The purpose of a good education is to show you that there are three sides to a two-sided story. ~Stanley Fish
“The bottom line is that words do have power. They build up people and give them the mind-set that they can do it, but words can tear down people leaving them with the impression that they are nothing and never will be anything…Words can create hope or despair. Words can give birth to ideas and challenge people to great heights. Words can empower or enslave. Those of us who have chosen a life as educators must have a higer consciousness of our words. The school, via its agents…must be ever mindful of the power of words.” (Smith & Mack, 2006, p. 42-43)
“Adaptation to changing realities requires higher-order thinking skills. The mechanics of teaching those skills aren’t particularly difficult. What’s tough is convincing the public that it’s necessary and doable, that an education designed in the 19th century doesn’t work in the 21st.” ~Marion Brady, Cover the Materials-Or Teach Students to Think?
A favorite excerpt on technocentrism:
“Consider for a moment some questions that are “obviously” absurd. Does wood produce good houses? If I built a house out of wood and it fell down, would this show that wood does not produce good houses? Do hammers and saws produce good furniture? These betray themselves as technocentric questions by ignoring people and the elements only people can introduce: skill, design, aesthetics. Of course these examples are caricatures. In practice, hardly anyone carries technocentrism that far. Everyone realizes that it is carpenters who use wood, hammers, and saws to produce houses and furniture, and the quality of the product depends on the quality of their work. But when it comes to computers and LOGO, critics (and some practitioners as well) seem to move into abstractions and ask, ‘Is the computer good for the cognitive development of the child?’ and even ‘Does the computer (or LOGO or whatever) produce thinking skills?'” Seymour Papert in this ground-breaking article (italics mine)