Formal Education: Societal Indoctrination or Liberation?

[buckeyegrad]

As a professional educator, I'm always amazed by how often formal education is spoken of as a liberating experience. This not only contradicts my own experience, but it also is considered a myth by critical scholars (i.e. neo-Marxist, feminist, post-modernists, constructivist). Although I think it might be a nice ideal to hold and seek to achieve, I am becoming more convinced that formal education cannot be anything else than a mechanism for societal indoctrination (note: I'm not saying that is a bad thing in every single instance).

I would love to hear others' views and experiences on this topic..

[MaxBuck]

Originally Posted by buckeyegrad

As a professional educator, I'm always amazed by how often formal education is spoken of as a liberating experience. This not only contradicts my own experience, but it also is considered a myth by critical scholars (i.e. neo-Marxist, feminist, post-modernists, constructivist). Although I think it might be a nice ideal to hold and seek to achieve, I am becoming more convinced that formal education cannot be anything else than a mechanism for societal indoctrination (note: I'm not saying that is a bad thing in every single instance).

I would love to hear others' views and experiences on this topic..

Sounds like a peculiar view for a professional educator to have.

Education is what you make it. If you enter academia with the concept that you are there to have your head filled with knowledge, then you're likely to be indoctrinated as opposed to educated. If, on the other hand, you have intellectual curiosity and intend to challenge your teachers as well as yourself, then you will get a true education. This is one reason I value elite educational institutions such as Harvard, Duke and Stanford -- you are going to come across a greater concentration of intellectually curious colleagues and professors who will challenge your thinking in ways you can't imagine till you get there.

The same is true IMO in one's church experience. If one enters seeking God's will, prayerfully and thoughtfully and without preconceptions, one is a lot more likely to hear God's voice than if one enters seeking to have the Rev fill up your head with what and how to believe.

I'm sorry, grad, that your own experiences in academia have left you so cynical. Universities aren't perfect, but they're great places.

[buckeyegrad]

Originally Posted by MaxBuck

Sounds like a peculiar view for a professional educator to have.

Not peculiar at all. In fact it is the predominant view in most Colleges of Education and is where the leading research has been directed over the last decade and a half. The goal in the field has been how to overcome this trend in formal education. From my own perspective, most of these efforts are failures because they are not about true liberation, but only substituting the indoctrination of one paradigm for another.

Education is what you make it. If you enter academia with the concept that you are there to have your head filled with knowledge, then you're likely to be indoctrinated as opposed to educated. If, on the other hand, you have intellectual curiosity and intend to challenge your teachers as well as yourself, then you will get a true education.

I do not disagree with you here. However, I take this to suggest that formal education is a failure in terms of liberating individuals. If the goal it to have individuals pursue their intellectual curiosities and challenge one's teachers, one's self, and one's society (what I call being a co-producer of one's education), then the institutions should not allow students to succeed who are passive and simply want their heads to get filled with knowledge (I actually used this exact metaphor yesterday with a lecture I gave to about 400 college freshman).

The same is true IMO in one's church experience. If one enters seeking God's will, prayerfully and thoughtfully and without preconceptions, one is a lot more likely to hear God's voice than if one enters seeking to have the Rev fill up your head with what and how to believe.

Agree here as well. It is one of the reasons when I teach Bible study at my congregation, I continually tell the people that I'm not the final authority on anything, but rather the Bible is. And it is why I get so frustrated with the class because they seemed satisfied with just receiving my teaching instead of using it to further their own studies.

I'm sorry, grad, that your own experiences in academia have left you so cynical. Universities aren't perfect, but they're great places.

Well since I've decided to make a career of managing and studying universities, I too think they can be great places, despite my "cynicism", which I simply call "being through the looking glass".

[Apache]

Let us face facts here.

Almost all of the ism's are a private interest. Some make a group of a large part of society better and some are just aimed at getting what we want. If you take an objective look at issues and take your feelings out of the equation almost all have some good and also som fallout that could be termed bad or negative. Again this is judged by what you feel is important and true.

Schools today tend to be controlled by a more liberal idealogy. Liberalism is what you make of it or put to practice.

Feminism for example has brought so many benefits. A majority of our population was minimized, ignored, and made relatively second class. How wrong was that idea?

For me, the negative fallout, is that the concept of being a Lady or acting like a Lady has gone by the wayside for so many. Again, my perception and perhaps prejudice has come into the equation. For those ladies out there, hats off to you!

It is hard or darn near impossible to keep pre-judged concepts from getting into the discussion.

Ladies, if you disagree entirely, I understand, but it was the first comparison I could come up with.

[MaxBuck]

Originally Posted by buckeyegrad

... I take this to suggest that formal education is a failure in terms of liberating individuals. If the goal it to have individuals pursue their intellectual curiosities and challenge one's teachers, one's self, and one's society (what I call being a co-producer of one's education), then the institutions should not allow students to succeed who are passive and simply want their heads to get filled with knowledge (I actually used this exact metaphor yesterday with a lecture I gave to about 400 college freshman).

Sounds like I probably misunderstood your point. We agree; teachers who grant success based upon simple rote feedback of the transmitted facts are letting their students off the hook in many cases (though I'd argue that in technical coursework such as engineering, physics and chemistry, particularly at the undergrad level, the re-transmittal of facts may be a proper goal).

I guess whether it is the responsibility of the university to "liberate" individuals is an open question. Kind of like the old joke about how many psychologists it takes to change a lightbulb. ("Only one, but the lightbulb must want to change.") The student must come to school wanting to learn, wanting his/her mind to be challenged so that intellectual growth can occur.

[BUCKYLE]

I'd say that most people go to college to get a better paying job. It has little to do, imo, with "higher education". But, I didn't go to college, so what do I know?

[sandgk]

Originally Posted by BUCKYLE

I'd say that most people go to college to get a better paying job.

I'd say most go to college to get away from home and play beer pong. j/k

Originally Posted by BUCKYLE

It has little to do, imo, with "higher education".

What no scholarships for beer pong! Say it ain't so.

Originally Posted by BUCKYLE

But, I didn't go to college, so what do I know?

Questioning is always the first step towards understanding.

Now - on a more serious note.

Grad - I've said this before - so if it sounds familiar, forgive me.

I believe that the greatest skill or attribute a young person can obtain, or hone during their time in college, is the ability to learn, inquire and assess independently.

That would put me fairly firmly in your column - as far as what a college or university should be. For the best means to test that budding skill set would be something akin to a synergistic application of the Socratic method of teaching. (For instance, in the manner they run small student-teacher Seminar groups to explore subject matters at Oxford).

[muffler dragon]

Originally Posted by sandgk

I believe that the greatest skill or attribute a young person can obtain, or hone during their time in college, is the ability to learn, inquire and assess independently.

I like this "other" option. When considering the "formal education" point, I must admit that I consider the collegiate experience instead of the prior ones. This "other" option helps with the overwhelming result that most of the degrees received out there have little to do with the occupation that one takes on.

[DGADBTWSOM]

I agree with the sentiment that college is what you make of it. There are leaders and there are followers and those who follow may take up ideas of those who they admire, sometimes that person is a college professor, sometimes it's Sean Hannity . But that is true for anyone, whether or not they go to a university, we all have people who have influence us, and a formal education, if taken seriously, will either confirm preconceptions or challenge those ideas and put a new light on previous views.
A decent formal education does a pretty good job of letting a person realize where they stand on issues (and how to throw a filthy ping pong ball into a dixie cup), anyone who lets a institution make there mind up for them has a pretty weak mind.
I always liked the idea that if your dumb, surround yourself with smart people, if you're smart, surround yourself with smart people whom disagree with you.

[stxbuck]

I would definitely disagree that higher education is about societal indoctrination-if anything, a lot of faculty will try to challenge ideas that society holds-often with a leftward tilt, but that is a topic for another thread.
Real social indoctrination comes in junior high, where, in my experience teaching/subbing, 2 key things are pounded into the students heads that, ultimately, serve as the bedrock of a functioning society. The 3rd point is the final thing pounded into kids heads in jr. high school(w/ les success than the other two ideas)

1-You don't have to like like someone, but you do have to keep your mouth shut, hands to yourself, and a modicum of respect for said disliked individual as a human being.

2-Be on time, write stuff down, fulfill a given task that you wrote down.

3-Nothing bad ever happens from reading.

The first two ideas are really the key to being a functional member of society, and the ability to support yourself w/ a job. Everything else is skill training.

[BuckeyeMike80]

I don't know about "higher education" being about indoctrination.

I think "lower education" is more about indoctrination - little heads of mush and whatnot. Kids are impressionable while adults or near-adults (16-22 years old) are increasingly NOT.....

[scooter1369]

Originally Posted by BuckeyeMike80

I don't know about "higher education" being about indoctrination.

I think "lower education" is more about indoctrination - little heads of mush and whatnot. Kids are impressionable while adults or near-adults (16-22 years old) are increasingly NOT.....

I concur. My 10 year old came home from school one day last week and announced that if she were allowed to vote, she'd vote for Obama. When asked why that would be, her response went something like:

"McCain is too old and he'll die in office. That would leave that ditzy lady from Alaska in charge. She can't even keep her own kids in line, how will she run a country?"

I asked her where she heard this, and she said that's what they are being taught in school. That voting Democrat is always the right thing no matter who the candidates are. I asked her to go to school today and ask about the sub-prime mortgage mess that Clinton's administration left us and ask her why Bush is being blamed for something that started in 1998.

I can't wait to read the nastygram I'll get in her back pack.

[NorthShoreBuck]

I always considered myself a misfit and malcontent in school. I think that had much to do with the indoctrination you speak of at the lower levels.

Now I am over educated, with the loans to prove it.

I did take vocational welding and college prep in high school so I could work through college. I took engineering in college for a job but took business and philosophy for my own education.

I was lucky that I had a few teachers that told me, they were not there to teach me, it was my job to learn and they would facilitate. Some really took the reins off.

I remember an engineering prof telling me that the more you learn the more you realize how little you know. He also bought beer on more than a few occasions.

I also had a grad level IT professor that was always saying compare and contrast, there may not be only one or a correct answer. She was a kick.

Yes I had more than a few that pushed their liberal leanings every chance they got. I made it out alive and so did they.

So I would say you have to hope you have some teachers like I did and some parents like scooter. You get out what you put in.

Why are today's kids so poor in math and science?

[jimotis4heisman]

i have a a college degree and law degree. i actually dont use either. i learned more in the summers in college digging ditches and over winter break pushing snow than i did "earning" either of those pieces of paper...

[Taosman]

I always considered any education just another "tool". Indoctrination implies putting you in a "box" and creating walls. Saying it's indoctrination is like blaming a knife for cutting someone. Or a gun for shooting someone.
Education is just one tool in you box of tools for dealing with everyday life.