The basic format for
modern education is in many places attributable to Plato. More
academic disciplines have arisen over time and as more and more
youths are educated the system has become further institutionalised.
I wish to muse over how aligned the education system is with the
current social climate. Having only really experienced the English
school system I will be exclusively talking about it, however I am
sure most countries education systems will share many attributes with
it and so hopefully the essay will still make some valid points for
readers anywhere in the world.
Education is a
wonderful thing but we seem to now view it as something which must be
applied to you by an institution and not something that just happens
as people live their lives. Schools may teach most of us to read and
write however we learn to speak just by interaction with other people
who can already speak. The suggestion that education is wasted on the
young has some truth to it but perhaps this may not be inherently due
to their age and rather because of how society treats the young. We
deem youths less capable of making their own choices and have made
education compulsory for them. Forced learning is not as effective as
passive learning or when an individual chooses to learn something
themselves. The difficulty is creating an environment where passive
learning is maximised and the desire to learn things is greatest.
Education is most beneficial to the young as they have most time to
make use of it and so regardless of how “wasted” it may be there
is no suggestion of leaving it until it can be fully appreciated by
more mature people. It simply makes it clear that the aim of an
education system should be to offer as many useful life skills to
youths that can be effectively and willingly learnt.
I doubt any would argue
that the aim of any education system would be to create a skilled and
productive work force that are well rounded and contented people who
can easily get along with the rest of society. I am concerned that in
order to regulate a vast nationwide system it has become too
quantitative which has resulted in it deviating from the ideal aims.
All subjects are graded on the same linear scale to represent some
level of aptitude from the student. Employers use these gradings to
assess potential employees and society scrutinises schools based on
them too. My first criticism of this way of quantitatively comparing
schools and people by a single grade in the subject they have taken
is that is it a very ambiguous measure. Success in a subject is based
on the basic aptitude of the student, the effort they then put into
the exam/coursework and the relationship they have with the teacher.
It also will be affected by things like how well the student takes
exams and their state of mind around the time of the assessments. The
information a grade offers might mean the student is very bright or
it might mean they went to a good school or that they worked very
hard. There are levels of qualification that are sufficiently
demanding to prove that the student had good teachers, good aptitude
and worked hard such as a PhD from a prestigious university but prior
to this stage you still don't get very complete picture of a person
from their grades.
The second issue I have
with the grade system is that it creates false incentives within the
education system. Exams were initially intended as a way of measuring
someone's abilities in a subject however the failings of exams in
their ability to really provide an accurate measure of all that much
means that people prepare for the exam rather than learning or
educating. Exam techniques are taught, the common questions are
repeatedly covered, unsubtle clues are given as to what will be on
the papers so those taking the exams may commit a few pieces of key
information to memory rather than having to understand a concept.
Exams are to the stage now where you will get marked down for using
an alternate method to the syllabus standard for reaching an answer
even if it is the correct one and your workings are clearly shown.
Exams are very much a man made thing that are only really self
serving. They do not prepare you for anything in the real world nor
offer any useful skills to contribute to society. By using exams as
the primary way to measure the effectiveness of education and
students then we turn the who system into something that prepares you
to do well in exams rather than educate you. Certainly there is
overlap between the two but it will distort the efficiency much like
trade barriers distort the efficiency of the global economy.
The next point for
concern is the subjects themselves which seem to be aimed at
providing skills for the highest earning jobs rather than offering
skills more in proportion to the kinds of job available and required
throughout society. Practical skills are taught less in schools than
purely academic ones and the scope to vary what one studies is small
for younger age groups. It seems to be the accepted view that those
who don't get on well at school go off somewhere and learn a
practical trade. It is almost as if the school system is weeding out
the less academic people from the very start and not even bothering
to cater for their needs, leaving it to independent bodies to offer
certification for various tasks that are much more integral to the
operation of society than most of the top jobs down the academic
path. Token subjects like design and technology and home economics or
whatever more politically correct name they have been given these
days can be taken by those still in compulsory education but they
take much the same format as the other more academic subjects with
coursework and written exams.
Intellect is a very
difficult thing to describe and even harder to measure, it is
comprised of many different elements including coordination, logic,
linguistic, social, memory, creativity, speed, spacial awareness and
visualisation, reasoning, experience and many more. Academic
achievements only measure a couple of these properties of
intelligence, which is already only a portion of what a grade
represents. All the aspects of intellects are of great use to society
and in performing jobs and enriching peoples lives but the education
system chooses to focus on a few. This is certainly problematic in
that it will be wasting good potential but it is also damaging to
those who are not suited to the education system but are still by all
accounts bright, skilled and capable people. I personally know some
good examples of these people who have a chip on their shoulder
because they think society views them as stupid resulting from their
lack of academic achievement. These people have become blacksmiths at
the very top of the trade, skilled plumbers at a young age or
professional gamers, none of which are the trades of someone without
intellect and ability. My feeling is that these people would be much
happier had the school system nurtured their kinds of skill alongside
nurturing academic skills in those others with more aptitude and
interest in those subjects. Had they achieved the same level of grade
as other students in school but in different areas that reward
different things then they would have not been disenfranchised with
the system and felt outcast by society. I suspect they would have had
direction earlier in their lives and so wasted less time post school
to find their feet and would be happier as a result.
Education increases
knowledge and understanding which in turn increases the freedom of an
individual. Compulsory education is somewhat ironic in that you
remove a freedom in order to increase freedom. In an ideal world I
think there is no need of compulsory education, people would
appreciate the benefit of being educated, education would be of
better quality and enjoyability (this is not anything against the
teachers I have had in my life many of whom did remarkably well given
the confines of the system they worked within and are, by all
accounts, great teachers, this essay is about the problems inherent
with the way society operates its education system and not those
within it), and not being forced to go would make students appreciate
it much more. I am not sure how viable it would be to make education
non-compulsory in a country like the UK. I fear those who were
disenfranchised, in bad schools, have disinterested guardians or who
were not very academic
would suffer and end up
with lower grades, higher conviction rates, lower employment rates
and other such statistics. In effect non compulsory education would
likely widen the wealth gap in the UK and similar countries. Before a
society could make education optional it would need to boast an
excellent school system and more importantly it would need to have
all members of society above a certain level of poverty. This level
of poverty I have discussed before in other essays and may be defined
as the lowest income above where criminal activities are not a more
economically viable alternative. This is easy to describe but very
hard to measure or calculate as it not only depends on the financial
returns of minimum wage employment verses crime but all of the
externalities as well such as the risks, the time investments, the
social status and so forth would need to be factored in. Assuming
99.99% of your society is above that theoretical level of poverty
then you are in great position and could make it better still by
making education non-compulsory.
Other improvements that
could be made to the education system are much harder to clearly
describe and are somewhat more ambiguous. I would like to see more
choice of subjects and specialization at a younger age with the
ability to completely drop all conventional academic studies after
they have basic maths and the ability to read and write. I would like
to see better measures of performance in subjects that are as close
as possible to the students aptitude in that subject. I would like to
see more things taught in schools that have no bearing on any subject
and are purely for the benefit of living within a society such as how
the political system works, how the economy works, some psychology so
as to foster a greater understanding of self in people, how to gut a
fish, change a tire and wire a plug. If I were to write a curriculum
it would have only basic science, maths and English and then lots of
more useful life skills such as those previously mentioned. It would
then have a selection of options including all the present academic
studies such as Biology and History as well as many more that are
much more removed from writing and facts such as gardening. Things
like music, art, drama, D&T and home economics would have very
little in the way of examinations or academic portions and would rely
on the performances and produce of the students to succeed. I would
like to see teachers rated by ex student review and life achievements
and I would like to see students rated most by their teachers who
have had the most chance to observe their skills and potential.
Certainly this brings with it new problems such as favouritism but it
does align the incentives and information most closely.
Education is a great
thing for society as a whole and for individuals as well. It
increases the freedom of people and allows society to carry on with
the skills, experience and understandings of our ancestors. There is
no doubt that it is a useful and worthy endeavour nor that it is of
most benefit to the young. Much of what is done in the aim of
providing education is based on tradition and the kinds of education
that were required historically. Not so long ago education was only
available to the privileged few who would never need any trades or
practical skills and so it is easier to see why the academic subjects
formed as they did. Society has changed faster than the education
system has evolved to suit it and now everyone goes to school yet we
all still focus learnings on what only a few can end up making use
of. The growth of population and the increase in school attendance on
top of that has caused the need to standardize and institutionalise
which has lead to the focus on examinations rather than education.
History offers us a great explanation as to why there are problems in
the system and is an extra confirmation that there is no important
reason for it to be as it now is.
I listed many of the
changes I would make to improve the system yet gave no real
justifications for those changes or how they could be sensibly
implemented. Some may be more obvious than others but I shall take
this opportunity to expand on a few so as to pain a more colourful
picture. I discussed a lack of choice of subject matter that
increases as age decreases in students. The only purely academic
skills that seem important to operate within society are basic maths,
literacy and a grasp of some of the fundamental aspects of the
physical sciences. Even these are not essential for all lines of work
although would still likely be helpful. Most of these skills could be
covered by quite an early age and then dropped all together should
the student wish. Other subjects would make use of the skills and
reinforce them from different perspectives and English, maths and the
sciences would still be subject options for those that take interest
in them. Education is about engaging minds and the best way to do
that is by being interesting. Students are forced to take subjects
they find dull and teachers are forced to teach within strict
guidelines (largely to get uniformity for examinations). This makes
the experience less fun for both groups of people but is a problem
that can be approached at two ends. By giving students a wide choice
of subjects to choose from that could include plenty of seemingly
non-educational, non-useful or low demand topics such as game
strategy, soap opera study or costume design, then you increase the
chances of having interested students. By relaxing curriculum
guidelines the teachers themselves can cherry pick the bits they find
most interesting, the enthusiastic teacher is far easier to learn
from and engage with. At younger ages attention spans are shorter but
there is much more scope to learn ancillary skills alongside the
intended ones. Simply by having a group of youths engaged and
involved in a new task they will be learning a great deal of
different things. You learn through experience and so schools should
offer a wealth of experience, sadly much of my memories of school
involve being bored sat in a selection of repetitive classrooms.
Roughly speaking I
would group those within compulsory school age into three categories
based on age. The first would be very much as it is now and ideally
would end when the basic maths and literacy was achieved. In this
period I would not offer any optional subjects nor aptitude testing
or grading. The middle group would suddenly have lots of options as
to their studies and these would be the most relaxed and fun seeming
ones although a mild form of performance/aptitude grading would start
to be given for subjects that the students have chosen. The only
subjects I would presently think wise to maintain as compulsory are
those which encourage physical activity such as PE. I would however
like to offer a much wider range of ways in which students could be
physically active and so those people who were no good at things like
football could do horse riding or hiking or military style training.
A light restriction on choice could be something like a minimum of
two physical subjects to be included within a students selection. The
third and final group would also have only their chosen subjects
however these would be a little more restricted than the middle
group. Likely there would be less subjects as the detail to which
they were taught would be increased and thus require more time. A
requirement to maintain some physical studies seems sensible but an
additional requirement to do a minimum number of “useful”
subjects would also be included. These useful subjects would be aimed
specifically at providing the skills required by specific industries
or groups of industry. An example could be a course on electrics
that would obviously lead to the role of electrician, or chemistry
which could lead to a selection of roles in the chemical, oil (sadly
arms) and pharmaceutical industries. This group would be from around
thirteen years to around sixteen.
After this point
education would still be offered and would continue to narrow down
subjects allowing people to specialise. Some might have all they need
by this point and enter the working world instead of further
education however external qualifications would be brought in house
as much as possible. This is very similar to present non compulsory
education however I would focus more on trying to keep the
institutions highly linked. An example of this would be those doing
practical intern-ships and those doing an academic degree would share
the university experience and have the option to move to a different
place from the family home and live in student accommodation cheaply
together. This would help to stop alienating portions of society and
break down the English class system a little further as well as some
of the other suggestions.
Even these few changes
I have suggested and described in slightly more detail would be very
hard to implement in one sweeping change and as with everything in
society would offer the best results if it were gradually moved
towards with incremental adjustments. The relaxing of the curriculum
could be quite easily accomplished without too much upset. More
subjects could be offered slowly and compulsory ones could be made
optional. A number of subjects are slowly changing how they are
examined with increasing weight given to coursework. There are plenty
of drawbacks to coursework as the only real alternative to exams
however it is a step in the right direction giving options to how
people can have themselves assessed and play to their strengths.
These changes are all practical with our current system in place and
would pave the way for the more complex changes suggested. One of the
biggest requirements to improve the education system is funding.
Ideally teachers would be paid a comparable wage to doctors and have
a lower burden of bureaucracy to attract the best candidates and
allow them to focus on the purpose of their job. Offering loads of
subjects that are interesting to youths is also going to be both
expensive and logistically more challenging. It may be the case that
teachers of the more fringe subjects are based at more than one
school. Society needs to alter its economy in order to channel enough
funds at the education system to make most of these suggestions
sensible in state schools. The perfect education system requires the
perfect society so as to have sufficient funding, the appropriate
incentives to achieve , the best learning environment, high levels of
social trust and so forth. Many would likely argue that education is
the way towards a perfect society but at least it doesn't need to be
perfect to point you in the right direction. We should improve
society for the sake of improving education and at the same time we
should improve education to improve society.
No comments:
Post a Comment