Product Description

This timely, persuasive, and hopeful book reexamines John Dewey's idea of schools, specifically community schools, as the best places to grow a democratic society that is based on racial, social, and economic justice. The authors assert that American colleges and universities bear a responsibility for-and would benefit substantially from-working with schools to develop democratic schools and communities.

Product Details

• Amazon Sales Rank: #221590 in Books
• Published on: 2007-03-28
• Original language: English
• Number of items: 1
• Binding: Paperback
• 160 pages

Review
"One of the most startlingly impressive aspects of the ... text is that the authors have recast Dewey's work by a close reading and re-analysis of his legacy. In so doing, they have re-energized the progressive intent in his original work and provided a contemporary focus for a renewal of the progressive agenda in education. I found the argument compelling and exciting and, in my view, the authors have fully succeeded in identifying key tasks for a role for education in promoting participatory democracy." Henry Louis Taylor, Jr., Director of the Center for Urban Studies, The State University of New York at Buffalo "Dewey's Dream's strength is its contribution to a re-visioning of higher education's democratic commitments...Perhaps the most important less from [Dewey's Dream] is that it is the generation of new knowledge that fundamentally demands engagement in the 21st century...This is Dewey's dream fulfilled." The Michigan Journal of Community Service Learning "Dewey's Dream is both a tribute to the philosopher and a critical assessment of his work...For any university educator or administrator interested in facilitating collaborative community problem-solving projects part 2 should be required reading for its presentation of concrete strategies...This book could serve as a short, focused (albeit biased) introduction to [Dewey's] philosophy of education, and it would certainly provoke in-class debates about the extent to which Dewey's influence can still be found in public school classrooms today." The "Journal of Educational Research" review read, "Dewey's Dream is intellectually refreshing, provocative, persuasive, jargon free and downright practical. The authors organized the text to model for readers how to intertwine theory and practice to reveal ways that schools can promote participatory democracy. And John Dewey would be proud." The Journal of Educational Research "[The authors] offer their book as 'a democratic manifesto'...[T]he authors quote Dewey and secondary sources at length to explain Dewey's ideas about participatory democracy and the unfulfilled role of democratic schooling in its realization. Their aim...is hortatory." Political Science Quarterly "[A] short and lively book...I have great respect for the practices, sites, and thinking of Harkavy, Benson, and Puckett. A particularly crucial contribution in this work and earlier writings is to raise the centrality of living places to civic attention." The Journal of Higher Education Outreach and Engagement "Dewey's Dream is, they disarmingly say, a manifesto, aiming to be 'agenda-setting and movement-initiating, not thesis-proving,' and draws on the wealth of practical experience building community school partnerships at the University of Pennsylvania...The second part [of the book] is a fascinating discussion of a particular model for this [community school] movement, concentrating on the West Philadelphia community schools project, of which these authors are legitimately proud. There are particularly interesting brief discussions of the way university and school teaching, research, and community engagement can complement one another in programs on nutrition and health care." Perspectives on Politics "Dewey's Dream has great merit. It provides an engagingly written overview of the educational philosophy and action of John Dewey...It also places the current movement of academic civic engagement...into proper historical and intellectual perspective... It should be read by all those interested in the role of higher education in modern society - and by those who should be." Education, Citizenship, and Social Justice "[A] thoughtful and engaging collaborative manifesto...which [seeks] to bring Dewey's thought to bear on the current problems facing the academy and the good society." Gregory A. McBrayer -The book was also the basis of a symposium in The Good Society journal, vol. 17, No. 2, 2008 "Lee Benson, Ira Harkavy, and John Puckett have provided us with a provocative discussion of a significant issue... One likely benefit of Dewey's Dream will be that more people will come to realize the need to challenge the unquestioned assumption that Dewey's views are unassailable... For no reason other than the challenges that are leveled against Dewey's views, Dewey's Dream should be read by university reformers, educational philosophers, and teacher educators." - The History of Education Quarterly, February 2009

About the Author
Lee Benson is Emeritus Professor of History, University of Pennsylvania.

Ira Harkavy is Associate Vice President and Director of the Center for Community Partnerships, University of Pennsylvania.

John Puckett is Associate Professor in the Policy, Management, and Evaluation Division of the University of Pennsylvania Graduate School of Education. He is the co-author of Leonard Covello and the Making of Benjamin Franklin High School: Education as if Citizenship Mattered (Temple).

Customer Reviews

Dewey's Dream
Since the Post-World War II period, each decade has been marked by a book or two that shapes the discourse in higher education, not only in this country but across the globe. Benson, Harkavy and Puckett have captured a particular moment with this timely assessment of the essential democratic role of the modern university in an era of growing neo-liberalism, the commodification of knowledge, and the rise of the entrepreneural institutions across the world. The authors -- all noted historians with a commitment to public education -- have challenged the university and its supporters to re-claim their rightful catalytic and responsible function in building democratic societies, reforming the place and focus of higher education, and establishing a new spirit of civic responsibility through research, teaching and service towards community engagement. This is a powerful argument for how universities ought to more strategically impact society, local communities, and public education through the creative and productive application of the academic talent and assets each institution possesses. It is a inspiring and descriptive testament to what universities can do for society, for schools and to clearly demonstrate a deeper practice of democratic citizenship. I highly recommend this work for anyone who wants a renewed sense of hope and vision for our universities.

Michael Malahy Morris
Research Professor and Director
Community Learning & Public Service
University of New Mexico
Fulbright New Century Scholar 2007-2008

Participatory Democracy Theory
"Dewey's Dream: Universities and Democracies in an Age of Education Reform"
by Benson, L., Harkavy, I., & Puckett, J. (2007)

John Dewey's theory of "participatory democracy" (p. xii) in schools is tackled by Benson, Harkavy, & Puckett, authors of "Dewey's Dream: Universities and Democracies in an Age of Education Reform (2007)". This book is presented in two parts with 4 chapters each where the authors introduce the readers to the theoretical basics of Dewey's work and philosophy in his lifetime up to the attempts at current solutions to the "Dewey Problem" by means of university-assisted community schools (chapter 6). The authors started their argument by stating the fact (Dewey problem) that "Dewey never developed and implemented his theory in real world practice" (p. xii). For decades, these three outstanding professionals have been dedicated to developing "the concept of university-assisted community schools" to achieve democratic schools and communities. Therefore, they have tried to achieve Dewey's utopian idea of a "Good Society" (p. 11) currently known as a "Great Community" (p. xii).
The University of Pennsylvania has developed a partnership with its surrounding community to establish the bases of Dewey's theory. By emphasizing problem solving as the foundation of education, the authors show what is to be done to put ideas in practice. This kind of partnership is to be one out of diverse "examples and studies of university partnerships" (Sanders, 2005). Through such partnerships, students can be prepared to "transition from school to their careers" up to the successful achievement of employment (Sanders, p. 17) in a collaborative student-centered program. Throughout the book the readers can observe the development of Dewey's philosophy on school reform. The book highlights how Dewey's work in education was influenced by the work and vision of educators like Harper (p. 16) and many others. These experts believed in the development of a participatory society that would "help human development and students' learning" (Sanders, p. 18).
However, as a foreign educator I claim there are socioeconomic and political limitations to fostering a win-win racially, socially and economically democratic school environment. There is a lack of a responsible and true participation of the school, family and community (individually and collectively) to create positive and lasting improvements as reflected in Dewey's pioneering ideas. Ideally all involved parties (school, family and community) know the need to transform the educational system to more community-oriented institutions, but few decide to develop the challenging work of putting the theory into practice (p. 43). From k-12 to the university partnerships there are lots of obstacles to overcome to achieve higher functioning schools and high achieving students. For instance, it is easier to have more family involvement in early stages than when students become more independent, while the community contributes more and has a more active role with teenagers and young adults. However in a participatory democracy, I understand the need of school, family and community involvement at all stages for "sustained interschool and interdisciplinary collaboration" (p. 103). This is a century that is expected to be quite different from the past and educators and the community have to rethink their responsibilities.
The authors' attempts to put Dewey's ideas into practice show there is yet a long journey to accomplish and overcome the challenges to transform the educational system into positive and collaborative community schools with "shared vision, clearly defined roles and responsibilities and open communication" (Sanders, 25). As the authors state Dewey's ideas are not impractical, however, they have not been adequately put into practice yet (126). I strongly believe that a culture of trust and collaboration is essential, as is a shared vision of where the school needs to go and clears management structures and strong leadership development programs which involve all the stakeholders: families, community members, and community resources. I envision the larger community to include the larger context, advocates, staff and students.
Summing up, this is a global world where there is a need to work collaboratively in the development of coalitions and organizations to support community schools. Some people have a certain mindset and are attached to their ideas and afraid of change and partnership. However, it is a fact that community schools will "enable all human beings to lead long, healthy, active, peaceful, virtuous and happy lives" as Dewey envisioned it (p. 126). Nothing is established forever, therefore mindsets can be influenced. I believe life changes for the better and a diversity of viewpoints will make the process of participatory democracy richer, better able to prevent failure in education, and better able to facilitate team building exercises for student achievement. This collaboration will improve community and family communication and cohesion to the school in a context of stability and participation at all stages.


Work Cited
Benson, L., Harkavy, I., Puckett, J. (2007). Dewey's Dream: Universities and Democracies in an Age of Education Reform. Philadelphia, PA: Temple University Press.
Sanders, M. G. (2005). Building school-community partnerships: Collaboration for student success. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press, Inc

Infatuation with "local community"
The main purpose of the book is to celebrate as an unqualified success a certain programme at Penn, which was described (in terms approved by the authors) by the president of the university as follows: "Today, thousands of Penn faculty and students realize the unity of theory and practice by engaging West Philadelphia elementary and secondary school students as part of their own academic course work in disciplines as diverse as history, anthropology, classical studies, education, and mathematics. For example, anthropology Professor Frank Johnston and his undergraduate students educate students at West Philadelphia's Turner Middle School about nutrition. Classical studies professor Ralph Rosen uses modern Philadelphia and fifth-century-B.C. Athens to explore the interrelations between community, neighbourhood, and family. And history professor Michael Zuckerman's students engage West Philadelphia elementary and secondary school students to help them understand the nature---and discontinuities---of American national identity and national character." (pp. 95-96).

It seems to me that the euphoria for such things is based on uncritical faith in the axiom that "local" and "community" are both synonymous with "good." For little else by way of arguments is ever offered. One of the bogus arguments offered is that "all the research literature shows that the best learning takes place, not in studying theories and abstract forms, but in solving concrete problems" (p. 98). Even if, irrationally, this "research literature" was taken at face value, it would still not justify community engagement in any way since, for example, classical astronomy abounds in concrete problems. Another bogus argument is that it is somehow a good idea to "integrate" community action and traditional education. For example, the authors are very enthusiastic about a curriculum in which "health promotion activities are integrated with core-subject learning in science, social studies, math, and language arts, as well as in health, career education, and other classes. Ultimately, every curriculum unit will have a community education and/or community problem-solving component." (p. 102). No one would deny that much extremely useful work can be done by people devoting themselves to community service. But what grounds are there for thinking that this approach can be successfully "integrated with core-subject learning" beyond the immediate problem in question, in subjects such as science and mathematics? None whatsoever. This again is simply taken for granted since it follows from the axiom.

But perhaps the main argument for community engagement is the Dewian argument that it is a prerequisite for a democracy worthy of its name. Dewey argued that "democracy is not in reality what it is in name until it is industrial, as well as civil and political" (p. 6). This had implications for education, he felt, since the purpose of schools is to produce citizens fit for true democracy: "Change the image of what constitutes citizenship and you change the image of what is the purpose of the school" (p. 36). Let us agree with all of this for the sake of argument. What does it have to do with the axiom above? Indeed, Dewey himself wavered on this point, at times doubting that local communities were relevant. "Not only did he now [in his Democracy and Education] deprecate schools as a 'relatively superficial means' of education for children and adults in a democratic society, he now also sharply deprecated the role of local geographic communities. Because communication across space could produce far more 'intimate association between human beings' than could be produced by their living in 'physical proximity,' he now asserted that cohesive, vital communities could consist of human beings 'separated thousands of miles from each other.'" (p. 50). "But by 1927, he had, to an astonishing extent, radically reversed his 1916 position in the role played by local geographical communities in a democratic society, a reversal that he never explained." (p. 50). Of course Dewey's theoretical views on democracy were the same throughout. This shows that it is fully consistent with all of Dewey's ideals of democracy to reject the importance of the local community. In other words, focus on the local community is not an end in itself; the question one must ask is whether it has the desired consequences (preparing people for participatory democracy, etc.). But the authors fail to engage with this question and instead take the value of engaging with the local community for granted as an inviolable axiom. In summary, it is possible to cherry-pick Dewian principles that are congenial to the axiom (as our authors do in their anachronistic history), but there is no logical arrow of implication from the former to the latter, as Dewey's own sometime-rejection of the latter shows.

The authors write that "our primary purpose is agenda-setting, movement-initiating, not particular thesis-proving" (p. 126). We are forced to conclude that this is all a euphemism for "dogma-assuming," since the axiom is never justified.