your neck.  I think I answered my own question.  You won't know/learn/see until you experience it for yourself.

 Although a very belated contribution, the above series of discussions is extremely fascinating to me in relating to my own - relatively recent experiences of primary and secondary education (albeit of significantly differing context coming from a transitional-rural community in Victoria Australia). 
 
Of particular note, I remember acutely the homogenizing approaches to education asserted at the private Catholic primary school I first attended; large classes, highly ritualised, dogmatically empirical evaluations of student progression - (I still have a cluster of reports from teachers demonstrating such technique). It was an environment that would prove utterly unsuitable for myself, which was a contributory factor to pervasive exclusion and isolation from teachers and other students. Whilst this is a particular, and indeed an unrepresentative anecdote, much of what has been discussed I can relate to with quite vivid clarity.
 
Indeed, for myself in reflection, a particularly revealing conjunction I experienced be-twixt the school-parent responsibility nexuses, was how I was subsequently treated by the school and my parents at the age of 11. After a series of events, the school recommended an independent psychological evaluation, with which my parents complied. I do not remember much of the evaluation - besides being very upset. However, in view of the above discussions - I feel that my parent's own reaction to what must have appeared to be my unruly behaviour and "eccentricities" is somewhat emblematic of how when both the school and my parents were faced with a child who, essentially, did not fit the paradigms of the educational frameworks and what a child "should be" - it was I, the child, who was troubled - not the system of education, not the teachers, not the doctrinal religious modality of education, nor my home life - it had been for both parties - a troubled child - not a troubled institution. I should note, that my parent's were, and are, indeed loving and caring people - and I myself attribute much of the turmoil I experienced to the inflexible and dogmatic modalities of education of that particular school. Again, this is not representative, but those series of experiences I feel relate quite succinctly to the above discussion, not in an explanatory or analytical context, but in relating to the discussion as a youth who has experienced some of the aforementioned failures of teachers inculcated into dogmatic modalities of life and thought.
 
Alternatively though, I can also attest to the positive and highly influential differences that caring teachers have, can and continue to make, in both my life and other people I have met. Indeed, it was the dedication of an English & History teacher I had from the age of 14 that distinctly changed how I understood myself, and challenged me with every step I took - I was incredibly fortunate in this and cannot be more thankful to her in this regard. Furthermore, the secondary school I had attended adopted a far more flexible, although a much more academically diligent, framework for students and teachers. Though demanding, there was greater room to challenge - be challenged and even creative space in a multitude of avenues, in and beyond the school. However, on the flip-side, this fortune was entirely dependent upon the (increased) financial wealth of my father, and the generosity of the school's head-master - a pertinent point of socio-economic benefit that has been raised by all contributors so far. Indeed, Mr. Fish's comment - as already noted is particularly apt in describing my Secondary educational experience:
 
 "Schools tend to also reflect, acknowledge and privilege white Western middle class values and ways of living, so schools are often an extension to a certain degree of this social group's lifestyle, making success that much more likely for white middle class students." 
 
Of note though - at the secondary school I attended, Australian students were a minority relative to the various international students who attended and boarded at the school - though here - to what extent "Western middle class values" were recreated and re-perpetuated, would be an interesting aspect to consider.
 
In relating this though, I feel I have experienced aspects of both positive and negative educational environments throughout the crucial psychological developmental phases of my life to date. In reflecting on the above discussion in this context - I certainly feel there is much to be answered for in how education operates in society - I certainly learnt very little about children, family and social communities throughout my primary & secondary education - and now at the age of 22, I am learning at how very little I could even say "I know" is relevant, beyond my own experiences. I can only muse upon though at how empiricist inculcation has possibly contributed to family dysfunction and social/community alienation. Educating for a society though, through ahistorical, positivistic and universal-narratives of nationalism, empiricism and finance however, I feel has, and is leading, to extenuating social-dysfunction in many areas of Australia. Indeed, reflective of this you can trace the current debates circulating here concerning binge-drinking and alcohol-fueled street violence flaring throughout Sydney, Melbourne, Brisbane and Canberra. As an aside here though, I have not followed the debates with extreme attention.
 
A question i would like to raise thus, is to ask wherein between; the parents (as educational products) teachers (as educational instructors) administrators (as educational enforcers & functionaries) do the underpinning narratives of teleological logics of "progress" and "science" lay in terms of accountability? I.e., the creation - recreation and re-perpetuation of nationalised scientific narratives which have come to command our social cognition. Although as  Mr. DeGuillio has noted; "we must not give it a reality it does not possess in the process", surely the operating narratives permeating social cognisance mandate both a consideration and response in the context of how we generationally perpetuate ourselves (or are ourselves perpetuated)?  
 
Nonetheless, thank-you to all who took their time to write above as well - I have found your discussions thought provoking and intensely important.
 
Sincerest regards,
di-a.