and dislike, but most of all a lack of understanding” (Snow, 1993, pp. 3-4 ). Bearing the
blame for this societal intellectual crisis, as it does for most societal ills, is education. “It
has been natural in the debate around the Two Cultures to treat the division between them
as an issue in education,” writes Joseph Bronowski.
This has made it seem that science and literature are bundles of information, and
that all we need do is to swop them about more. But we shall not mend the rivalry
of cultures by turning them into compulsory courses at school. What divides the
cultures is not the insulation of information but of sympathy. They are not, even
now, two separate claimants for educational time, but for understanding. The
problem is not to get science and literature equally into the public’s head, but jointly
into the public mind and outlook (Bronowski, The Identity of Man, 1965, pp. 93-
94).
Development of the American middle school and high school in the twentieth
century extended Van Doren’s fragmented university into k-12 education. According to
Wesley Null, secondary education, historically predisposed to teaching subjects in
isolation, has further splintered curriculum because more sophisticated methods of
instruction that teach connections between disciplines would not fit easily into the current
objective assessment model. The systematic curriculum model, taking hold of the schools
during the Industrial Revolution and never completely relinquishing its grip, operated on a
factory model in which public education produces students who can “function in the global
economy.” Teachers are seen as workers who “have no choice but to follow the mandates
laid down by the experts” (Null, 2011, p. 40). School principals operate as mid-level
Previous Page Next Page