ABSTRACT
Neoliberal accountability mechanisms such as national and international testing of school students has produced much debate around the world, particularly in regards the relationship between test results and socio-economic background. It is suggested for example that lower socio-economic background students have lower test results than higher socio-economic students. As a consequence, a ‘deficit’ theory of learning occurs related in particular to the level of family income. Placing aside for the moment (due to the limitations of space) the purpose and nature of neoliberal testing and connections it may have or not have with the culture of specific groupings of citizens, there is an epistemological argument to be made (as above in these notes) regarding the nature of knowledge and whether capitalist or neoliberal schooling takes account of how the vast proportion of the human population goes about learning. From the perspective of pragmatic philosophy, human learning takes place when unexamined and unreflective assumptions, ideas, predispositions and the like come into contact with new situations. As the human proceeds to grapple with the relationship between current understandings and possible developing thoughts, concepts, ideas and practices to resolve resulting tensions, new practices are created that enable progress and change. In general terms, modern schooling does not attempt to monitor or track emerging practices, but instead, imposes often disconnected and superficial tasks that are supposed to illustrate the outcomes of learning, rather than learning itself. This contradiction raises the issue of human consciousness, the capability of being aware and reflective of previous personal and community history and experience. Sometimes called the ‘hard issue’ of philosophy, the problem of human consciousness pervades education, teaching, learning and assessment and, while denied, distorts terribly our understanding of learning outcomes for all children. If it can be argued that human consciousness is produced pragmatically as other thoughts and ideas, then how students reflect on their experience from the perspective of their previous experience and culture – broadly, their personal consciousness – will direct their own thinking and new concepts of the realities they face. A practice approach to understanding human experience and learning therefore does not take us down the path of ‘deficit’ theory, but instead opens up a view of humanity involved in a complex array of social practices that we engage together, as communities and through which we reach broad social consensus on our understanding of what is important, how communities develop and how the social and physical worlds interconnect.
