Students and Teachers
My mom will
often talk about the purpose of education being to widen a student’s horizons.
Coming from a science background, I never understood what that even meant, let
alone whether it was being achieved! After all, the laws of physics applied to
the universe; the principles of engineering governed how you built things: those
are facts; where’s the horizon widening in that, I wondered?
Two recent
incidents made me finally understand what she said probably only applied in the
non-science streams.
The first one
was what a colleague of mine who studied economics in the US told about this
professor of his. The professor believed that rule of law was a necessary (but
not sufficient) criteria for a country to get rich. This being the US, he would
then give a provocative example: Israel and Palestine. The former had the rule
of law; the latter didn’t. Of course, the debate would then become a political brawl
but the original topic would still get argued over indirectly…
The second one
was Freddie deBoer’s blog that widening horizons was so much a norm in US universities
that perhaps
students be warned about it:
“You’re going to be exposed to stuff you
don’t like at college. We will try to give you a heads up about the stuff that
might upset you, but what is considered potentially offensive is an inherently
political, value-laden question, and we aren’t always going to agree with your
prior beliefs about that question. We cannot guarantee that everything you
might be offended by will come with a warning, and we are under no obligation
to attempt to provide one. We will try to work with you with compassion and
respect, but ultimately it’s your responsibility to deal with the curriculum
that we impose, and not our responsibility to make sure that it doesn’t bother
you. If you can’t handle that, you don’t belong in college.”
I guess that is
what my mom meant, even if she would not have it put things that bluntly!
Of course, not
all students agree with that aim. As Alan
Jacobs wrote, the students’ expectation is quite different and would probably
be along these lines:
“I am passing through this place, headed
for the next stage of my life — possibly graduate education in some form or
another, more probably a job — and I am paying you to prepare me for that next
stage. In short, we have a business contract in which I am your client, and it
is your job to serve what I perceive my needs to be, not what you may happen to
think they are…Please stop acting like this is the University of Paris in the
age of Aquinas and we’re all seeking transcendent wisdom.”
And so I guess
students and teachers will continue to disagree with the purpose and (hence)
the achievements of education. Happy Teacher’s Day!
In today's world, much of what you say will make sense to many people around. The purpose of education, nearly all parents in India too believe, is job to bring home a lot of money. Parents apart, the general "rating" of the branches of engineering by commoners for example, will have this criterion of which branch makes it easy to get jobs, and further, which branch produces higher "return for the investment", i.e. the cost of education. In the government jobs too, there are grade preferences for the IAS aspirant - for example, one leading to a 'customs officer' is the best if it produces more money. At lease that became the prevailing opinion during a period. Why, there is an academy somewhere in India for pick-pockets, teaching the students the best available education! To sum up, the purpose of education is money. Many professors you quoted too are not clothing anything in euphemism; "just fight your way out in the rat race of life", they seem to urge. That money permeates through all such races is an unspoken truth.
ReplyDeleteTo some extent, in today's world governed and enticed by markets, money being at the root of our goals or aspirations, some legally permitted some not, is something that is here to stay - definitely for the time being. There is indeed nothing much to say beyond that...
Or, is there?
Training of oneself towards self-discipline and avoidance of exploitation or braking the law for gaining money or advantage may be a better way than endless increase of the police force and supporting law enforcement systems, such as ever-increasing judiciary. Such ways of self-disciple, some historians admit, were helpful in the past. China and India are given as examples too. Probably, the reason why in ancient Tamil, the word translatable in English as "education" was always loaded with the implication of "character or behavior" far, far beyond "gaining of knowledge or skill in chosen domain" is exactly that - the society benefits by self-discipline. One has to intrinsically believe in abiding in what is for our overall good.
Law abidance need not produce money for one thing, but it is a nuisance often. If education cannot do this necessary training of law abidance, what other methods are there available for us? Is there anyone promoting this social/cultural need in us? Who is doing it? What is the name of such "rehabilitation", since such things cannot be called education?
Arguments may never settle this eternal debate of the purpose of education one way or other. What may look pretty conclusive during this period of aggressive market capitalism is the reason why the point you are making in this blog has many takers. Still, not everybody.There are even takers for the assumption that "education ennobles spiritually" or "education elevates culturally". Or, there are those who may not give such words which lead to argument, but intrinsically know education has a worth, that can be experienced from deep within, which certainly cannot be quantified by money equivalence. Also, overall education is not about specific applications; it is about training towards ability in order to arrive at specific solutions to suit arising situations.
One critical debate would remain: What should be the attitude of those who formulate and regulate national education? That is where the simple but profound question, "Do values or merits, other than translation of education into money, count?" "Does a broad based approach is correct or focusing on specifics is proper?" cannot be wished away. This question is not understood by school or college students. Some of them, in later years, consider it a worthwhile question and agree with "value or subtler merit plus broad based method"; some others refuse to budge towards any "values" basis and insist on a focus on "training for maximum applications for gain"; the rest ignore this issue altogether. Life is like that.