Talk:Poisonous pedagogy

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article is part of WikiProject Education, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's coverage of education and education-related topics. Please participate by editing the article, and help us assess and improve articles to featured and 1.0 standards, or visit the WikiProject page for more details.
Portal
??? This article has not yet received a rating on the quality scale.
??? This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale.

Transferred from German-English_translation_requests:

Contents

[edit] de:Schwarze Pädagogik

  • Corresponding English-language article: Poisonous pedagogy
  • Worth doing because: the English version makes very little sense.
  • Originally Requested by: User:Jackiespeel 8 March 2006
  • Other notes:
  • Status: translated, ready for review/proofreading. Chonak 02:12, 23 April 2006 (UTC)
  • Supported:

One phrase in the German was unclear so I omitted it: der Tabuisierung der Berührung mit Hilfe eines abstrakten Erziehungsapparates: "the tabooization of touching with the help of an abstract child-raising device". Is that what Rutschky intended?

"Abstract child-raising device" sounds like a disparaging way of referring to morality or religion. If so, I think it's non-NPOV and should be clearly attributed to its author. Chonak 02:12, 23 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Children's books and fairy tales

Traditional children's fairy tales portrayed child abuse and manipulation by wicked adults. Alice Miller discussed them in her book "Thou Shalt Not be Aware." However, this section simply says how they "affect children is disputed, because of the variety of experiences." It is not clear to me how this section illustrates the concept of Poisonous Pedagogy. -- Bookish 13:45, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

  • The text as it currently appears is just a translation of the German counterpart. Is the writer of the article perhaps interpreting "cautionary" fairy tales as thinly veiled threats directed at children? Chonak 05:59, 2 June 2006 (UTC)
My feeling is that the fairy tales section should either be removed completely or substantially re-worded. I am currently participating in a major re-write of another article, but I could come back to this one later. Do you agree that it should be removed or revised? -- Bookish 20:46, 2 June 2006 (UTC)
I think this is the author's logic: he is presenting the named children's stories as examples of tales in which an evildoer is killed. If one were to take such stories as de facto threats addressed to children ("Behave or die"), that could be considered part of poisonous pedagogy.
It definitely needs work. As I'm not well versed on the concept of schwarze Pädagogik (have never read Rutschky's views and only one book by Miller), I'm not in a position to do the rewrite at present. I've posed your questions and mine over at the German talk page to see if the original writers can expand on the section.
The reference to the Hays Code does need explanation too, as noted below. Chonak 22:23, 3 June 2006 (UTC)
Thank you for posing the questions at the German talk page. I think the article is basically very good, but I'm not happy about leaving it up to visitors to try and guess the author's logic in the fairy tales section. Tales in which an evildoer is killed are a recurring theme in all kinds of literature. What is the specific relevance to Poisonous Pedagogy? The Children's books and fairy tales section is very short at the moment, and I feel the article would not be weakened if it was removed until a more carefully reasoned version could be introduced. I have read most of Alice Miller's books. Although she mentions childrens' fairy tales, it isn't one of her major themes. I wouldn't find it easy to compose a condensed summary. However, she discusses Rutschky's Schwarze Pädagogik at great length in For Your Own Good.
The Hays Code struck me as a confusing digression. Personally, I think it would be better not to make an attempt to massage it into having some relevance. -- Bookish 11:27, 4 June 2006 (UTC)
You might be interested to know that the complete text of Alice Miller's For Your Own Good is available online. I worry that relying too much on translations of a German Wikipedia article is not the best way to improve the English version. -- Bookish 12:36, 4 June 2006 (UTC)
I have to agree with you about the 'fairy tales' section, so I'll cut the text from there and save it somewhere (maybe a subpage of this talk page) to preserve it in case we find some way to make it relevant. (As a newbie, I'm averse to tossing material.) I'll add a link to the Miller book on the article's book list too. Chonak 07:40, 5 June 2006 (UTC)
I think you've done the right thing. The fairy tales chosen as examples were not well known classics to English speaking audiences. Removing the section also takes care of the Hays Code problem. I suspect the person who added it misunderstood the article. -- Bookish 09:46, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Hays Code

Thanks, 81.173.134.142, for adding the Kellogg link: a good observation. About the Hays Code, could you expand that "see also" with a few words to show what part of the Production Code relates to this section? Because of the length of the Production Code article, I think the connection isn't clear enough yet. Again, thanks. Chonak 04:33, 1 May 2006 (UTC)

I agree. Without a few more words to show how the Production Code relates to this section I think it might confuse readers. -- Bookish 13:45, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Article format

The References section is sub-divided into "Books" and "Web pages." As it is a Wikipedia custom to include an "External links" section for links to external web pages, is there any reason why that change should not be made to this article? -- Bookish 14:58, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

  • Sounds good. Chonak 05:05, 31 May 2006 (UTC)


[edit] Introduction

Since I translated the article, the German version has (IMHO) improved the first paragraph as follows (my translation):

  • Poisonous pedagogy is a designation for repressive child-raising methods from past centuries. It is a basically negatively loaded umbrella concept, comprising behaviors and communication of a strongly manipulative or violence-prone character.

It may be good to rewrite the English first paragraph too, though I worry that the above text verges on POV. (Hard to avoid it with this topic.) Chonak 23:00, 3 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] See also

Talk:Poisonous pedagogy/Deleted material