The multiple goals of education

[Rob Lister]

This is kind of an offshoot on the “ So, is homeschooling inferior? (http://www.randi.org/vbulletin/showthread.php?s=&threadid=39598) " thread.

It seems to me that before you can even consider the topic interesting, you must first objectively define the term inferior. Inferior in terms of higher education? That’s something that the study -- presented in the linked thread -- addressed. Seems to me that’s a little circular. Education for education’s sake is nice, but so is getting drunk for drunk’s sake. There must be some end goal in education. Different people have different goals. Different entities (i.e. the state) might have goals that are substantially different than individuals (though, the politicians and lobbyists will always present their goals in grandiose and personal terms)

So, for what objective educational goals should we strive as individuals, as a parents, as the state, or as a nation?

[tamiO]

Originally posted by Rob Lister

So, for what objective educational goals should we strive as individuals, as a parents, as the state, or as a nation?

The educational system should instill curiosity, a passion for learning, critical thinking skills and the ability to research.

[Rob Lister]

Originally posted by tamiO


The educational system should instill curiosity, a passion for learning, critical thinking skills and the ability to research.

Are those the goals?

[crimresearch]

Should provide?
Maybe in an ideal world...in the one we're stuck with, the folks who actually pay for the schools (politicians and corporations), want schools to turn out a steady supply of those who will absorb and regurgitate whatever an authority figure promulgates.

Going along to get along is highly desirable in an electorate, and in a military, and as welfare clients...most important of all in the current bought-and-paid for educational system, the iron triangle wants graduates who will make good consumers...easily distracted, easily led, content to substitute blind faith for critical thinking, and conformist copy-catting for creativity.

And it never hurts to start identifying the round pegs in the square holes as early as possible...as a feeder system into the prison/industrial complex.
And providing a few million jobs sure takes the load off the dole.

Did I forget anything? Oh yeah TV...they should turn out graduates who like to spend hours in front of the TV.

Or maybe I'm being too harsh.
Maybe we do have an educational system that really turns out caring, well rounded, and self determined citizens who will think for themselves.

After all, what politician wouldn't want *that*?

Paul
( Wait!! I forget self esteem...schools should definitely nurture self esteem!! )
:p

[Rob Lister]

Originally posted by crimresearch
Should provide?
...
{harsh interlude omitted}
...
Or maybe I'm being too harsh.
Maybe we do have an educational system that really turns out caring, well rounded, and self determined citizens who will think for themselves.


Not to be critical, but 'subjective much?'

At least the big corps have an 'objective' objective: WATCH MORE TV, BUY MORE STUFF

What's yours?
I mean, if you can't define it objectively, it's no wonder you're not getting it.

For example: "...citizens who will think for themselves" might be
"Upon graduation, the student will identify the logical fallacies in six sample State of the Union addresses"

Okay, not a great example, but you know what I mean. I mean, that wouldn't even be possible without an essay many times longer than even a single given sample.

[crimresearch]

"Not to be critical, but 'subjective much?'"

Yeah.

But when the schools are run by and for the politicians, there is a reasonable premise that some aspects of the educational process are 'good for business'.
Whether by design, or circumstance, just as the people get the government they deserve, politicians get the electorate they need.

And career politicians (and corporations, and teacher's unions, etc.) do not need students to be taught skepticism, or analysis, logic, etc.

Is it a coincidence that the rise in political control over the school system parallels the stripping away of those topics from the curriculum?

Hmmmmm...

Paul

[cbish]

Rob Lister wrote:
So, for what objective educational goals should we strive as individuals, as a parents, as the state, or as a nation?

That's an excellent question Rob. As a high school teacher, I think I can comment on the "failures of our educational system". One category is a societal one. First, as a society, we are not honest with ourselves as to what our educational system can and cannot do. Secondly, we, as a society, have no freaking idea what we want out of our educational system.

[drkitten]

Originally posted by Rob Lister
This is kind of an offshoot on the “ So, is homeschooling inferior? (http://www.randi.org/vbulletin/showthread.php?s=&threadid=39598) " thread.

It seems to me that before you can even consider the topic interesting, you must first objectively define the term inferior. Inferior in terms of higher education? That’s something that the study -- presented in the linked thread -- addressed. Seems to me that’s a little circular. Education for education’s sake is nice, but so is getting drunk for drunk’s sake.

Education level, particularly at the high school and college level, is very strongly linked with economic and social opportunity in general. It also links strongly with the absence of a lot of negative factors like crime, welfare rolls, teen pregnancies, poor medical care, and so forth. It's also very easy to measure as a large-scale demographic property. So it's not quite as circular as you seem to think. Almost irrespective of what you want, education (through the college level) seems empirically to be a good way to achieve it.

The big problem : people have a tendency to mistake measuring instruments with the goals themselves. If you decide (for whatever reason) that height is good and that you want to make people taller, redefining how long an inch is will adjust the numbers but not the reality. There's a real risk that policymakers are confusing "degrees" with "education," and watering down the various degrees. If this happens enough, then the linkage between "education" and the various other social policy goals will probably break -- to some extent that's already happening with the (over)emphasis on graduate degrees (which don't show the same linkage, not nearly as strongly).

But I don't have any problems with a methodology that evaluates the effectiveness of high school education by the percentage of college graduates it produces.

[epepke]

Well, there's a difference.

The goal of teaching is to instill a desire for learning and to provide opportunities to learn and resources for learning.

The goal of education is to provide a stream of loyal plastic robots for a world that doesn't care, in the words of Frank Zappa.

[cbish]

drkitten wrote:
The big problem : people have a tendency to mistake measuring instruments with the goals themselves. If you decide (for whatever reason) that height is good and that you want to make people taller, redefining how long an inch is will adjust the numbers but not the reality

This is an excellent point. Coupled with the fact that most stated goals are established by people who don't know the job at hand and are, in reality, statistically impossible.