Education is what remains when you have forgotten everything

“Education is what remains when you have forgotten everything”person-optical-illusions-018

What do you perceive?

Perceptions on the world are dependent on how we process the information which enters through one’s senses. The analysis of this information is dependent on a predetermined subconscious response. We are not aware of how we are perceiving a scenario because this analysis is ingrained, intrenched and programmed through systematic conditioning to the world around us. Yet, this conflicts with our perspective of ourselves. It conflicts because we believe that all decisions are independent. We are aware that our conscious feels transient, or not real and it doesn’t feel as if “someone else” can influence it, because of this trait. So, if we are unaware about how we perceive the objective is it possible to ‘truly’ perceive the objective?

To truly perceive the objective suggests that every observer will be able to view the subject and remove the same inference. Therefore a person has to be told how to think, leading them to build the same conclusion as someone else. For example, didactic education means that information is pre-digested and regurgitated to students, removing true conscious engagement and only enables thinking by the means of someone else. Yet, this isn’t always the case. Art shows a physical expression of a perspective, but observers take a variety of inferences. These inferences are influenced by historical and societal experiences that influence how they perceive the objective. Therefore, our perspectives on the world are based on the experiences in our life to date. But isn’t this a false dichotomy? The very nature of development results from predetermined thinking, so thought can never be truly authentic.

It’s at this moment of realising this paradox that true conscious thinkers are able to influence how a society cultivates thinking within itself. If how we think is based on prior experiences, then are experiences should be free from the thoughts and influences of others. Therefore, we should be provided with opportunities to build our own understanding of the world, by solving our own problems, investigating our own questions and developing our own method of understanding the information that we are processing. But, there are limits to this. We cannot freely learn to walk, talk and operate in society without guidance. Therefore, during our development a balance must be struck between opportunities for free thought and guidance when learning basic grammar, we must be able to interpret the grammar through which we require to transform the world. So, what is required from education?

Education should be an environment where individuals are encourage to critically evaluate, solve problems and bring meaning to their own questions about the world and the reality which surrounds them. Assessments and exams should be a thing of the past, they are a means to quantify attainment they do not provide an opportunity to develop as an individual. Will we be able to assess students? Not quantitatively. Will we be able to quantify what our students look like? Probably not. We should see education as the qualitative development of individuals who will be able transform the world around. Through the freedom of their own thoughts students will be empowered, independent and leaders of their own world.

Advertisements

Cultural Captial in Education – Incorporation into policy

“You can lead a horse to water, but you can’t make it drink.” I want my horse to drink to survive, but I can not force the horse to drink water. This is true in education, a teacher can establish a learning environment for a pupil to be successful, but can not force success into a pupil. There must be a want or desire to do so. So how do we develop desire?

The Problem

Policy makers only focus on observing feedback which shows the strongest or clearest correlation which implies causation. (“Rule 1 of stats club never talk about stats club. Rule 1 of stats club, correlation doesn’t imply causation”). For example, greater attendance results in better attainment. True, but as the Young Foundation (2012) identifies this does not identify the true value added. True values are the personal attributes a student develops to increase their attainment, perseverance, confidence or a want for success. Rarely have I heard of someone not wanting success and being successful, we all have a degree of consciousness. If high academic attainment links to high performance, and this to personal attributes, where in policy are we planning to develop this?

Simple answer, not at all.

Developing soft skills (Non-cognitive skills)

It is these skills that define who we are and how we behave and the futures we make for ourselves. The Young Foundation (2012), EPI (2014) and FEA (2015) all support the idea that the developing non-cognitive skills is crucial to underpin academic and life success.

Outcome Model example:

  • The outcome model links the benefits of developing an individual’s non-cognitive skills (intrinsic and extrinsic) with benefits for both them and society. (This seems like a win-win situations, there are limitations).
    • Individual achievements of behaviours – Want to develop key skills to build their own success.
    • Social and emotional capabilities – Core skills that allows the person to develop their own desires.
    • Inter-personal relationships – Good parents and community contributes.
    • Benefits to society – Strong independent individuals who are not reliant on the state to support their success.

So, if there is clear evidence what is being done to introduce these concepts into educational policy?

The difficulty is identifying a clear correlation between good non-cognitive skills and academic and life success. West (2014) published a conflicted study that shows no linked between the non-cognitive skills and academic performance. Yet, the Young Foundation (2012) has clear evidence to identify a positive relationship between student’s emotional well being and socio-economic background. Policy decisions based on qualitative information is not reassuring. But, after reading reams of threads and literature there is a body evidence all pointing in the same direction that can not be ignored.

Recommendations for policy

The future directions of policy need to make an active effort to collect data through longitudinal studies and develop tests to identify the non-cognitive development of an individual over time. Hold Ofsted (hopefully in the future a college of teachers) accountable for ensuring that schools have effective systems of developing non-cognitive skills within their pupils. By not doing anything, the power of a student to make their own decisions academically and later on in life will continually shift reliance and dependence on others for support. Establishing a link between non-cognitive skills and academic performance has never been more important in a developed society.

In the future all the horses will have the appropriate non-cognitive skills to see the importance of drinking. The same will be true for our education system, students who have a desire for success.

References

West (2014) – http://cepr.harvard.edu/cepr-resources/files/news-events/cepr-promise-paradox.pdf

Fair Education Alliance (2015) – http://www.faireducation.org.uk/report-card/

Economic Policy Institute (2014) – http://www.epi.org/publication/the-need-to-address-noncognitive-skills-in-the-education-policy-agenda/

The Young Foundation (2012) – https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/175476/Framework_of_Outcomes_for_Young_People.pdf

Cultural Capital in Education

Schools should be seen as centres for improving the academic and cultural capital of it students. To my knowledge there is no policy that currently exists to develop or support the cultural richness of our students. For example, a student who attends private school has a variety of cultural and academic experiences to engage in. Parents hold the school accountable because they want their child to have these experiences. My school is sponsored by a top University, this establishment also holds the school accountable because they too want students who have had a variety of experiences. Why are state schools not held accountable for cultural capital? It’s clear that top institutions want well rounded culturally rich students. But, those from low socio-economic backgrounds struggle to gain similar experiences due to financial or guidance limitations. What is the Government going to do to address this?

The definition of cultural capital is, “Cultural capital is the ideas and knowledge that people draw upon as they participate in social life. Everything from rules of etiquette to being able to speak and write effectively can be considered cultural capital.” (Crossman, 2010). This phrase considers the development of social and practical skills that allow a person to take part and function in society. In modern democracy an individual would need strong social capabilities to be successful. This means that part of one’s success in society is dependent on their social/cultural capital.

Cultural Capital categories:

  • Embodied – concious or passive inheritance of certain behaviours or skills. Skills influenced by the environment and life that an individual leads. For example, colloquial dialect. A modern society also expects basic life skills to be develop in these avenues as well, focusing for example.
  • Objectified – physical objects of science or art owned or appreciated by an individual. Only by those who have developed strong embodied understanding of history and art.
  • Institutionalised – recognition of culture. For example, institutions provide qualifications for individuals.

Societies responsibility for develop cultural capital in all individuals is important. Embodied education is the responsibility of parents and carers. Objectified and institutionalised education is the responsibility governments and community leaders. In middle class households parents and carers continually support the embodied development of their offspring. Parents from low socio-economic community struggle to find the time to support their child in a similar way. What is been done to support the development of embodied education in these individuals? What is being done to support the embodied development of parents who were also deprived?

Society has a responsibility to support all individuals enhance their cultural captial. Government policy linked to cultural capital in education is difficult to find. I found myself constantly being referred to cultural education (DfE, 2013). The report identified that cultural education was important. To support cultural education more funding to objectified, arts based charities has been increased. The kind of students who will take advantage of these opportunities are the mobilsed middle class. There is little evidence of supporting increased mobiltiy in all individuals. For example, how a pupil thinks, talks, problem solves, socialises, concentrates, believes, aspires, plans, prepares, organises, repairs a bike, plays chests or develops other non-profitable skills that, as we all know, are important but not supported.

For those indivdiuals from low-socio economic backgrounds more must be done to support their embodied cultural development. Liberate their ability to fairly operate in a social society. What are we doing to support these individual’s? To my knowledge, nothing! That is an injustice.

Crossman, 2010. http://sociology.about.com/od/C_Index/g/Cultural-Capital.htm

DfE, 2013. https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/226569/Cultural-Education.pdf