Cogitationis poenam nemo patitur.
Nobody should be punished for his thoughts.
Education System(August 4th, 2002)
I was going through some of my old writing (yes, I have plenty of it) and came across a final thesis I did during college (which I managed to squeeze an A out of). It covers quite a bit of my thoughts on the American Education System, as well as the approach to education systems in general. Please be patient if it seems a bit starched here and there... It was a final thesis, and I was nervous as hell (and late as usual).
With better understanding of the world (not much, but a little), some of my opinions look harsh and inflexible in retrospect - however, I gave myself an honest way out at the end of the thesis.
The Future Of Undergraduate Education In The United States of America: The Need For Change
“Daddy, you’re lucky. You had less history to learn when you were in school!”, says a child. The beauty of this joke is that it can be said of any generation. Our rapid acceleration in fields ranging from physics to communication during this century has increased the average student’s projected knowledge base. The students in the future will require even more knowledge to benefit society. Consequently, changes in the education system shall be required.
The classroom is the first place we must visit in our changes. Referring to classrooms circa 1976, Palmer writes
The meeting for learning that Palmer refers to here should be what the educational system should be striving for. Instead of blindly accepting that which is provided, the student must find their own way through it. From this comes true understanding of the material at hand for the student. The student should be considered neither a slow nor fast learner. Instead, they should be permitted to digest the material at their own pace while benefiting from perspectives of fellow students and the teacher. It also serves as a tool for the teacher, for the teacher has been made aware of another singular perspective of the same material. This enhances the teacher’s ability to teach the material to other students.
The student’s knowledge of the material should not be judged by the ability to regurgitate it, or by a multiple choice test. Comprehension of the material is not truly represented by these. A true measure of a student’s understanding of the material would be applying it. Since different subject areas would require different demonstrations of comprehension, there can be no generalizations. For English Language, writing and reading would have to be applied in various forms. In mathematics, solving mathematical problems or proving mathematical equations would suffice. A more difficult subject would be history, where the student is required to remember dates may be considered ideal by some for multiple choice testing. This is not the case; the student’s comprehension of the happenings of the past cannot be indicated by whether they shaded the right square. Instead, an essay that outlines their interpretation of the history while using factual dates would be more relevant.
Though the student should be able to have some control over what they study, they should not be permitted to limit themselves by doing so. Introductory courses in other fields should not only be encouraged in the future, they should be required. In the near future, understanding how other people do their jobs will become even more important than it is now. By not exposing students to this, we are not only limiting the individual. We are also limiting society that much more.
Comprehensive examinations of all material covered should be done before a diploma is awarded. This, too, should not be multiple choice. The student should be able to use the knowledge gained to demonstrate that they do, in fact, understand the material for which they are receiving the diploma. Though not well known, much of the American education system was influenced by that of Germany. The terms lernfreiheit and lehrfreiheit are supportive of the ideas mentioned above. Metzger writes
Metzger further writes
The second meaning of Lehrfreheit, as Metzger presents it, is
Tools such as these concepts allow the student to use their own faculties to learn. The teacher is permitted to present new ideas, instead of regurgitated text books. A sharing of knowledge occurs without external pressures of administration. A divorce from what employers wish to be taught at institutions seems necessary to do this.
Many would say that the educational status quo works. This cannot be disagreed with; we cannot measure that which we do not possess. Instead we must assess that which we do possess and decide whether or not we should improve it, based on what we believe the future holds. History has proven that advancements in education are required. Consider the formalization of education over two thousand years ago. Before then, there were those who probably felt no need for formal education. As the present education system indicates by its very existence, this did not stop the advancement of education. A dissenting opinion at this time is likely to suffer the same fate.
Some would say that the education system has changed already. Indeed, it has changed greatly. Yet, as Salamon writes regarding education in the 1990s,
At present, the education system is churning out bachelors degrees as fast as it can. Employers in all fields rarely seek candidates with less today, and the educational institution is tasked with meeting with the requirements of both the employer and student. Still, many of the products of the education system have not learned to reach their potential.
In the classroom of today, students have become proficient at regurgitating what they have read. As Fromm writes regarding students,
If we task future generations with advancing society, we should not treat them akin to the pet parrot. More emphasis should be placed on processing the information, as opposed to storing it. If the student learns to think with the information on hand and learns to form his or her own opinion, then advancement is possible. The gathering of information, though important, should not be the focus. Information is available in a multiplicity of forms at this time. Those that can use it are rare. This has been realized by many teachers and students, yet the educational system requires that tests be passed to prove ability in an area.
Society requires a diploma to demonstrate a certain amount of knowledge in an appropriate area. Therefore, the student must pass tests to become gainfully employed. The student does not need the knowledge to do this. A fleeting glimpse of this educational slideshow suffices, to be forgotten with the arrival of the next class. This does not support the increased need for knowledge in society. Though students are being exposed to more today than fifty years ago, one would be hard pressed to say that they are learning more. As Friedrich, Ferenbaugh and Nash wrote
It may be true that the education system does create educated people by this definition, yet these few are not the norm. These are those who were sincerely students, as opposed to pretending to be a student by passing tests.
One could argue that a diploma should represent marketable skills, and that would be correct. However, skills do not have to represent knowledge. Instead, skills can mean – and should mean – the ability to process the knowledge at hand. If we decide that this is not the case, we may stop all research on robots; future generations of our society shall be automata by this logic. Indeed, some may already be so.
It would be difficult to remove the needs of the employers from the educational equation. However, if a person requires only a high school diploma to join the military and have an honorable profession, why should they try to become more educated? This exemplifies the limits placed on education by employers. The answer to this, which is itself another topic, is unconditional state funding.
The United States of America has long been a leader in the free world, and it is time that its scepter of education be polished. This need not be a call to arms, nor should it be construed as such. Instead, it should be looked upon as a call for improvement. If the reader disagrees with ideas presented in this work yet sees the need for change, this work is a success.
Works Cited:
Fromm, Erich. To Have Or To Be? New York: The Continuum Publishing Company, 1976.
Friedrich, Otto, Ferenbaugh, Dorothy and Nash, J. Madeleine. “Five Ways To Wisdom”, Jones 1-12.
Jones, Thomas B. ed. The Educated Person. A Collection of Contemporary Essays. Minnesota: Metropolitan State University, 1989.
Metzger, Walter P. Academic Freedom In The Age Of The University. New York: Columbia University Press, 1955.
Palmer, Parker J. “Meeting For Learning: Education in a Quaker Context.” The Pendleton Bulletin. May 1976.
Salamon, Linda Bradley. “Undergraduate Education: For the ‘90s, for Life.” Jones 13-26.
