Critique on Gatto's interpretation of the 6 functions of secondary education discussed in The Ultimate History lesson: A Weekend With John Taylor Gatto

Originally posted at http://tragedyandhope.ning.com/profiles/blogs/john-taylor-gatto-on-alexander-inglis-principles-of-secondary

The Ultimate History Lesson with John Taylor Gatto had a significant influence on me. The course of history -- the "Ominous Continuity", -- Gatto described seemed like a reasonable interpretation of history. (See https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL463AA90FD04EC7A2 for the 5 hour interview and commentary)

The discussion in Peace Revolution #45 of the 6 Functions of Secondary Education in the "Principles Of Secondary Education", By Alexander Inglis really got my attention and I've always wanted to check this out. I have finally gotten around to it via my project to convert this book into audio. Please note that I have not read the book yet, nor have I finished the conversion to audio and listened to it. Nevertheless, I submit my thoughts for your consideration.

In the process of editing the text created from the scanned images I came across the part of the book where Inglis describes these 6 functions. Below is my take on what Inglis wrote, what Gatto said about it, and What Richard said about both.

Tragedy & Hope Peace Revolution #45 https://tragedyandhope.com/peace-revolution-episode-045: Last hour of Interview with John Taylor Gatto. Below is Inglis’ text, followed by the commentary from John and Richard about each function and, lastly, followed by my commentary.

John changes the order of presentation. Why? Structurally, this order of presentation allows John to finish with what he considered to be the two “creepiest” functions, which fits in generally with his “ominous continuity” in the evolution of education.

Inglis:
(1) Adjustive or adaptive function;
(2) Integrating function;
(3) Differentiating function;
(4) Propaedeutic function;
(5) Selective function;
(6) Diagnostic and directive function.

Gatto:
(1) Adjustive Function
(2) Integrative Function
(3) Directive Function
(4) Differentiating Function
(5) Selective Function
(6) Propaedeutic Function

Gatto’s introduction of the book:
T&H Peace Revolution #45 at approximately 1:54:15
“I have something here. I have the six principles of schooling, as laid down in 1917 by the man that Harvard named their Honor Lecture in Education for. So, far from being a fringe individual, this guy is the reason the Harvard Honor Lecture in Education is named as it is: The Inglis Lecture. Looks like Ing-lis but its pronounced Ingills. And I would like to read you the six purposes of schooling.

I moved heaven and earth, and it took years to find this book. Just like trying to find in past years a copy of Carroll Quigley’s Tragedy And Hope. I learned about Inglis from the 20-year president of Harvard: James Bryant Conant, who was a poison gas specialist in World War 1, was in the very inner circle of the Atomic Bomb Project in World War 2, was the High Commissioner of occupied Germany after the War. So he (Inglis) wrote — oh there must be twenty books — about the institution of schooling, of which he was completely a proponent. And I forced — he’s a very bad writer — I forced myself to read most of these books, and in one of them, he (Conant) says that if you really want know what school is about, you need to pick up the book I’m referring to here: Principles of Secondary Education.

Two years it took me to find a copy of the book; 750 pages, tiny print, and as dull as your imagination can conceive. And, Furthermore, its not until you get to the very middle of the book, in an unlabeled section that he “spills the beans”. Let me spill them for you. The 6 purposes or functions, as he calls them.”

Paul Mozina feedback:
My observation is that the print is not tiny (See scans of the book at https://archive.org/details/principlessecon04inglgoog), it is standard size and type for contemporary publications. Is it Dull? — subjective opinion. This content is not hidden in an “unlabeled section” of the book, it is labeled consistent with all of the other content in the book. Here is how it is labeled:

Chapter 10
The Aims and Functions of Secondary Education

1. The Aims of Secondary Education
   150 The Aims of Secondary Education: their basis…
   151 Three fundamental aims of secondary education…
   152 The social-civic aim…
   153 The economic-vocational aim…
   154 The individualistic-avocation aim…
   155 The interrelation of the three aims…
   156 Aims based on traits involved…
2. The Functions of Secondary Education
   157 The functions of secondary education…
   158-163 The 6 functions below…

Let me preface my analysis of what Inglis wrote, and Gatto and Grove’s comments, with the following extract from Lysander Spooner’s “The Unconstitutionality of Slavery”:

“It is a rule of law, in the construction of all statutes, contracts and legal instruments whatsoever that is, those which courts design, not to invalidate, but to enforce that where words are susceptible of two meanings, one consistent, and the other inconsistent, with liberty, justice and right, that sense is always to be adopted, which is consistent with right, unless there be something in other parts of the instrument sufficient to prove that the other is the true meaning. In the case of no one of all these early state constitutions, is there anything in the other parts of them, to show that these words “free” and “freemen” are used as the correlatives of slavery. The rule of law, therefore, is imperative, that they must be regarded in the sense consistent with liberty and right.

If this rule, that requires courts to give an innocent construction to all words that are susceptible of it, were not imperative, courts might, at their own pleasure, pervert the honest meaning of the most honest statutes and contracts, into something dishonest, for there are almost always words used in the most honest legislation, and in the most honest contracts, that, by implication or otherwise, are capable of conveying more than one meaning, and even a dishonest meaning. If courts could lawfully depart from the rule, that requires them to attribute an honest meaning to all language that is susceptible of such a meaning, it would be nearly impossible to frame either a statute or a contract, which the judiciary might not lawfully pervert to some purpose of injustice. There would obviously be no security for the honest administration of any honest law or contract whatsoever."

Below is what Inglis wrote about the 6 functions, followed by Gatto’s interpretation, followed by Richard’s commentary, and finally — by my two cents worth.

Inglis pg 376:

1. The adjustive or adaptive function. It is a postulate of the social aim of secondary education that it should provide means for the adjustment of the pupil to his social environment. In section 143 (Chapter IX) it was maintained that the social environment to which the secondary-school pupil is to be adjusted is dynamic, not static, and that the rapidity of social change is so great as to warrant the assumption that the social environment in which the present pupil is later to live will in important respects differ from that of the present. The course of social evolution shows cearly that for any one generation the total social organization represents a composite of relatively stable and constant elements of the past and certain elements appropriate to the present. It also implies that the present social organization comprises certain elements which may be expected to remain relatively stable and constant in the near future, and others which we may confidently expect to be either entirely lost or radically modified. This suggests that mere adjustment through the development of relatively fixed habits of reaction is fairly adequate for those elements which may be conceived as destined in all likelihood to remain relatively unchanged in their essential characteristics within the life of the present generation. It suggests also, however, that adjustment alone (in the sense of the establishment of fixed habits of reaction) is insufficient, and that some capacity for readjustment must be developed if the individual is to be prepared for the changing conditions which will inevitably come during his life after the period of formal education. In other words, the adjustive function of secondary education includes both the establishment of certain fixed habits of reaction, certain fixed standards and ideals, and also the development of a capacity to readjust adequately to the changing demands of life. Tempora mutantur, et nos mutamur in illis ("Times change, and we change with them”), is true with regard to the times; it is true of us only in a collective sense and to the extent that readaptation is possible.

Gatto’s Interpretation:
T&H Peace Revolution #45 at approximately 1:56:45:
“The first he calls the Adjustive Function. Schools are to establish fixed habits of reaction to authority. That’s their main purpose: habits and reactions to authority. That’s why school authorities don’t tear their hair out when somebody exposes that a, ahhh, ahhh, that the atomic bomb wasn’t dropped on Korea, as a history book in 1990’s printed by Scott Foresman distributed, and why each of these books has hundreds of substantive errors; learning isn’t the reason the texts are distributed. So, first is the Adjustive Function: Fixed habits.

Now, here comes the wonderful insight that being able to analyze the detail will give you. How can you establish that someone has successfully developed this automatic reaction, because people have a proclivity, when they’re given sensible orders, to follow it. That’s not how/what? they want to reach; the only way you can measure this is to give stupid orders and people automatically follow them. Now, you’ve achieved function 1. Have you ever wondered why some of the foolish things schools do are allowed to continue.”

Richard Grove’s comments on Gatto’s interpretation:
T&H Peace Revolution #45 Team approximately 2:15:05:
“So, going back to Alexander Inglis and the Principles of Secondary Education, naming the Harvard Lecture on Education after Inglis — that must be pretty substantial work that he laid down — and after two years, Johns able to get his hands on a copy of the Principles of Secondary Education, and we have several copies of it here as well. Let me read off these habits again: Number 1, Fixed habits, that means they want them all to react the same way”

Paul Mozina feedback:
John says Inglis calls it the “Adjustive Function” thus omitting the word “Adaptive” from the description of the function. Is this why he feels liberated from including this aspect of Inglis’ definition in his analysis of the function? How does this omission affect his interpretation of Inglis’ meaning?

Inglis does not use the word “authority” in his description — it is not even implied as far as I can tell.

Gatto’s speculates about stupid orders and the intentions of educators. His conclusions are not based on anything explicit in the text, rather they are vox et praeterea nihil: voice and nothing more : sound without substance.

Inglis pg 377:

1. The integrating function. In section 144 (Chapter IX) the bearing of the social factors of integration and differentiation on secondary education was discussed. It was there pointed out that one of the imperative demands made by society on the secondary school is provision for the development of that amount of like-mindedness, of unity in thought, habits, ideals, and standards, requisite for social cohesion and social solidarity. From this arises the integrating function of secondary education, which in this country particularly is constantly acquiring greater and greater importance for a number of reasons. Among these may be mentioned the following:

(1) The increasing complexity of life in a modem democracy constantly increases the amount of common knowledge, of common action, and common ideals necessary. The elementary school is constantly becoming less and less adequate for this need.

(2) The increasing heterogeneity of the population in this country tends constantly to increase the diversity of social heredity and therefore to render the process of social integration more necessary and more difficult.

(3) The increasing diversity of industrial occupations and of living conditions tends constantly to increase the forces of differentiation demanding increased forces of integration to balance and compensate.

(4) Other institutions which formerly operated as integrating agencies have been modified in such a way as to
operate with diminished force in that direction or have proved quite inadequate for that purpose under the changed conditions of society: e.g., the Church and religion.

To conceive that the factor of integration is of importance in connection with problems of "class distinction" only is an error. Important as those problems are for a democracy they involve but a part only of a more fundamental problem including other problems of social integration.

Gatto’s Interpretation:
T&H Peace Revolution #45 at approximately 1:58:36
“Number 2 he calls, he calls it the Integrating Function , but it’s easier to understand if you call it the Conformity Function. It’s to make children as alike as possible — the gifted children and the stupid children — as alike as possible, because market research uses statistical sampling and it only works if people react generally the same way.”

Richard Grove’s comments on Gatto’s interpretation:
T&H Peace Revolution #45 Team approximately 2:15:29:
“… Number 2, the Integrative Function. That means they’re (children) are all as alike as possible as interchangeable parts so if you present information to a crowd of people, they’re all likely — if it causes cognitive dissonance — to have a similar emotional reaction, and bring up irrational points, because that’s why they’re having an emotional reaction because they’re not using Observation, Logic and Compassionate Communication.

Paul Mozina feedback:
Inglis doesn’t mentions “gifted” or “stupid”. John speculates about market research. Richard reiterates John’s perception and introduces cognitive dissonance and emotional reaction, neither of which is mentioned in the text. Occam’s Razor would caution against drawing these conclusions.

Inglis pg 378:

1. The differentiating function. The integrating function must at all times be conceived as correlated with the differentiating function of secondary education and the relation between the two functions must be considered as supplemental rather than conflicting, the supplemental relation being necessitated by the relation of the two factors of integration and differentiation in the process of social evolution. As the integrating function of secondary education arises out of the necessity of developing a certain amount of homogeneity out of the heterogeneous population for the purpose of assuring social solidarity, so the differentiating function of secondary education arises out of the necessity of taking advantage of the differences among individuals for the purpose of determining social efficiency.

Two facts make this differentiating function in secondary education both possible and necessary:

(1) Pupils in the secondary school (the raw material with which secondary education must perforce deal and which conditions its operation) differ greatly in native capacities, in acquired tendencies (especially as conditioned by training outside the school), in interests and aptitudes. Failure to recognize this fundamental fact at any time must inevitably mean failure to do justice to the individual and failure to develop the highest social efficiency out of the raw material available.

(2) The diversified needs of modern industrial and social life demand preparation for widely different forms of activity which cannot be provided for all individuals. Moreover, if such universal preparation were possible, it would be extremely wasteful and undesirable. The differentiated activities of life demand differentiated education, the burden of which, as far as formal education is concerned, must be borne by the secondary school.

Gatto’s Interpretation:
T&H Peace Revolution #45 at approximately 1:59:29
“The fourth function is the Differentiating Function: It’s once you’ve diagnosed kids in this layer you do not want them to learn anything that the higher layers are learning. So you teach just as far as the requirements of that layer.”

Richard Grove’s comments on Gatto’s interpretation:
T&H Peace Revolution #45 Team approximately 2:16:05:
“Number 4, the Differentiating Function. This is to help keep them separated, and to keep people, this is preparing them for number five, which is the selective function breeding qualities, but the differentiating function, number four, keeping them separated in their different social castes, social strata, giving them labels, names — you know, sort of remarks in class — to let others know that these aren’t suitable people to be breeding with.”

Paul Mozina feedback:
Both John and Richard allude to “layer”, which Inglis does not mention in his description of this function. In Inglis’ description of the Integrative Function he says: “To conceive that the factor of integration is of importance in connection with problems of "class distinction" only is an error.” Is this where John and Richard got the idea that Inglis was talking about class hierarchies or “layer” or “layers” in regards to the Differentiating Function? If so, they have mis-construed Inglis’ meaning.

Inglis pg 379:

1. The propaedeutic function. The propaedeutic function of secondary education is merely one phase of the adjustive function, having reference to a part only of secondary school pupils - those preparing to continue their formal education in some higher institution. Preparation for such higher education cannot be considered as a separate aim of secondary education. It must be considered, however, as a legitimate function of secondary education in the case of those pupils whose preparation for the attainment of the ultimate aims of education may be extended over a longer period of time than that of the great majority. The general aims of the education of such pupils remain the same aims formulated above, namely, the social-civic aim, the economic-vocational aim, and the individualistic-vocational aim.

A number of factors, however, affect the attainment of those aims in the case of the pupils who will continue their formal education in some higher institution. A more intensive and more extensive preparation for the social-civic activities is possible; preparation for vocational activities in its direct and specific form is deferred; different forms of preparation for different modes of leisure are possible and justified; a somewhat higher selection of pupils is common, at least with reference to social and economic status. As the activities of such pupils will " function " differently in life after the period of formal education, so must the function of secondary education differ somewhat in the case of such pupils.

Common practice tends either to over-estimate or to underestimate the propaedeutic function of secondary education. In the past this function has commonly received altogether too much attention, and the rather definite requirements of preparation for higher education have tended to overbalance the whole economy of secondary education in this country until it became the dominant aim of the secondary school instead of occupying its legitimate place as a contributing function. On the other hand, the present revolt against such a domination of college preparation has in some cases led to a gross under-estimate of the importance of the propaedeutic function of secondary education. This has already been discussed in section 128, and requires no further consideration here, except, perhaps, to recall the fact that secondary school pupils destined to continue their formal education in higher institutions comprise the largest roughly homogeneous group of pupils in the public secondary school - homogeneous in the sense that a complete secondary-school course may be mapped out for this group much more readily than for any other group and in the sense that a rather definite and tangible temporary goal may be set up for their education. Whatever be the particular form that the articulation between secondary education and higher education may eventually assume, it must be recognized that preparation for higher education must be one of the legitimate functions of secondary education. Nevertheless it must also be recognized that it is but one of a number of functions.

Gatto’s Interpretation:
T&H Peace Revolution #45 at approximately 2:02:00
“And the 6th is the creepiest of all, and I think it’s partly what Tragedy And Hope is about. It’s a fancy Roman name the — the propaedeutic function. Cause as early as Roman big time thinkers, it was understood that to continue a social form, required some people being trained that they were the custodians of this. So some small fraction of the kids are being readied to take over the project”

Richard Grove’s comments on Gatto’s interpretation:
T&H Peace Revolution #45 Team approximately 2:16:55:
“6th, the last is the Propaedeutic Function. Which is preparing some of the people to be the future managers, the future ranchers on this plantation… and without giving this same information , and giving people equal access to all these layers of information, it really sets up a solidified production, a mass production line, of the class system that has been inherited — re-inherited — from Britain during the years after 1812, especially after the civil war toward the end of the 19th century.”

Paul Mozina feedback:
Where in Inglis’ text does he mention “custodians” or “ranchers”? Where does Inglis mention the class system? Where does Inglis describe taking over “the project” (In his commentary, which I did not transcribe above, Gatto goes on the describe Inglis’ ancestors — in effect pinning the sins of the Fathers on this child. Guilt by association)? Both John and Richard are reading something into Inglis’s text that is not there. These are not “innocent constructions” of the actual words; the prerequisite that Spooner described above as necessary for making a fair interpretation of the meaning and intention of any speech or written words.

Inglis pg 380:

1. The selective function. Selection is a necessary function of any form of education, the necessity arising from the factor of individual differences which become an increasingly important factor as the course of education proceeds higher and makes a greater demand on capacity. It was pointed out in Chapter III that individuals differ widely in mental traits. In so far as those differences are due to the limits of capacity set by nature and to rates of development also determined by nature it is clear that, as education demands more and more capacity, with certain individuals the limits of their capacity are reached, or, what is more common, the point is approached at which given possible amounts of training produce results incommensurate with the amount of teaching and learning energy expended, and the point of diminishing returns is reached. No amount of training can ever equalize the abilities of individuals whose native capacities differ to any marked degree. Hence selection must inevitably be a function of secondary education.

The selective function of secondary education may be viewed from two somewhat different but related aspects. From one aspect selection is commonly considered as involving the elimination of those individuals who are unable to meet the demands set. To this view little objection could be raised, provided, and only provided, that the demands set could be justified. In the past in this country and at present in some countries the demands set were largely based on the assumption that ability and willingness to meet the requirements of certain specified subjects of study with limited range measure intellectual ability in general - a theory which itself rests on the further assumption that either all desirable mental traits are involved in the specific subjects selected, or the improvement in the mental traits involved can be transferred to other material. Such a theory is discussed in detail in later sections. For the present it is sufficient to state that the theory must certainly be greatly modified and that it cannot justify emphasis on any small number of subjects in the secondary school as affording adequate training for all or as affording a training which is susceptible of unlimited transfer.

In contrast to selection by elimination the second aspect of the selective function of secondary education emphasizes selection by differentiation. Its justification rests on two considerations: (1) that individuals differ in capacities, interests, and the nature of environmental influences, those differences appearing not in the sum total of mental traits, but in the various mental traits as related to each other; (2) that, within limits, training in various specific mental traits or groups of traits is justified from a social viewpoint. In terms of psychology it assumes that different mental traits are found in different individuals in different degrees. In terms of sociology it means that no one subject or group of subjects can claim exclusive place in secondary education and that different subjects or groups of subjects are equally justified from the viewpoint of social economy. In terms of school practice, it means that if a pupil lacks ability or interest in one field of study but possesses ability and interest in another, discrimination is justified, and, particularly in the public secondary school, that pupil has a right to receive education in fields for which he possesses ability and interest. He cannot be deprived of the opportunity for education because of inability or lack of interest in some officially favored subject or subjects.

Gatto’s Interpretation:
T&H Peace Revolution #45 at approximately 1:59:54
“Number five and six are the creepiest of all . Number 5 The Selective Function: What that means is what Darwin meant by Natural Selection. You’re accessing the breeding quality of each individual kid. You’re doing it structurally, cause school teachers don’t know this is happening. And you’re trying to use ways to prevent the poorer stuff from breeding, and those ways are hanging labels, humiliating labels, around their neck — encouraging the shallowness of thinking. You know, I often wondered, cause I came from a very very strict Scotch-Irish culture that never allowed you to leer at a girl. When I finally got to New York City, the boys were pawing the girls openly, and there was really no redress for the girls at all except not showing up in the classroom — you know high absentee rates. Well, you’re supposed to teach structurally that sexual pleasure is what you withdraw from a relationship, and everything else is a waste of time and expensive. So the selective function is what Darwin meant by the favored races. The idea is to consciously improve the breeding stock. Schools are meant to tag the unfit with their inferiority by poor grades, remedial placement, humiliation — so that their peers will accept them as inferior. And the good breeding stock among the females will reject them as possible partners.”

Richard Grove’s comments on Gatto’s interpretation:
T&H Peace Revolution #45 Team approximately 2:16:28:
“The selective function is definitely about the breeding qualities, as John says, this is one of the creepiest steps that teachers are undertaking — unwittingly — but it’s part of the system they they’ve all inherited and just assumed it was all about educating. And as John says, volition is removed in a schooling situation so that education not something of education, its not learning, it’s now conditioning or being modeled in sobs else’s desired image.”

Paul Mozina feedback:
Inglis does not mention Darwin or Breeding in his description of this function. What in the text led John and Richard to make this inference? Was it Inglis’ use of the word “Elimination”? Inglis says: “… the elimination of those individuals who are unable to meet the demands set.” In the context, he is asserting that some individuals — for whatever reason — will not benefit from a higher education. Both John and Richard are reading something into Inglis’ description that is not there. These are not “innocent constructions” of the actual words.

Inglis pg 382:

1. The diagnostic and directive function. A phase of the adjustive function, and one closely related to the selective and differentiating functions, is the diagnostic and directive function of secondary education. Social economy and personal efficiency and happiness postulate that each individual, as far as may be possible, should do what he can best do. The determination of what each pupil may best do and what he may do with the greatest efficiency and happiness cannot be accomplished unless he is brought into contact with a somewhat wide range of experiences, in large part through studies in the secondary school. Hence the school must provide materials to acquaint the pupil with various activities of life, must give him some opportunity to test out and explore his capacities and interests, and must provide some direction and guidance therefor. The mere offering of various forms of instruction does not complete the work of the secondary school. It must, as far as may be possible, add to that function the function of exploring, testing, diagnosing, and directing the education of the pupil. It must permit the pupil to discover and test his own special aptitudes and capacities, and must assist in that process through a thoroughgoing system of educational guidance, including educational guidance and direction in the narrower sense, moral guidance, social guidance, physical guidance, and vocational guidance.

Gatto’s Interpretation:
T&H Peace Revolution #45 at approximately 1:59:05
“The third function he calls the Directive Function. School is to diagnose you’re proper social role and then to log the evidence that here’s where you are in the great pyramid. So that future people won’t allow you to escape that compartment.”

Richard Grove’s comments on Gatto’s interpretation:
T&H Peace Revolution #45 Team approximately 2:15:05:
“Number 3, the Directive Function. The social role is defined usually by the teacher, and their future starts to be more and more limited based on the information, access, accreditation that they’re being provided through the public school system”

Paul Mozina feedback:
Inglis does not mention social roles in his description of this function. In his conclusion Inglis says: “It must permit the pupil to discover and test his own special aptitudes and capacities, and must assist in that process through a thoroughgoing system of educational guidance, including educational guidance and direction in the narrower sense, moral guidance, social guidance, physical guidance, and vocational guidance.” Are John and Richard applying an “innocent construction” to what Inglis said?

Maybe I just need to read/listen to the whole book... and then I will "get it".

Update 3/20/18. I did convert Principles of Secondary Education to audio and listened to it a couple times.

https://archive.org/details/PrinciplesOfSecondaryEducationByAlexand...

That did not change my opinion...