In the first chapter, Dewey writes of “traditional” education ,
Learning here means acquisition of what already is incorporated in books and in the heads of elders. Moreover, that which is taught is thought of essentially static. It is taught as a finished product, with little regard ither to the ways in which it was originally built up or to changes that will surely occur in the future. It is to a large extent the culture product of societies that assumed the further would be much like the past, and yet is used as educational food in a society where change is the rule, not the exception (p. 19).”
When using technology as a teaching tool, how do we ensure that learning is not static? In what ways does technology reproduce the “banking method” of education? In what ways can it subvert it?
I loved listening to David Harvey’s interpretation of Marx. I took to heart his advice of reading Marx not in absolutes, but rather as a theoretician making sense of a dynamic and fluid system. Harvey’s description of Marx very much shaped the way I read Chapter 15.
As I approached chapter 15, I also began to think about situating Marx historically, as to better understand his rationale and reasoning for writing Chapter 15 of Capital. The following is a cursory overview. Marx published Part I of Capital in 1867. By this time he had already published The Communist Manifesto (1848) and had been ousted from both Prussia and France for his radical views. In 1867 Marx was living in London and one can see the influence of the British economic systems throughout Capital.
Marx also lived at a time of “Industrial Revolution” (1760-1850s) when Europe experienced the overhaul of the Feudal System as agricultural advances and energy technologies such as steam power and coal contributed to the development of factories and factory growth in cities. During the time that Marx wrote, there were also a series of revolutions in Europe, including “Revolutions of 1848” in which there were uprisings against European monarchies.