⋆.ೃ࿔࿐ྂfaith & fantasy⋆.ೃ࿔࿐ྂ discussion
note: This topic has been closed to new comments.
✯Archives✯
>
⭒First Thoughts⭒
message 13051:
by
Elizabeth
(new)
Jun 27, 2023 07:26PM
Sharp
reply
|
flag
does that make me craZAAAAAYYYY?
THIS YEARS THEME? JAMAICAN ME CRAZAYYYYY
Mod
Mod
(Right?! 😅)
Mod
🙄
Mod
(Also, I decided to check out the Batman song, and now the tune is stuck in my head...)"
(Poor Elijah!😅)
Mod
(Also, I decided to check out the Batman song, and now the tune is stuck in my head...)"
Escape
Escape the deathly hands of that old hag, Lady Indecision. Instead, run after Lady Philosophy, whose company ennobles and rebukes.
(first thought lol).
(first thought lol).
The Cave from Plato's Republic
Mod
I say, I say, the rhythm is all in the hands. Feel it out, brotha!
Mod
As far as the East is from the West....
"'Religious truth is not only a portion but a condition of general knowledge,' wrote Newman (Gaebelein 1976). The history of God's revelation in Christ and the progress of Christianity are too central to the development of Western paideia to be isolated from the study of arts and letters. Such a separation emasculates the study of religion, as well as of the arts and letters."
Mod
(not exactly. I'm just organizing my digital notes and I felt like sharing that :) ).
It's from David Hick's Norms & Nobility, specifically, from the part: proposals for the modern practice of classical education.
"The craze for guidance counseling in the modern school is in large measure an unwitting acknowledgement that education is failing to make the strategic connection between what a student learns in the classroom and what choices he makes outside the classroom. The modern mode of instruction undercuts responsible learning because of its analytical attack on subject matter and because of its utilitarian self-justification. Learning has lost its normative edge, and we need special guidance to make our students responsible, self-aware persons. But guidance counseling cannot begin to perform the morphosis of a healthy paideia - for students acquire a lively sense of values implicitly, not extrinsically, when normative inquiry is a part of every class and discipline, not the special study of one."
Mod
Mod
This is also very true. Guidance counseling also just sucks in general if you attend public school, which makes the situation even more sad. Private schools and universities are better, of course, but perhaps only because they have more funding.
Mod
LOL
Lily - Books by Starlight wrote: "Stephen wrote: ""The craze for guidance counseling in the modern school is in large measure an unwitting acknowledgment that education is failing to make the strategic connection between what a stu..."
That's interesting that you should equate better education with better funding. Hicks doesn't believe that's the case at all. I'll quote him in full since Sharon loves wordy posts ;)
"If, therefore, I have turned the rich experience of classical education into a poor argument, it has been to plead the case against the modern school, while asking my reader, who, like myself, is at least to some extent a product of that school, to consider the oldest and noblest task of education: what I have called normative learning. It must be with a deepening sense of frustration and despair that the custodians of paideia have watched the decay of normative learning in private and state education since World War II. To be sure, there has been no lack of shiny new school buildings, each offering a smorgasbord of new courses to rival its own hot-lunch program. But the quality of learning cannot be measured in terms of school construction costs and new federal programs. What happens is not necessarily what ought to happen, and the feasibility study - because it generally takes so little into account - seldom indicates what is truly possible. Looking over the centuries-old progress of classical education, one must imagine what might have been, and one must ask what education in the United States today ought to be.
After World War II, it seemed economically feasible - perhaps for the first time in human history - to offer the blessings of paideia to more than just an elite of well-born or intellectually gifted young people. But at the very moment when this dream seemed within reach of the overwhelming majority of Americans, education left the path of normative learning to chase after two elusive political objectives: plenty and equality. At first, plenty was assumed to guarantee equality. The war had demonstrated the capability of U.S. industry,when supplied with trained men and women, to produce plenty for all. Ameri can industry's victory over two formidable enemies, Germany and Japan, as well as over the Great Depression, bred in many Americans the illusion that there was no problem a prosperous economy could not solve. The sheer superabundance of goods, Americans believed, would overwhelm whatever nagging problems of inequality lay in the background - and what they meant by inequality was, characteristically, poverty: an unequal share of the wealth. Edu-cation, therefore, was assigned the task of training men and women to produce plenty for all, so that no one's share of the wealth would be so small that he would have to go without.
As Plato, Thucydides, and de Tocqueville have all observed, democracies prefer to look for material solutions to their spiritual problems. They never despair of making up the difference between the citizen's desires and personal fulfillment with greater production or with a more equitable distribution of goods. Indeed, this is the reason for democracy's basic optimism. But by the mid-1950s, it became clear that plenty was not solving the problem of inequality.
In gross terms, there was of course plenty for all, but it was not reaching a sizable segment of the population. This deprived segment - it was decided in the parlance of the day - lacked an "equal opportunity" to lay hands on its share of the wealth. Again, U.S. society turned to its schools to provide this missing opportunity. But because equal opportunity was viewed in terms of getting ahead or getting a job or "getting mine" and not in terms of giving every person his due to an education that would enable him to reach his fullest human poten-tial, the result was a lowering of academic standards to accommodate the weak, indolent, or unmotivated student and a dismantling of the remaining paideia in favor of training for "Marketable skills. Classical education could stay only if it could prove its practical value in the marketplace. It became more important to master a specific process than to understand a general principle, and the content of learning became unimportant, so long as it trained the student to do something that would permit him to earn his share of the wealth and thereby help society solve the problem of inequality."
That's interesting that you should equate better education with better funding. Hicks doesn't believe that's the case at all. I'll quote him in full since Sharon loves wordy posts ;)
"If, therefore, I have turned the rich experience of classical education into a poor argument, it has been to plead the case against the modern school, while asking my reader, who, like myself, is at least to some extent a product of that school, to consider the oldest and noblest task of education: what I have called normative learning. It must be with a deepening sense of frustration and despair that the custodians of paideia have watched the decay of normative learning in private and state education since World War II. To be sure, there has been no lack of shiny new school buildings, each offering a smorgasbord of new courses to rival its own hot-lunch program. But the quality of learning cannot be measured in terms of school construction costs and new federal programs. What happens is not necessarily what ought to happen, and the feasibility study - because it generally takes so little into account - seldom indicates what is truly possible. Looking over the centuries-old progress of classical education, one must imagine what might have been, and one must ask what education in the United States today ought to be.
After World War II, it seemed economically feasible - perhaps for the first time in human history - to offer the blessings of paideia to more than just an elite of well-born or intellectually gifted young people. But at the very moment when this dream seemed within reach of the overwhelming majority of Americans, education left the path of normative learning to chase after two elusive political objectives: plenty and equality. At first, plenty was assumed to guarantee equality. The war had demonstrated the capability of U.S. industry,when supplied with trained men and women, to produce plenty for all. Ameri can industry's victory over two formidable enemies, Germany and Japan, as well as over the Great Depression, bred in many Americans the illusion that there was no problem a prosperous economy could not solve. The sheer superabundance of goods, Americans believed, would overwhelm whatever nagging problems of inequality lay in the background - and what they meant by inequality was, characteristically, poverty: an unequal share of the wealth. Edu-cation, therefore, was assigned the task of training men and women to produce plenty for all, so that no one's share of the wealth would be so small that he would have to go without.
As Plato, Thucydides, and de Tocqueville have all observed, democracies prefer to look for material solutions to their spiritual problems. They never despair of making up the difference between the citizen's desires and personal fulfillment with greater production or with a more equitable distribution of goods. Indeed, this is the reason for democracy's basic optimism. But by the mid-1950s, it became clear that plenty was not solving the problem of inequality.
In gross terms, there was of course plenty for all, but it was not reaching a sizable segment of the population. This deprived segment - it was decided in the parlance of the day - lacked an "equal opportunity" to lay hands on its share of the wealth. Again, U.S. society turned to its schools to provide this missing opportunity. But because equal opportunity was viewed in terms of getting ahead or getting a job or "getting mine" and not in terms of giving every person his due to an education that would enable him to reach his fullest human poten-tial, the result was a lowering of academic standards to accommodate the weak, indolent, or unmotivated student and a dismantling of the remaining paideia in favor of training for "Marketable skills. Classical education could stay only if it could prove its practical value in the marketplace. It became more important to master a specific process than to understand a general principle, and the content of learning became unimportant, so long as it trained the student to do something that would permit him to earn his share of the wealth and thereby help society solve the problem of inequality."
FIRST THOUGHT, what can I say? xD
Putting aside our misgivings as to the sagacity of imposing political objectives on the school, are we not still entitled to ask whether modern education has accomplished its utilitarian goals? Has it significantly added to American plenty and equality? I would argue at the secondary school level: no. Whatever gross additions it has made, they are neither significant in achieving the political objectives nor are they worth the infinite cost of depriving future generations of their rightful and necessary paideia. Our plenty - perhaps because we cannot imagine life without it - means nothing to us, while hiding from us the lavishly wasteful and destructive consequences of its production. Meanwhile, we seem farther from equality than ever because we have not learned the truth of Socrates.Jwho found his plenty and equality walking through Athens' overladen agora, desiring nothing. Instead, we teach our children to crave much and to respect themselves and others in terms of their wealth - that is, of their vulgar ability to accumulate nonliving matter. We have made education the gateway to
riches rather than to contentment.
riches rather than to contentment.
Mod
But even then, because of how many students they're trying to serve, public school counselors just end up burned out, unmotivated, and overwhelmed, which is no help at all to the average student. That's why I mentioned funding. Our district at least is WAY underpaying both the teachers and the counselors, and (at least according to my sister), it's made for a depressing school environment.
Mod
Mod
Are you sure?🤔
Lily - Books by Starlight wrote: "You are totally right in your final statement. I admit to having thought of how private-school counselors can much better equip students to gain admittance into elite colleges than the average publ..."
I'm curious, why should a private school counselor be, de facto, a better counselor than a public school one? And why should people desire to go to an elite university? :)
I'm curious, why should a private school counselor be, de facto, a better counselor than a public school one? And why should people desire to go to an elite university? :)
Mod
The student-to-counselor ratio is much more even at private schools, so counselors actually have time to meet with students. I went to public school, and sometimes it'd take weeks or even months just to track down my counselors to meet with and talk with them about classes. That's not something private-school kids ever have to deal with.
Mod
I don’t know if that’s a first thought or attached to another conversation. (My first thought lol)
The belief of the Baptist that baffles the Buddist
Moses supposes his toeses are roses, but Moses supposes erroneously. Moses, he knowses his toeses are roses, as Moses supposes his toeses to be
Aaron is starin’ at Moses’ toeses and thinking he ought to leave. But Moses is owin’ Aaron a tearin’ for the time he told him to leave.
This topic has been frozen by the moderator. No new comments can be posted.
⋆.ೃ࿔࿐ྂfaith & fantasy⋆.ೃ࿔࿐ྂ
Books mentioned in this topic
Unearth the Tides (other topics)Dance of Thieves (other topics)
One of Us Is Lying (other topics)
The Sweetest Sound (other topics)
Quiet: The Power of Introverts in a World That Can't Stop Talking (other topics)
More...
