Last March 19, a thesis titled Political impact of research. The INCLUD-ED case (Political impact of the investigation. The INCLUD-ED case). The author is a member of CREA, against her guru, the professor (suspended) and two men. Its director was Marta Soler, also from CREA and suspended. The tribunal was professors Serradell (UB), Elboj (UniZar) and Roca (UV), all CREA, the latter going from substitute to regular due to the resignation of professor Campdepadrós (UdG), another CREA. I have asked Transparency of the UB for the names of the second substitute and the authors of the mandatory reports prior to the deposit of the thesis, in case they were also CREA, and I bet they are, but they do not respond.
It is usual with CREA. Theses and theses that talk about the same thing with very little variety (just look at the titles); extremely brief, which, given the degree of redundancy, reduces the specific contribution to a minimum; cut from the same cloth and judged by CREA courts and fellow travelers. My favorite: The contributions of Jesús Gómez and Ramón Flecha to dialogic theories and practices (1965-2006), authored by CREA, read in 2010 at the Segovia Teaching School (UVA) and judged by four historical members of CREA (Valls, Sordé, Soler and Elboj) plus a regular traveling companion (López Pastor) as secretary (it is required that this be a local teacher) and another as director (Torrego). It served as the basis for two hagiographic books, Desired friendship y creative friendshipstwo delirious lives of saints about the founding friends published by Hypatia (CREA).
but it is not. The regulations require that the majority of its members and the two expert authors of the previous reports be outside the university, but nothing is provided for groups, networks or research projects, which also involve conflicts of interest and entail academic, and often ideological, homogeneity, more than any department or center. In fact, given that the thesis is the masterpiece of the researcher, until then in training, and the starting point of his professional career, a good director and a good doctoral program have the best opportunity to present it in society, before academics of other salaries and on other waves, since no one will pay so much attention to his work again for a long time. The TESEO database and those of each university record the different practices. In ideological terms there is usually no problem, since the university highly values pluralism. It is true that the humanities and social sciences lean to the left, like Business and Law or engineering lean to the right, but in the courts it is resolved with free debate, something that is even appreciated.
The gist is that CREA is an ideological sect. I know that this concept is not very precise, since it can range from systemic pedagogy (family constellations) or study technology (Scientology) until rajníshes (Osho) or Opus Dei, but I have been able to observe CREA, usually from a distance and episodically up close, for a long time: monolithic discourse (anomalous in the university), soporific simple mantras, very disciplined performance, claustrophobic aroma (endogamy, cohabitation by sex, very-very feminized…), aggressive and paranoid reaction to criticism, growing cult of the leader and obsessive search for power (the latter led us to two serious confrontations, in the Association of Sociology of Education and in the innovation network Innova, and turned me into one of its betes noires (time is irrelevant, take it only as disclosure).
The content is pure fervor. In the first, trainers proclaim how much they have discussed ECI
The thesis mentioned at the beginning is a good example. If Manolito Gafotas gave us the concept of a global world, CREA brings us successful educational actions (AEE) and international scientific evidence (ECI). The AEE are half a dozen unique formulas of different value that, according to them, ensure educational success for everyone, particularly the most disadvantaged, and are offered packaged as Learning Communities (CdA). How do they know? First, because his dialogic theory, in particular Flecha, says so; Furthermore, because it is demonstrated, ineffably but emphatically, by the ECI. But the value of that ECI is zero. In Includ-Ed, mother of all projects due to its financing (true) and its team (CREA and dispersed believers from some other countries), the final result included an incomplete and biased literary review (like any doctoral thesis), a superficial analysis of some PISA data (on some tables in public reports, no sophisticated statistics or going down to microdata, as any paper worth its salt) and a case study of a small school affiliated with CdA (without typological or statistical representativeness, nor enough students to pass as an anecdote). This March’s thesis includes four articles with 3, 4, 4 and 4 authors: and on Portugal, on Mexico and on sexual harassment at work, nothing to do with the rest or with Includ-Ed – perhaps added so that the article/author ratio goes from 0.82 to 1.07; a doctorate for one article is a bargain… but that court was not going to object.
The content is pure fervor. In the first, trainers proclaim how much they have talked about ECI, how very scientific everything is, how they have improved on a personal level, also students, families and communities, their new horizons, the paradigm shift, how their vision changed, their concept of school, their practice forever, the transformations in their personal life, in their ability to relate, hope and the ability to dream big, full of dreams and ideas, how mutual support, learning and other school benefits, self-esteem, resilience, empathy, inclusion for everyone… well, I won’t bore you anymore. In the second they explain how much they met and talked, ie how very dialogic everything was.
More than a job with professionals, it seems like an interview on the way out of Fátima – only believers, no curious people. In the third, this network that claims to transform 9,000 schools chooses a Mexican evening primary school that seems to improve results and deploys the usual prayer book.
The ECI always follows that script, with few variations: a CREA investigation, never independent, tells the PREPA of some CdA from enthusiastic testimonies of actors of the latter and authors of the former; Its supposed success can be typically academic or scholastic, or applied to everything like a balm: public or private, rural or urban… learning, satisfaction, coexistence, assistance… like navel-gazing and publishing it filtered on Instagram. Three decades and we are still waiting for an external and objective evaluation of the PREPAs, or CdA. Only Includ-Ed itself exists, weak as a custard; one of the disappeared AGAEVE, as biased and as weak as those of CREA; and a recent article by CREA in its magazine, pompously titled It is Very Clear What Improves Educational Outcomes, and What Does Notalready dismantled by several experts. There is only one independent thesis () that registered minimal differences of different signs, none of which were significant.
In associations, better with them than against them, since they are many and fierce
As a business model it is truly brilliant. In Magisterium they thrive with a lot of marketing on a facile and dull ECI that nobody reads. In sociology they look the other way because they are warriors of social justice. The drive towards metrics can be seen in its faculties. In associations, better with them than against them, since they are many and fierce. Before the financing agencies they argue the good cause and the supposed impact.
Teachers are offered one volunteer under their command for every four or five students. To the schools, a seal that proclaims that they try, the AEE. For the administrations, a very cheap solution, without spending on personnel or investments. To the young graduates, easy theses – you will learn the price. To fellow travelers, collaborate on projects, provide training… For themselves, a career as a giant with feet of clay, but irreversible as a civil servant. Hemingway said that we should all have a bullshit detector as standard (crap detector), and it has not been done, so let’s see when they call us for review.
