The Congregational Principle
Link to purchaseCornell Notes
Main Notes
- The text criticizes current scientific school establishment plans for further centralization
- Introduces the Congregational principle from Colonial New England as an alternative approach
- Salem Procedure (1629) initiated a system of local governance in churches
- Congregationalism promoted individuality, dialectical thinking, and local decision-making
- Each town in Colonial Massachusetts had flexibility to develop its own style and culture
- Towns could exclude people who didn't fit their vision, allowing for more cohesive communities
- The system promoted self-reliance, democracy, and local loyalty
- Religious discrimination was initially prevalent but gradually diminished without central intervention
- Local choice is presented as self-correcting and limiting the spread of harmful ideas
- Criticizes central planning and national curriculum as stifling local innovation and diversity
- Argues that compulsory education and central planning have failed to achieve their goals
- Suggests that prohibition of choice in education has had negative effects on society
- Proposes a return to local control and choice in education
- Critiques the view of education as an engineering problem or a courtroom drama
- Discusses the parasitic growth of education-related industries
- Examines the American tendency to seek quick fixes and magical solutions
- Criticizes the mechanistic view of human nature in education
- Quotes Octavio Paz on the restrictive nature of the North American educational system
- Argues that monopoly schooling contributes to loss of national and individual identity
- Proposes decertification of teaching and a return to community-based education
Cue Column
- How does centralization in education contrast with the Congregational principle?
- What were the key features of the Salem Procedure and its impact?
- How did Congregationalism promote individual thinking and local governance?
- What were the benefits and drawbacks of allowing towns to exclude certain people?
- How did the system of local choice lead to gradual social change without central intervention?
- Why does the author argue against a national curriculum?
- What evidence does the author present for the failure of compulsory education?
- How does the author relate education to the broader American culture?
- What alternatives does the author propose to the current educational system?
- How does the author's view of human nature conflict with current educational practices?
- What role does the author see for families and communities in education?
Summary
The text presents a critique of the current centralized, standardized education system in the United States and proposes an alternative based on the Congregational principle from Colonial New England. The author argues that the current system, with its focus on national standards and curricula, stifles local innovation and fails to meet the diverse needs of communities and individuals.
The Congregational principle, as described in the text, emphasizes local governance, individual choice, and community-based decision-making. The author traces the historical development of this principle in Colonial New England, highlighting how it allowed for diversity among towns and gradually led to increased tolerance and social progress without central intervention.
The author contends that the current education system, based on compulsory attendance and standardized curricula, has failed to achieve its goals and has contributed to a loss of national and individual identity. He argues that this system treats students as machines to be programmed rather than as individuals with unique needs and potentials.
As an alternative, the author proposes a return to local control of education, with emphasis on family and community involvement. He suggests decertifying teaching, allowing for more diverse educational approaches, and trusting families to make educational choices for their children. The author believes this approach would lead to a more dynamic, responsive, and effective educational system that better serves the needs of individuals and communities.