Reply With Quote
Triple posted. Yikes.
And of course the pursuit of those ideals was never corrupted to serve anything other than 'the people.'
Triple posted. Yikes.
Last edited by Winehole23; 09-09-2009 at 12:12 PM.
And today collegiate education is being democratized to the point of worthlessness.
At least they don't discuss the declining grades in math and science. We can feel better until those numbers come out, which I am sure they have and someone will post it soon enough.
Well, that is the thing here, you can see blue collar as chaff, and that is cool I don't have to go on an "everyone is equal" binge. The point, though is that the Grundschuler get the basic education needed to survive (I believe they teach personal finance, etc in the first two years before voc-school). Then they get a quality vocational education. That way a construction worker there will understand what it is they do on their first day on the job, better than someone here who drops out and just shows up on a construction site one day. They will be in a better postion (where it relates to knowledge) to innovate in their position because of this deeper understanding, improving the base knowledge of the industry. Also, it will get rid of these unaccredited "Voc Schools" here that charge $18,000+ for an unaccredited associates degree, or worse yet, a certificate.
I am a HUGE proponent of thinking that everyone should be educated across all disciplines regardless of their ultimate goals (business majors SHOULD take humanities, etc.). If all engineers just went to engineering classes and were taught the same thing, it would create a situation (IMO) where there would be far less innovation, inspiration and the like. Our founding fathers werent just some farmers, but they were educated vigourously in many different subjects, and the same holds true going further back (I will admit that this was a group of only a relative few at a time when education was for the elite). However, just because this is my ideal doesn't mean it is reality. While I can work to change society to get closer to my ideal (if it will accept it), I don't have to be too wise to see that a form of education that promotes my ideals, but doesn't fit reality actually does more harm than good.
For the most part. Most Americans end up studying essentially worthless majors. Art, Political "science", etc. All a waste. Most universities have a significant foreign student population in the sciences and engineering. It's an all around culture of failure and laziness.
What better way is there to ensure that the blue collared know their role than to run them through 13 years of state and workforce indoctrination? Public education as it operates serves to reinforce the notions of class and subservience in this country.
Something to consider is that back in olden times in the US literacy was nearly universal, at least among whites. The American reality was that class was not permanent, but transitory and education was the responsibility of the individual, aided by the local community.
After a century of public education (and greater centralization of it over the last forty years), basic literacy is waning among the public and class is now seen as permanent, despite the robotic protestations of all good Americans to the contrary.
They weed themselves out. Or they would, absent social promotion.
There is an element of viewing education as a theraputic/managerial arm of the state in your posts, that I would like to see clarified.
For the life of me I don't see what's wrong with saying that academic promotion should be based on actual attainment rather than state administered social meliorism.
i actually feel that democracy is intimately connected to education. the question is how much freedom versus how much discipline to use. as the great american philosopher john dewey postulated there should be a strong emphasis on the subjective quality of a student's experience and the necessity for the teacher of understanding the students' past experiences in order to effectively design a sequence of liberating educational experiences to allow the person to fulfil their potential as a member of society
Why must education be organized around something so artificial as grade levels? There are plenty of examples of individuals who can ace multiple grade levels in a shorter calendar time, as well as examples of individuals who fail to pass one within a year yet go on to great things.
I do too. Our current system fails miserably in this regard.
In my opinion, this view of education is a big reason why it has failed. The behavioral steering, er, "subjective development" of the student has replaced mastery of curriculum as the goal.
Last edited by Winehole23; 09-09-2009 at 12:27 PM.
my father was an educator in some of the poorest and most crime riddled areas of philadelphia and san antonio. he often told me of children who had parents in prison, on drugs and/or siblings and friends in organized crime or gangs. for them, education was not really the black and white simplicity of assimilation into the mainstream by means of effort and effort alone.
Why "aid" oneself to higher education if one is complacent to government handouts and the segregated life associated to the environment in which they live?
Dewey can go himself.
Age grade stratification is a barbarity better suited to tribalism, not related to educational acheivement. I agree wholeheartedly. That is why I keep insisting that mastering curriculum is the central feature of education. This can happen at the pace determined by the student's drive and abilities, not the artificial timetables of the ins ution.
We need to get away from this assumption that everybody is equal.
Some people are just stupid s and need to be told so.
What was it then?
And you're the only one talking about the aim of mainstream assimilation. I think. Was I talking about this?
not sure what you are saying "failed" about dewey's pedagogical theories. the experimental school at the university of chicago is one place that has implemented his beliefs on teaching has been in existence for over a century now and has earned a remarkable international reputation for teaching.
http://ucls.uchicago.edu/about/character.shtml
You are absolutely right, those that chose to go the blue collared route would absolutely know their role. They would be educated on the ins, outs, and subtle nuances of their field, before they enter their position. I am glad you are seeing this model as an exemplarary one. Also, one minor correction, those who choose to go the route of the vocational worker only have 12 years of public education, not 13.
As to your second paragraph, I don't see any difference between what I am proposing and the story you told. Every person has equal opportunity to acheive because they all start at the same type of school. It is their responsibility, as well as that of their parents', and the "local community" to ensure that they go to the school of their choosing. So this model, once again, does exactly what you want it to do.
Maybe I had miscalculated in thinking that you were initially using sarcasm to disagree with my post, as you have done nothing but provide proof that such a system can work very well.
i don't think he was hermaphoditic
I was referring to primary education. Surely Dewey has influenced that too, and perhaps not all to the good.
The whole focus on the child's self-esteem is alien to education. Even worse, in very many places it has replaced it.
that is, effort alone or ap ude tests do not alone stand as a testament to a student's at ude or potential when it comes to education.
perhaps you should actually go to the link i provided. it is about primary education.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions