Published 2019.
Stein makes it look like he has something so "new" and "miraculous" and he is going to inspire "hope" (an often repeated word in his lexicon and that of his book endorsers). Btw, I as a critical integralist philosopher of education gave up on hope long ago for a much better concept of "fearlessness" (for 21st century meta-theorizing and thinking)....In conclusion, "the book is radical but not radical enough."
Book Review (Commentary)
As many reviewers here [on Amazon.com books] or those following Zak Stein's work comment--it is obvious his bright IQ and sincere passion shines through. This book is his first systematic compilation of those traits he has honed. He is the kind of progressive futurists polymath philosopher of education the world needs.
Dr. Michael Schwartz (book endorsement) is right on saying that planetary thinkers are required in all fields today but especially in Education so as to grow "the critical-integral imagination" for what Stein calls, "Human identities [that] will need to be world-centric" for a new and better humanity (p. 2). That’s a high-bar demand.
Stein from the beginning in his Preface: “Integral Paideia” tells us his book is going to be "radical" in approach, with a rarified vision for a sane future for Education. He says we will need "educational activism and innovation as a political instantiation of emancipatory philosophy" and a "meta-ethics" for "the global meta-crisis" (p. 7). So, by this time with all these big concepts you get the sense this is a pretty heady treatise by a heady guy, who got his Ph.D. at Harvard University. Nothing wrong with that, and he doesn't apologize for "a long and complex book" (p. 5). I found this Preface to the book made up of his several pre-published essays, 'big sounding' very clever and intriguing--but it is nothing new--nor all that radical, from my perspective as a radical educator for 50 years. Many have treaded the waters and shaken mountains in progressive and alternative and "integral" education philosophizing and activism before Zak Stein. Stein can offer all the "social miracles" he offers to the field of Education (and the world) in his Chapter 4, and those are wonderful aims for a futures thinking about education overall. Fine. They again, are not just all that new or radical. Stein makes out in the Preface of his book and often in his writing that he is the 'savior' foraging ahead down the path with his radical sword of words, concepts, and high level consciousness (integral-speak). Yes, he is a brilliant leader to watch for. I just find it more than annoying that his work in this book is compared to John Dewey, or William Irwin Thompson (as 2 book endorsers do)--that's just silly.
Stein is a newbie to the field of Education and yes, his gifts are welcome. However, let's be clear, beyond the fancy marketing title of the book "Education in a Time Between Worlds" and all his big meta-speak, that several critical (and integral) educators have forged before him and I wished he would have given them much more due in his Preface, or to even have written a respectful nod to his predecessors in an “Introduction” chapter to his essays therein would have satisfied me that he is a scholar who has done his homework on "Integral Education."
That's right, the real working through of this book is in the sub-field of alternative education and specifically "Integral Education" --which, I and Stein would likely rather call "Critical Integral Education"--which honours via the "critical" insertion that we are after an even more radical and (r)evolutionary integral thinking than most in the Integral Community. He wrote, "I use integral theory" (highly influenced by philosopher Ken Wilber) to critique existing systems and to explore the need for and possibility of a radically different social world" (p. 4). Long before Zak Stein, I was doing the same thing and were other educators but Stein mostly ignores citing our work or engaging the sub-field of Integral Education. His essays are not meant to do that, which is fine; yet, he could have written an Introduction to so give due to predecessors of his "new" approach to Education.
The book isn't radical enough from a critical integral philosopher's perspective, like mine, or other philosophers of education I work with--and, it ignores the Indigenous worldview critique of all Euro-centric thinking about education as Four Arrows does. And Stein ignores (for e.g.) the potent critiques of counter-education by the late Ilan Gur-Ze'ev, who's thinking in both these examples, is brilliant and original in terms of (r)evolutionary philosophy for education and societal transformation. But, no use getting picky here what Stein left out, I'm merely saying he ought to have seen Wilber's theory (at least) is a new branch of Critical Theory (a point made by Dr. Jack Crittenden (1997, p. x) in the Foreword to Wilber's book "Eye to Eye." Yes, Zak Stein is saying about integral theory what others have already said about its critical capacity for aligning (in part) with the Critical Theory schools of cultural-political criticism and particularly all those critical theorists and pedagogues who have worked so hard for a hundred years more or less to revolutionize the way Education ought to take a leading role in forging and shaping societies rather than the current backseat regime of education in N.A. today. Again, Stein offers in the book little to no connection with his predecessors here and the linking of integral (meta-theory) with critical theory and educational emancipatory traditions.
Stein makes it look like he has something so "new" and "miraculous" and he is going to inspire "hope" (an often repeated word in his lexicon and that of his book endorsers). Btw, I as a critical integralist philosopher of education gave up on hope long ago for a much better concept of "fearlessness" (for 21st century meta-theorizing and thinking) --but that’s another topic and one I wish "integralists" were more up-to-date on; but again, Stein hasn't read or cited my work to engage it and I have offered him many opportunities to do so. In that regard, also there is virtually nothing I can see in scanning the book about the "Affective Turn" in philosophy and education and its crucial role in any future (r)evolutionary movement (integral or otherwise). This is because Stein is so "cognitive" heavy, like many of his teachers he admires so much (e.g., Wilber, Marc Gafni). Oh, and btw, even if Stein says in the book "I am no Wilberian" (p. 3) to try to distance himself from any of the negative associations that might bring to his career and leadership in the future, sorry to say: Stein is indeed a Wilberian and Gafnian, by any standard. Though, I think he just needs to use a more discerning language that (and I agree) he is critical of such big thinkers, independent too in his thought and practices but being a Wilberian is not near as enclosing as being a Wilberite (acolyte of Ken Wilber). I myself am a Wilberian going back as far as 1982 and Stein only came to Wilber's work in the 21st century in grad school.
Finally, the book is a bit of a travesty on the level of quality of production, as I see it. It lacks some basic scholarly and just common sense components--re: design. If Stein wants more quality in the field and embrace of Education for a better world, he better ensure quality in his book productions. My copy of the book deteriorated in my hands with just a few hours of reading, pages falling out of binding which is of cheapest grade; as well when I used a yellow highlight on the paper the paper buckles because it is so thin and low grade. For a futurist book and guide in times of tumult ahead, you'd think a quality book so brilliant (and published by Brilliant Alliance) would be consistent with the contexts it is produced in.
And, then, most annoying is the lack of attention and effort made by the author and publisher to create an Index for the book. Really! I find it astounding that was not included in a thick and complex scholarly book like this. Now, if the book was readily online to be searched in digital, I could forgive this error--but the book is not searchable on line that I could find. This really limits researchers like myself being able to access what is in the book and what is left out and where biases lie on the author's part. An Index allows one to assess much of that within minutes. So, now I have to read every page to find things I am searching for.
In conclusion, the book is radical but not radical enough, and that would take a long essay to argue but I have at least made a few indicators to point to where Stein is not really fully thoughtful enough about "schools" and their future, but also neglectful about Critical Integral Education. Fundamentally, his book is about this topic of Integral Education and he could have been really radical—really real—and, addressed those pioneer predecessors and contemporaries in the sub-field of Integral Education and all the hard work they are doing in philosophy, theory and on the ground in the experiments in education overall. I mean it doesn't speak well for me, on first blush, that Stein ignores (for e.g.) the higher education experiments going on around the globe in Integral Education (for e.g., at the University of Calgary, my old alma mater, where a Masters in Education program has existed for like 10+ years now as teachers or school administrators wanting an MEd degree can study Integral Theory as their specialist stream). And, all this is missed in Stein's integral education book--and vision(?)
-R. Michael Fisher (Oct. 4/24)
Amazon.com book review [they did not publish and gave no reason why]
****
Note: for those interested in my further support and critique of Zak Stein's work go to my essay some years ago:
https://prism.ucalgary.ca/items/75fdaa1c-d49b-48b2-a47e-13d88901f6e8
