the "The degree of civilization 39 WEST 19th STREET • NEW YORK, NEW YORK 10011 • (212) 206-7070 Dostoevski May 31, 1984 Honorable Robert T. Stafford, Chm. Dear Senator Stafford: We are writing concerning Joint Resolution 138, which calls for a commission to investigate teacher training in our colleges and universities. The Fortune Society supports the establishment of such a Commission. We are an organization of ex-offenders. Much of our activity involves counselling ex-offenders on the options available to them, including educational and training options. A great many of them are non-readers, even though they attended the public schools for an average of 8 years befors dropping out. For these members we run our tutoring program, teaching them basic reading and basic arithmetic. Although our students vary greatly in age, basic personality, economic status, legal status, and home attitudes toward reading, we find that all of them can learn to read by studying letter-sounds and learning how to use the letters forreading and spelling. Many of our students were labeled as learning-disabled or dyslexic when they were children. But we find that whether or not they were so labeled, they all make the same types of reading mistakes, and that all of them can overcome these problems by careful study of letter-sounds. We believe that many of these men and women are illiterate mainly because elementary school teachers are not being given sufficient background in letter sounds, and how to use them for teaching reading to school beginners. Indeed, one of our staff recently took a master's degree in basic education, and she received no training in this area. Nor was there any effort on the professors' part to determine whether or not she had received such training as an under-graduate. Illiteracy is certainly one important causative factor in our country's high crime rate, for the illiterate has very few honest ways to make a living. We believe, therefore, that an improvement in teacher training might make an important contribution towards the reduction of criminal activity. Finally, we wish to request that this letter be printed in the records of your hearings. cc to Senator Alphonse D'Amato Senator James Moynihan Contributions are tax-deductible Respectfully, Margout M. Boshofe Margaret M. Bishop Reading specialist Would you please include the following remarks in the record of the hearing on S.J. Res. 138 on June 7, 1984. S.J. Res. 138 is a bill which is aimed at increasing our understanding of how teachers are educated in this country and how this process might be improved. It is particularly concerned with improving reading and other basic skills. It refers to an "emphasis on classroom psychological techniques not related to the development of student academic competencies" and to "the effect on students" of such techniques. My own professional work has focused heavily on one of these techniques, namely the method known as "Values Clarification." This technique is problematic not only because of time it takes away from study of the basics but also because of the ways in which it indoctrinates students in certain quasi-religious values, invades the privacy of families, and so forth. I would like to summarize a few of these criticisms of the method and also list several of the nationally-known authors who have published such criticisms. Space will not permit developing any of these statements in detail, but the references to particular scholarly works will permit the reader to find supporting evidence and argument. I quote freely from some of my own articles. (1) Values Clarification "involves a form of indoctrination in radical ethical relativism. That is, it teaches the particular value position that all values are subjective and matters of individual choice, and it does this without ever seriously discussing the the philosophical arguments for and against such a position." (1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 10) (2) "By failing to distinguish between moral and non-moral values and by identifying all values with personal preferences and tastes, Values Clarification assumes a simple form of hedonism, namely the doctrine that pleasure is the highest good in life." (1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 10) (3) "Similarities between client-centered therapy and values clarification are significant enough to conclude that values clarification is, in essence, a form of client-centered therapy." (7) This judgment is particularly isgnificant inasmuch as many schools have required students to participate in Values Clarification excercises. (4)Values Clarification undercuts the basis of a liberal democracy, for it all values are relative and subjective, then this must also include values such as equality, tolerance of other peoples' ideas, justice, and so forth--i.e. the values upon which our republic is founded. (1, 2) (5) Values Clarification teaches that the purpose of life is self-fulfillment. But this teaching directly undermines and competes with basic Judeo-Christian beliefs that the purpose of life is to love God and serve one's neighbor. (1, 2, 3, 4, 5) (6) Values Clarification involves a serious invasion of the privacy of students and their families. Prof. Lockwood, in a major study of the privacy issue, concludes: "In summary, a substantial proportion of the content and methods of Values Clarification constitutes a threat to the privacy rights of students and their families." (9) His evidence is very specific and very disturbing. (7) Actual Values Clarification excercises often reflect substantial bias against the authority of parents, state, and church; against a sense of duty and obligation to anything that goes beyond narrow self-interest; and against traditional moral teachings such as marital fidelity and pre-marital chastity. (1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 10) (8) There is little evidence that Values Clarification actually achieves any of the positive results which its authors claim for it, and the use of the method clearly takes time away from the basics. (8) In summary, Values Clarification (as one example of a psychological technique which has been widely used in public schools) not only takes time away from more basic areas of study, but it also fails to give the students anything positive in its place. And, even more significantly, its use raises some very disturbing questions about the relations between church and state and about the role of the state in indoctrinating students in beliefs and values that directly undermine and compete with basic Judeo-Christian values and beliefs which their parents seek to teach them. 1. 2. 3. 4. Following are the articles referred to above: Baer, Richard A. Jr. "Values Clarification as Indoctrination." The Educational Forum XLI, no. 2 (1977) 155-165. Baer, Richard A. Jr. "A Critique of the Use of Values Clarification in Environmental Education." The Journal of Environmental Education 12, no. 1 (Fall 1980) 13-16. Baer, Richard A. Jr. "Teaching Values in the Schools: Clarification or Indoctrination." Principal 61, no. 3 (January 1982) 17-21, 36. Baer, Richard A. Jr. "Parents, Schools and Values Clarification." The Wall Street Journal CXCIX, no 70 (April 12, 1982) 22. 5. Bennett, William J. and Delattre, Edwin J. "Moral Education in the Schools." The Public Interest 50 (Winter 1978) 81-98. 6. Delattre, Edwin J. and Bennett, William J. "Where the Values Movement Goes Wrong." Change 11, no. 1 (1979) 38-43. 7. Lockwood, Alan L. "A Critical View of Values Clarification." Teachers College Record 77, no. 1 (1975) 35-50. 8. Lockwood, Alan L. "The Effects of Values Clarification and Moral Development Curricula on School-Age Subjects: A Critical Review of Recent Research." Review of Educational Research 48, no. 3 (1978) 325-364. 9. Lockwood, Alan J. "Values Education and the Right to Privacy." Journal of Moral Education 7, no. 1 (1977) 9-26. 10. Stewart, John S. "Clarifying Values Clarification: A Critique." Phi Delta Kappan LVI, no. 10 ((1975) 684-688. I should note that in addition to being a Professor in the Department of Natural Resources at Cornell University, I am also the Director of the Program in Agricultural and Environmental Ethics and a member of the graduate field of education. Thus my writing on Values Clarification is directly within my field of professional competence. FEINGOLD ASSOCIATION OF THE UNITED STATES June 4, 1984 The Honorable Robert Stafford Chairman, Education Subcommittee United States Senate Washington, DC 20510 Dear Senator Stafford, Please include the following statement in the coming hearings on SJ Resolution 138: A substantial number of children (generally estimated at between five and ten million in the United States) suffer from a variety of learning and behavioral disorders. The names most commonly applied to these disorders are "attention deficit disorder syndrome" and "hyperactivity." In their training, teachers are seldom taught that many of the chemical compounds routinely found in the classroom and school can be a factor contributing to the behavior and/or learning problems of some of their students. The most troublesome chemical compounds can be found in many areas, including: food additives (in snacks, class parties, lunches), in materials used in the classroom (scented stickers, scented glue, scented markers, oil-based paints and varnishes) and in cleaning compounds, disinfectants, and pesticides used in the building. The Feingold Association is a non-profit, volunteer organization willing to assist educators in identifying those compounds likely to cause problems for chemically-sensitive children. The Association can provide suggestions for substitutes which would be beneficial for all of the children and which would not contribute to the problems experienced by the sensitive child. |