A complete rethinking of the very concept of education

Never before has American education been in as precarious a state as it appears to be today. For more than ten years we have seen many governors’ summits and a host of commissions, committees, panels, unions, boards, and company executives trying to warn citizens that America’s schools have become dysfunctional and in dire need of repair. And for more than ten years student achievement scores have worsened despite billions being spent to stop the downward trend. Perhaps the time has come to stop and try to examine the problem rationally. This is not the first time that American education has reached a threshold where only radical solutions seem to be required. This time, however, the reformers are calling for a systemic reform, a complete rethinking of the very concept of education. As politicians, educators, academics, psychologists, sociologists, and CEOs entered the fray, the well-intentioned movement turned murky and increasingly chaotic. It soon became clear that the reformers really did intend to wipe out what education had meant to Americans.

The acquisition of outstanding knowledge for themselves, the study and appreciation of great works of minds and artists, the acquisition of communication and mathematical skills, the objective pursuit of scientific knowledge, the analysis and assimilation of ideas and ideals that allowed the Western civilization to serve as a beacon to the rest of the world, all of this was suddenly declared superficial, politically motivated, artificial and unnecessary. The new education was going to move from these academic trivialities to prepare the new person for the 21st century, a person aware of the leading role that the new technology was going to play that would somehow take care of all the other academic “frills”. “which had marked the progress of the old education, the education of the past.

The search for truth, which was at the heart of traditional academia, would be replaced by promoting the social and emotional growth of the individual while preparing him or her for the demands of “real life.” As a result, a group of researchers and educators began searching for a system that could accomplish this. It seemed to hit a gold mine when a group of sociologists and educators, with the help of politicians and business executives, came across a program that had been around for some time and had close connections to Dewey’s “progressive education.” Known as Outcomes-Based Education, it required a much greater emphasis on the affective dimension of the educational process at the expense of the old academic rigors. Based on the conviction that it is a disproved theory that children must first learn basic skills before engaging in more complex tasks, the emphasis would now be on “more complex tasks”.

The educational process consisted of moving from concepts to facts and not the other way around. This required a complete renovation of teaching methods. Rather than the teacher being an authority figure at the head of the class, he or she was to be a “coach” or “facilitator” helping the class discover insights in small groups by working on one or more projects. Working together in groups would prepare students for the team approach used by industry. It would also “level the playing field” so that the disadvantaged would have the same opportunities as everyone else in the learning process. This brings us to the two dominant mantras of the new education. One is that it should foster self-esteem; the other that “it takes a whole town to raise a child.” The former requires that students acquire the attitudes, values, and feelings that would lead to a smooth and painless transition to “real life,” as defined by experts; the second requires that the child’s entire community participate in defining his or her education. As for the evaluation of the results, standardized tests are ruled out for the most part. Whatever tests are taken, they should be supplemented by portfolios containing the student’s work record that follows them throughout their education and beyond. In summary, the primary emphasis is placed on the student’s ability to process information rather than acquiring and retaining content knowledge or a discipline.

The general movement is from academic to behavioral concerns, from the cognitive to the affective domain. The stark contrast to “traditional education” is evident without going into more detail. Since the results so far can only be called dismal, shouldn’t we just clock in for a while to see where we’re going? Should self-esteem be the ultimate goal of education? Should “the whole village” be involved in defining a child’s education? Should the idea of ​​acquiring knowledge take precedence over acquiring skills for new technology? Has the concept of education become so controversial that it demands a new definition? The two great revolutions that shook the world, the French Revolution of the eighteenth century and the Industrial Revolution of the nineteenth, tried in vain to redefine education. The passage of time inevitably justified a return to the time-tested concept of the educated person developed by the ancients and the European Renaissance. The latest example of this occurred shortly after World War II, when the Soviet Union suddenly seemed to be outdoing us in new technology with the launch of Sputnik in 1957. None other than the American commander-in-chief responsible for the defeat of Hitler was agree that instead of American education focusing on the general training of technical experts, it should continue to emphasize the liberal arts and the development of well-rounded citizens. The reward came with the fall of the Soviet empire. It has also come in the form of the staggering continuation of Americans winning more Nobel Prizes than the rest of the world combined.

In a new study recently published by two professors with impressive credentials, we even find the incredible thesis that the entire infrastructure underpinning current educational reforms is based on flawed and unsubstantiated research and statistics. The study challenges the notion that American schools are failing and inferior to European schools. The authors ask how it is possible that Americans have escaped the conclusion that education in this country is in a deplorable state. The authors then proceed to present statistics that support their conclusions. Even admitting that his handling of statistics has been seriously questioned, the main thesis remains valid. Does the success of American education over the last two centuries justify the sudden storm of criticism leveled at our schools? The call for a complete overhaul and “reinvention” certainly needs to be approached very carefully. Such a radical approach may well affect not only the general direction but also the basic philosophy of an educational system that has given our country leadership in almost all areas of human endeavor. We thus come to the basic question that must be asked. What should be the basic purpose of American education? Is it to prepare us for adult life and, if so, what do we want adult life to consist of? Or is it to fulfill the promise contained in our Declaration of Independence: the guarantee of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness? Could it be the old adage of Know thyself? A sage of the Renaissance considered virtue to be the only constant in mortal affairs because only it “can make those who embrace it wounded and those who abandon it miserable.” He defined virtue as the ability to “rightly sense God and act rightly among men.” Given the recent interest in teaching character, should virtue be the primary goal of education? Can any or all of them be summed up in the concept of wisdom? And don’t most or all of them fall into the category of what has been considered “academic” since the days of Plato and Socrates?

It is essential that we measure what progress has been made before proceeding. Therefore, we respectfully urge the leaders of future Summits to use their influence to ensure that the radical programs being imposed on schools in an attempt to “reinvent” education at the national level are carefully re-examined. Schools have already been overwhelmed by the intrusion of social services, health services, special interest groups, and the attempt to turn them into multipurpose community centers. We must not blur the distinction between “schooling” and “education.” Any summit that does not take into account the views of parents, taxpayers, and citizens who are legitimately skeptical about what has happened in the last ten years of reform efforts is bound to create more tensions and misunderstandings that could lead to gridlock. the american school