Chapter thirty-two of the Ornstein text is entitled “Dichotomizing
Educational Reform.” It is an article
written by C.D.Glickman. In his
article, Glickman discusses what he believes
American public education is about and what philosophical beliefs should
drive that education. Glickman shares with us his belief that “public education is supposed to serve a
common good” and he goes on to state
that Horace Mann, in the mid 1800s,
wrote that public schools “would be the great equalizers of human conditions,
the balance wheel of the social machinery.”
The debate remains however as to what an “educated” person in our
democracy actually is. Who is to make
the decisions as to what constitutes a thorough education? Does one need three years of high school or
college level preparatory classes in order to be an “educated” person in our
society? What essential knowledge and
skills should an educated person in a democracy possess? Glickman, however, believes that we should not think in terms of
any one structure , method or system of education but rather that we must
consider competing views as we go about answering the above questions.
Do you agree with Glickman’s position?
Why? Why not? And finally, do you agree with Horace Mann’s
statement above? I look forward to
reading about your philosophical preferences with regard to the education of
our young people.
Mann's vision of education as the great equalizer has by point become so embedded in most of our ideas about democracy, that it is hard to imagine not embracing such a view. Certainly, it is hard to argue with the fact that the more one knows about one's world, the better equipped one is to deal with being human on this planet!
ReplyDeleteHowever, trying to define what constitutes an educated person is incredibly difficult - perhaps precisely because there is so much to know about the world. Do we consider a nuclear physicist to be better educated than an English professor, or just differently educated? Do we still use the "Renaissance Man" definition, the idea that a person who knows something about a wide variety of topics, rather than being an expert or specialist, is better educated than a brain surgeon? It seems to me these are impossible questions to answer, because there are so many ways to be educated.
Glickman mentions Hirsch, the proponent of a core set of information that is required knowledge in order to be cultured. While we all bridle at the idea that Hirsch, or anyone for that matter, should have the final say on such a list, isn't there some value to some shared set of cultural references? Don't these references (be they Greek myth or Harry Potter) provide us with analogies that help us deepen our thinking and facilitate discussions about our own lives? We still teach Plato, the Odyssey, Chaucer and Shakespeare. In western culture, there are many allusions to Judeo-Christian biblical stories and ideas. As humans, we use stories to pass on knowledge and understand our lives. Who chooses which stories?
After all, cultures tend to be chauvinistic about their knowledge. I was fascinated to read that the Pythagorean theorem appeared in both Babylonian and Chinese mathematics a thousand years before Pythagorus developed it. What else might they have discovered that we have or will claimed as new knowledge in the West? How can we delimit what is worth knowing when there is so much we don't know?
Glickman rightfully points out that formal education is currently valued in our society as an end it itself. It is something that is finished at some point in time. In my opinion, any real definition of education must incorporate the ability to keep learning and changing in response to the world around us.
Ultimately, in my own mind, an educated person is able to uncover and analyze information to build new interpretations and knowledge. The information is not limited to any realm.
When I lived in Ireland in the late 1970's, we often hitchhiked around the country. Frequently, drivers we met, while having just the basic formal education, were quite well-read. I distinctly remember a truck driver reciting Yeats and Betjeman to us. The man had probably left school at
age 14, but he knew more about poetry than some of the people I was studying English with. Was he not (self) educated?
I agree that a person can be considered “educated” in many different ways. I do not think that a person needs to go to college or some equivalent in order to be successful or educated. I also do not believe that attendance of a higher education facility or even the graduation of said facility makes anyone “intelligent”.
DeleteMay I offer up an old med school joke: “What do they call the guy who graduates last place in his Medical School class?” …….. “Doctor”
I do believe in the standards and the core, I feel these things are important for a person to be functional in society. We need to be able to add, subtract, multiply, spell, make complete sentences, know who did what in history.. or at least a basic knowledge.. this is what I mean by the core. Standards are extremely important, we need to be as much on the same page as possible. I attended about 5 different elementary schools, without standards I would have easily fallen through the cracks.
Glickman states, “ The public school system must value and allow multiple conceptions of education that students, parents and faculty members can choose from”. I agree with Glickman that not one single way of delivering this core is 100% correct or incorrect and that all of these methods have merit. We would be doing a disservice to all if we only considered one method to be correct.
I also believe that at some point the individual needs to make a decision (yes, democracy) in regards to what interest them and possible career pursuits. Differently educated people make the world go around. I do not know how to farm for wheat or fix my car; I have no clue which spot you get prime rib from.. etc.. I cannot negate the importance of these types of “different” education, and I do not believe any of us would begin to. Most of the people I speak with have no idea what infinite-point perspective is, and I’m more than ok with that, I’m grateful for it. As I stated before I do not think that the collegiate route is for everyone and I’m personally glad it’s not because then we would just have a bunch of people who waxed philosophic all day.... and nothing would get done.
An american education must have some type of foundation and stand by it no matter what. Foundation is very important because, it gives you a basis to start somewhere. Foundation is wider than any beliefs of any one individual or any one group. The people who should decide things should be made up of a committee of different people. It is good to have people from different areas to decide on educational decisions. They shall participate unwilling parents, students, and educators because, it is good to get everyone's opinion on the subject. This is what the core of education should be.
DeleteThe idea and concept that everyone should have an education puzzles me quite frankly. Not everyone is made to go to college. Some people are better off if they go to a trade school. Just because you do not go to college does not mean you are not smart. Some people are better in doing a trade type of job. For example some people are good with their hands. Look at Steve Job he did not have a college degree and was a well known man and accomplished and made lots of money.
I do not agree with what Glickman stated because people learn in different ways.In different cultures people are taught to do things in certain ways. The debates that are discussed here talk about standards vs no standards and intrinsic versus nonintrinsic and motivation vs. cultural. Talks about American being the land of the free and anyone no matter what can be able to do anything. There is another side to this that America could be a hegemonic system.
I agree with Mann about the idea of common schools. That the school should be made equal and that no one should have been treated differently. That everyone should be treated fairly and equally. Which, I totally agree with everyone should have an equal and fair education that is due to them.
I too agree that one definition is not sufficient to define whether or not a person is educated. I also agree that not everyone is destined to go to college, get a PhD, etc. In fact, I can recall the 2 guys who found Google...I believe they dropped out of college to pursue what they believed to be a good idea and now it is one of the top publicly traded companies out there in the market. This example proves that you can be educated and even gifted without having attended some form of higher education.
DeleteI do think there needs to be benchmarks as to what needs to be learned and what skills need to be taught in order for individuals to function in society. For example, everyone needs to have strong communication skills to interact with others. If you don't complete a public communications course or even practice presenting in schools, you lack the skills needed to be "educated" in my opinion. Therefore, I believe certain skills and knowledge must be learned for them to function in society. If they lack these credentials, then I would consider them uneducated.