Education
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
March 28, 2024, 04:27:28 PM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  General Politics
  Political Debate (Moderator: Torie)
  Education
« previous next »
Pages: [1] 2
Poll
Question: What should be the primary purpose(s) of education?
#1
To keep kids busy
 
#2
To indoctrinate students into a specific ideology
 
#3
To indoctrinate students with general societal values
 
#4
To memorize a variety of facts
 
#5
To give students basic living skills
 
#6
To create a citizens who are able to understand and weigh complex issues
 
#7
To teach students job specific skills for future employment
 
#8
to allow students to develop social skills with their peers
 
#9
To encourage cooperative problem solving for the diverse problems of the workforce and world
 
#10
To turn them into mindless drones who obey and consume
 
#11
To understand and accept the diversity of society with peers from a wide variety of backgrounds
 
#12
We don't need no education
 
#13
Other (don't keep us in the dark here - explain)
 
Show Pie Chart
Partisan results

Total Voters: 35

Calculate results by number of options selected
Author Topic: Education  (Read 2869 times)
Citizen James
James42
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,540


Political Matrix
E: -3.87, S: -2.78

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« on: September 11, 2005, 03:33:46 PM »

I've tried to include as many concepts of education I can think of - from the idealistic and utilitarian, to the pessemistic and cynical.

What say you?  What do you think the purpose of education is?
Logged
ilikeverin
Atlas Politician
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 16,410
Timor-Leste


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1 on: September 11, 2005, 03:34:52 PM »

facts, skills, social skills
Logged
John Dibble
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 18,733
Japan


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #2 on: September 11, 2005, 03:37:58 PM »

Options five-seven.

BTW, memorizing facts is pretty much useless - learning them is what's important. There's a big difference between memorizing something and learning it long term. Of course I'm not saying we don't want our students learning or memorizing facts, but I think that is only a means to the ends above.
Logged
Giant Saguaro
TheGiantSaguaro
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,903


Political Matrix
E: 2.58, S: 3.83

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #3 on: September 11, 2005, 03:39:25 PM »

Prepare kids/students to be good citizens (observe regulations and so forth, respect others, etc.), problem solve, and complete tasks through critical thinking, analysis, and/or team work. Corporations emphasize the latter often when they address education. To some degree, there is indoctrination in any education, so I think indoctrination is imbedded here like it will in anyone's view of what education should do/be.
Logged
Bono
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 11,699
United Kingdom


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #4 on: September 11, 2005, 03:41:05 PM »

If you mean publiceducation, obviously indoctrinating.
Logged
MaC
Milk_and_cereal
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 9,791


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #5 on: September 11, 2005, 03:49:56 PM »

well, the mindless drone part is what the current system's status quo is.  I fail to understand why we shouldn't try to change that.  I think (it's not listed, but there're other similar choices) is to teach kids how to think.  The current system teaches them what to think, therefore teaching them to be mindless, fact absorbing, drones.  ex. see MEAP test, IOWA test, ACT test, and other equivalency tests.
Logged
ilikeverin
Atlas Politician
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 16,410
Timor-Leste


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #6 on: September 11, 2005, 03:55:33 PM »

Options five-seven.

BTW, memorizing facts is pretty much useless - learning them is what's important. There's a big difference between memorizing something and learning it long term. Of course I'm not saying we don't want our students learning or memorizing facts, but I think that is only a means to the ends above.

Well, it was the closest thing to 'learning facts', so I picked it.
Logged
dazzleman
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 13,777
Political Matrix
E: 1.88, S: 1.59

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #7 on: September 11, 2005, 04:03:18 PM »

6,7,8
Understand and analyze issues, job skills, social skills.
Logged
John Dibble
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 18,733
Japan


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #8 on: September 11, 2005, 04:13:57 PM »

Options five-seven.

BTW, memorizing facts is pretty much useless - learning them is what's important. There's a big difference between memorizing something and learning it long term. Of course I'm not saying we don't want our students learning or memorizing facts, but I think that is only a means to the ends above.

Well, it was the closest thing to 'learning facts', so I picked it.

The comment wasn't aimed at you, rather the option in general. Personally, I believe it's more important that they know how to apply the facts than just learn them - knowledge is useless unless applied, afterall.
Logged
angus
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 17,423
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #9 on: September 11, 2005, 04:17:09 PM »

what the hell...  5, 6, and 9.

actually, it's a bit more complicated than choosing from among these topics.

"It seems to me that education has a two-fold function to perform in the life of man and in society:  the one is utility and the other is culture.  Education must enable a man to become more efficient, to achieve with increasing facility the legitimate goals of his life.  Education must also train one for quick, resolute and effective thinking.  To think incisively and to think for one's self is very difficult...  Education must enable one to sift and weigh evidence, to discern the true from the false, the real from the unreal, and the facts from the fiction."

   --Martin Luther King, Jr.  1948
Logged
Schmitz in 1972
Liberty
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,317
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #10 on: September 11, 2005, 04:36:58 PM »

2, 3, and 10: Both indoctrination options plus the mindless drones option.

Horace Mann would be so proud.

Logged
© tweed
Miamiu1027
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 36,563
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #11 on: September 11, 2005, 04:38:44 PM »

Options 5-7
Logged
Bono
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 11,699
United Kingdom


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #12 on: September 11, 2005, 04:38:56 PM »

2, 3, and 10: Both indoctrination options plus the mindless drones option.

Horace Mann would be so proud.



Smiley
Nice to know someone else knows who he was and the evil he did.
Logged
A18
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 23,794
Political Matrix
E: 9.23, S: -6.35

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #13 on: September 11, 2005, 08:16:59 PM »

Public schools are little more than statistic indoctrination centers.

The sooner education is privatized, the sooner the nation moves in a more libertarian direction.
Logged
Frodo
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 24,509
United States


WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #14 on: September 11, 2005, 08:19:23 PM »

Options 6, 7, and 9. 
Logged
muon2
Moderators
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 16,788


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #15 on: September 11, 2005, 08:47:38 PM »

The question suffers by lumping all levels and types of eduaction together. The goals of education are necessarily age-dependent. I suspect the Q and A I've seen are dominated by views on high-school age eduaction. I think that is a very narrow slice of one's life in which to consider education.

One goal that is not one the list is to create life-long learners. That means instilling an interest and desire in eduaction. I include an interest in both formal and self-directed education in life-long learning. Our environment is ever-changing, and without life-long learning we are not able to fully adjust to those changes.

I helped write a mission statement for our K-8 schools in the 1990s. It goes as follows:

Our mission is that all students become life-long learners and achieve their maximum potential so that they may participate in and contribute to a democratic society.

Logged
Citizen James
James42
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,540


Political Matrix
E: -3.87, S: -2.78

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #16 on: September 12, 2005, 01:19:55 AM »

Public schools are little more than statistic indoctrination centers.

The sooner education is privatized, the sooner the nation moves in a more libertarian direction.

Would you care to elucidate on how privitization would encourage the students to be independent thinkers, as opposed to providing the minimal acceptable quality at the lowest bid and highest profit margin?

Please explain your theory in more detailed terms than the simplistic privatization=efficency.  If you're going to cite Adam Smith or something be sure to use examples and explain the mechanics of what brings about this greater efficency, along with being prepared for the most likely criticisms, and how you would address them.

Or do you mean libertarian in a dystopic social darwinist sort of a way?
Logged
A18
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 23,794
Political Matrix
E: 9.23, S: -6.35

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #17 on: September 12, 2005, 05:16:51 AM »

I'm not going to explain basic economics to someone with no brain.
Logged
Platypus
hughento
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 21,478
Australia


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #18 on: September 12, 2005, 05:23:42 AM »

3, 5 and 6 Wink
Logged
MODU
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 22,024
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #19 on: September 12, 2005, 08:57:20 AM »



Many of the above have merit (not all, of course).  Education, as in primary education, is to provide students with problem solving skills in order live in society.  Also, social skills, so they know how to treat others and understand the differences between right and wrong (bring back the paddle!).  Some high schools are now getting "specialized" in a particular field, so if a student knows in what general direction they want to progress in life, learning work-related skills is also a benefit, but not necessary.
Logged
??????????
StatesRights
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 31,126
Political Matrix
E: 7.61, S: 0.00

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #20 on: September 12, 2005, 11:35:46 AM »

I'm not going to explain basic economics to someone with no brain.

Excellent point.
Logged
muon2
Moderators
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 16,788


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #21 on: September 12, 2005, 01:57:41 PM »

Without a common basis of facts and experiences it's hard to engage in any classroom training at all, let alone training a student for independent thought. If you'd like to hire an expert private tutor for each student, perhaps one can have truly individual learning plans. Otherwise, an important goal of early primary eduaction must be to provide students with a firm grounding in a common set of facts that will be the basis of later education. If that means some rote learning in education, I'm for it.

In physics, I expect graduate students to be able to think their way through complex problems, anticipate critical questions, and synthesize methods to test hypotheses. Before I can help guide those graduate students they need a firm foundation of problem solving skills, and examples of basic techniques. Without that they can learn a script, but rarely create new research.

Where do the physics students get that foundation. Of course it comes from earlier education. In college, physics majors will learn a lot of relationships, memorize equations, and repeat time-tested old experiments. To learn at that level, they need a vocabulary of mathematical facts, and the ability to think critically about the world they see around them. That takes them back to earlier education, and a cycle of rote knowledge becoming the basis for deeper understanding.
Logged
Citizen James
James42
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,540


Political Matrix
E: -3.87, S: -2.78

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #22 on: September 12, 2005, 11:17:48 PM »

I'm not going to explain basic economics to someone with no brain.

In other words, you can't even explain it to yourself.

As I'm in a contrarian mood, I'll give you a halfway decent arguement  in favor of privatizing education.  I consider it important to understand different sides of an issue, so I enjoy presenting alternate points of view now and then, especially when their proponents have difficulty making decent arguements.

Three big problems plague the school systems - Bureaucracy, burnout, and boredom.

Contrary to popular opinion, there are corporations which are able to look past the next quarterly report.  They could make a fortune off this, even without the dismantling of the public school system.  (consider the case of UPS and FedEX, which competed with the USPS - providing superior service and forcing the USPS to get with the times and compete as well).

Public school systems have a lot of middle management.  Given how much paperwork needs to be created, filed, colated, cross referenced, refiled, reviled, recovered after the apropriate time frame, shredded, and disposed of - no great suprise there.  But the technology for such is stuck back in the mid 20th century.   Plus you often get school boards who are elected by the few people who actually pay attention to local government often pushing their own odd agendas, or basking in taxpayer funded 'retreats'.

We could cut down on the bloated middle, and focus staffing on the front lines - better student teacher ratios, smaller more localized middle and high schools and more investment on educational tools and technology.

A corporation which is sufficently forward looking could see many long term benefits from their venture - first pick of the best and brightest before they even start looking elsewhere, trade outs with major food producers in exchange for brand name placement,  and a bunch of consumers who are favorable disposed toward you if you did the job right.  In addition, the well educated tend to make more, and thus spend more, and thus become bigger consumers in general.

Then there's burnout.  You've all seen it - teachers who don't want to be there, but will blow their pension if they leave.  Well done privitization could cut down on some of the worse stressors (mountans of paperwork, excessive class size), and give emplyees a chance to opt out and take their 401k with them rather than depending on the whims of the state for their retirement.   Those who simply want to work in a different location can seek to transfer without worrying about losing their position on the pay scale.

Finally, there's boredom.   Much of this comes from the ancient outdated factory model of education which continues to be frequently used, and part from the excessive political correctness (from both left and right) which keeps classes from exploring many issues in depth.  If parents vote with their dollars in which school to use, they can tacitly approve of more interesting instruction or move their kids elsewhere.


.....

Or we could just work to improve the public system.   From what I see here you don't seem to be getting your parent's tax dollars worth Philip - but remember that with work you can succeed even despite your education.    There are a lot of bright people here, and I suspect you have a lot of potential despite your closed mind.

Give intellegent rational thought a try.  You might just like it.
Logged
Bono
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 11,699
United Kingdom


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #23 on: September 13, 2005, 02:02:15 AM »

I'm not going to explain basic economics to someone with no brain.

In other words, you can't even explain it to yourself.

As I'm in a contrarian mood, I'll give you a halfway decent arguement  in favor of privatizing education.  I consider it important to understand different sides of an issue, so I enjoy presenting alternate points of view now and then, especially when their proponents have difficulty making decent arguements.

Three big problems plague the school systems - Bureaucracy, burnout, and boredom.

Contrary to popular opinion, there are corporations which are able to look past the next quarterly report.  They could make a fortune off this, even without the dismantling of the public school system.  (consider the case of UPS and FedEX, which competed with the USPS - providing superior service and forcing the USPS to get with the times and compete as well).

Public school systems have a lot of middle management.  Given how much paperwork needs to be created, filed, colated, cross referenced, refiled, reviled, recovered after the apropriate time frame, shredded, and disposed of - no great suprise there.  But the technology for such is stuck back in the mid 20th century.   Plus you often get school boards who are elected by the few people who actually pay attention to local government often pushing their own odd agendas, or basking in taxpayer funded 'retreats'.

We could cut down on the bloated middle, and focus staffing on the front lines - better student teacher ratios, smaller more localized middle and high schools and more investment on educational tools and technology.

A corporation which is sufficently forward looking could see many long term benefits from their venture - first pick of the best and brightest before they even start looking elsewhere, trade outs with major food producers in exchange for brand name placement,  and a bunch of consumers who are favorable disposed toward you if you did the job right.  In addition, the well educated tend to make more, and thus spend more, and thus become bigger consumers in general.

Then there's burnout.  You've all seen it - teachers who don't want to be there, but will blow their pension if they leave.  Well done privitization could cut down on some of the worse stressors (mountans of paperwork, excessive class size), and give emplyees a chance to opt out and take their 401k with them rather than depending on the whims of the state for their retirement.   Those who simply want to work in a different location can seek to transfer without worrying about losing their position on the pay scale.

Finally, there's boredom.   Much of this comes from the ancient outdated factory model of education which continues to be frequently used, and part from the excessive political correctness (from both left and right) which keeps classes from exploring many issues in depth.  If parents vote with their dollars in which school to use, they can tacitly approve of more interesting instruction or move their kids elsewhere.


.....

Or we could just work to improve the public system.   From what I see here you don't seem to be getting your parent's tax dollars worth Philip - but remember that with work you can succeed even despite your education.    There are a lot of bright people here, and I suspect you have a lot of potential despite your closed mind.

Give intellegent rational thought a try.  You might just like it.

Scott Scheule, in his guide for policy makers, has adressed the logical falacy you are using now:

[T]here are two proper requirements to be fulfilled before implementing a policy. I will state them first casually, then in more precise economic terms.

To justify a policy you must show:

   1. Something is wrong.
   2. There is a way to fix it.

Now, in economic terms. You must show:

   1. The private market is erring.
   2. The political marketplace will yield a result that fixes the corresponding private market error.

The second requirement is usually ignored. In fact, it was for a long period of time assumed that the government was a perfect actor with perfect information. These assumptions were wrong. Once this was realized, the field of public choice economics emerged, which discussed in detail why the political marketplace has its own errors. I believe the second requirement has never once been fulfilled in the history of mankind, and that is why I am an anarchist.

The readings we’ve been assigned have a sort of “gotcha” feeling to them. Empirical study comes out, shows that people significantly overvalue risk when it’s widely publicizied, and the statists cry, “Gotcha! The private sector erred, capitalism has failed here.” Requirement one, satisfied. Time for the government to fix the problem.

Ah, but what of number two?

Irrationality will arise just as surely in the political marketplace as the private one. Every datum offered for a failure of neoclassical assumptions applies just as easily to the political marketplace. Yet the latter extension is ignored. Government is presumed perfect; requirement two is glossed over.

Classic example. It is generally presumed that monopolies are bad. Many prescribe antitrust laws administered by the government to prevent the formation of monopolies in the marketplace; without realizing that the government itself is a monopoly, and one backed up by far more force than any software giant. The market was bad because it was monopolistic, and antitrust proponents assume that an even larger monopoly will be able to fix the initial ill.

Economics is not a game of “Gotcha.” It is the study of how people make choices. And how do they do that? A person picks the most preferable of his options.
So, with regards to the big picture, it is not enough to say the market is flawed. Everything is flawed. One must satisfy the second requirement; they must provide a less flawed alternative; we have the entire field of public choice to show why government is not such an alternative.


The same thing applies to "public schools.". Even if the market for schooling was failing, which it wasn't, it would be encesary to show that the government would do a better job replacing it, which clearly it hasn't, given that even the literacy rate is lower now in some places than it was before the public schools system was created, which wasn't surprising, given that the public schools in america weren't created to educate, but to "integrate" the Irish immigrants.

Unlike most other errors in economics, this is one that is all too frequently made by professional economists with fancy degrees and lots of letters after their names. Why?
The best explanation for this failure is touched upon in the following two articles: “Do Pessimistic Assumptions About Human Behavior Justify Government?“, by Benjamin Powell and Christopher Coyne, and “Do We Really Ever Get Out Of Anarchy?“, by Alfred G. Cuzan. Many of us think of the government as “conceptually external,” exogenous to the overall social system.

The founder of public choice, James Buchanan, made this critical error when he wrote, in The Limits of Liberty:

The state emerges as the enforcing agency or institution, conceptually external to the contracting parties and charged with the single responsibility of enforcing agreed-on rights and claims along with contracts which involve voluntarily negotiated exchanges of such claims.

Yet, if public choice theory has taught us anything at all, it is that governments are composed of men – the very same breed of men who compose markets – and therefore governments must be conceptually internal, endogenous to the social system. Buchanan himself seemed to recognize this fact, observing that

There is no obvious and effective means through which the enforcing institution or agent can itself be constrained in its own behavior. Hence, as Hobbes so perceptively noted more than three centuries ago, individuals who contract for the services of enforcing institutions necessarily surrender their own independence.
Logged
Cubby
Pim Fortuyn
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 5,067
Israel


Political Matrix
E: -3.74, S: -6.96

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #24 on: September 13, 2005, 02:59:20 PM »

Memorize Facts- I'm great at this, so it sucks that its ridiculed now. I almost wish I went to school in the 50's so my grades would've been better and I wouldn't have had to "work in groups", I hated when teachers made us do that.

Understand and Weigh Complex Issues: Essential for living in a democracy, I'm glad a lot of you agree with me.

Develop social skills with peers: Despite what I said above, I believe this is very important too. This is partly why I am against home-schooling.

If I had a fourth choice, Option 12, b/c not only do we not need it, we also don't need any thought control or dark sarcasm Smiley
Logged
Pages: [1] 2  
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.06 seconds with 13 queries.