On Education

On Education

A friend of mine, Saqra R., recently posted this thought: “…It might be a really good idea to focus on making a universal 2-year college type education an extension of the public school system and free for all. For the sake of peace and because we need more information than we used to need…”

For some years now, education and schooling and how it is conducted have come under examination and challenge. Some people feel education has not kept up with the times; others feel education serves little function but to train students to memorize select facts (and these facts might not be truth but be designed to suit a cultural or political perspective) and regurgitate those facts without examining them for accuracy. Some traditional forms of schooling are considered, as one person wrote, “counterintuitive to true learning & also ableist….& many homeschoolers are opting for unschooling. These better suit kids & their abilities, take strengths & weaknesses into account, and better equip them for “the real world”. So we should be starting with education (not schooling) from the get go. It inspires lifelong learning & confidence.”

Before I continue, I want to start with definitions (1) :
Education: the process of receiving or giving systematic instruction, especially at a school or university; an enlightening experience; a body of knowledge acquired while being educated; information about or training in a particular subject. Knowledge acquired by formal learning and instruction.
Schooling: education received at school.
School: to train or discipline in a particular skill or activity; the place where this activity takes place, from the Greek skholē : a leisure, philosophy, lecture place
Homeschool: to educate one’s child at home rather than send them to a school
Unschooling: an informal format that advocates learner-chosen activities as a primary means for learning; the child learns through play, household responsibilities, personal interests and social interaction. Activities can include work experience, travel, books, family interaction and mentoring. There are seldom lesson plans or a set curriculum.
Teach: impart knowledge to or instruct as to how to do something; give information about or instruction in a subject or skill; cause to learn or understand something by example or experience; encourage someone to accept something as a fact or principle.
Learn; learning: the acquisition of knowledge or skills through study, experience, or being taught; commit to memory; become aware of something through research and observation; train someone to achieve a modification of a behavior through experiences and conditioning (such as self-discipline, self-control, self-examination and observation of effects of behavior)

So if we look at each definition, education and schooling of any sort appears to have the goal of education and learning in mind. The results will differ based on the individual, the skills of the student to absorb or retain or add to his or her body of knowledge, and either the disinterest or agenda/purpose of the person, group or society offering the schooling.

The problem is, that we have forgotten what the intent of education was, failed to define what we want from education as a society, and we have neglected to look at children as individuals with different capacities.

Originally, education was limited to the ruling families and ruling classes. The intent in that case was to produce competent rulers and leaders. Even today, we find that the ruling class secures a better, elite education for its own kind (2) allowing only the few exceptional students from the working class to enter their arena of study whose parents can find the funds to send their child.

But early on in the US, education took a different direction. The founders were both the intellectuals of their day and, though many were from the financially elite, they recognized that a democracy could not long survive an ignorant, uneducated or gullible citizenry. To be ignorant was to be prey to the cunning, the deceiving and the man with a private hunger for power and domination over others- in other words, a narcissistic psychopath or sociopath.

For example, according to the Center on Education Policy, George Washington University, “…the Founding Fathers maintained that the success of the fragile American democracy would depend on the competency of its citizens. They believed strongly that preserving democracy would require an educated population that could understand political and social issues and would participate in civic life, vote wisely, protect their rights and freedoms, and resist tyrants and demagogues. Character and virtue were also considered essential to good citizenship, and education was seen as a means to provide moral instruction and build character. While voters at that time were limited to white males, most of whom were assumed to be property owners, many leaders of the early nation also supported educating girls on the grounds that mothers were responsible for educating their own children, were partners on family farms, and set a tone for the virtues (see footnote 4) of the nation…” (3)

In other words, the focus of education was to create a competent population that could understand political and social issues, would understand civics and participate in civics, would vote wisely to protect their rights and freedoms and resist tyranny, despots and demagogues. So now, we need look at some more definitions. I am including the definitions of both freedom and liberty, because there are some slight differences, and the word liberty is more common to founding documents:

Competent: having the necessary ability, knowledge, or skill to do something successfully; from the Latin “competere”- be fit or proper
Civics: the study of the rights and duties of citizenship
Rights: that which is morally correct, just, or honourable; a moral (4) or legal entitlement to have or do something
Duties: a moral or legal obligation; a responsibility
Freedom: the quality or state of being free, such as: the absence of necessity, coercion, or constraint in choice or action; liberation from slavery or from the power of another; the power or right to act, speak, or think as one wants; absence of subjection to foreign domination or despotic government; the state of not being imprisoned or enslaved; the process by which a person controls their own life. (self-determination) but not the life of another
Liberty: the state of being free within society from oppressive restrictions imposed by authority on one’s way of life, behaviour, or political views.; freedom from arbitrary or despotic control; the positive enjoyment of various social, political, or economic rights and privileges; the absence of arbitrary restraints, taking into account the rights of all involved (in other words, the exercise of liberty is limited by the rights of others.) Thus liberty demands the responsible use of freedom under the rule of law without depriving another of their freedom
Tyranny: cruel and oppressive government or rule; cruel, unreasonable, or arbitrary use of power or control; a ruler who seized absolute power without legal right
Demagogue: a political leader who seeks to exploit an issue for his own gain and garner support by appealing to the desires and prejudices of ordinary people rather than by using rational, reasoned argument
Despot: a ruler or other person who holds absolute power, typically one who exercises it in a cruel or oppressive way
Authoritarian: favoring or enforcing strict obedience to authority at the expense of personal freedom; showing a lack of concern for the wishes or opinions of others; dictatorial

Keep these definitions in mind as we go through our examination of education.

In addition, advocates for wider education of the working classes saw an economic and societal benefit to teaching citizens to understand civics, reading, arithmetic and writing, geography, grammar and even rhetoric, along with “moral instruction”. (5) And while initially girls, children of color and children with special needs were excluded from most education, the decades passing saw more and more inclusion as the value of an educated populace was realized. (It was not until the 1980s that influences in a major political party began to dismantle a belief in the value of higher education for all as a fundamental requirement for democracy; that anti-intellectual/anti-higher education and anti-science ideology began to strongly insinuate itself into mainstream political ideology as a political ploy).

The only conclusion to be drawn from the usefulness or any of these educational styles is

the child itself and what he or she achieves in terms of being able to live life fully and in an enriched way that allows for on-going learning
the parents and what they bring to the table
the quality of the person or persons teaching the student
the environment best suited for the child to learn and finally
why and what a society or culture expects from, or hopes for, its citizens and how much opportunity it gives them to achieve this.

The Child Itself and what he or she achieves in terms of being able to live life fully and in an enriched way that allows for on-going learning

What benefit a child derives from his or her education depends on the child. Children are not born equal in the ability to learn, to apply what he or she has learned, in their capacity to absorb knowledge or remember what has been learned.

To date, no education system devised has proven to be able to make a child more intelligent or more able to acquire and apply knowledge and skills than what it was born with. We know the child’s pre-natal environment and genetics can determine IQ and we know we can improve that IQ potential through good pre-natal care. We know that post-natal care and environmental/family/cultural factors/experiences can bring to fruition or suppress a child’s natural IQ. We can enhance what was already there, we can encourage the full development to the best level of the specific child, but at this time, we cannot add to its intelligence or ability to absorb knowledge. We can enhance what was already waiting to be awakened through memory training, games, reading and word play, positive social interaction, mental stimulation, and visuospatial reasoning. Each child has a specific capacity to learn, intake, correlate, and comprehend. The task of education is to 1) ensure that full capacity is achieved for each child according to its ability, and 2) to develop within each child an interest in their community, their world and a desire to continue learning, or intellectual curiosity and 3) ensure that we do not assume anything about any child and its capacity or ability until we have given that child every best opportunity.

While we also have to accept that not every child is born with a desire to learn, or a capacity to learn equal to every other child, we need to assume every child is born with a potential to reach their highest capability, given the proper developmental opportunity.

Parents and What They Bring to the Table

Parents must have an honest look at themselves and the skills, abilities, comprehension and knowledge as well as determination they bring to the education table. As a society, we need to look at what “homeschooling” and “no schooling” means to a parent and why they choose it. And both society and parents need to be absolutely honest about and with themselves regarding why they are making the choice to homeschool or no-school.

I have seen great success and dismal failures in every system of education, whether home, public, charter, or private. I’ve worked in those systems and worked with the children from those systems. But what a child has as a home environment is critical to reaching full potential- and I have found that in too many cases, “homeschool” is a way of attempting to either control a child and what they experience of the real world, indoctrinate them to fear the outside world, make it possible for the parent to take no responsibility for ensuring a child’s education, or keep a child at the mercy of the parent’s own paranoia, ignorance or ideology.

Don’t misunderstand- depending on the school boards in charge of a school, public schools and charter schools can be just as bad- and in many cases, homeschooled children do extremely well in exams. In most cases, exams and tests explore the data a child knows and how well they have learned/memorized answers, and homeschooled children do well at that. But the point of education is to teach a child how to think, not what to think, and to be able to accept proven facts that challenge their current knowledge or beliefs about what they know- that is the test of quality education. I’ve met children extremely well-trained in how to “argue” to a conclusion they have been taught to reach, but when confronted with facts/data/information that might lead them away from that conclusion, they become defensive and reject any further debate.

The same can be said of public schooling, depending on the school board and the textbooks a state chooses for its curriculum. The best public schools understand the intent of education to develop knowledgeable, reasoning, intellectually curious citizens, the worst follow a doctrine of cultural indoctrination to the dominant group and its point of view regarding history, values and beliefs, whether good or ill. Bu tin either case, what a parent feels about the value of education, and how the parent contributes to encouraging learning, can influence how a child behaves in public school environments. Parents who provide access to books, create learning opportunities in the home environment and who present a positive attitude about learning set the tone for what the child will feel about going to school and his or her behavior while there.

Parents who choose unschooling face different challenges. Unschooling, according to an article by Eleesha Lockett for Healthline, is defined as “the idea that children can direct their own learning, at their own pace, without the rigid structures of formal education. Instead of following curricula, students are given a supportive setting that fosters their natural curiosity about the world. The way in which a child learns is largely determined by their personality type and learning style. “ (6)

In a survey of unschooled children, Peter Gray and his colleague Gina Riley concluded “The findings of our survey suggest that unschooling can work beautifully if the whole family, including the children, buy into it, if the parents are psychologically healthy and happy, and if the parents are socially connected to the broader world and facilitate their children’s involvement with that world.” (7) So a critical factor in the success of unschooling is parental involvement and a willingness to give their children access to ideas and experiences the parent may not agree with in terms of their own beliefs.

All of these educational or schooling systems have one critical element: the parents and what they bring to the table. I’ve met children who were so “no schooled” that they could not even pronounce their own name and couldn’t read, and children who were so brilliant that they got into trouble at school and home because they were so bored, and their parents didn’t think education was important.

In some cases, parents chose unschooling because they did not want to bother to deal with their children’s education or they were fearful their child would question their religious beliefs if “exposed to the world” and in other cases parents were not capable of teaching their children.

In other cases, parents chose public school because they could no longer control children who had behavioral problems, and they put their problem onto the teachers, not always to good effect for the teacher, the child or the other children in the room.

The parent, in every case, is the first critical factor!

The Quality of the Person or Persons Teaching the Student

As with parents, the quality of the teacher or instructor is a critical factor in what a child learns, how they learn it and whether or not the child continues to seek out learning opportunities. The truth is, teachers run the gamut from excellence to abysmal failure. In the article “10 Qualities of a Good Teacher” (8), Emily Dennison lists the following qualities for a good teacher:

“Good Teachers

Are Strong Communicators
Listen Well
Focus on Collaboration
Are Adaptable
Are Engaging
Show Empathy
Have Patience
Share Best Practices
Are life-long learners”

These same qualities apply to parenting skills, as well!

Parent or teacher, certain behavior or personality traits can reduce a teacher’s or parent’s effectiveness, and some can lead to diminishing a child’s desire or ability to learn. These can include:

Low motivation or lazy and not interested in teaching
Poor communication
Disrespectful towards students or other staff; see themselves as the most important person in the room
Disorganized and unprepared to teach; have no goals for the students
Exhibit a lack of knowledge or skill in the subject being taught
Free with criticism, withhold genuine praise- because they like to feel superior and usually only praise the students who “grovel” or whose own status can give more status to the teacher
Rigidity
Limited teaching style (a good teacher has to be able to teach using audible, tactile, visual, kinetic and other methods to get the same lesson across!)

Perhaps not surprisingly, I’ve seen that some of the characteristics of bad teachers and bad leaders are the same.

The Environment Best Suited for the Child to Learn

This is where honesty from a parent comes into play. While many parents see themselves as the “best person” to teach the child, the truth is, not every parent- perhaps even most, if reading and comprehension and specific knowledge are factored in, is able or capable of creating the best learning environment for a child.

In some homes, there is constant chaos and the child is unable to stay focused on the lesson; the family is disorganized, little attention is paid to goals, and expectations constantly change. In a case like this, the child is probably better off in a formal environment.

In some homes, the focus is on learning, the child is encouraged to read, to share ideas, to discuss what he or she has been learning; the parent is actively engaged in providing access to learning and is comfortable with the child challenging assumed “facts” or questioning authority. In such cases, the child is often more advanced than other children her or his own age, and can become bore din the typical classroom. In such a case, the child might do better with homeschooling or no schooling.

In still other cases, the parents may be able to provide everything to educate a child, but not have the desire or space to homeschool or unschool; in this case, the parent usually sends the child to attend formal education while supporting that education with an enriched home environment for self-learning.

And as always, much depends on the quality of the schools available, the funding they receive for supplies and access to information, their curriculum choices and the quality of teacher they are able to attract. This is why funding education is so important!

And Finally, Why and What a Society or Culture Expects From, or Hopes For, Citizens

Remember we defined the different between freedom and liberty? The words “life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness” had specific meanings when those words were put on paper. There was a sense that each citizen would recognize their responsibility not only to their immediate family, but to their neighbors, community and nation. In taking on the responsibility of liberty, the individual had to accept certain limits to his or her freedom, in order to secure a fair and just nation for every person.

This also meant we had to recognize that, while each citizen was equal under the law and the law was not to make differences between class, gender, age, religion, ethnic origins and so on, not every person was equal in his or her ability to absorb and utilize knowledge, understand complex issues, read and comprehend to an equal extent, examine what they were being told or sold… and this meant that those who had the most ability needed to be trained to their highest potential, no matter their background or bloodline, and those who lacked these skills needed to be brought up to their best ability.

Unfortunately, some people have mistaken the intent of education and have used it to try to create a “level” education for all, in which no one excels and no one falls by the wayside. Noble sentiments, but dangerous for a free people. For it is only when each person is trained to their highest capability and ability, and those who excel are given the opportunity to apply their excellence, that a nation can remain free.

By all means, teach every single child and adult to their highest, best potential. But “dumbing down” (9) curriculum and lowering expectations to match the least capable, to make everyone feel “equal”, is not the intent of the founders, nor the intent of education, and is a death sentence for democracy- and civilization, for that matter.

For example, I have watched as less and less is expected of children, and curriculum (and behavioral standards) is reduced more and more so that no feels “left out” or “bad” about their lack of success. That’s not the best way to teach children to reach for excellence. A quality school has both remedial classes and accelerated classes, with no judgment of any child’s worth or value, and parents need to take more responsibility for providing learning opportunities at home.

It always dismayed me when I would do home visits for the schools, and see not one book in sight, and few learning opportunities and teaching moments being offered by parents.

Curriculum could return to higher expectations- schools should focus on in-depth how to think, not what to think. We need to ensure children and adults learn how to reason, use logic, are introduced to such ancients as Socrates, Aristotle, Plato, and others, as well as Franklin, Paine, etc and modern thinkers who challenge our prejudices and beliefs; that students are taught civics and rhetorical analysis and critical reasoning. That students are not only able to read Shakespeare, Dickens, Melville, Hardy, etc by age 13-14, but can recite epic poems, speeches, stories- all of this is training in being able to remember, reason, and engage.

We also must deep in-depth history- not just the things that create false pride, but the events and people who challenged our errors, our comfortable history, who showed us how we created a nation and how we can make it better still. And this applies to all of us, not just any one group.

Now, most young people are not introduced to the classical thinkers and philosophers until the last year of high school or the first year or two of college. And in too many schools- and homes- we are left with the brighter kids being bored to tears and the less capable children not being challenged to do their best.

The real world needs deep thinkers as much as it needs skilled workers, and every child needs not only opportunities to achieve, but opportunities to be challenged and achieve their best– and the brightest should be given opportunities to rise to their intellects and have access to the best education possible, whatever their economic backgrounds, and yes, all of it free.

What we really need to do is provide the best education possible for all children, education that challenges them, provide opportunities for children to match and surpass their current skill and knowledge levels, provide both higher intellectual training as well as trade education so each child can find their own level of best achievement as well as their area of interest and never underestimate what a child is capable of.

And go back to seeing education as a high goal, not to “earn more money” (which seems to be how most people see education) but to create a better society- what’s the old saying?

“…To create a nation founded on an aristocracy of achievement arising out of a democracy of opportunity…”

Critical reasoning, logic, deep history, the Socratic methodology of examining ideas, science and its methodology for understanding the world, mathematics, civics, reading comprehension, rhetorical analysis, geography, writing for clarity and creative expression, global cultural studies, economics (both foreign, domestic and in-family), even entrepreneurial opportunities within the school framework, and yes, even a year in which basic skills such as home maintenance- plumbing, carpentry, electrical work, masonry, and so on are taught… in other words, a complete and all-inclusive preparation for the student to live capably in the world and make the best decisions for their lives as possible.

(1) definitions derived from Oxford, Websters and Chambers dictionaries

(2) Remembering that education is only as good as what the student puts in to learning. Not all children use this advantage to its best or comprehend what they are taught- all economic classes have people with limitations, limited capacity for learning and in some cases, the education is wasted due to the student assuming privilege and opportunity despite a lack of having absorbed any knowledge at all, or simple arrogance, in that even if they fail to learn much, they feel entitled to privilege and are often given leadership positions anyway!

(4) We have to understand the definition of the word “moral”/”virtue”. Too often, some people perceive morality as both being about “religion”, and dealing with private sexual behavior, and do so to the exclusion of other moral principles; they become obsessed with the private behavior of other individuals, or form rigid sexual expectations of each member of the nation and attempt to pass their personal views into law or impose rigid laws based on their private religious beliefs onto others who may not share those religious views. This is why the separation of church and state became an important principle in American law. But morality deals with holding or manifesting higher principles for personal and public conduct beneficial to society, including integrity, honor, decency, dignity, etc.

(5) Moral instruction is defined as helping someone to acquire a set of beliefs and values regarding what is right and wrong that helps guide their attitudes, intentions and actions towards other people, other things and their environment, both personal and public. Moral instruction deals with how a person interacts with their community, individuals, guides their character and moral development and understanding and helps them understand right and wrong within their culture. But moral instruction is more than this: it can enable or empower the individual to go against the culture or community if that culture or community has ceased to be moral, as moral instruction is about building a person’s character to the point where they can hold higher principles than their community or culture and hold beliefs and values that are considered most beneficial to not just their own culture or society, but to the world.

(9) an education curriculum simplified so as to be intellectually undemanding and easy for the widest audience; the deliberate oversimplification of intellectual content in subjects and content of a curriculum; the diminishment of critical thought and methods of examining and assessing rhetoric/information; the undermining of learning and language standards, the dismissal of expectations of achievement