There is an endless drumbeat on how people in the US need to be better educated. I'm not arguing that education isn't good, but I question the ability of education to help us compete in world markets.
Obviously, if everybody in the US had mathematical skills equivalent to John Von Neuman, a key designer of both the hydrogen bomb and the modern computer, we would have something to sell abroad. However, I don't believe that any type of education could reliably produce that kind of genius unless it also involved some type of invasive brain modifying technology.
Also, though he sufficient social skills to be able to marry and raise a family, he also had some foolish habits such as attempting to drive and read at the same time.
I think that education, while it must be partially aimed at employability, must really be aimed at equipping average people with what they need to live a good life as mature human beings. This means, though I don't knock regimentation and drill, that students cannot spend all of their time studying academic skills, as for many people these will not be the most important aspects of their adult lives.
Ultimately, I fear the problem of what and how to teach can be addressed narrowly in a scientific way. For instance, we can learn, though controlled trials, how best to teach arithmetic. However, in a broad sense it is too large and value laden to ever be perfectly addressed. In particular, national competitiveness seems to be a wrong standard. If my children are reasonably happy and healthy than I simply don't care about whether they or children in China are the best ones at Calculus.
No comments:
Post a Comment