Modern Education was the Result of a Shotgun Wedding
I liken our dominant educational structure as the offspring of a shotgun wedding between industrialists who needed literate workers to operate their machinery, and progressives who wanted to lift up the common person from poverty and drudgery. It wasn’t an easy marriage, and the children are a tad dysfunctional now. The union was never able to clearly identify the guiding principle of education. One book that has influenced many of my opinions on public education is Kieran Egan’s, The Educated Mind: How Cognitive Tools Shape our Understanding. Egan says that Western education is based on three incompatible principles, where all three can never be achieved in a single system.
- Education as Socialization (age cohorts, class groupings, team sports)
- Education as learning about Truth & Reality, based on Plato (varied subjects, academic material, connection to culture)
- Education as discovery of our nature, based on Rousseau (personal sense-making, teacher as facilitator)
If you put emphasis on one of these principles, the others get ignored. The industrialists would have preferred education as socialization and the progressives would have leaned toward education as learning about truth. We have seen some attempts, like Waldorf schools, to develop systems that promote education as discovery of our nature, but that does not go well with a standardized curriculum, whether it has a corporatist agenda or a progressive one.
As Egan says:
“Socialization to generally agreed norms and values that we have inherited is no longer straightforwardly viable in modern multicultural societies undergoing rapid technology-driven changes. The Platonic program comes with ideas about reaching a transcendent truth or privileged knowledge that is no longer credible. The conception of individual development we have inherited is based on a belief in some culture-neutral process that is no longer sustainable.”
Shotgun Wedding 2.0
I think we may soon get invited to another shotgun wedding, this time between techno-utopians, with financial speculators as bridesmaids, and libertarians, who feel the state and teachers have screwed-up education. It’s education as socialization, but socialization to the dominant business paradigm. But any problems with the education system are a result of the governance and economic environment in which it resides. It is through democracy, all of us, that we can improve education. Public education does not need a VC-backed Silicon Valley start-up to be saved. It needs more of us to participate in it. It needs democracy.
If social business is merely a hollow shell without democracy then the same goes for the new social education, currently manifested as xMOOC’s, those backed by large institutions or private interests. Audrey Watters provides a good overview of the flaws around the notion that our new education couple will be any better than the last arranged marriage:
“Hacking Your Education advances the notion that education is a personal (financial) investment rather than a public good. The School in the Cloud project posits that education is a corporate (financial) investment rather than a public good. Why fund public schools when we can put a kiosk in a tech company’s annex? Why fund public schools when you can learn anything online?
The future that TED Talks paint doesn’t want us to think too deeply as we ask these questions. But what happens,when we “hack education” in such a way that our public institutions are dismantled? What happens to that public good? What happens to community? What happens to local economies? What happens to social justice?
As such, the vision for the future of education offered in Stephens’ new book is an individualist and incredibly elitist one. It contains a grossly unexamined exceptionalism, much like the Hole in the Wall which, at the end of the day, worked best for the strongest boys on the streets.
So despite their claims to be liberatory — with the focus on “the learner” and “the child” — this hacking of education by Mitra and Stephens is politically regressive. It is however likely to be good business for the legions of tech entrepreneurs in the audience.” —Audrey Watters
We have not yet been able to effectively integrate democracy and business. Our current education systems, while flawed, still have some democratic oversight. In a networked world, our society needs to be more democratic, not less. Just as some business leaders are beginning to realize the potential of democracy in the enterprise, now is not the time to remove democracy from education. If work is learning, and learning is the work, there is little hope for democratic business if education becomes a business. For our future to remain democratic, both education and business need to be based on its fundamental principles. We are at a crossroads. Let’s cancel this wedding.
For our future to remain democratic, both education and business need to be based on its fundamental principles. We are at a crossroads. Let’s cancel this wedding.
I certainly won’t attend as an innocent bystander.
I was having some worry about ‘all’ of the subjects that you point here, but it was impossible to me compose the picture.
You gave me “the nodes and the pattern” to think about it in a more integrated way.
I feel that the pieces start to link and I hope I will start to think in a more creative way.
Thank you so much! (again)
Harold – I am questioning most of the content that is assumed no matter what the system. What do kids know that makes any sense to their lives as a result? What have they missed? What is the world that they have to cope with? What is the fit?
I see a massive disconnect. And I see how parents have given all the role in many cases to schools.
To the contrary, I think education has too many people involved in the wrong ways. Parents seem to be overly involved in telling the teachers and school administrators what to do, forgetting their responsibilities of developing well-mannered, organized, well-groomed, well nourished, and rested children. Teachers are trying to merge the gaps between traditional and creative education to meet the government’s need to standardize, the administrations needs to quantify and the family’s needs to supervise. When students leave school for the afternoon and arrive to their dance lessons, they can barely shed the push and assume their own motivation to learn. I could go on and on, but I will end it here.