Georgia Southern University Digital Commons@Georgia Southern Electronic Theses and Dissertations Graduate Studies, Jack N. Averitt College of Spring 2011 The Curriculum of Capitalism: Schooled to Profit or Schooled to Educate Douglas O. Carroll Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.georgiasouthern.edu/etd Recommended Citation Carroll, Douglas O., "The Curriculum of Capitalism: Schooled to Profit or Schooled to Educate" (2011). Electronic Theses and Dissertations. 528. https://digitalcommons.georgiasouthern.edu/etd/528 This dissertation (open access) is brought to you for free and open access by the Graduate Studies, Jack N. Averitt College of at Digital Commons@Georgia Southern. It has been accepted for inclusion in Electronic Theses and Dissertations by an authorized administrator of Digital Commons@Georgia Southern. For more information, please contact [email protected]. 1 THE CURRICULUM OF CAPITALISM: SCHOOLED TO PROFIT OR SCHOOLED TO EDUCATE? by DOUGLAS O. CARROLL Under the Direction of Grigory Dmitriyev ABSTRACT Utilizing a critical pragmatist framework for analysis of the United States public school education, the research suggests the United States public education system perpetuates a curriculum of Capitalism linking with democracy; yet social Capitalism remains remarkably undemocratic as the experience of race, class, and gender contradict the curriculum of public schools. The consequence of these contradictions is perpetuation of racist or sexist stereotypes, a distinct class system delineated by financial, educational, and techno-wealth, a heightened if not profound sense that the American ideal is no longer within reach or a political sham. In sharp contrast to conservative theories of education and the move to standardize education, progressive educators do not believe in disassociating classroom experience from the sum of the accumulated experience of the individual. The research utilizes a number of tools of curriculum theorists including the incorporation of biographical material of Du Bois, Dewey, Lessing, Marcuse, and Feyerabend as the primary method for investigation. INDEX WORDS: Capitalism, Critical pragmatism, Democratic capitalism, Social capitalism, Curriculum of capitalism, Racial economics, Gender economics, Education reform, Public schools 2 THE CURRICULUM OF CAPITALISM: SCHOOLED TO PROFIT OR SCHOOLED TO EDUCATE? by DOUGLAS O. CARROLL B.A., Armstrong State College, 1982 M. H.S., Georgia Southern University, 1993 A Dissertation Submitted to the Graduate Faculty of Georgia Southern University in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirement for the Degree of DOCTOR OF EDUCATION in CURRICULUM STUDIES STATESBORO, GEORGIA 2011 3 © 2011 DOUGLAS O. CARROLL All Rights Reserved 4 THE CURRICULUM OF CAPITALISM: SCHOOLED TO PROFIT OR SCHOOLED TO EDUCATE? by DOUGLAS O. CARROLL Major Professor: Grigory Dmitriyev Committee: Ming Fang He Patrick Novotny Kent Rittschof Electronic Version Approved: May 2011 5 DEDICATION Dedicated to Dr. Robert A. Burnett, Rebecca and Stephen, and all of the public school educators investing their lives in children as well as all the children under the care of ‗caring‘ public school educators. 6 CONTENTS CHAPTER I – CURRICULUM, CAPITALISM, AND PUBLIC SCHOOL EDUCATION ............................................................................................................................8 Conservative Conceptualization and Progressive Reconceptualization ..................................8 Research Framework and Purpose ........................................................................................41 Theoretical Framework: Critical Pragmatism .......................................................................52 Rationale for Critical Pragmatism as the Research Framework ............................................64 Methodology ..........................................................................................................................76 Preview and Organization of the Chapters ............................................................................81 CHAPTER II – PRAGMATISM, MARXISM, AND THE CURRICULUM OF CAPITALISM..........................................................................................................................85 Pragmatism and the Curriculum of Capitalism .....................................................................85 Evolution of Marxism in the United States ...........................................................................91 Reconceptualizing Marxist Theory: The Frankfurt School and Critical Theory ..................98 The Belief System of the Curriculum of Capitalism ...........................................................108 Paradigms of the Curriculum of Capitalism ........................................................................128 CHAPTER III - DU BOIS AND DEWEY: THE CURRICULUM OF CAPITALISM AND RACE ...........................................................................................................................149 Du Bois Conception: Race, Education, and Democracy .....................................................149 Are Du Bois and Dewey Critical Pragmatists? ...................................................................165 Racial Identity and Capitalism: Vestiges of the Slave Economy ........................................181 Double Consciousness: Of Souls and Lived Experiences ...................................................189 Praxis ...................................................................................................................................198 CHAPTER IV – DORIS LESSING: THE CURRICULUM OF CAPITALISM AND GENDER ...............................................................................................................................201 Biography of a Critical Pragmatist Feminist .......................................................................201 7 Identity, Critical Feminism, and the Curriculum of Capitalism ..........................................206 Colonialism, Feminist Identity, and the Curriculum of Capitalism ....................................230 Praxis ...................................................................................................................................240 CHAPTER V – MARCUSE AND FEYERABEND: THE RISE OF THE TECHNO- CLASS AND THE CURRICULUM OF CAPITALISM ......................................................247 Marcuse and Feyerabend: The Influence of Heidegger ......................................................247 Technology and the Curriculum of Capitalism ...................................................................262 Marcuse and Feyerabend: The Curriculum of Techno-Capitalism and Education .............277 Praxis ...................................................................................................................................291 CHAPTER VI – RECLAIMING PUBLIC SCHOOL CURRICULUM .....................................298 Current State of Public Education .......................................................................................298 Bureaucratic Totalitarianism: The Curriculum for Conformity ..........................................304 Reclaiming Education – Restoring Democracy ..................................................................313 Altering Priorities: Reconceptualizing Education as System for Reform ...........................333 Praxis: A Personal Reflection & Conclusion ......................................................................338 References ....................................................................................................................................353 Author Note .................................................................................................................................389 8 CHAPTER I – CURRICULUM, CAPITALISM, AND PUBLIC SCHOOL EDUCATION Conservative Conceptualization and Progressive Reconceptualization Negotiation of meanings and purposes – itself the mark of a democratic society – is, for progressives, the means of developing the individual initiative, independence of judgment, and social commitment on which democracy in turn depends (Nicholls, 1989, p. 167). If asked to define curriculum, many educators, parents, politicians will quote the all too familiar cliché, ‗the three-Rs‘. Though simple, compact, and concise, in contemporary classrooms it is trite and at the very least an anachronism from colonial America. Curriculum is going through a revolutionary re-invention creating a schism between the orthodox conservative educational establishment and a resurgence of progressive oriented educators seeking to expand the field beyond the belief that curriculum is simply an integrated course of studies or a subject matter standardized for delivery by an educator (Pinar et al., 2002). Standardizing curriculum and the movement for national standardization reinforces the perception the nation‘s public school system is in crisis and the solution to resolving the crisis is greater bureaucratic control and oversight. Progressive and conservative educators have in common the basic belief that public education as an institution is in need of modernization; the form of modernization is at the core of the debate. In reality, though with reluctance – conservative and progressive educators agree upon the idea of a national assessment and to some extent, the idea of a national curriculum. Agreeing to the concept of a nationalized curriculum is one thing. Finding