The Purpose of Education

[Doku]

Originally Posted by Mark Lapierre

Many of the replies to this thread seem to imply that those in control of the educational system have deliberately sculpted it to mass produce average suit-wearing mindless automatons.

I tend to see it differently.

Actually, it would seem that in America, it was a deliberate design.
Semi-propaganda version: The Marc Tucker "Dear Hillary" Letter
Straight from the horse's mouth version:
1 - Go to the congeressional record: Congressional Record 105th Congress - THOMAS (Library of Congress)
2 - Search for "DOLLARS TO THE CLASSROOM ACT SCHAFFER"
3 - The first one that comes up is what you want:
"DOLLARS TO THE CLASSROOM ACT -- HON. BOB SCHAFFER (Extension of Remarks - September 25, 1998)"

Originally Posted by Erock

Scott. Help me. I am pretty much exactly like you except I haven't gone to college yet. I'm a senior in high school. I actually like my high school a lot, and I have a good group of friends which makes it alright, but I have noooo idea what to major in or what to do.

I really don't want to go to college for society's reasons.

Going to college for the social experience is messed up, in my opinion. Not only are you earning zero dollars, but you are also spending about 100k total. I can think of MANY more fun things to do with 100k.
College helps you with a few things:
1: There are some jobs that you can not get w/o the degree. 2: If a degree is not absolutely required, the degree will help you get your FIRST job. After that, it's all about what experience you have.
America absolutely runs on the "Good Old Boys network." In other words, it's not what you know, it's WHO you know that counts.
To meet a lot of people and develop social skills, I would suggest a few things:
1: Toastmasters.
2: Read "Never Eat Alone" by Keith Ferrazzi
3: Join a club or two in an area of interest. Don't pick a club where people don't talk... (chess, bridge, ...) Take something strange like blacksmithing, or foreign languages, or knitting, or ...
4: Get a sales clerk job. Running a cash register forces you to interact with people. Just don't pick a massive place like WalMart... pick an area of interest... Computers? Electronics Boutique. Books? Barnes and Noble, etc.

My personal take on education is that public education is exactly what America needs. We need more factory workers. We need more WalMart greeters. We need more ditch diggers. We need more garbage collectors. Now, for my children, I will homeschool. I expect my children to be America's elite, not America's peons. For my part, I expect to retire very early so that both my wife and I can be fully involved in the lives of our children. Proper education is a life experience, not torture.

Let's face it. Most of us referred to public school as either an institution, or as a prison. Think about it. They tell you when to get up, when to report to your cell, when to eat, when to talk, when to remain silent, when to report to the next cell, etc. They even tell you when you can take a dump for christ sake! But that does work well for the factory workers 'though... Report to your station when the whistle blows, go to coffee/smoke break when the next whistle blows, then back to work, then to lunch, then back to work, then "clock out" and go home. Just like school. Most factory workers get two smoke breaks, and lunch. Most schools have morning and afternoon "recess" as well as lunch. Coincidence? or design?

--Doku

[Steve Olson]

Hi Everyone,
I just did a blog post on this very subject, so instead of re-writing it here, I will just link to it.
The Seven Lesson School Teacher

Thanks

Steve Olson

[Mark Lapierre]

Originally Posted by Michael Chui

Hm... I wouldn't think so. The ability to use knowledge feels like it crosses a line the others don't. First, knowledge isn't necessarily useful; the point of learning isn't application. It's so that you know things. Second, the desire to use seems to underpin the desire to know... that's interesting.

Certainly, in specific cases, it'd be a really good idea to teach how and why something's useful, but how universal is that?

True, in many cases the pursuit of knowledge is all that is needed, however in the context of school-based education, I believe being taught how to apply knowledge is incredibly important. I think that the issue many people have with what they're taught in school, is that there doesn't seem to be any use for the knowledge they were given. The replies of Qilfish and Akashic_Librarian provide examples of what I'm referring to.

Secondly, if the desire to use truly underpins the desire to know, then it's even more important that the desire to use be taught explicitly.

Thirdly, what is the point of knowing if nothing is done with that knowledge? Communicating the same knowledge then also becomes pointless. However I do consider analysing knowledge to be one use of knowledge, and in some cases, such as philosophy, the only obvious use. But ultimately, even the analysis of knowledge is pointless if that knowledge has no use. We don't grow through possession of knowledge, but rather through the benefits that knowledge provides (for all).

How universal is the how and why of the use of a particular area of knowledge? It's applicable to any field of knowledge which can be used. We have an entire sector of our educational system which is designed to teach areas of knowledge which are intended to be applied.

Perhaps that particular need (the ability to use knowledge) would be satisfied if, when passing on knowledge that could be used, the ability to put that knowledge to use is also passed on, and the ability to communicate knowledge is taught for knowledge which isn't put to any material use.


Doku:
The following quotes, from the document you pointed me towards, indicates that while deliberate design was the driver, mindless automatons were not the intended outcome.

"What is essential is that we create a seamless web of opportunities, to develop one's skills that literally extends from cradle to grave and is the same system for everyone--young and old, poor and rich, worker and full-time student. It needs to be a system driven by client needs (not agency regulations or the needs of the organization providing the services), guided by clear standards that define the stages of the system for the people who progress through it, and regulated on the basis of outcomes that providers produce for their clients, not inputs into the system."

"Throughout, the object is to have a per- formance-and-client-oriented system to encourage local creativity and responsibility by getting local people to commit to high goals and organize to achieve them, sweeping away as much of the rules, regulations and bureaucracy that are in their way as possible, provided that they are making real progress against their goals."

[Michael Chui]

To those who have nicely extreme disagreements with our current educational set up, you might find this article interesting. You should also note the writer's profession and position. People are working.

Originally Posted by Mark Lapierre

in the context of school-based education, I believe being taught how to apply knowledge is incredibly important.

Ah, that is, interestingly, the precise reason why we would differ on this point. I would prefer to redesign the educational system to suit the objectives that should be met. I believe that if students can desire knowledge, then based on this knowledge, which is not predicated by a restricting application, they can then act knowingly.

The pursuit of knowledge is important in and of itself. I don't have a solid defense for that assertion, but I think it is true. This was, after all, the founding concept of the Institute for Advanced Study.

Originally Posted by Mark Lapierre

what is the point of knowing if nothing is done with that knowledge?

This is a remarkably common question with some definite merit, but the demand for utility to come of all things makes me wonder. How would you apply art, for instance? How about history? What about combinatorics? But is knowledge of these things useful? Certainly. I apply knowledge about them all the time, yet the application is the knowing itself. The easiest example is history: I know facets of the past, and thus can see their effects on the state of today, and so I can grant myself context in which to see our circumstances.

Of course, I speak of disciplines.

But then, we speak of the applications of a particular disciplines, and then we also speak of unforeseen and surprising, new applications of those same disciplines. Is this something that can be taught? Finding knowledge can be taught, as can analysis and communication. But usage? It is not so easy to encapsulate usage as it is the other three abilities.

Keep in mind I'm not making a list of things we need to add to our schools. One of the grander flaws of our current school systems is the lack of application in the curriculum we are taught. But I don't think it's a very important one; it seems more to me like a symptom, rather than a cause, of poor curriculum design and pedagogy in general.

[Mark Lapierre]

Originally Posted by Michael Chui

I believe that if students can desire knowledge, then based on this knowledge, which is not predicated by a restricting application, they can then act knowingly.

I would consider 'acting knowingly' to be an appropriate use of knowledge and so I don't disagree with you. I would also agree that providing a different frame of reference is a worthwhile use of knowledge.

Originally Posted by Michael Chui

This is a remarkably common question with some definite merit, but the demand for utility to come of all things makes me wonder. How would you apply art, for instance? How about history? What about combinatorics? But is knowledge of these things useful? Certainly. I apply knowledge about them all the time, yet the application is the knowing itself. The easiest example is history: I know facets of the past, and thus can see their effects on the state of today, and so I can grant myself context in which to see our circumstances.

I admit the implication that use of knowledge be material use was misleading. I do agree that the pursuit of knowledge is important, and I think that one reason for its importance is the contribution knowledge makes to our world, even if indirectly.

Art could be applied simply by creating more art, or if already created, by providing others with something to admire, be inspired by, or otherwise produce an emotional response.

Originally Posted by Michael Chui

One of the grander flaws of our current school systems is the lack of application in the curriculum we are taught. But I don't think it's a very important one; it seems more to me like a symptom, rather than a cause, of poor curriculum design and pedagogy in general.

I agree, though I think that if the curriculum doesn't include appropriate teaching of the application of knowledge, then it's failing in the often stated goal of preparing us to enter the workforce. In terms of a truly worthwhile educational system the lack may be unimportant, but in regards to the failings of the current system it seems much more relevant.

What do you think are the real causes, and what are the solutions? Instilling a desire for knowledge would obviously be a great start, but how could that be achieved more effectively than it is now?

[MichaelL]

Originally Posted by Qilfish

Back in year six, they refused to teach us long division. What's up with that? It wasn't on the sylabus, so though we asked many a time, we didnt get taught it and then in year 7, most others did. Grah. Now I still can't do long division...

Meh, long division... I learnt it back when I was like 10 then never saw it again until this year (my last year of high school - age: 18 - and all we used it for was finding the roots of a cubic (without using a calc), and since we can use a calculator for everything it's pretty much null).

[Michael Chui]

Originally Posted by Mark Lapierre

I would consider 'acting knowingly' to be an appropriate use of knowledge and so I don't disagree with you. I would also agree that providing a different frame of reference is a worthwhile use of knowledge.

In which case, you're not teaching them to use knowledge so much as to recall their knowledge when they act. I think that this would arise naturally from the desire to know, but perhaps it wouldn't.

Originally Posted by Mark Lapierre

I admit the implication that use of knowledge be material use was misleading.

It's not that; it's the idea that knowledge can never be an end unto itself. That is the idea I disagree with. I was a bit concerned with keeping the concept of what "usage" meant narrow, and intentional about keeping the definition of "knowledge" vague, because these are very difficult and elusive terms to put one's finger on.

Originally Posted by Mark Lapierre

if the curriculum doesn't include appropriate teaching of the application of knowledge, then it's failing in the often stated goal of preparing us to enter the workforce. In terms of a truly worthwhile educational system the lack may be unimportant, but in regards to the failings of the current system it seems much more relevant.

I disagree; it depends largely on what phase of education you speak of, and a large amount of context and the like. There are no shortage of arguments that the current system prepares us all too well for entrance into the workforce: as mindless automatons marching to the same drummer. Most of us here are in agreement (to speak presumptively) that this is not a worthy goal of education.

But the actual thrust of our belief, to continue my presumptions, is not merely that education is faulty, but indeed so, too, is our workforce. One important concern is the one Steve brings up here; I agree with his conclusions, and look forward to the future.

We should "redesign" our workforce, somehow, but I question the assertion that education is a means to an end, specifically, joining the workforce. The specifics of this, or even the more general aspects, my philosophy hasn't fully addressed yet, so I'm not ready to go on and on about it.

Originally Posted by Mark Lapierre

What do you think are the real causes, and what are the solutions? Instilling a desire for knowledge would obviously be a great start, but how could that be achieved more effectively than it is now?

Put simply, I don't know. I work very intuitively, so my intuition draws up a conclusion to begin with and then I fill in the blanks to get myself from where I am to where my intuition is pointing. Certainly, the misconception of the workforce is problematic, and the relationship that the education industry (why is it an industry?) has to it is also problematic. I like neither situation.

Doku, above, suggests the now-commonplace analogy between the school and the factory. I've noticed a recent trend in schools to attempt to displace this, but eh... I still think it's a problem. The factory analogy has two parts: (1) that schools are designed to train people to become factory workers, but more importantly (and not suggested by Doku), (2) that schools act as factories.

The latter conclusion is that schools are handed raw material in the form of children, process them, and ship out the resultant shiny packages. They're even branded. This analogy is unfortunately apt, and the new era of business has not yet dawned sufficiently to warrant a widespread attempt at breaking the analogy by educational institutions. The vast majority of business institutions still work using industrial age techniques, so why should schools do any differently?

And even knowing all of this, even understanding it deeper than I already do, considering an effective solution is orders of magnitude harder. I don't accept Doku's perspective, because I cannot agree with caste structures, even if they're merely implied. The Walmart greeters are human beings, too, and deserve a chance at consciousness, empowerment, and fraternity as much as the rest of us.

[Doku]

Originally Posted by Michael Chui

And even knowing all of this, even understanding it deeper than I already do, considering an effective solution is orders of magnitude harder. I don't accept Doku's perspective, because I cannot agree with caste structures, even if they're merely implied. The Walmart greeters are human beings, too, and deserve a chance at consciousness, empowerment, and fraternity as much as the rest of us.

I don't agree with caste structures either. As a kid, I grew up with nothing. My mother worked, and my father worked two jobs. There were times that we had potatoes for a week straight because that's all we could afford. Now, I have a large house, lots of land, and a solid six figure income. I have friends that are janitors, sales clerks, unemployed bumbs, as well as CEOs, retired milionaires, etc.
Of all my friends, every one of them that is at, or below the poverty line were happy with their public education, and look at me funny or even argue with me when I tell them that I am homeschooling. Every one of my friends that is over a six figure income that went to public school hated it, and feel that they "survived" it, and that it had less than zero benefit to getting them where they are today. (most of them are also homeschooling their children... coincidence?)

Yes, I absolutely agree that everyone deserves a chance. Everyone deserves a sense of self worth, etc. I just don't think that a public school education gives them any of that.

[Michael Chui]

Doku, the specific disagreement I have with you was this statement:

Originally Posted by Doku

My personal take on education is that public education is exactly what America needs. We need more factory workers. We need more WalMart greeters. We need more ditch diggers. We need more garbage collectors. Now, for my children, I will homeschool. I expect my children to be America's elite, not America's peons.

Now, if I'm misreading that, then I'm misreading it, but that sounds to me like an implied caste system: if nothing else, the homeschooled elite and public schooled peons. It doesn't sound to me like the current system is something they deserve.

[Doku]

Originally Posted by Michael Chui

Now, if I'm misreading that, then I'm misreading it, but that sounds to me like an implied caste system: if nothing else, the homeschooled elite and public schooled peons. It doesn't sound to me like the current system is something they deserve.

Aaahhh. Yep. You are correct, sir. I do believe that there will be a homeschooled elite, and public school peons. I also do not believe that the current system is something that anyone deserves. I also do not believe that anyone deserves to be sent to a war zone. It is, however, something that people volunteer to do. People have choices. If they want to choose to go to public school and work in a factory, that is their choice. I will send my children down a different path.

[Keith]

Originally Posted by kthdsn

Life is pretty rubbish right now, but we're trying to repair our home, save some money and move. In the mean time, we're doing the best we can at home to reverse the effects the school is having. It might not be good enough, but it's all we can manage right now.

I recommend this podcast by Steve on Solving Frustrating Problems where there seems to be no good way out. It seems relevant to your situation.