Interview with Eleanor Goldstein

Introduction by Richard Farson
Welcome to the ILF interview with Eleanor Goldstein. It is with special pleasure that I can introduce Eleanor to those of you who don't know her. She is a woman of many talents. Knowing about her having started, run, and sold a leading business in the field of education, and through her books and articles having pioneered the field of false memory syndrome, I was surprised when she told me that she once wrote a textbook in economics, that was published in Russia, of all places. Having sold only the database part of her business, she remains deeply involved in electronic publishing, automated libraries, and other cutting edge technologies. I know you will find her to be a wise and witty and most responsive interviewee. So, welcome Eleanor.

Richard Farson
I'll use executive privilege again and ask the first question. Eleanor, one of the aspects of your career that I admire most was your dedicated effort on behalf of the many people falsely accused of sexual molestation of their young children or students. I think we'd all be interested in how you got into that field, and as you look back on all that, what are the most important things you learned?

Eleanor Goldstein
I remember exactly the moment when I first became aware of false accusations of child abuse. I was sitting at my table in my office reading the Sun-Sentinel newspaper, a syndicated article appeared which stated that many parents were being falsely accused of horrendous acts of abuse inluding Satanic acts, by their children, with little or no provocation. Repressed memories were being solicited in thereapy, which had been previously forgotten. The protocol was to believe these memories, confront the perpetrator and cut off all relations. I soon met thousands of peope who were so confronted and baffled and destoyed by such accusaions. When I heard these stories I felt compelled to publish them. I could not imagine anything worse. To be accused of something that you did not do, especially by someone you truly care about has got to be devestating I was truly enraged by the idea. The article included an 800 number belonging to an organization that published a journal of child abuse accusations, that was edited by Dr. Ralph Underwager. As a researcher, I follow the lead, so I quickly responded to the number. Dr. Underwager answered the phone and said it was true, hundreds of people were reporting that they were accused of things that they had never done. He refered me to an article written by Jane Doe in which she chronicled events that she experienced when her daughter contfronted her and her husband with weird accusations and told her to leave her home. The writer of the article was Dr. Pamela Freyd. We had many telephone conversations, and finally met in Washington, D.C. a few months later. This began my long journey into the strange world of false memories. I learned about the horror that was being created when people come to believe things are true that never happened. I learned the techniques that can be unwittingly used to influence people. The word, unfamiliar to most at the time, kept reappearing in the scientific literature, CONFABULATIONS. Confabulation means a mixture of fact and fantasy to create a new memory. I was intrigued, and the first book that I wrote on the subject that word became its title. The following ten years were fascinating as the story unfolded. In the course of this incident, ten of thousands of families were destroyed, Hundreds of people were imprisoned, many still languish in jail, dozens of lawsuits have taken place, therapists and institutions have been sued, and a great deal of research has taken place as to how the mind, specifically memory really works. We learned that we are vulnerable to believing almost anything no matter how absurd. People are very easily influenced and the more absurd an accusation might be the more readily many people will believe it. We are, after all, what we learn and we can be just as readilly influenced my misinformation as by accurate information. Now afer ten years the literature has come to reflect the reality of false memories. Ten years ago such literature did not exist. I learned many things. How suggestible we as human beings are, how powerful unintended consequences can be. How hard it is to get through to the media. How many ruthless people there are, and yet how many kind and thoughtful people there are to help take up a cause when good leaderhip is provided.

Participant
The blot on the field of psychotherapy represented by those therapists who were sure that all kinds of symptoms reflected parental sexual abuse remains one of the worst periods in the history of psychology. At the height of the frenzy over recovered memory, almost any symptom from headaches to sleeplessnes were thought to be indicative of such abuse. Indeed, there didn't even need to be a recovered memory, just the fact that the therapist identified sexual abuse as the cause would sometimes lead to the rupture of the parent/child relationship. I was appalled to talk to closed minded therapists and their patients. You performed a great service, because that kind of therapy seems to be in eclipse now. Or do you still find it to be actively purveyed?

I'd be intersted in your take on the current prisoner abuse scandal, how the various parties are treating their roles in the drama, and what we are led to believe.

Eleanor Goldstein
I have been considering your question regarding the current prisoner abuae scandal and thinking about how it fits into what I learned about False Memories and False Accusations. There are some similarities. First, it seems unreasonable to believe that a few enlisted soldiers acted upon their own instincts to torture prisoners. Does that seem likely, and that they would photograph those activities. This appears to me to be just as unlikely as it was to believe that thousands of educated and seemingly upstanding citizens would abuse their chilren. Why would the general public believe that these atrocities could so easily occur. Robyn Dawes, author of House of Cards, claims that the reason people are willing to believe such things is because authorities say it is so and a consensus developes around those authorities. We have much evidence that this occured during the hysteria around false accusations of child abuse. Currently authorities are claiming that a few young enlisted people are responsible for hundreds if not thousands of atrocities and they did so of their own volition. Notice the consensus building around this theory, or defense of the establishment by most of the media. I have trouble believing that these young people took it upon themselves to torture prisoners and that they should be held soley responsible. We shall have to see how this plays out, but I venture to guess that there is a lot more to this story. Of course there is a major difference in the prisoner abuse stories and the sexual abuse of children by their parents stories. In the first case, there are photographs documenting the abuse, in the second case, there is no evidence in the case of the stories that I investigated, other than confirmation by a therapist, because of supposed side-effects.

The similarities that I see are the way the stories are presented to the public and the naivety with which we accept the stories without much evidence.

Participant

Eleanor, would you tell us why and how you created SIRS and how it adapted as the technology of education developed?

Participant
Eleanor, you work in a fascinating field - it is well known how fallible the human memory is. While I was locked up in Biosphere 2 a couple of odd memory related incidents occurred. The first was a series of almost halucinatory flash backs that would force their way into my, and other biospherian's consciousness (this is apparently fairly common for people in isolated environments). However, I could never be sure if these never-before remembered memories were real, or simply an invention of my brain, confabulations. I started talking to a therapist on the phone at the half way piont to help alleviate some of the pressures of being enclosed. Similarly, I could not truly be sure if some of what I thought I dredged up from my memory was real, or simply an invention to please my shrink!

Are there ways to analyze "memories" to know if they are real or confabulations?

Participant
Eleanor, I have a similar question to the previous question of Jane Poynter. I have twice beenn involved in a situation where the person has gone to great lengths to force an arrangement which everyone else believed was not in their best interests and did their best to dissuade them from entering into.

When the arrangement on which they had insisted, turned out as expected, not to be in their best interests, (but had been by that time at their insistance, set in unchangeable stone, they gradually came to believe, and to genuinely remember, that others had forced the arrangement on them against their will.

I don't think in either case that they are just pretending that they did not think and act as they originally did. I wonder if whatever caused them to refuse to consider sound advice from many independant sources originally, has now worked in the opposite direction to convince them that they were manipulated into actions they would never have agreed to themselves had they not been forced to do so. No amount of written proof of their original insistance, seems to have any effect on the deep seated resentment they now feel at having beenn cheated. With the best will in the world, I have no solution. Have you?

Eleanor Goldstein
Richard,

I will respond to your question about SIRS tomorrow.

Jane,

Your experience in Biosphere 2 is intriguing. A situation in which a person experiences isolation sounds like a place where false memories, or confabulations, could readily flourish. Did your therapist suggest the possibility of confabulations? I have written a paper that was published in Family Therapy Magazine describing environments where confabulations flourish, but I have not thought about the circumstances you describe. If you want a copy of the article just let me know.

Sandy,

When people take a strong position based on false memories, they often have a difficult time admiting to having made a mistake. It takes forgiveness and compassion to understand that person's position. Often the resentment fades when the person wearies of the strained relationship, if the other people involved can just understand and not expect a solution, just live with the problem knowing that you and those who understand the situation recognize what has happened.

I have spoken to thousands of people, and in some cases there are retractors, in some cases there is reconciliations without trying to discover what the truth is, and in some cases there is no reconciliation at all.

Participant
Eleanor, I don't want to pile questions up on you, but I recently was at a conference of somputing professionals, where the question came up--if you had to choose between classrooms and computers, which would you choose. I know that ten years ago, and even now, classrooms would win. Will they win again in ten years?

Eleanor Goldstein
I am most happy with interaction that takes place in a classroom. Computers are still rather impersonal, especially when they take on a teaching role. When computers are used to enhance communication, I think thay serve a great purpose. And when computers are used to provide information they are wonderful. But as a substitute for inter-personal relations I do not think they do very well. Ultimately, it is the human inter-action that a computer does not provide very well. Face to face is best. This does seem to be hedging the issue. I hope that we do not ever have to make an either , or choice. Computers are fantastic, but iner-action in a classroom is also awesome. The best of both, is what I would choose.

Eleanor Goldstein
Hello Donald,

I much prefer trying to come to a concensus than to choose alternatives. I do not like having to identify myself by political party, as an example. Neither side is always right, or always wrong for that matter. In a great essay, The Indispensible Opposition, Walter Lippman goes to great lenghts to describe why we must always hear the other side, He quotes John Stuart Mill on that subject. Lippman says we often learn more from our enemies than from our friends so it is essential that we listen to those we disagree with and can incorporate the either/or notions into the dialog and finally into the solutions.

Participant
I agree on the both/and rather than the either/or posture. That's why we organized the ILF on a nonpartisan basis. My question forcing a choice between classroom and computer was not to foster either, but to try to get an understanding of the developing role of computing technology in education, from someone who really knows it. Education in general has managed to resist all forms of technology that were at the time thought to be powerful enough to reform the antiquated structure and methods of traditional education. Technology such as the magic lantern, radio, TV, video and, until the Internet, programmed learning through the computer have all been marginalized. Now that it offers a new social form through non-geographic, interactive networking, it may overwhelm the traditional resistance. Since you, Eleanor, are at the forefront of this potential revolution, I thought you might have a better perspective on the chances for this technology to revolutionize education. It certainly needs revolutionizing--after thirteen years of full time study half of our graduates are functionally illiterate. Whatcha think?

Participant
Eleanor, I'm surprised that you would say that computer communication is impersonal. We started an online "community group" in our School of Management and Strategic Studies back in about 1983 that is so rewarding to its members on a deeply personal level that it continues to this day, with almost the same membership that it started with. Think of all the marriages that have derived from contacts on the Internet. And wouldn't history say that deep and intimate communication has always been more likely to be expressed in written communication, love letters, soldiers' letters home, and even political discussions?

Eleanor Goldstein
Hi Richard,

I see the computor as another tool, but unless it leads to more intimate encounters, I think it is rather alienating. I know that I have a different view than many other people, but for me human communication and sharing is the most important of all activities. I am not even an advocate of spending too much time reading, which I know is heresy. I want to have the experience, rather than live vicariously through the lives of other people in fictional or even biographical situations. The computer is another machine, albeit a significant and meaningful one that comes close to encouraging human contact, but it is still not the real thing. It is a little like the Stepford wives. Being able to communicate through time and space is indeed wonderful, but still just a substitute for the real thing when human contact takes place. It is a great experience to see a fine film, but that is someone else's life. The computer provides a step closer to sharing, and may in some respects reach even a higher level of communication because it forces one to think and articulate, but it is still one dimensional. Seeing the gleem in a teacher's eye, hearing the inflection in someone's voice which indicates recognition, the body language which conveys meaning is still only to be experienced in person Now please realize that I think that the potential of the computer is enormous, and I have dedicated much of my professional life to this medium. There are times when there have been 50,000 simultaneous accesses to my data base. I could never speak to that many people, but the instantaneous reciprocity is not there. A recent book about President's wives discusses the loneliness that many wives felt. There are sentimental letters, for example, between Ben Franklin and his wife, but they were apart for many years and he was a philanderer having spent a great deal of time in France while she took care of the home front. More visits and fewer letters would likely have made her a much happier person. Sharing a great thought, watching a sunset, having a moment in time and space with other people are great experiences. Why do people still go to concerts, when they can get better sound and more comfort at home?

Perhaps much communication can take place through a computor. but I do not think that it can take the place of face to face contact.

Participant
Eleanor: A very persuasive individual who I only know through the computer has said, and I quote "I much prefer trying to come to a concensus than to choose alternatives. I do not like having to identify myself by political party, as an example. Neither side is always right, or always wrong for that matter."

I would love to be a fly on the wall if she ever attempts to come to a consensus on the future of the computer and its role as a human medium for sharing ideas.

Eleanor Goldstein
Donald,

I have created three electronic textbooks, entitled What Citizens Need to Know About Government, Economics and World Afairs, which I think embody all of the elements that are appropriate for good teaching. When I sold the part of my company which deals with data bases, that went with it. I have therefor lost control. the new company does not choose to emphasize this product because "it is too far ahead of its times",and because it is not as profitable as other products. I wish that you could see it, because I think that it is truly terrific. But the powers that be, do not want to promote it. The textbooks provide a panaroma of the disciplines and allow for feed-back from the instructor to the student as well as students to each other. As with many things, it is fairly easy to find solutions, but implementing them is another matter. There is built in resistance to change. There are excellent reviews of this product and it has been used with extraordinary success in many classrooms, but acceptance by evaluation committees is difficult, because they are tied into obsolete criteria. If you are interested, I could send you some promotional materials.

Participant
Eleanor: I would be pleased and proud to get some of your promotional material. Not too much because my computer chokes with an overload!

Participant
Eleanor:

I appreciate your support of "face to face" education. I think education is

changing in another dimension and that is the growing need for "lifetime education" and it is here that computer based education will probably make its greatest contribution. Certainly your 50,000 hits on your data base is encouraging and I would guess that most of them were educational supplements to people who had a good background in "face to face" experiences.

Participant
Eleanor, in 10:8 you mention an article about flourishing environments for conflabulations. I would love to receive it. Thanks a lot. jpoynter@paragonsdc.com

Eleanor Goldstein
Richard,

Should there be a distinction between education and training? I believe that there is a time in life when one may consider that he or she is well-educated, but training may go on forever. Several of my favorite professors made the point. One of them was George Gamow, the author of many science books, and the father of the "big-bang" theory of the Universe. He made the point that humans have made many discoveries which provide an understanding of the world and that we would now be filling in information for an already known universe. As an example, he pointed to our understanding of geography. He stated that the world was so well mapped that we are not going to find any new continents, oceans, or mountain ranges. Much is yet to be filled in, but the mapping has been essentially completed. Thus an educated person, understands the geopraphy of the planet and is not likely to except the theory that the world is flat.

Wally Weir, my philosophy professor claimed that to be educated meant that you had a basic structure for understanding and that much of what would occur is to add to the understanding, but little would be out of the framework of what you had assimilated from prior learning.

Thus to be educated means to have a framework for acquiring new information. For example, Having knowledge of language allows us to comprehend new concepts.

Training, is something else, Learning how to do something can be taught by a computer, rather easily. That is just mechanical learning. Not that one or the other cannot be exchanged. But I think that knowledge is best passed from one person to another, while skills can more readily be transmitted by computers or manuals. Sure, a child could learn language from a computer, but through out the world language is transmitted for the most part from parent or sibling, or some other close person to the baby, no matter where in the world or how difficult the language. It is the nod of the head, the smile, the hug, or whatever other means one has of communicating from one living being to another.

Eleanor Goldstein
Richard,

Should there be a distinction between education and training? I believe that there is a time in life when one may consider that he or she is well-educated, but training may go on forever. Several of my favorite professors made the point. One of them was George Gamow, the author of many science books, and the father of the "big-bang" theory of the Universe. He made the point that humans have made many discoveries which provide an understanding of the world and that we would now be filling in information for an already known universe. As an example, he pointed to our understanding of geography. He stated that the world was so well mapped that we are not going to find any new continents, oceans, or mountain ranges. Much is yet to be filled in, but the mapping has been essentially completed. Thus an educated person, understands the geopraphy of the planet and is not likely to except the theory that the world is flat.

Wally Weir, my philosophy professor claimed that to be educated meant that you had a basic structure for understanding and that much of what would occur is to add to the understanding, but little would be out of the framework of what you had assimilated from prior learning.

Thus to be educated means to have a framework for acquiring new information. For example, Having knowledge of language allows us to comprehend new concepts.

Training, is something else, Learning how to do something can be taught by a computer, rather easily. That is just mechanical learning. Not that one or the other cannot be exchanged. But I think that knowledge is best passed from one person to another, while skills can more readily be transmitted by computers or manuals. Sure, a child could learn language from a computer, but through out the world language is transmitted for the most part from parent or sibling, or some other close person to the baby, no matter where in the world or how difficult the language. It is the nod of the head, the smile, the hug, or whatever other means one has of communicating from one living being to another.

Participant
Interesting way of seeing the difference between education and training, Eleanor. I see it a bit differently. I see education as making people different from each other--encountering the great ideas of philosophy, history, literature, science, etc. and mixing them with one's personal experience so that each educated individual emerges a unique product, an individual unlike any other, but sharing many levels of understanding with others, so that communication is possible. Training, on the other hand, makes people alike. It is skill oriented, and we want everyone to learn the same material--reading dials, medical procedures, languages (I think of learning a language as training, because we want everyone to to it the same way--learning about culture, of course, would be education). So measurement is appropriate for training, but totally inappropriate for education. There is no way to sensibly evaluate a Harvard education because each graduate is unique, each "learned" something different. But it is relatively easy to test a skill.

Now, you pose the thought that education is fostered in the face-to-face situation, while training (which you seem to define as the kind of filling-in information that lifelong learning requires) can be done efficiently with computers. If we were only talking about computer programmed learning, I might agree, but if we are talking about dialogue, well, I'm inclined to think that computer facilitated communication, across cultures, for example, can be highly educational. I think the ILF works that way. It has certainly been an education for me--changing my mind in fundamental ways. Very often learning from myself, too. Figure that one out.

Your professors, while certainly right about our having mapped the earth, to my mind, make a mistake in using that analogy to cover the field of education. The knowledge and interpretations of the microcosms and macrocosms of the universe are so dynamic that we make radical changes in our understanding on a continuing basis. Education is never-ending. Indeed, I would turn your professors' ideas on their heads. Being "well-educated" means only that you are better prepared to encounter the really big ideas that keep reshaping one fundamentally. We are not just filling in the blanks. Learning is not just a mopping up exercise.

Forgive the lengthy response, but you pushed my button on the role of computers in training and education. It is important to distinguish between them. But I don't count computers out on either task, and as the Czaress of educational technology, I don't want you to either.

Participant
Eleanor, I often cite statistics such as half our US public school graduates are functionally illiterate, that they haven't read a book in the last year, that students can't pass tests they took two weeks earlier, that Ivy Leage seniors can't pass a 7th grade history exam, etc. Today the LA Times carries a story indicating that in 1993 only eleven percent of Americans believed in evolution, while 47% believed that "God created human beings pretty much in their present form at one time within the last 10,000 years or so." Other statistics: 49% believe in demonic possession, 36% in telepathy, and 25% in astrology. Studies of what people understand about the measures on their ballots are even more discouraging. Schools of education are the lowest ranked on most any campus, attracting few students with inquiring minds. The new accountability binge is making matters worse. A case can be made that education is largely a babysitting service, and that students permanently learn only what Ivan Illich called the hidden curriculum (the form and ritual of education--sit still, raise your hand, obey adult authority, etc.) and retain almost nothing from the standard curriculum. Surely education needs radical reform, and there is little on the horizon, other than computing technology, that offers much hope, I would think.

I, personally, don't believe in compulsory education. I see it as the core of the problem, and more than that, as a violation of children's rights. Do you have other ideas for the radical reform of education?

Eleanor Goldstein
When you consider the bell-curve for intelligence, it is not surprising that a small percentage of people can be educated to the standards that we think are acceptable.

People learn far more from experience than they do from formal education. We have yet to devise ways to measure what people know. When I was in the Dominican Republic, in the poorest village, I was very impressed with the native intelligence of many of the women that I met. I think that part of the problem, is that we teach the wrong things in schools. We teach many things that are irrelevant to the lives of the students, also many things that are not of interest. I think that we could probably devise a very meaningful way to reform education, if we set our minds to it. I think that we could develop a concensus of what should be taught for sucessful living, but there is too much vested interest in exisitng curriculums. Our education system is a huge industry, with powerful interests who like things as they are.

I would say that, unless severely handicapped, I have never met a person that wasn't good at something. But schools do not encourage students to learn what they are good at, but rather emphasize what they do not know. With the current way of standardized testing, we create failures in our schools, rather than succeses.

We do not need to know what we are bad at as much as we need to know what we are good at. Schools should be oriented towards success, not failure. You got me on one of my favorite subjects, but it is so very frustrating. I came so close, yet so far of having many of my ideas incorporated into education, then I sold out. Many teachers and librarians have told me that I changed the way they do things. How many heroes do we have in education? How many role models. How many people are celebrities for being great educators? We do not respect educators, so why should our children respect education?

Participant
I agree, right down the line.

You sold a big part of your company, but you kept the parts that were of most interest to you, didn't you? You haven't given up, have you?

Eleanor Goldstein
It is very difficult to make such significany changes in life. One of my worst years, having lost Daniel, several other good friends and the structure of the company as it existed. I would like to hear from other people about how they handled significant changes in their lives. I am making some considerable transitions and find that quite interesting but wrenching at the same time.

Participant
I can see how it would be very difficult to give up such a big piece, or really any piece that would make the experience of running it so very different.

Participant
Eleanor, I'd like you to tell us more about your long experience in trying to augment education around the world. How is it that your services and technology have been so successfully implemented when most such efforts fail? Do you have a different orientation from the others?

Eleanor Goldstein
Richard,

When I started to teach in the 60's there was a lot of turmoil in the schools, as you may recall. relevancy was the buzz-word. Change was everywhere; the Vietnam War protests, the Civil Rights Movement, the War against poverty, it was all happening and Boulder, Colorado was one of the places where it was happening the most and that is where I was teaching. Kids were restless and textbooks were irrelevant to the times. I kept my own files of articles to respond to the interests of my students. It was my good fortune, that the SSEC Social Science Education Consortium moved to Boulder, sponsored by the National Science Foundation. Remember the "new math", well it was the time of the "new Social Studies". Irving Morissett, who was Director of that program, was a positive influence for me. I was a participant in his graduate program. He encouraged development of new ideas. It was there that the idea for SIRS was nurtured. Why not apply the strategies of the new social studies to the ideas confronting society. Why not use the resources that students would be using in real life such as newspapers and magazines and documents, rather than rely on text-books which would become out-dated as soon as they were printed.

So it was a time when relevancy was considered important and it was a time when the culture was under-going monumental change and I happened to be in a place when all of this was going on and I had the opportunity to apply what I was learning to the educational practices that I believed in. It was a confluence of events. I was rather single minded about getting information to people. It was always upper-most in my mind that problems could be solved only if people had access to information representing all points of view. Using the strategies of the "new social studies" to current problems seemed a natural thing to do. Irving Morrissett and some of my other Professors were very supportive and their endorsment meant a great deal to me.

It was such a simple idea, to make it easy to get information, to assemble, information by important topics, to organize it, to get permission to reprint it to index it. all a simple idea, but not so easy to implement. But as soon as we were able to make the materials available there was an acceptance. After all, people , especially librarians were always cutting out articles for their verticle files. Haven't we all had the experience of wanting to keep articles that we find interesting, but that is hard to do on an individual basis.

I have a fundamental belief that people are hungry for information, I would go so far as to say they are "starving" for information. I took on the challenge of bringing interesting information, about important issues, at a reasonable cost to libraries. I was doing for the librarian the task that librarians would do for themselves, if they had the time and resources to do it.

About that time, we moved to Washington, D.C. and I did research in every government agency library and every special interest group library to find important articles. It is a long and convoluted story as to how it all come into being. This is just a quick survey.

I think that my orientation is to act upon the belief that people want relevant information, that everyone has something of great interest to him or her, and that if you provide that information people will respond. It seems a logical idea, "make it easy to get information". At first some people accused me of making it "too easy to get information". They said I was spoon-feeding. I think education should be excitng and fun. Many curriculum developers want to make learning difficult and they think that only when they fail a certain percentage of students are they successful. I believe that every student should experience success and education should be a positive experience. I have never met a person that doesn't have something that is of interest to him or her. I find it the task of a teacher to be a facilitator in the learning process. I wrote study guides to that effect and many people responded to that idea.

I appreciate your interest.

Participant
The field of social studies is so broad, and loaded with ideology, about family, politics, history, community. How did you steer a course through that minefield? Surely there must have been many times you wanted to introduce documents that would counter, say, the history they were being taught about our relations with Native Americans, or how politics really works in corporate America, or how our justice system actually functions, or how few nuclear families actually exist, etc. Your choice of articles could have jarred a lot of teachers and librarians.

Eleanor Goldstein
I have never had a problem with the choices that we made for articles to be included in SIRS. We select from such diverse publications and include so many articles that while there are bound to be articles to displease everyone there are also articles to please everyone. We do not espouse any particular point of view, but we say that our mission is to present all sides of an issue in so far as it is possible., in order to encourage dialogue on major social issues confronting society.

I adhere to the principles of John Stuart Mill in his essay about why it is essential to hear and truly listen to all points of view. You must particularly listen to those with whom you disagree, he says. One of three things happens when you listen to those with whom you have a difference, I am just paraphrasing.

I. If you are wrong you have the opportunity to exchange error for truth.

2. If you are right you have the opportunity to convince the other person of his errors.

3. If nothing else, you will be more convinced of the argument you are making by having to defend it.

I believe that there are certain self-evident truths that have guided my work. I do not over-reach. I am just there to present information and to espouse problem-soving, or inquiry approaches to learning.

Participant
So might you include articles from the politically polarized Weekly Standard and The Nation, or would you be more likely to draw from more mainstream publications like the NY Times and Newsweek?

Eleanor Goldstein
We would likely use all of the above mentioned publications. We subscrbed to well over 1500 publications.

Participant
Eleanor -

I'm following this fascinating discourse with great interest, & will chime in with something more substantial shortly. In the meantime, your reference to Lippman's essay was intriguing enough that I found it on the Internet at

http://php.chol.com/~jh1228/weblog/pivot/entry.php?id=19

if anyone would like to see the full text.

Participant
Great essay, and it couldn't be more timely, as we develop the most polarized society since slavery.

Participant
Forgive me, Eleanor, but I'm still wondering. You make it seem as if there were no limitations on your editorial selections. Could you supply any and all material to the public schools, without regard to the political consequences, as long as you presented both sides? Abortion, guns, civil disobedience, the case for torture, criticism of our leaders, homosexuality, etc.?

Eleanor Goldstein
Yes, Richard,

I cover any topic that is in the news. I define the difference between a problem and an issue. The same problems always exist, and always have existed and will never go away. They become issues as the media focuses attention and provides critiques and the problem moves into the public awareness. I have created a taxonomy for the study of issues that is now widely used and accepted. My Professor, Irving Morrisset used to talk about the structure of the discipline. under which all other topics can be subsumed. Now I have a series of books called Enduring Issues. These are issues that will never go away and will bever be solved. Each generation will have to confront these issues independently. We now keep track, known as authentication of the issues that are most accessed by our users. Stangely enough capital punishment is almost always the most popular topic. These topics can be readilly accessed from the portal page with lists of full text articles for each issue. Under the main topics we now have over ten thousand topics for which there are articles. Years ago, the head of the Social Studies Department at Cambridge University, name Rex Walford, said about my product, "Why you do cover everything, don't you?"

I have a theory that the topics that are the most important to the students are the ones that some people want to censor. Those are the very topics about which they need the most information, and it has been my responsibilty for the last thirty years to provide that information in a reliable, responsible way.

When I first started teaching, the Vietnam War was controversial and hard to address in the classromm, then it was the Civil Rights Movement, then Sexuality. I have never evaded the controversial issues.

Participant
So you were able to do what the teacher or the curriculum was not. I'm sure the librarians and the teachers appreciated that, and made good use of it.

Do you see major changes in the format of education over then next generation, or do you think that the education establishment/industry will keep it pretty much as it is now?

Eleanor Goldstein
Richard,

You do ask provocative questions. Yes, there will be changes, for the better and for the worse. Technological advances will occur, and those do eventually filter down to the schools, but it takes time because the biggest profits are in the general marketplace and that is were most of the developmental money goes. As the educational establishment grows, so will the trend towards conformity and the movment towards standardization. More possibilities, but also more control.

Just look how much money is spent for entertainment and vieeo games compared to educational products.

However, the movement towards ownership by a few big companies, as is happening in education, creates a vacuum, because big companies worry only about bottom-line for their shareholders. Big companies will not touch anything that does not promise great rewards. Thus, there is room for small innovative educational companies to move in and be innovators. There will always be rebels in the publishing business, educationa as well as general publishing, eventually these rebels do make an impact and move the big cumbersome monopolies to change. Big companies are always looking for small companies that are profitable. So the cycle moves. Small companies are incubators, big companis are bottom-feeders,

Well, I leave for Europe tomorrow for two weeks to take part in the D-Day commemoration and other touring.

I have immensely enjoyed our dialogue.

Participant
And I guarantee we have enjoyed it too, Eleanor. I'm sure I'm not the only one who has thought differently after engaging you in this most interesting dialogue. Many thanks for spending this time with us, and we hope you have an interesting time in Europe (one can't exactly wish you a good time, when you are going to the beaches of Normandy to commemorate D-Day--God, those awful images coming at us, at the very week I entered the Navy.)