The Theory and Practice of Intellectualism in the Us
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
THE THEORY AND PRACTICE OF INTELLECTUALISM IN THE U.S.: LITERACY, LYCEUMS, AND LABOR COLLEGES DISSERTATION Presented in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Doctor of Philosophy in the Graduate School of The Ohio State University By Kelly Susan Bradbury, M.A. Graduate Program in English The Ohio State University 2009 Dissertation Committee: Dr. Harvey J. Graff, Adviser Dr. Kay Halasek Dr. Beverly J. Moss Copyright by Kelly Susan Bradbury 2009 ABSTRACT Since Richard Hofstadter’s 1963 historical examination of anti-intellectualism in American life, academics and cultural commentators have used that term in their calls of crisis and decline in American culture. While these critiques sometimes offer useful commentary on American culture, most are based on and reinforce narrow views of intellectualism that assume the term designates only a “life of the mind,” a high level of intelligence, or the study of old, abstract, or highbrow ideas. My dissertation intervenes in this critical discussion by moving the focus from listing examples of and laying blame for Americans’ anti-intellectualism to reconsidering past and present views of intellectualism. My objective is to review and revise how we think about learning and its value and to challenge problematic assumptions about intellectualism that privilege certain types of knowledge, measures of intelligence, and locations of learning. I propose a view of intellectualism that is based primarily on people’s desire to learn and think critically and that is more concerned with attitudes toward learning and engagement with ideas than with privileging the texts, ideas, and institutions associated with academic and cultural elites. It is important to reconsider views of intellectualism because they influence the knowledge and learning environments valued and privileged in the U.S., what and how we teach in American schools, and, ultimately, many Americans’ beliefs about and ii interest in education. These issues are particularly relevant for scholars of rhetoric, composition, and literacy studies because they affect what literacy practices get valued and they contribute to hierarchies within the discipline of English Studies that privilege the work of literature scholars. This research also reveals the complex relationship between literacy and intellectualism in the United States. Focusing on three case studies, my dissertation shows why activities and institutions often understood to be non-intellectual may be considered differently. Following an introductory chapter that surveys relevant literature and introduces my case studies, Chapter 2 reconsiders the nineteenth-century lyceum and challenges the assumption that “useful knowledge” cannot foster intellectualism. I argue that the lyceum cultivated an interest in learning among participants and provided the opportunity to engage the knowledge disseminated. In Chapter 3, I demonstrate how the curriculum and pedagogy of Brookwood Labor College stimulated workers to become active, analytical learners and motivated them to educate others through their activist work. I discuss in Chapter 4 how the reading and writing assignments used in contemporary GED classes can foster students’ critical thinking and interest in education. My examination challenges the notion that basic or remedial education programs—and their participants—cannot be intellectual. In Chapter 5, I show how my interpretations of these case studies complicate accepted views of intellectualism and suggest the benefits of expanding those views. Together, these three sites of learning demonstrate there are multiple ways to foster intellectualism. They also contest social and institutional hierarchies, challenge the literacy myth, and shed new light on scholarship and teaching iii in the fields of rhetoric, composition, and literacy studies. I conclude the chapter with personal reflections on the teaching of intellectualism. iv I dedicate this dissertation to my parents, John and Carol Bradbury, for their unconditional love and support. v ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I am greatly indebted to Harvey J. Graff, my dissertation director and adviser, for introducing me to literacy studies, believing in this project, and patiently guiding me through its development. Harvey has been for me both model and mentor, and I cannot thank him enough for his time and support. I am extremely grateful for the feedback and encouragement I received from Kay Halasek and Beverly J. Moss. I am lucky to have had the opportunity to work with them both these past five years. I am grateful, also, to Nan Johnson for her feedback early in the development of this project. The students at the adult education center that I describe and analyze in Chapter 4 let me into their lives, first as their teacher, and later as a researcher. Their drive and determination have inspired this project and my teaching. I am forever grateful for my time with them. A hearty thank you, also, to the teachers and program supervisor who let me observe the workshops and took time out of their busy schedules for an interview with me. Many thanks to my friends and colleagues at Ohio State without whom I could not have withstood the challenges, nor enjoyed the rewards, of graduate school. I am especially grateful to Sheila Bock, Aaron McKain, Kate White, and Wendy Wolters Hinshaw for reading some of the earliest (and roughest) drafts of chapters and for providing constructive feedback and much-needed encouragement. I am thankful also for my fellow literacy scholars who make up the Graduate Interdisciplinary Seminar on Literacy Studies (affectionately known as the Grad Sem). This community of brilliant graduate students has created a truly collaborative intellectual space that taught me the value of interdisciplinary scholarship and helped me grow as a scholar. I have been lucky enough to have received several monetary awards that have aided me in the research and writing of this dissertation. Thanks to a generous American Dissertation Fellowship from the American Association of University Women, I was able to devote my final year in the doctoral program to composing and completing my dissertation. I also received funding for my archival research on labor colleges. Thanks to an Alumni Grant for Graduate Research and Scholarship from Ohio State’s Graduate School and a Dissertation Research Award from the Center for the Study and Teaching of Writing at OSU, I was able to travel to and spend ample time in the Walter P. Reuther vi Library Archives of Labor and Urban Affairs at Wayne State University and at in the Tamiment Library Labor Archives at New York University. I am grateful for the assistance I received from the staff who assisted me at both libraries and those who helped me with my research on lyceums at the Ohio Historical Society. My archival research was invaluable to this project. And to my family…I owe them everything. My parents raised us in an environment that cultivated my own love of learning and that valued the teaching profession. They, along with my sister, brother, and sister-in-law have been and remain my biggest cheerleaders. I am so grateful for them all. Finally, I thank Scot for his love, support, patience, and good timing. vii VITA 1997 ...................................................... B.A. English, South Dakota State University 1999-2001................................................... Graduate Teaching Assistant, South Dakota State University 2001 ...................................................... M.A. English, South Dakota State University 2001-2004................................................... English Department Adjunct Instructor, Dakota State University and South Dakota State University 2004-2005................................................... University Fellowship, Graduate School, The Ohio State University 2005-2006................................................... Graduate Teaching Associate and Graduate Research Assistant, The Ohio State University 2006-2007................................................... Graduate Teaching Associate and Outreach Consultant for the Center for the Study and Teaching of Writing, The Ohio State University 2007-2008................................................... Outreach Consultant and Writing Across the Curriculum Consultant for the Center for the Study and Teaching of Writing, The Ohio State University 2008-2009................................................... American Dissertation Fellowship, The American Association of University Women PUBLICATIONS “Democracy in the Balance: The Fate of Intellectualism in Higher Ed and the Public Sphere” (a curricular unit) in Reading Popular Culture: An Anthology for Writers , viii 2nd ed. Ed. Michael Keller. Dubuque: Kendall/Hunt, 2007. 255-370. (1 st edition published in 2002.) “Examining the Normalizing Gaze” (an assignment sequence). Rhetorical Visions: Writing and Reading in a Visual Culture . Eds. Wendy Hesford and Brenda Brueggemann. Boston: Pearson Custom Publishing, 2006. 607-610. “Idolizing Idiocy and Ignorance: Examining Images of Anti-intellectualism in American Popular Culture.” American Popular Culture: Historical and Pedagogical Perspectives . Ed. Seymour Leventman. Cambridge: Cambridge Scholars Press, 2006. 3-11. FIELDS OF STUDY Major Field: English Specialization: Rhetoric, Composition, and Literacy Studies ix TABLE OF CONTENTS Abstract .........................................................................................................................ii Dedication ....................................................................................................................