Discussion in 'IntroSpectrum' started by Virgo, Feb 13, 2007.
Beneficial or Counterproductive?
(In it's current form)
fuck a dichotomy...
In what ways? (In regards to your answer, not the fucking part)
If you read the writings of people such as the founder of modern education system, John Dewey, and other elitists from the early half of last century, who have helped mould the public school system into what it is today, you would see that their goal was not to educate children. It was to indoctrinate children. This is what school does. For one, it aims to strip children of their individuality, then it fills their heads with a lot of garbage and propaganda. The system doesn't want people to know anything more than what they need to know to serve the system. It's a very pavlovian system aimed at bascially making people into good slaves who will serve the system well.
Who controls the system that is enslaving the people?
i think it needs to be completely revised. for one, the goal of education should be fundamentally geared toward creating mature adults that will integrate into the overall plan of society. this asks an important question: what is a mature adult? is the mature adult one who is well versed in algebra to calculus, various scientific disciplines, and writing essays? this definition seems lacking. i propose that a mature adult in this society is one that is well versed in matters of logic and reason, ethics, skilled in some sort of job, and knowledgable about the political matters which affect him. it would follow then, that the current curriculum of reading, writing and arithmatic is unsatisfactory to this end. therefore, education should be geared around teaching things such as logic and reason (to navigate the treacherous paths that lie ahead), ethics (to understand the need for moral behavior and to thus act toward that end), job skills training (to provide a way for them to supprt themselves) and an awareness of political matters (so that the bulk of society can make logical and well-reasoned decisions in regards to perhaps the most important thing of all: the way they should live).
i propose that all pre-high school education should focus on the basics of the three r's as this much is necessary in order to understand higher matters. but as soon as basic comprehension of these matters is comprehended, it would be foolish (and to my mind unethical) to not provide an education that is most relevant to their being productive members of society. algebra does not teach this. biology does not teach this.
whats more, with this archaic curriculum that is in place today, many children become alienated and thus at risk for dropping out. this is because the issues which are taught are not relevant to them. the children are not stupid -- they realize this too. they then grow bored with school, their grades drop accordingly, and eventually they are left in the dust -- society will not show kindness to them in their coming years.
if children come to school to learn things that are relevant to them and supplement that with job skills training programs, they at least understand that what they are doing is aimed at making them functional members of society (which implies that they make money, buy things, and vote).
ultimately, so long as this change remains undone, we will be doing a diservice the the inheritors of our society and, because of that, a diservice to ourselves.
this is true to an extent but not to the degree which you carry it. your seeing of the world is blurred and poorly detailed.
It's not just a single person, but rather a network at the top, which exercises its control from the top-down.
Wow, way to plagiarize a Learning Readiness Journal.
I've read that before. Would you mind replying with your own thoughts next time instead of pawning off somebody else's as your own?
If you're going to plagiarize, at least take out the "I propose" lines because that makes it obvious that you didn't write it. Who are you "supposedly" proposing it to? Us?
Shame on you
What evidence do you have to support this view?
re: my blurred view of the world
Also...I agree with much of your first post. Early education focuses on teaching to the test and preparing students to compete in a capitalist society. This latter approach isn't bad in and of itself...we all gotta eat. We all gotta have a roof over our head. But they don't teach about surviving in a capitalist society...the teach about dominating in a capitalist society. They don't ask that students THINK about the society they live in.
Critical thinking is dead. I have students in the sociology classes I teach that are fresh out of high school who struggle with thinking about their world. They want fucking STUDY GUIDES for every exam. They want to be told HOW to think about the world. It's not like it's math or chemistry or biology where you have to know specific equations or models or body parts.
I like study guides... You know, some profs are insane and have no idea how to teach or write tests (although, they might be brilliant otherwise). Study guides save me from having to depend on highly-qualified idiots. On the other hand, you don't really need a guide for chem.
I think the education system forces students to care more about having good grades as opposed to actually learning to apply knowledge. What would the world be like with more people who knew how to think critically? Death to ignorance.
Hmmm... I like Dewey. And his decimal system.
true...but I'm a brilliant teacher, so that doesn't apply to me... [teet]
It should be common knowledge, unless you believe the system is set up to work to your benefit, then in that case you're just naive. But most people are.
okay give me a link or something to what i bit off. i dont even know what the fuck a learning ready journal is.
i was straight a student
but ended up droppin out
your so intelligent KEALYGIRL
yess word critical thin king is in essence frowned upon damn near by school. the crazy thing is that showing kids how to live in the world would probably be more effective at creating a healthy economy if thats what the argument for the current curriculum is.
probably because the idea is to create a solid human being first, with the hope that good things will likely follow so long as that much is straight. the things you talk about happening in your class i think are very real, very concrete effects of how wrong we are approaching this shit.
and i agree alot with the stuff you often say. its just that i dont think you see the essence of things. to understand things, they need to be reduced down to the most basic level. you dont do that and it hinders your view of stuff. but do you X. im not mad.
Education - Means degrees. These degrees give you oppertunities in our society. More or less, you have a label that certifies you in a certian skill. Only alot of what your taught in school is subjective do to the teachers politics, ideology, and philosophy.
autodidact - means wise. You're unconventually teaching yourself. This can be bad or good depending on what you teach yourself and how you learn it. It can have the same effects of indoctered teaching, depending on what you teach yourself. And if you fail you Only have yourself to blame. Gottfried was a Autodidact who invented calculus as we know it today. He was a mathematical self taught genius. However, autodidacts are scarce today. Basically you do the shaping yourself not teachers or anyone else of authority. However, getting a job based on self-taught merits in todays society is not enough.
it is in my belief the way society is one should be BOTH!
Good willing hunting is a prime example of autodidactism.
No, it is not Common Sense . . . it is a Common Conspiracy Theory. There is a difference. Common Sense is this: When you spill something on the floor in your house, you clean it up so it won't attract ants or if you leave milk out, it will go bad. Assuming that there is an elite group who has been orchestrating the evolving world for the last several hundred years with unmatched knowledge and eternal forsight is not Common Sense. That is fuckin retarded.
Now, are you able to provide your reason for believing this or not? What you call Common Sense is nothing more than some idea that you've picked up from some other creative individual along the way.
Belief and Knowledge are not the same thing.
Common Sense deals with knowledge.
Belief in an elite superpower puppeteer, with absolutely zero evidence to support it, is not Common Sense.
Separate names with a comma.