What is the true value of Education?
What Else do you think we should be tought through education?
What Else do you think we should be tought through education?
I teach art and do community based art workshops around Sheffield, I think there is a lot of pressure on young ppl at school. The idea of getting their GCSE’s are for them to get into work but sometimes it is too much to ask a young person what job they want to do in the future. I like to help children and teenagers get into expressing their interests in art. Allow individualism rather than conformity, are we taught to become a part of the workforce?
Yes, exactly
Teachin kids to communicate, read, write, speak, listen etc is the priority (seems obvious but how many people really communicate with kids, and adults when it comes to that, rather than simply dictate), followed closely by encouraging individuality, curiosity and the natural inclination to question.
Think the questioning bit is hammered out of people, partly because it saves having to answer questions, its easier to have a conformist population and also because a lot of people, authority especially, find questioning threatening.
are we taught to become a part of the workforce?[/QUOTE]
I dont think we are taught, so to speak, to become part of a workforce, as much as we are in our culture, socioly conditioned to become part of a workforce.
We recieve cultrual ideas and sociol norms through sociolisation and through other mechanisams of society like law, Media and department for emploeyment and education, ect, of what is suposedly expected of us as inderviduals.
IMO we certainly are these days.
I think the education that kids and youths had from the 1970s until the mid-late 1980s was about the best, it was actually well roundeed and mixed proper learnng with play/fun, even high school wasn’t that bad until GCSE/sixth form/A-level time (it was around this time things changed).
I think it has got worse in all EU countries and IMO it changed because of the harsh pressures of the market – Britain (and the EU) was losing out to competition from the Far East and so Thatcho and her successors (including Blair) “re-victorianised” education to bring it back in line with the old Empire model.
This is how kids in SE and Eastern Asia and many other foreign nations are still taught (i.e strong disciplined learning, a higher value on exam results and obedience of authority/social norms). It works but like any industrial process there is a lot of scrap, and in this process the scrap is human beings.
The British Establishment argues its not so bad as in the Eastern countries there are now less teenage suicides then there were in the 1980s (it was very bad then particularly in Japan), but what they forget is that family ties are often a lot stronger in Asian countries, plus they still have a vibrant manufacturing industry and lots of manual jobs.
The kid in Singapore or Malaysia who doesn’t get all their expected grades might be disappointed and tearful, but often their family will stay behind them and they can often work in a family business or at the worst they will end up assembling computer parts or MP3 players or TV sets – maybe boring and mundane but still a living wage, plus they learn technical skills they can often use outside the workplace. They get enough of a “life” or an existence to at least want to hold on to it..
Britain no longer has many of these industries (often through the fault of bad management and short termism on the investment markets rather than a lack of skills) and those which do exist are often staffed by immigrants as small businesses don’t or can’t invest in training and use ready made skilled peopel from overseas.
So kids who do not do well at age 14 upwards are actually being written off today and often left to go “feral” (and often they end up becoming young parents themselves) without any sort of education even in basic life skills.
If this isn’t actually addressed I think it could actually damage the social stability of this country within as little as 5-10 years….
If this isn’t actually addressed I think it could actually damage the social stability of this country within as little as 5-10 years….
Bleak future, brave new world here we come?
if you’re talking about Huxley/Orwell type scenarios we are already there – it actually happened in the 80s/90s and the bulk of the population accepted it all and even welcomed the changes in our society due to the economic growth of the time.
there is already a war in foreign lands to secure the resources to support our lifestyles, but there is also the risk of war coming home (such as increased terroriism and civil disturbances), on both a conventional political and karmic level.
The big question is whether people are prepared to sacrifice a small amount of their consumer lifestyle in order to make things better for all – or whether people will carry on and let “the market (and ultimately the battlefield?) sort it out”
there is already a war in foreign lands to secure the resources to support our lifestyles, but there is also the risk of war coming home (such as increased terroriism and civil disturbances), on both a conventional political and karmic level.
The big question is whether people are prepared to sacrifice a small amount of their consumer lifestyle in order to make things better for all – or whether people will carry on and let “the market (and ultimately the battlefield?) sort it out”
good points an agree with you but i was coming at it from a diffferent angle, thinking more about the progression towards designer human beings.
In BNW its genetically-messed-with foetuses resulting in 5 (i think) classes /castes of human beings, each with different capabilities and functions, to fulfill all society’s needs.
Seems to me a version of this is happenning now, has been happening for a long time.
I can’t remember the name of the bloke (some aristocrat/high class biggot) who famously supported the Poor Law (again, bugger my memory not sure if it was the 1600s one or the mid 1800s, probably the latter)
I initially remember thnking ‘wow, good on him’ but then read one of his letters, he basically said that the poor should be given some help, not enough for them to prosper but just the right amount so that enough of the ‘peasants’ would survive to do all the work the rich needed doing . . .
‘Help them to survive but only to the extent that they are useful to you, and in the numbers which you need’. Not that much of a philanthropist after all
Can’t help feeling its the way things still are
We still do live in a very unequeal and divided society, where the rich genraly get richer and the poor get poorer.
I as many other’s have experienced sociol discrimination, where authaurities will hapilly arrest you, even when you have done nothing wrong, on the say so of someone of higher sociol status, without no everdance, but if the same “higher sociol status”, is to physicaly damge you, even with everdance, no justice usaly comes from it, from the authorities, police, courts, politicians ect.
Thankfully though, society has seen improvements, for a more fairer, equaler society, historicaly.
The Romans for instance, were very cruel fashists who would tortue and ridicule to death, anyone who spoke out freely against the Regime. They also later, during the “Dronacian” period, developed a legal system, which despite being as some might say the foundations of modern day Justice, was established predominatly to protect the regime of those who were in power.
Religioun, was for many, close in comparison to what we class as education, today. Fundermentaly, reading and wrighting were based on religouse concepts, whilst those of higher sociol status, seem to have had interest in mathematics, as well as forcing sociol order.
Through out the middle ages, partially because of the hysteria of man made Religiouns, many innocent and peacfull people, just trying to live in peace with Nature, were persicuted, tortured and burnt at the stake, for being accused as being Witches, or in line with the Devil, in the name of the force fed, preachings of religioun, passed down from generation to the next, by those of respected sociol stature and sociol class. The Royal familys, had such an bizzar interest in witchcraft, that they pervosly funded and brigades of mobs to cary out the interigation, torture and sentancing of death of any one who was expected of being involved in witchcraft.
Adversoly enough, in regards to peoples own sociol freedoms to nature, improvements for a fairer society were made since victorian times.
Charles Dickens aswell as many other influentiol people of the time, demonstrated there views through literature in more interlectualy respected sociol circles of the higher and middle class, to improve the wrights for children who at the time, might be pressured to do dangourise work in factouries at an age of seven, or even younger.
Women were able to vote, through demonstrating together, thus aplying democratic pressure to Parlerment.
The Slave trade was thankfully abolished thanks to the democratic pressure of ethical minded people who would not stand to see the neglect of human wrights of slaves neglected because of the fashisam and bigitoryness of people in power through the use of force.
My conclusion would be thus that as general localised human wrights may have got better, despite atrosities our goverments have a hand in in other countries, most law and law enforcement still seems to be aimed at protecting the higher clases and keeping the lower classes simple, restraind and confined and seemingly chargable at lesure, by those in Power :yawn:
:laugh_at: still you know what they said “things can only get better”
Why is it that secondary moderns, dont teach children much Latin, though private and grammer schools do?
Latin is still a funderntal language used in science and medicane ect.
Many plants for instance, have there charicterised medicanal qualitys, linguisticaly registerd through their Latin name.
So kids who do not do well at age 14 upwards are actually being written off today and often left to go “feral” (and often they end up becoming young parents themselves) without any sort of education even in basic life skills.
indeed, I feel that this is a bit of a vicouse cycle.
The 11+ test that decides wether children will go to a Gramer school or a secondary modern, is in its self biast to many “young parents” them selfs, since they are because of there sociol circumstunceis, far less likely to have or afford the same resources as middle class famillys, like Personle Computors (PC’s), Books, comfortable plases to study ect.
In my opinioun, progress has been made by Blairs Goverment, at least in the feild of pre school, and sociol resources for some younger people, onto their teens. I dont feel that education is easily acsesible to many though after the age of 18, especialy with pressures of New Deal, which is reputed for forcing young people off of there potentioly long term careaer providing employment and into pointles, waste of time New Deal courses, where you are usaly dismised, back onto the Dhal, if you make the 6 months of tediease, mundane, un-represented labour for 15.00 pounds a weak more on ya giro.
ASBOS, aswell, what good do ASBOS realy do?
especialy for young people, other than to get so called “anti sociol” people off the streets, because there isnt the incouragment or anything better for them to do 😥
I dont know why people arn’t taught at school about alkaloids and there adictive qualitys and taught more to teach drugs with respect! 💡
:noway: Im sure it would course less drug addicts! :head_bang
Unless you go to medical school, you are very unlikerly to acturly be taught about the asociated medicenal qualitys of many drugs, only the dangers, and evan then, most of the drug education that young people are taught, they are not told what drugs are doing to them and why they are adictive, only that they are dangourise and not to do them.
This sought of atertude to drugs I feel is dangourise and ignorent to the real hazards of drugs, as when young people see other peers experimenting and enjoying drugs, and there just told there bad and adictive, they dont have an in depth enough understanding to know the real effects of drugs in short and long term, or what courses such effects and why, because they are not tought this!
there are multiple reasons why drug education is crap.
the nanny state and wider society would have to admit they were wrong in many respects and accept/tolerate recreational use and many are too stubborn to do this.
Britain is still bound by UN rules to restrict drug use. Unless we tear up or renegotiate the treaty then we lose substantial international support. We are also financially dependent on overseas trade and investment, particularly from the USA and Eastern countries with socially conservative govts.
If britain became too “drug friendly” they would remove investment/capital and cause a major recession.
Also as previously mentioned, the countries which are strict about their kids lifestyles and drug use and have traditionalist education are doing very well in the capitalist market economy, far better than Britain where our hedonistic youth often drop out between age 15-18 to get mashed up or even if they go to uni have a bit more social life as well as the hard studying.
0
Voices
11
Replies
Tags
This topic has no tags