504
PARTISAN REVIEW
the proper stimulation that might encourage their more inquisitive pupils
to escape from boredom and mischief into biology and mathematics. But
under the present system they have no recourse.
John Dewey, in "Challenge of Democracy to Education," quotes "the
patron saint of progressive education," Horace Mann, who said that "edu–
cation is our only political safety; outside of this ark is the deluge." Since
then the meaning and context of "progressive education," which the dic–
tionary defines as "a set of reformist educational philosophies and methods
that emphasize individual instruction," has been totally accepted. (I won–
dered whether Dewey would consider the mindless application of
innovative fads as either "progressive" or "education"?) "I don't know
what democracy ·means in detail," he confessed, before going on to ask,
"What direction shall we give to the work of the school so that the rich–
ness and fullness of the democratic way of life in all its scope may be
promoted?" He also stated that school administrators are to set "the direc–
tion of the educational enterprise . . . [which] entails special intellectual
responsibilities and leadership."
Igor Webb made that point. He argued that only a university president
with a broad vision is in the position to reform an institution of higher
learning. Of course, American society, which undervalues education while
assuming that everyone is entitled to a college degree, militates against
strong leadership. But without raising admission requirements to univer–
sities and expectations of both students and faculty, he believes that high
schools would not feel the need to live up to their responsibilities. Peter
Wood's focus was on these high schools. He stated that we are short-chang–
ing students by not adequately preparing them for college. Now, colleges
must teach what the high schools neglected, including preparation for cit–
izenship. Instead, why not train those teenagers who want to become
accountants, farmers, or ball players for these occupations, and let them take
courses in the humanities and sciences later on, when they choose to? This
would allow colleges to do their jobs. Both Webb and Wood, though com–
ing to the issues from presumably opposite directions, found that their
suggestions appear so outlandish only because politicians cannot afford to
toy with teachers and their unions, or to introduce legislation that seem–
ingly restricts the broadest possible access. (I believe that, theoretically, the
public understands these problems, but gets muddled by the dogmatisms of
interest groups and their critics.)
Bernard Avishai approached these issues from the perspective of
potential employers. The need for industrial labor is passe, he said. Labor
unions representing categories of workers are outdated in a period of rapid
change, as ever more sophisticated computing and programming skills are
needed and thus must be taught. But teaching institutions, and workers,
