The purpose of education…
As a head of faculty, science teacher, physicist and parent the question over the “purpose” of education is a troubling one – one that often leads to heated debate.
I’d like to separate the discussion into two entities; the “formal system” that we (read so called developed countries) have sanitised, packaged and apportioned the accumulation of “facts” and “skills” into from the more general “informal system” of education, accumulated from a series life lessons, often artisan based, handed from generation to generation.
Education, at the hands of politicians, has had the “formal system” perpetually tinkered with, to the point where many would consider it broken beyond repair. We patch the mistakes of previous regimes, we re-invent & repackage tried and tested pedagogical approaches under new names and constantly shift responsibilities from the learner to the teacher. To paraphrase David Marcus from The Wrath of Khan, “Teachers have always been the pawns of politicians”.
Sadly, the “informal system” has fared just as poorly. Parents, employers and society at large have been happy to delegate the responsibilities of their “informal system” to the patently dysfunctional “formal” option. It feels that we live in a time when the expectation is for schools to provide ALL the education a young person’s needs – and upon emergence from Year 13, out pops a well-mannered, socially adjusted, independently motivated young adult with requisite skills and knowledge to enjoy all the riches life has to offer. Piffle.
To return to the question over the purpose of education, for me it’s clear. Education is about turning windows on the World into doors and passengers into drivers.
Education is that lofty goal of providing glimpses into Donald Rumfeld’s “Known Unknowns” – without education, we don’t know what we don’t know and we don’t know what opportunities we are missing. This seems to have been lost in the current incarnations of education policy. The political apparatchiks who control the National Curriculum have decided what’s statutory and what can be considered an “option” – and to paraphrase another quote, the clear implication is that “whilst all subjects are equal, some are more equal”. The wider impact on the learner or their contribution to society post compulsory education is rarely discussed.
There is another way. Look at the Bank of England. In 1998, the Bank was given operation independence from central government to decide UK monetary policy. Sure the politicians set targets – to keep inflation at 2% or lower, but the policy is set independently.
Surely we can conceive a system where Education is taken away from the politicians and an august body of pedagogical experts from across all phases thrash out the best and more importantly, consistent approach to moving the debate on?
Again, the purpose of education, is clear. Education is about turning windows on the World into doors and passengers into drivers.
How we achieve this goal is the question that keeps me awake.
Posted as part of
Purpos/ed: what’s the purpose of education? http://purposed.org.uk/2012/04/500words-take-2/
See more posts at: http://bit.ly/purposedu500
6 Comments to “The purpose of education…”
Add Comments (+)-
-
Glen says:
Hi Doug
Thanks for the feedback. I know the Banking comparison is not the most opportune at present, but I suppose The Bank of England has remained blameless, and individual Banks / Bankers have shouldered the blame. Is that like individual schools and teachers implementing a wider policy I wonder.
Nevertheless, “something” is needed as even though I am only an 8 year veteran I am seeing things go full circle and I am convinced that there must be a better way than the politicians running things.Glen
-
-
Julia Skinner (@theheadsoffice) says:
I will use that phrase about doors & windows – it says it all!
-
Hi Julia
Thanks for the comment — I thinks its original as I have been using it for a while, but I am happy to concede that I have mashed up other peoples quotes…;-)
BTW — love your Tweets.
Glen
-
-
Spencer Ayres says:
Hi Glen,
I really like the analogy of turning windows into doors, but I have found that in schools those doors are rarely open more than ajar and all too often they are firmly shut. I also agree that politicians are not the most suited people to be dictating what should and should not be taught or, more importantly, how things are learned.
The difficulty I have is in your separation of them and us – formal and informal ‘systems’ of education.
(Incidentally, the idea of a system to me brings connotations of falling off the end (like a conveyor belt) or even opting out altogether, neither of which I would want any of my students to do, and neither of which are true reflections of what education is.)
Parents blame teachers, teachers blame parents, everyone blames politicians. A much more coherent and consistent approach might be to look at school based education as the foundations on which none-school based education can stand. So, ‘formal’ education should stimulate a love of learning which continues throughout a persons life. It SHOULD prepare them with necessary skills to become the person that you describe, if not by the end of year 13, but sometime soon after. And if should open the doors to the world for students. But this will only happen if schools and teachers realize that learning happens everywhere and not just within the four walls of the classroom. We need to integrate not separate.
Spencer
-
Hi Spencer
Thanks for taking the time to comment.
I was conflicted when I used the word “system” in my post and I can see how it opens the door to more debate. What I am trying to confer is my belief that society in the broadest sense has partitioned education into “school” and “home” — with the consequence that the “home” bit seems to be increasingly marginalised and the burden of responsibility has been firmly shifted onto the shoulders of the professional educators.
Cheers
Glen
-
Thanks for the contribution, Glen! I really like the way you’ve talked about turning windows on the world into doors and provided a rallying call to do more with informal education.
In the wake of the banking crisis it’s perhaps not the most opportune time to suggest a Bank of England-style body for education. But that doesn’t mean (as you point out) that it’s not urgently needed!