I recently had a discussion with a friend John, who is a Superintendent in a rural school district. We were discussing his district specifically and what it was providing its students in the way of relevant programs of study. The conversation came around to a question often asked and an answer that is too familiar. I asked what the purpose of school was? As educators what is it that we want for our students at the end of the journey of K-12? Of course the answer was to get them to college or to get them to a good job.
My friend was consulting with a number of local companies to determine what they were looking for in employees. He was also consulting with area colleges to see what they expected to receive as college ready students. He was doing everything a responsible, caring superintendent could do in order to properly prepare his students for the stated goals of education, getting to college, or getting a job.
Thinking about the goals, as pragmatic as they are, I was really having trouble with the idea of what the goals were. We were considering limiting kids’ learning to the limited needs an industrial complex, or the present entry requirements of institutions that are slow to change in an ever-changing culture.
My other problem with these almost universal goals of American education is that for too many kids these goals are not an inspiration to learn. If college is truly a goal for education, why is it that only a third of Americans have completed four-year degrees? The first answer that comes to mind is that most were not able to handle the studies involved. A more likely answer however, is that a degree has become cost prohibitive. People can no longer afford to go to college without incurring massive debt. How can any kid embrace a goal of education knowing that it is financially unattainable, or that it will come at a cost of unending loan payments? This is not unlike promising every kid playing sports should have an expectation to play in any of the national, professional sports leagues. Few might, but most will not.
This goal of a college career is certainly less of an incentive when we consider schools in areas of poverty. Middle-income people may have some shot at college with the help of family, but that puts the student and the family into years of debt. What chance do poor kids have, especially in the current political climate of limiting any government funding for anyone? Nationally, student debt is rising at an astronomical rate because of the need to fulfill the goal of college and its promise of financial security upon completion. Poor kids are told that college will break the cycle of poverty. How is that an incentive for a kid who knows its likelihood will never happen? Education’s goal is not the kid’s goal. That is not a winning strategy.
Now for the second goal of education for those who we recognize as the non-college ready students. Our goal is to place them in the labor force. We ask business and industry what they require of their employees, and then we work that into our education system. We have then prepared our students for the workforce of today. The problem here is that they are not prepared for the workforce of tomorrow. That is more likely the place that they will live. We saw the result of this when the economy went bust. Many workers who found themselves again in the job market, were not prepared for the world of work today. We can’t program kids to fit into a workforce that may not support their skills after they graduate. Business, industry and our entire society are subject to rapid change driven by the evolution of technology. Think of how different the workforce will look from when a kid enters school until his or her graduation. In that time, that twelve-year span, how many businesses died, and how many started anew? Yet, we will have programmed our kids to be work ready for a workforce that may no longer need those skills. Think of how long a time it took moving typewriters out of education in a world of word processors.
If college readiness and work readiness are failing goals in education, what should the goal of education be? I don’t know. I think life readiness or learning readiness might be more fitting for our world today. Teaching kids how to learn and continue to do so outside of a classroom is the best way to prepare them for whatever path they choose. A goal of self-reliance might serve kids better in the future. To enable a kid to learn without a teacher is the best gift a teacher can give a student.
Change will be slow however, because all of our educators and all of our society have been programmed to believe that school is to prepare kids for college or work. We have come to believe that education is salvation, when in fact it is the learning that is important. Education is a certificate of learning that comes at great expense. It does have its place however, and we will always hold it in high regard. The fact is however that fewer people will be able to pay for that piece of paper, but the learning it represents may cost a great deal less, not in terms of effort or work, but in terms of dollars and cents. In the future it may not be the degree, but the learning that is important. Maybe we need to reassess our goals in education?
I agree with your assessment of our current limiting goals and I also support your broader based goals. A local school has the following mission-critical minds and compassionate hearts….in a poetic way, I think their mission captures what is most needed out of a K-12 education-the development of a mind that is not willing to simply accept the surface or the validity of what is presented without some kind of critical review (this would certainly embrace the sciences). The compassionate hearts captures important ideas about citizenship, contributing to a community, giving back…..
If I were to add an additional goal it would be something liked to communication-the ability to not only have ideas and think of important questions but to communicate one’s ideas and to engage in dialogue in as many ways as possible.
John D’Auria @jdauria
Tom, how will we best educate relative to the mis-use of carbon in our world? How will be address this issue before it becomes impossible to address? I realize this is off-topic, yet I am interested in your thoughts. Thank you. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=brvhCnYvxQQ#t=13
[…] By tomwhitby […]
Tom, great discussion topic and well summarized. I’m a retired manufacturer and for the last two years I have been working to promote manufacturing and STEM education. I started a website and social media initiative that is being very well followed. Please check out our Pinterest page http://bit.ly/1640bTl .
When I first started my research into the skills shortage I attended a conference on Harvard’s outstanding 2011 report, “Pathways to Prosperity” http://bit.ly/1paRsoV . One of the conclusions drawn by the reports authors is that we as a society need to develop a new “Social Compact” with our youth providing them high quality pathways to adulthood (Page 40 of pdf) It goes on to say that educators will continue to play a central role in this endeavor.
So what is the educators role today is the question you are posing to us. I fully agree that teaching students how to research and learn on their own is a necessary but not sufficient aspect of education. In the age of “Google It” that is much easier than ever before to learn on your own. However, as a student I needed and enjoyed more structure and rigor. That is not what kids today are being encouraged to do in school. Often parents and guidance are encouraging them to take the easiest courses possible to achieve the highest GPA’s to get into college. Then they either flunk out or spend the next 1-2 years in remediation taking courses they must now pay before they even start the actual 2 or 4 year syllabus of the degrees they are pursuing. In our area only 30% of HS grads have taken any form of Physics, Chemistry, Biology, Algebra 2, Trigonometry, Geometry or some form of Computer Programming. I do not feet that just being able to learn on their own is sufficient for any reasonable pathway to adulthood in our 21st century. We seem to be out of educational balance so to speak.
One effort of late to address this lack of science and math is the every growing STEM initiative. However, I have a concern about STEM as well. These initiatives were supposed to be of a constructionism pedagogy. The focus being in the areas of hands on engineering and technology that would encourage students to go deeper into the math and sciences to solve the problems. What I’ve experienced, however, is that many programs have only a shallow focus on competition and fun. Curriculum providers see the STEM hysteria as a great source of income so they keep the programs short and simple. Parents are being led to believe that these STEM programs are a panacea to more the rigorous course work that they were originally intended to promote. They become an end in themselves with no lasting educational science and math value.
One last footnote in response to “harrisfr’s” comment on sustainability. Manufacturing since the 50’s has adopted Edward Deming’s LEAN (Six Sigma – TPS) production methods. The foundation of LEAN is to do the most with the least in every aspect of the production process. The least time, material and energy. LEAN processes are by definition the safest, most efficient and most sustainable. If we applied LEAN organizational principles to education and government much of our nation’s and the world’s problems would rapidly diminish and climate change would benefit enormously.
I was Superintendent of a very high poverty district for 5 years. We were also very high performing by the accepted measures required by our State Board of Education at that time (mid-1990’s, before the adoption of No Child Left Untested. Our job description as educators was to Nurture Hope and Keep Dreams Alive.” Our Purpose was to allow our students to become the architects of their futures rather than the victims of fate. They all came to us with dreams, our job was to make them realities. College/career was a means, not an end.
[…] https://tomwhitby.wordpress.com/2014/04/16/failing-goals-of-education/ […]
[…] Failing Goals of Education | My Island View […]
Maybe education need not be compulsory. Strange as it sounds, maybe it would be more highly valued, and perhaps cheaper, if it were voluntary? Just thinking outside the box,