The Paradox of Elite Education on a Small Island (Part III)
Today some of us on Facebook were having a little discussion on how the Education minister on a small island was saying that one method of countering extremism (and hence terrorism) was to use students (presumably educated correctly) to counter extremist propaganda. That, of course, is what all states do in terms of national education. Small islands don't have a lien on that concept.
One person seemed to be asserting that you could teach people to comprehend, analyse and execute (presumably algorithms or procedures, not people) without using ideology or by imposing views through force or mandate. I don't think that assertion flies, because all forms of comprehension, analysis and execution contain intrinsic ideologies. One reason for reflective analysis is to know what those intrinsics are.
That said, it is obvious that if you are educating to produce elites, based on some concept of what 'elite' means to a small island, you must be providing different educational methods, modes, and/or materials. You can't produce an elite unless there is a quantitative or qualitative difference. If you prefer to just wait for things to float to the top, you must remember that both scum and cream will rise to the surface.
But once you couple the ideal of public education and equal rights of access to that education, you are just inviting people to develop the skills to game your selection process and turn themselves (or their descendants) into potential members of the elite. Then you may have selected not for highly-educated or qualitatively better people, but for those who can convince you that they are. You may get both scum and cream, and be unable to differentiate the two.
Why can't you differentiate the two? Because if the underlying ideology of your state is Machiavellian pragmatism, the people you think are cream might be people others think are scum. The two might really be two sides of the same silver pieces you have paid to Judas Iscariot.
See? There are perils in any undertaking, and none more so than when you move away from easily measured educational goals (e.g. ability to construct a mortise joint) and toward goals that are measured by what you can't really see (e.g. ability to appreciate the concept of political hegemony).
One person seemed to be asserting that you could teach people to comprehend, analyse and execute (presumably algorithms or procedures, not people) without using ideology or by imposing views through force or mandate. I don't think that assertion flies, because all forms of comprehension, analysis and execution contain intrinsic ideologies. One reason for reflective analysis is to know what those intrinsics are.
That said, it is obvious that if you are educating to produce elites, based on some concept of what 'elite' means to a small island, you must be providing different educational methods, modes, and/or materials. You can't produce an elite unless there is a quantitative or qualitative difference. If you prefer to just wait for things to float to the top, you must remember that both scum and cream will rise to the surface.
But once you couple the ideal of public education and equal rights of access to that education, you are just inviting people to develop the skills to game your selection process and turn themselves (or their descendants) into potential members of the elite. Then you may have selected not for highly-educated or qualitatively better people, but for those who can convince you that they are. You may get both scum and cream, and be unable to differentiate the two.
Why can't you differentiate the two? Because if the underlying ideology of your state is Machiavellian pragmatism, the people you think are cream might be people others think are scum. The two might really be two sides of the same silver pieces you have paid to Judas Iscariot.
See? There are perils in any undertaking, and none more so than when you move away from easily measured educational goals (e.g. ability to construct a mortise joint) and toward goals that are measured by what you can't really see (e.g. ability to appreciate the concept of political hegemony).
etched with acid at 4:59:00 pm
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home