1. Our educational system does not simply need reform: it needs a revolution.
2. In order for us to fully utilize our human resources, people should pursue what they are passionate about.
3. Our educational system should advocate for every profession, rather than creating a hierarchy of subjects (examples being: science of the utmost importance; arts/theater as the lowest).
Sir Ken Robinson believes that our educational system has been formed as a result of the need for industrialism, and now that that period of history is over, we shouldn't allow ourselves to be stubborn and stick to it. He uses watches as an example: in the current digital age, younger people don't use wrist watches, because it is not useful. Most older people still do. Why? Because we don't always know what they take for granted.
Robinson makes certain important points about our current educational system. He questions why we educate students in batches, by birth date, if one's level of intelligence or maturity is an individual thing that is different for everyone. There should be a better way to measure and group people, shouldn't there? Furthermore, he challenges the way in school, working together is "cheating," whereas in the real world, it is really just collaboration. Robinson takes the extra step to indicate that with our educational system, our creative abilities are at severe risk of decline. Not only are many of us not able to find our passions as a result of the hierarchy of subjects, but we are also being taught to always think one way, the right way. So, our ability for divergent thinking declines, and our creativity is suppressed.
I found these points intriguing, and I certainly agree with a good majority of them. I'm not sure how an education revolution can take place at this point, but a good start would be by spreading his ideas as much as possible.
I think Robinson's questioning why we educate students in batches is very interesting. I wonder what might be a better way to measure and group people. Would it make more sense to group people based on a social or academic scale? In addition, does it make more sense to start this "new" hypothetical educational system at the college level, or earlier?
ReplyDeleteWould this "new" system allow us to more easily find our passions? I have mixed feelings about Robinson's claim that our current educational system limits our creative abilities and thus makes it difficult to find our passions. I feel that being educated amongst a diverse group of people, whether that be mixed ages or social competence would likely be beneficial to one's learning and pursuit of a passion. At the same time, what type of system organization would lead to this outcome?
Kayla, I think you raise an interesting question with the basis of the scale system. In a way, I see beneficial arguments to both systems, so I would probably endorse a system where both could be combined to generate a system that is more based on many aspects of our character, not just one.
DeleteI actually agreed in general terms with Robinson's claim about finding our passions. Our system can make it hard to be creative and try out different disciplines. But I also agree with you in that being at a place like Michigan exposes us to so many different kinds of people and educational opportunities that we discover things that we wouldn't otherwise in other systems. So I'm still torn as to what system would really be the best.
I find his outside the box thinking very interesting and think that he is onto something with the idea that we need to recognize that our education system needs to be just as adaptive as our economic and political systems are. Although I wouldn't agree that all the ideas he is putting on the table are useful and practical, I like the fact that he is attempting to break the molds of conformity that dominate our thinking and he is inspiring creative thinking. He makes the important observation that our education system is dogmatic, which we have learned to be the downfall of many great societies in the past. I think that the way that our class is designed is a good example of an attempt to reform and improve the way we learn. I also like the point he made about the growing use of ADHD medications that he made in the video. I think more and more people believe that they truly need these medications when they are actually completely normal. I specifically like his criticism of the parents who believe that their children need to take these medications just so they will be something they aren't.
ReplyDeleteI agree with most of what has been said and also have mixed feelings about Robinson's points. Out current grouping of students into grades may not but receptive to the abilities of each student, but is a diverse class beneficial to learning. Mostly, I agree with Travis's point that these solutions are impractical. Despite the fact that our society is certainly very different from the time of the enlightenment and the industrial revolution we still have a capitalist system that ranks professions with respect to their wages. I think Robinson's claim that the arts are suffering a lack of attention in the education system is a nice sentiment, but I don't think the formation of the "hierarchy of subjects" is the fault of the eduction system. It's reality. Most people who study art and theater don't end up as successful and socially respected as people who end up engineers and doctors. Our educational system is reflective of our economic and social systems. I think this especially applies to higher education; school costs money and we need to learn things that make university economically worth it. I personally like the idea of restructuring our educational to be more beneficial to a new generation of students. However, the only way I can see that such a transition would be possible would be if society completely acknowledged a new form of education. Robinson's dream school is very interesting, but would only succeed if it could connect students to jobs and I don't think employers will be receptive to such an overarching change when the current system has been in place for so long. The current system was what the current employer's went through, they understand it and the grades it produces mean something to them. I don't see a way to change that.
ReplyDeleteI thought this article was incredibly interesting filled with important and very informative links. The Ken Robinson video was incredibly interesting in my opinion. I never though about our education system quite like a factory, but it is a perfect fit and makes perfect since. Much in Menand's article as he compares education to the right educational ladders and down the professionalism chutes, the factory metaphor exemplifies the idea of systematic education. The factory idea is very interesting as it labels almost every student the same way as they are educated in batches. It shows a teaching method in which kids are treated as entirely the same. However, I do not know if there is a way to go beyond this type of thinking. Seeing how many different types of students there are, how can we possibly have every single kind of different teaching styles. Most likely, this would turn in to another kind of sorting system that is almost the same as the factory system. Robinson's ideas also seem to clash with the ideas of Menand in stating that their is more than one option, while Menand offers three. Is Menand offering 3 types of education the same thing as giving students only one choice?
ReplyDelete