Division I regional track finals
Fenwick graduation 2012
Ponitz graduation 2012
Dayton Daily News education reporter Scott Elliott writes about schools, kids, teaching and learning.
Home > Blogs > Get on the Bus > Archives > 2007 > March > 11 > Entry
What is the purpose of education?
(High tech workers in a Lebanon, Ohio, brake plant)
I was just checking out my pal JennyD’s blog and found her asking what is the purpose of education?
Jenny cites some of the most famous names in education and their takes on the purpose of education. Summarizing, she says its one of these three:
—Creating good ctizens
—Preparing workers for jobs
—Helping the industrious raise their social standing
I’ll add one more.
—Reducing vice and raising moral standards.
That fourth one was a key motive for those who founded public schools in Boston, New York and Philadelphia. They believed educated citizens would more inclined toward good behavior, more marketable for decent jobs and therefore less inclined to get involved in crime and immoral activities.
Today, public schools are asked to do all these things and one of the central tensions of public education is that doing some of these things well can cause the others to be neglected. Overall, I’d say Ohio leans heaviest towards preparing workers for jobs.
What do you think the primary purpose of public schooling is? What do you think it should be? Be sure to read the comments over at JennyD’s place for additional insights.
(Image credit: Linda Weisenborn, Cox News Service)
Permalink | Comments (14) | Categories: Schools and Politics
Comments
By Mary
March 15, 2007 7:45 AM | Link to this
Ms. Cornelius, I have the same observation that many seem to look upon schools as mainly socialization, rather than academic and intellectual. Contrary to the advice of education research, “socialization” is used often to hold kids back that are ready to move forward. Our complex and fragile society cannot survive an education system that operates that way. Also, some seem to look upon local schools as principally a job generator, economic driver, or child care service for working parents. Academics is just a pretend function.By Happy Homeschooler
March 13, 2007 4:36 PM | Link to this
sigh Wellwhynot- I think you are under the impression that I am knocking teachers for doing what they do and I’m not. I am sad that teachers feel the need to do so much (only because that means children are lacking somewhere else in their life). Believe it or not, I do understand many of the realities of public education. I grew up in Dayton Public schools, graduating in the late 90’s. After graduating a year early (because I wanted away from the problems of the school system) I went to college to earn my degree in education. I did student teaching in som wonderful private schools and some not-so-wonderful public schools. I see the difference and it is a harsh reality with inner city kids. The original question was what should the purpose of education be and I was stating my opinion that it should not have to include medical care. I believe most teachers would agree that it shouldn’t. That doesn’t mean schools are bad for trying to fill a void in the lives of needy children, just that I wish that it wasn’t this way. The money and time could be used in so many other ways, like in the classroom teaching. This issue is honestly one of the reasons that I chose to homeschool my own children. Too much time and money are wasted because schools are being stretched too thin because they must do so much.By Ms. Cornelius
March 12, 2007 10:28 PM | Link to this
Don’t forget that many people believe that the purpose of education is socialization and completely snub any emphasis on academic or intellectual pursuits. The purpose of an education is to enable the student to succeed without a teacher.By Mary
March 12, 2007 8:24 PM | Link to this
After going to Jennny D.’s blog, I note she is specialized for education of (economically?)disadvantaged children. Good for her. However, I hope she has also had training on spotting economically disadvantaged children who happen to actually be academically gifted. Contrary to myth, they really do exist. Educational needs of academically gifted students, no matter economic class, also needs to be better understood and provided by schools.By wellwhynot
March 12, 2007 7:38 PM | Link to this
I wish I could sit down with “happy homeschooler” and explain to her the realities of public education. It would be wonderful if teachers could spend their day actually teaching but unfortunately so many parents don’t do even the bare minimum for their children. We feed them breakfast and lunch. We send home food bags for the neediest to have food over the weekend. We send them to the nurse to get their eyes checked and then to see if she can find a way to get the glasses that mom won’t buy. We give their name to one organization to get free shoes so they have some that fit without holes. Teachers buy the kids school uniforms because the ones the child has is too small or so dirty it won’t come clean. We collect money to buy Christmas presents and food baskets. We have dental students apply flouride to keep their teeth from rotting out and send a note home to get mom to take them to the dentist, which she may or may not do. We call children’s services when we see signs of abuse and neglect. We attempt to teach morals without being religious. We teach hygiene and keep spray deoderant for kids who come to school smelling so bad no one can be in the room with them. We keep toothbrushes and toothpaste in our rooms. I’m sure I’ve forgotten something. Unfortunately, I don’t see things changing in the future. As much as I wish so much of my time wouldn’t be spent taking care of non-teaching duties, I wouldn’t want to go back to the days when everyone looked the other way when they saw an abused or neglected child. So while I don’t think those things should be part of education, I realize that things aren’t likely to change. We should be teaching students to be self-sustaining, productive members of society.By Happy Homeschooler
March 12, 2007 7:27 PM | Link to this
Nettie- I agree that many parents don’t step up and do all that they should as parents. It’s very sad, quite frankly, that the schools have felt that they need to cover the very basics just because parents can’t/won’t. I think, though, that it is a vicious circle. The school steps in and does a little bit more because they think that the parents won’t, and then parents become a bit more apathetic because the school allows it. The cycle can’t end that way, ya know? Not that I have some brilliant solution. I wish I did (my major in college ws early childhood education. I wanted to be out there making a difference in childrens lives everyday). I’m just sad that it has come to this- that the schools feel that parents can’t do their job properly and that they must step up. The resources could be used in so many other (much needed) ways. One question, though. Doesn’t the school require (they did when I was a child) that children have yearly well-child visits prior to school? Shouldn’t the doctors then catch those problems? It seems to me that this would be a less costly (for the schools) way of ensuring that children get their eyes/ears/teeth examined.By Dave
March 12, 2007 5:30 PM | Link to this
Folks have been throwing some great ideas around in this blog. I would like to add that as part of a high school education, students should learn the practical side of being a citizen — how to change a tire, balance a checkbook, sign an apartment lease, fill out a job application, buy a car, etc. I had one college roommate who was bright enough, but had to ask if the water was boiling so he could make mac and cheese!By School Supporter
March 12, 2007 3:32 PM | Link to this
Since some schools fall short of the goal to expand the middle class, and the military provides a surer path up from poverty, consider the knowledge, skills, and dispositions appropriate to a young soldier: You are a helicopter machine gunner. The pilot has landed between American troops and civilian non-combatants and instructed you, should the Americans fire on the civilians, to “return fire on the Americans.” Is the pilot’s order legal? Question 2: Your lieutenant orders you to fire on civilians; must you disobey the order? Basic training is not the origin of duty, honor, country; public education has a role. In Harry Stanley’s words, “I know they all had to have the same values that I had somewhere along the line. If it’s they didn’t get it in school, they had to get it in a religion or church or some place, you know. … But then to go and do something like this, it’s, it’s immoral to me, you know.”By Nettie
March 12, 2007 1:29 PM | Link to this
Happy homeschooler, oh how I wish we could do what you want us to do. Unfortunately, my estimate would be that less than fifty percent of parents do what you suggest are parents’ jobs. Those numbers would be even lower in inner city areas. Believe me, I dislike having to send eighth graders to the nurse to get eye exams because they can’t see the board, but when a student tells me they’ve told their parents but they don’t do anything, what do you suggest? Should that child suffer, never having a chance to succeed, because he can’t see and NO ONE cares? I don’t think so. I think it is my job to care. In reference to morals, it would be great if all parents taught them and we didn’t have to. Unfortunately, that doesn’t always happen either. I wish we could devise a list of what parents have to do and give them standardized tests on whether or not they’ve done them, but we can’t. Therefore, schools have taken over some of those responsibilities. I think that the purpose of education is to prepare students to become productive members of society. This encompasses human relations, job skills, and social skills.By Oldprof
March 12, 2007 11:41 AM | Link to this
Happy Homeschooler: I agree completely. Check this site: http://glumbert.com/media/shift and note that most of our college freshmen are preparing for jobs that don’t exist today, using technologies that aren’t yet here. Note that even manual trades like carpentry, road grading, and HVAC are going to be using skills that make specific classes in today’s technology about as useful as a course in shorthand or a practicum in slide rule. The focus of education should be the basic principles that don’t change rapidly (math, grammar, geography, basic science), some social skills (particularly effective committee techniques), and a good deal of self-discipline and self-education.By MrO
March 12, 2007 9:56 AM | Link to this
A literate society should be the ultimate goal not just of education but of society itself. As children grow into adults they need to have a basic understanding of the world they live in (government, basic science, history) as well as essential skills to find work (mathematics, writing, reading) and to make descisions for themselves, their children and the rest of us (problem solving, critical thinking, journalism (and critique of journalism), and information finding). Today’s youth are tomorrow’s voters and the next day’s leaders.By Mary
March 12, 2007 9:46 AM | Link to this
Perhaps asking the question and stirring the debate is more important now than the ad hoc answer to the question. The answer drives cost and other issues, but the question does not seem to be revisited by public discussion and schools as much as it should. In a similar vein, are we preparing students for today’s jobs or tomorrow’s jobs? Which jobs are we not preparing them for? “Happy homeschooler” points out some things she does not believe schools should do. I have my own lists as well as things I think schools should be doing - and these lists should be discussed. A lot depends on personal philosophies of education. A book called “Fifty Major Thinkers on Education” includes a wide range of philosophies such as those of Jesus Christ, Maria Montessori and Socrates and demonstrates the problem. A book written by a former teacher “Schools that do too much” is also interesting to read and stimulate some thought.By Sunnymom
March 12, 2007 7:52 AM | Link to this
I agree that public education should �Prepare workers for jobs �Help the industrious raise their social standing I think that good citizenship and moral training is the job of parents. The more that parents abdicate their responsibilities in these areas to public schools, the more we will see American’s moral compass go haywire.By happy homeschooler
March 12, 2007 2:28 AM | Link to this
I think that the purpose of education should simply be to teach children how to learn. If they learn ‘how’ to learn, they’ll be able to go so much farther. Unfortunately, schools don’t teach that- they force feed a child the info that they need for the standardized tests and teachers don’t really have much wiggle room for anything else. I don’t think the purpose should be to teach children morals (that’s the parents job) or should they be so focused on the ‘welfare’ of children. (No, I’m not saying that they shouldn’t report suspected abuse, etc… but schools do so much in the way of hearing exams, dental exams, scoliosis exams, etc… not their job). I think that if schools focused more on teaching children how to learn, and how to enjoy learning, they would all be much better off.