To: Ozark School Board and Administration
From: Steve Akeson, Psy.D.
RE: Ozark High School IB Program
11/28/10
I think it is important to provide some context prior to outlining my concerns regarding the IB program. No writer comes to a task without biases or predispositions. In fact it is these biases and predispositions that are at the heart of my concerns regarding the IB program.
I am the father of three Ozark High School Students. None of them will enroll in IB. One is currently a senior taking classes at OTC through the A+ program. One is a sophomore who will likely take a class or two at OTC through A+ if that is still an option. One is a freshman who will likely take AP classes prior to graduating.
I have my doctorate in Clinical Psychology and my practice includes psychological and neuropsychological evaluation. I teach graduate school and am involved in independent research. I have undergraduate and graduate classes in philosophy as part of my education. I am a Christian with some undergraduate coursework in Religion.
I am currently the Ozark JROTC Booster Club president and initially became aware of IB due to Sergeant White’s concerns about the program. I attended a meeting he had to discuss his concerns. I attended the school board meeting at which he raised his concerns. I did not speak at that meeting but chose rather to do some additional research on my own and to flesh out my concerns.
I will not speak to the financial issues raised by others as I have no basis upon which to evaluate the accuracy of these claims and no point of reference for the meaningfulness of the numbers cited. I will speak to the underlying philosophical shift which this curriculum makes when compared with traditional American education.
A few years back President Bill Clinton during a deposition made a statement which most people thought was ridiculous. He stated "It depends on what the meaning of the words 'is' is." On the surface this seems like attorney-speak. But in reality he is applying a basic tenet of post-modern philosophy: words have no inherent meaning. This concept of deconstructionism is too long to go into here but is a foundational concept in post-modern philosophy and education. As such the word “is” has no inherent meaning. What makes this a laughable dodge is that President Clinton used the word “is” immediately after citing it as having uncertain meaning thereby expecting the listener to understand the meaning of the second “is” while citing the questionable meaning of the first “is.” The deconstruction or re-defining of words is crucial in understanding and evaluating the IB literature. Much like operational definitions in a research study you must understand them to make sense of the study. Throughout the discussion and the literature of IB the term “rigor” or “rigorous” is frequently used. So what does rigor mean? Traditionally when we were uncertain of a term we would be told to look it up in the dictionary. The dictionary definitions of rigor include:
1a (1) : harsh inflexibility in opinion, temper, or judgment : severity (2) : the quality of being unyielding or inflexible : strictness (3) : severity of life : austerity b : an act or instance of strictness, severity, or cruelty
2: a tremor caused by a chill
3: a condition that makes life difficult, challenging, or uncomfortable; especially : extremity of cold
4: strict precision : exactness
5a obsolete : rigidity, stiffness b : rigidness or torpor of organs or tissue that prevents response to stimuli
What is the IB definition of rigor? William Doll’s definition of rigor is used by the IB curriculum. According to Doll, rigor is “one’s commitment to exploration.” When I hear the IB program is rigorous I hear that it is demanding, precise, and difficult. However, when the IB meaning is inserted it means it is “committed to exploration.” I would expect exploration means a person is making a systematic search, however, how do I know how IB has “deconstructed” exploration since this is not provided. This little shell game of meaning makes communication very loose and speculative when reading post-modern literature or evaluating IB.
When a person explores and/or evaluates information they do it though their default system of values, perceptions, and beliefs. This is commonly called a worldview. IB makes no qualms about their default position being post-modern as it is often stated “We live in a post-modern world.” This is not presented as a debatable point or discussion point but rather as a given. I would argue that point but would concede that Europe is largely post-modern and this philosophy is becoming more prevalent in the US. However, this is not the default philosophy that has existed in America to this point.
What is the traditional American perspective? Russell Kirk in his book The Roots of American Order does an outstanding job of explaining this. Kirk’s premise is that US Order is based upon the influence of four great cities:
1. Jerusalem – the source of our Moral Structure.
2. Athens – the source of our Philosophical Structure.
3. Rome – the source of our Legal Structure.
4. London – our immediate cultural progenitor.
I would expand on this to note that Judeo/Christian values are “traditional values” in the US. Greek philosophy pervaded European empiricism which gave rise to the science and technology boom in the United States following World War II. The court system is based upon systems started by Julius Caesar which influenced British Common Law. The philosophical structure for centuries has included Aristotle’s On Rhetoric which offered the following three factors that influence reason:
1. Logos – intellectual factors
2. Pathos – emotional factors
3. Ethos – social/ psychological factors
These foundational, or apriori, truths are the bedrock of United States culture and education. Following WWII the moral structure of the US changed from religion based to science based and the influence of the church on society began to wane. This period has been referred to as modernism. Post-modernism has a very different set of aprior assumptions. There is a de-emphasis on objective truth and an emphasis on subjective experience. While modernism focuses upon empiricism, order, historical record, study, rigor, and best available evidence; post-modernism focuses upon subjective experience, deconstruction, and re-interpretation. While modernism tries to reflect reality post-modernism “creates reality.”
How does this apply to IB? The Theory of Knowledge is the core to the IB program. It is re-evaluating all spheres of study through the lens of post-modernism. I have no problem with college students studying post-modernism or any other philosophy. I do have a problem with it being the default theory through which all things are evaluated and an even bigger problem with this being required of high school students.
The skill set referred to as executive functioning includes the capacity for judgment, reasoning, and abstract thought. It has long been theorized that these skills develop primarily from the mid teens to mid twenties due to myelination of the frontal lobes. Neuroimaging has confirmed what was previously theorized. These brain circuits are the hardware which need to be in place to benefit from opportunities of critical thinking. You can’t run the software if you don’t have the hardware. This developmental truth has long been known and is applied in reading readiness at the primary level. However, it is not applied to upper level high school classes and is yet equally relevant. The limited nature of executive functioning is reflected in society through limiting these same persons from being able to sign contracts, limited driver licenses, and other legal restrictions. I would submit that most high school students cannot fully evaluate these complex abstractions. They can memorize or reflect the thoughts of a trusted teacher, author, or parent. The younger the child the more this program would reflect indoctrination and the less it would reflect education.
I am also concerned about the influence of UNESCO on the IB program. Some will try to marginalize this concern by stating detractors are suggesting the UN is going to take over the school system. This is absurd and amounts to a straw man argument. Rather the concern is that the IB program is closely allied to UNESCO and the principles of UNESCO are integrated into the IB program. In fact the first director of UNESCO was Julian Huxley who is often quoted in IB information. Julian Huxley was a secular humanist, socialist, and president of the British Eugenics Society. His values still permeate UNESCO and influenced IB when it was established. Marie-Thérèse Maurette who ran the international school is credited with establishing much of the structure of IB. Ms. Maurette was a “peace” advocate, but as with all things IB you need to understand the new post-modern definition of peace. In this case it is not the absence of war but rather the equal distribution of resources to all world citizens. While this sounds good in a Robin Hood sort of way it is in fact redistribution of wealth as last seen in the Soviet Union complete with the corruption inherent in such systems.
Another focus is world citizenship or as some call it to become post-national. Much like the US moved from a focus on states to a focus on nation after the Civil War there is a drive to change the focus from nations to world. This sounds harmless enough until you consider that the leaders of such a society would be even further from the citizens and less accountable. World courts and unelected international appointees would have no accountability to individuals. IB states they are not Anti-American and I would agree they are not overtly anti-American. However, if the vision they promote was to take hold America would cease to exist as a constitutional republic.
IB also has an interest in the environment. This is presented as stewardship of resources but is in fact a way to control wealth. It removes individual rights in use of private resources, production, and consumption. This is already seen in some cases with private property being taken from private citizens; companies facing heavy regulations and restrictions; and consumers being limited in product choices.
My final point addresses the idea that completing IB will improve college readiness. Most college professors are politically liberal as has been clearly demonstrated by David Horowitz in his research. As such, many have post-modern and socialist leanings. Students who are already indoctrinated in these philosophies would have an advantage in such settings. This is not the outcome study I would suggest. Rather, do these students do better in the post-college world as citizens and employees? If not then doing better in college is meaningless. To illustrate via absurdity: Given the degree of binge drinking on college campuses maybe it would be helpful for high school students to develop a higher tolerance for alcohol as this would also make their adjustment to college smoother.
There are a number of other concerns I won’t go into for the sake of brevity. Rather I would like to offer a succinct summary of post-modernism and final summary paragraph.
British journalist Steve Turner wrote the following:
Creed
We believe in Marx Freud and Darwin
We believe everything is OK as long as you don't hurt anyone
to the best of your definition of hurt, and to the best of your knowledge.
We believe in sex before, during, and after marriage.
We believe in the therapy of sin.
We believe that adultery is fun.
We believe that sodomy’s OK.
We believe that taboos are taboo.
We believe that everything's getting better
despite evidence to the contrary.
The evidence must be investigated
And you can prove anything with evidence.
We believe there's something in horoscopes
UFO's and bent spoons.
Jesus was a good man just like Buddha,
Mohammed, and ourselves.
He was a good moral teacher though we think
His good morals were bad.
We believe that all religions are basically the same-
at least the one that we read was.
They all believe in love and goodness.
They only differ on matters of creation,
sin, heaven, hell, God, and salvation.
We believe that after death comes the Nothing
Because when you ask the dead what happens they say nothing.
If death is not the end, if the dead have lied,
then its compulsory heaven for all excepting perhaps
Hitler, Stalin, and Genghis Kahn
We believe in Masters and Johnson
What's selected is average.
What's average is normal.
What's normal is good.
We believe in total disarmament.
We believe there are direct links between warfare and bloodshed.
Americans should beat their guns into tractors .
And the Russians would be sure to follow.
We believe that man is essentially good.
It's only his behavior that lets him down.
This is the fault of society.
Society is the fault of conditions.
Conditions are the fault of society.
We believe that each man must find the truth that is right for him.
Reality will adapt accordingly.
The universe will readjust.
History will alter.
We believe that there is no absolute truth
excepting the truth that there is no absolute truth.
We believe in the rejection of creeds,
And the flowering of individual thought.
If chance be the Father of all flesh,
disaster is his rainbow in the sky and when you hear
State of Emergency!
Sniper Kills Ten!
Troops on Rampage!
Whites go Looting!
Bomb Blasts School!
It is but the sound of man worshipping his maker
Mr. Turner’s Creed addresses the foibles of post-modern philosophy in the real world very well. In summary, I encourage the School Board and Administration to engage in a rigorous (real rigor, not deconstructed rigor) review of the IB curriculum and underlying theoretical suppositions prior to advancing this agenda. If after doing so it is your decision to proceed I would still disagree but would believe you have done your due diligence.
