A cerebral post (I apologize)
Working on theses and doing reading for my various classes, coupled with long drives with nothing to do but think, tend to make my daily thoughts much weightier than the normal silliness I post on lj. And I feel like recording what I'm thinking here. So, consider yourself warned.
A quote from today's class reading:
Current calls for school reform typically equate national economic progress with the structure of schooling opportunities and standards. Occupational and vocational skills are argued to be an essential component of our present and future economic health, and American public schools are increasingly seena s the focal point for upgrading human resources via the teaching of such skills. However, prior to the common school movement of the mid-19th century, education for economic development was not a common theme in this country. Rather, several intellectual, moral, and political agendas were advocated by those interested in the possibilities of education.
What is interesting here, to me, are the various agendas that can be seen to be pursued through public education. There is, of course, the economic perspecitve, which dominates discourse nowadays to the extent that other factors are seldom mentioned. These days, we teach our children to read and write so that they can get jobs and further our economy. Period, there is no other reason. In fact, we even expose them to "diversity" not so that they will become better people, but so that they will become better workers. I will not let myself get into the frightening repercussions of the fact that globalization of economy has so infiltrated our thinking that we can no longer concieve of any other benefit save that which lowers costs and increases revenues. That is for a different post.
The other reasons (agendas, whatever you want to call them) this passage lists are intellectual, moral, and political. Now, public schools, in their current construction, are necessarily political institutions. How many times do we hear the phrase "Your tax dollars at work" in connection with the state of public schooling? School boards and administration positions are an integral part of community (township/city/whatever) politics. However, it is possible to separate the institution which provides the physical means from the reason for the service. The government builds/mans post offices, but public mail isn't construed as a service provided for purely political reasons. I haven't really thought out that line of reasoning nearly as much (or I'd have a better example, I promise) because I think that the fact that the government provides our schools is irrelevant. If we assumed that each community got together and bought a house and paid a few people to teach in it, instead of funding it through a formal institution, then the issues I have with schooling would still be present. (By the way, that idea may seem ludicrous, however I have seen it done. There are regions of El Salvador where the government has refused to fund public education for decades, and the communities there saw their need as so great that each person donated what they could to make community schools and hire their own teachers. Not saying that that's what we should do, because that system's got its own problems, just want to make it clear that a people should not feel beholden to an institution that they created simply because it does the job it was created to do.)
Nevertheless, I believe that neither politics nor economics has any place in the answer to the question "Why do we provide public education to every child?" I'm not arguing that this is currently how things work (in fact, I am sure that the people making the real decisions about education would completely disagree with my stance). This is my personal statement of belief (and of course I wish that more people held the same opinion as I, but that's not the point of stating this).
Morally, we provide our children with a common public education for two reasons. First of all, as members of the human species, endowed with intellectual capabilities beyond those of other animals, they have a right (dare I say "inalienable"?) to have access to the wealth of human knowledge that has been accumulated over centuries. From the very beginning, we have taught our offspring so that they may grow beyond us. In public education, this principle is extended beyond our own biological children to all the young of our species because we morally understand all humans to be of equal value. The second moral reason for educating everyone is because we will eventually be requiring them to live within the wider morals of society, and the desire to be just requires that we make sure that they understand our norms before chastizing them for breaching them. I am not talking about legality here. Moral norms and laws are two different sets of rules, which at times may overlap and at others may be in complete oposition. (Okay, that's also a point for a different post. If more people understood the division between morality and legality then there would be a lot less wasted time in "political" debate over topics which should essentially be non-issues from a legal standpoint....On a related note, did you hear that they performed the first legal abortion in Columbia today?)
The intellectual reason for public education is because knowledge dies if it is not passed on to and improved upon by future generations. There can be no new discoveries or novels if we do not tease out the scientists and writers from within our children. The Scientific Method which we invented to flesh out the truth of the universe relies on the principle that there will always be more new minds to challenge and/or corroborate current theories. Moreover, inextricably tied to our intellectual consciousness is the urge to share the knowledge we have gained from our personal experience. Our brains are driven to communicate with each other.
These are the reasons that I support public education. This is why we educate our children, not to help them make more money or become more politically aware. If children go on to use the knowledge we give them to become more efficient in their workplace or decide based upon the morals we have imparted to take political initiative, then those are acceptable outcomes. However, they are the goal, the objective, the reason, or the desired result. Damn it all, people, we educate the children so that they can be educated!
I don't know how that was for you (and remember, I did apologize in the title), but I feel great! (And apparently I spin in circles when I'm feeling intellectual. Is anyone all that surprised?)
A quote from today's class reading:
Current calls for school reform typically equate national economic progress with the structure of schooling opportunities and standards. Occupational and vocational skills are argued to be an essential component of our present and future economic health, and American public schools are increasingly seena s the focal point for upgrading human resources via the teaching of such skills. However, prior to the common school movement of the mid-19th century, education for economic development was not a common theme in this country. Rather, several intellectual, moral, and political agendas were advocated by those interested in the possibilities of education.
What is interesting here, to me, are the various agendas that can be seen to be pursued through public education. There is, of course, the economic perspecitve, which dominates discourse nowadays to the extent that other factors are seldom mentioned. These days, we teach our children to read and write so that they can get jobs and further our economy. Period, there is no other reason. In fact, we even expose them to "diversity" not so that they will become better people, but so that they will become better workers. I will not let myself get into the frightening repercussions of the fact that globalization of economy has so infiltrated our thinking that we can no longer concieve of any other benefit save that which lowers costs and increases revenues. That is for a different post.
The other reasons (agendas, whatever you want to call them) this passage lists are intellectual, moral, and political. Now, public schools, in their current construction, are necessarily political institutions. How many times do we hear the phrase "Your tax dollars at work" in connection with the state of public schooling? School boards and administration positions are an integral part of community (township/city/whatever) politics. However, it is possible to separate the institution which provides the physical means from the reason for the service. The government builds/mans post offices, but public mail isn't construed as a service provided for purely political reasons. I haven't really thought out that line of reasoning nearly as much (or I'd have a better example, I promise) because I think that the fact that the government provides our schools is irrelevant. If we assumed that each community got together and bought a house and paid a few people to teach in it, instead of funding it through a formal institution, then the issues I have with schooling would still be present. (By the way, that idea may seem ludicrous, however I have seen it done. There are regions of El Salvador where the government has refused to fund public education for decades, and the communities there saw their need as so great that each person donated what they could to make community schools and hire their own teachers. Not saying that that's what we should do, because that system's got its own problems, just want to make it clear that a people should not feel beholden to an institution that they created simply because it does the job it was created to do.)
Nevertheless, I believe that neither politics nor economics has any place in the answer to the question "Why do we provide public education to every child?" I'm not arguing that this is currently how things work (in fact, I am sure that the people making the real decisions about education would completely disagree with my stance). This is my personal statement of belief (and of course I wish that more people held the same opinion as I, but that's not the point of stating this).
Morally, we provide our children with a common public education for two reasons. First of all, as members of the human species, endowed with intellectual capabilities beyond those of other animals, they have a right (dare I say "inalienable"?) to have access to the wealth of human knowledge that has been accumulated over centuries. From the very beginning, we have taught our offspring so that they may grow beyond us. In public education, this principle is extended beyond our own biological children to all the young of our species because we morally understand all humans to be of equal value. The second moral reason for educating everyone is because we will eventually be requiring them to live within the wider morals of society, and the desire to be just requires that we make sure that they understand our norms before chastizing them for breaching them. I am not talking about legality here. Moral norms and laws are two different sets of rules, which at times may overlap and at others may be in complete oposition. (Okay, that's also a point for a different post. If more people understood the division between morality and legality then there would be a lot less wasted time in "political" debate over topics which should essentially be non-issues from a legal standpoint....On a related note, did you hear that they performed the first legal abortion in Columbia today?)
The intellectual reason for public education is because knowledge dies if it is not passed on to and improved upon by future generations. There can be no new discoveries or novels if we do not tease out the scientists and writers from within our children. The Scientific Method which we invented to flesh out the truth of the universe relies on the principle that there will always be more new minds to challenge and/or corroborate current theories. Moreover, inextricably tied to our intellectual consciousness is the urge to share the knowledge we have gained from our personal experience. Our brains are driven to communicate with each other.
These are the reasons that I support public education. This is why we educate our children, not to help them make more money or become more politically aware. If children go on to use the knowledge we give them to become more efficient in their workplace or decide based upon the morals we have imparted to take political initiative, then those are acceptable outcomes. However, they are the goal, the objective, the reason, or the desired result. Damn it all, people, we educate the children so that they can be educated!
I don't know how that was for you (and remember, I did apologize in the title), but I feel great! (And apparently I spin in circles when I'm feeling intellectual. Is anyone all that surprised?)