[PLUG-TALK] Re: [PLUG] Debian experts?
Paul Heinlein
heinlein at madboa.com
Wed Feb 21 20:23:33 UTC 2007
On Wed, 21 Feb 2007, Rich Shepard wrote:
> This is not at all surprising. There are many studies that have
> demonstrated the appalling lack of knowlege about geography (many
> high school students cannot locate their home state on an outline
> map of the country), name their elected officials (from the local to
> the federal levels) or Supreme Court justices, or many other facts
> we take for granted.
For the sake of what would someone need to know such things?
What knowledge is necessary for being a valued member of a social
group? This knowledge is physical (self-sufficiency), moral (avoiding
taboos), linguistic (how to communicate and listen for concerns),
cultural (to assimilate and interpret shared behaviors), and whatever
three-R's variety is necessary for economic involvement.
What parts of "knowledge" should receive priorities in formal
education?
The larger question that doesn't so much get asked is how large is the
social sphere for which we should educate children. Do we need to
educate people so that they can be a valued member of every community
on earth (a very, very high standard!)? the entire anglophone
community? the US of A? an ethnic group within Oregon? the economic
community of northwest Multnomah county? a family clan?
I think a *lot* of mischief takes place because we don't agree on the
scope of community to which we're educating people.
Me, I like to think that I'm aiming my daughters to be able to operate
in the scope of North American urban business/cultural community and,
to a lesser extent, the worldwide anglophone community. Note the
communities I haven't targeted: North American rural/farming, Central
or South American, African, Far Eastern, etc. Hopefully my daughters
will have the skills for self-education should they choose to operate
in those communities, but for now it's not part of the scope of the
education I'd emphasize for my children.
I have some good friends, on the other hand, whose daughter has some
learning difficulties. No one (including me) has ever categorized her
disabled, but learning is difficult for her. As she's grown, her
parents have started to limit the scope of the community for which
they're seeking her education. I suppose that community could be
characterized as basic self-sufficiency in Clackamas county. They
would care little whether she ever learned to recognize Oregon on a
map (though I suspect she can), but they want to know that she can run
a household, hold down a basic job, manage a checking account, and
travel to necessary locations.
My friends and I live in different school districts, but imagine we
not only lived in the same district, we also served on the same school
board. What arguments we could have about what constitutes a good
curriculum for high school students -- I aiming for baccalaureate
success, they for baseline economic viability.
Who's right?
Everyone involved the process of curriculum building -- parents,
teachers, administrators, students -- needs to answer the scope
question first and foremost.
There are lots of good answers -- different people need different
things. The answers need to be assigned priorities. Only then can any
satisfying debate over curricum begin.
--
Paul Heinlein <> heinlein at madboa.com <> www.madboa.com
More information about the PLUG-talk
mailing list