There have been a few things that I've wanted to blog about since I last opened this site... but I always seem to get distracted, and then justify my distraction by telling myself to think about it for a while before blogging so my argument is more convincing. Unfortunately, as you might guess, I tend to forget what I was going to write about.
But one thing that sparked in me the urge to put fingers to keyboard (which is connected to a computer, connected to the internet and accessing blogger... gee that catchphrase is a bit longer than pen to paper...) is Dan Brown's YouTube video "An Open Letter To Educators" (see it
here).
In this video Dan argues that education systems need to evolve past the point where they are now in order to retain their importance in society. This isn't because us Generation-Y-ers can't be bothered to sit in a classroom for more than 5 minutes when we aren't obliged to by law, but because the nature of information has changed drastically since the educational institution was designed.
In the past knowledge and information were valuable things. Starting way back when the only people with access to total information were the kings and his advisors, then moving forward to most aristocracy, and then to a broader class of the wealthy. If you wanted information you had to either be born into a position that granted you access to it, or have the capital to purchase it. Now I won't get into the whole concept of capital and knowledge and power as espoused by the likes of Foucault and Bourdieu, but you get the general idea. If you did not have the power (through whatever means) to access knowledge, you could not have it.
Now knowledge is virtually free. All you need is access to the internet, and you can find out anything. Sure, there are very small pockets of information that have yet to be uploaded to the internet, but for all intents and purposes, anything and everything is accessible for no cost on the internet.
"So why then do we persist in making people pay to learn facts, when they are so freely available?" is the question that Dan Brown basically asks.
I think that he definately has a point. Education institutions do have a habit of believing that the best way to teach their students is to teach them facts, and then test them on their ability to remember those facts. If that is the sole basis for a degree, I would certainly agree that there is not much point in paying for the privelige.
But I do think that there is more to most degrees than just fact-learning. I don't know if it is just because I went to the University that I went to, or that I did a Humanities degree, but to me a degree does much more than just teach you facts. A degree teaches you how to use those facts, talk about those facts, disagree with those facts, and critically analyse them. A degree should teach you how to be a critical problem solver who has the sufficient background knowledge in their area to effectively argue points, make plans, offer theories and succeed in their chosen area of specialty.
I guess a small part of that is memorising facts to the extent that you have to know what has been said and done in a discipline in order to move forward. We can't all discover everything from scratch. But I think that is the unimportant bit. Its like when you learn how to drive - you need to memorise all the basic rules and movements before you can go anywhere exciting... Or you will fail badly or die at worst.
So I think while Dan has a valid point, and many institutions do need to evolve the way that they teach their subjects and treat their students, the value of higher education is not entirely diminished.
Of course I'm biased... I have a Bachelor of Arts, and a First Class Honours Degree of Bachelor of Arts in Anthropology, and I am about to start my Graduate Certificate in Criminology and Criminal Justice. If I didn't believe in the education system, then I would certainly not be going back for my third degree, and not piling my HECS debt so high that I don't want to think about it... So I guess I'm somewhat invested in the argument.
But as I've said, Dan makes good points. He is a big ideas person, and I can see how a traditional learning environment would not suit him at all. He is so creative, he could probably design his own educational system and series of degrees to suit him before most of us could decide on which direction to take our lives after school... But I just had to argue the point from another perspective.
In life news, my sister turned 21! It was a pretty fun triad of happenings. First I went to the parent's place for dinner on the eve of her birthday. We had lasagne and wine and cake - a good night in my books. Then we went out on the town on the Saturday after her birthday and had a good time. Naturally I didn't last very long into the night as I'm a nana... and Nannal, in the middle of having an asthma attack, crashed my car into a pole that night. ... but overall it was a good night. And then finally we had the family dinner on the 20th at my parents' place. We invited all of the aunts and uncles and grandparentals and cousins... but who turned up? Mum and Dad and Teeni, of course. And Me and Nannal. And then just my Aunty Ce and Uncle Roly with their eldest Megan and her boyfriend Pat. That's right, out of all my parents siblings, their partners and children (that is 2 aunts 2 uncles all with partners and most with kids) only one sibling could be bothered to come. One didn't even reply that they weren't coming. They just didn't come...
Oh well, all the more for us I say.
Oh and I started Weight Watchers with a friend from work. Its actually pretty great. The first week I lost 2.7 kilograms, which was very encouraging. I'm not sure about this week, since I went over my points quite significantly on the weekend... damn birthday dinners! But I'm sure it will be ok.
Right this entry is quite long enough!
Aufwiedersehen!
Posts
