[NIFL-WOMENLIT:2268] Re: the role of slogans

From: Andres Muro (AndresM@epcc.edu)
Date: Tue Sep 03 2002 - 12:02:34 EDT


Return-Path: <nifl-womenlit@literacy.nifl.gov>
Received: from literacy (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by literacy.nifl.gov (8.10.2/8.10.2) with SMTP id g83G2YX04726; Tue, 3 Sep 2002 12:02:34 -0400 (EDT)
Date: Tue, 3 Sep 2002 12:02:34 -0400 (EDT)
Message-Id: <sd747948.081@nmail.epcc.edu>
Errors-To: alcrsb@langate.gsu.edu
Reply-To: nifl-womenlit@literacy.nifl.gov
Originator: nifl-womenlit@literacy.nifl.gov
Sender: nifl-womenlit@literacy.nifl.gov
Precedence: bulk
From: "Andres Muro" <AndresM@epcc.edu>
To: Multiple recipients of list <nifl-womenlit@literacy.nifl.gov>
Subject: [NIFL-WOMENLIT:2268] Re: the role of slogans
X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
X-Mailer: Novell GroupWise 5.5.5
Status: O
Content-Length: 3541
Lines: 63

I f.....ing hate slogans. They are often used by politicians who are not doing anything, but they cover their butts with slogans. GW's is "No Child Left Behind". GB's was that he was the "Education President". People come up with shallow meningless solgans and then, they don't have to do anything else, and others think that they are working very hard for education. Historically, the slogans that you cite carry some  baggage. If we deconstruct them, we will find political motivation behind them, so they have to be analyzed in context. From a Freirian perspective, education is the process of becoming conscious of the historical forces that have shaped our sopcial context. Accepting the slogans, without questioning them is accepting any type education, ie: education to hate arabs, jews??.

Andres 


>> alcdgg@langate.gsu.edu 09/03/02 06:30AM >>>
At the bottom of Ujwala's posting, she mentions a few slogans:
"each one teach one", 
"teach the mother and reach the child",
"education for all" 
I am curious, do people think that slogans are a good idea? 
Daphne
Daphne Greenberg
Associate Director
Center for the Study of Adult Literacy
Georgia State University
University Plaza
Atlanta, GA 30303-3083
phone: 404-651-0127
fax:404-651-4901
dgreenberg@gsu.edu 
>>> usamant@comcast.net 08/30/02 19:32 PM >>>
>>Again, it's interesting to note how  international development theory and
even policy at this point,
acknowledges  that if you educate women it helps with production, etc., but
there's nothing that
states that women and children  make up the majority of the world's
population and that it makes
sense to work to end the obstacles that would allow women and children
economically, spiritually,
physically and emotionally health and growth just  because that's what they
deserve in their own right and not for any other means or purpose.<<

Actually people like Boserup, Omvedt, Sen, Karlekar, Tinker, Mies and others
have discussed the obstacles to women's development and Ramdas, amongst
others have stated that lack of access to education is what is behind the
gulf between educated (or literate) men and women. There has also been work
done on how if literacy is not demonstrably linked to employment and
socio-economic advancement, there is almost no value seen in learning. A
number of UNIFEM listserv discussions,  country reports also address this
point. In my own research this is a point I've repeatedly made: that access
to education, whether in the US or in India, is a key factor in keeping
women out of the sphere of education. What needs to be reinforced in my
opinion, is that lip service has been paid to the issue of access in every
report, and all these "year of the child", "international year of literacy"
mean nothing except ribbon-cutting and verbose promises, which rarely
translate into concrete financial or educational programmes. Programmes
which have worked, have been innovative ones, often at a grassroots level
(www.pratham.org for example) which have to keep the search alive for
funding, as opposed to getting some sort of recognition or renewed funding.

I've been reading the discussion and wondering about what could be added to
make it really incisive, and how to include a more practitioner and learner
perspective from different levels and how to make it forceful. It's been
hard because a lot has been said, clichÚs abound, and catchy slogans like
"each one teach one", "teach the mother and reach the child", "education for
all" are everywhere. It's not easy.
regards
Ujwala Samant



This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Fri Jan 17 2003 - 14:45:46 EST