I am occasionally asked what I think about this educational issue or that, and I can very easily rant upon my soapbox about any and all of them. But what strikes me about many of the arguments we have about how best to educate or who should do the educating come down to very different ideas about the primary purpose of education.
Lately, it seems, the whole job of schools is to produce people who can make money and grow the economy.
In the past, it was about instilling our children with a common cultural identity (sometimes by destroying the ones they already had).
Some among us have even argued that for a democratic society to function well requires a well-informed citizenry.
There are strengths to all of these, depending on how they are implemented. The problem we face is that in this country we tend to latch onto one idea and spout about it as the only thing that matters. Lately educational policy has been pushed toward functional literacy and numeracy with the idea that schools are factories for producing workers for American businesses. I don’t entirely disagree with the premise that preparation for the workforce is one function of education, but if it is the only thing we consider, then there is no room for anything that does not directly show an economic benefit. Is the quality of a human being merely the amount of money they can earn? Is, then, the highest of human achievements membership on a Fortune list of the wealthiest muckity mucks?
Before we can really have a conversation about how we educate, we need to have a clearer agreement about WHY. Our why determines what we teach (and don’t), how we teach it, and what gets the most time and energy in a world where time and energy are finite resources.
So the next time you read an article about teacher quality or standardized tests or changing standards ask yourself, “Why are we doing this?” and “Is this getting us what we need from education?”