What future WITH education?

In an ideal world, how do you think education should be organised? What priorities do you think it should reflect? and who should be responsible for ensuring that it is of a good quality? Is there anything from the padlet wall that has informed your position? Your entry should be a minimum of 200 words. In an ideal world, education should be at the top of the list.Quite simply as when,for example creating the best retirment plans for the elderly will be to out benefit, it should be clear that today´s investment will show its effects in the future. Very much like the tamarind. Perhaps then, if the issue is that governments are too concerned with a "short-term" strategy, maybe the plans themselves should be set in motion and governed by other entities, independent ones that are there once those that administer governments are gone. Maybe this is the way to organise it as far as the institutions are concerned. Once this is taken care of and the entity has more flexibility and speed for adaptability, can analize results and take rapid action, al else should follow suit.It does sound like some form of outsourcing and I do wonder if it would not be more effective this way.This entity would be held accountable by the government who will be giving them the funds to operate and observing and evaluating results. Common issues and most of it is complaints I´ve read in the forums aim at corrupt governments,poorly paid teachers, lack of proper design and efficiency of study plans, it seems all but Finland has a decent and effective system. I believe the issues are being observed from a perspective of what education should be like and not what kind of world we want to make with it. We observe that the world is moving faster and faster but we take it as it is instead of creating the world we truly need, one without poor and hungry, one of equality, of peace and harmony.

Education,lifelong learning,social classes

How has your experience of school shaped you as a learner, and as an adult? There was a really sharp contrast between the schooling I received in South Africa and in Argentina. Needless to say, in South Africa in the 70's we were part of apartheidt so there was a clear education of the social classes or basically a social education which upheld a system in place.That having been said, it shaped the way I though for a long time to come.Argentina,with all its pitfalls,was not a racist country and so what ideas I had if any, in that respect faded away, what did stick with me for long was more than an idea, but fear. Fear was instilled in me as we were educated "under threat of",as a consequence I abhor teaching my students under threat and despise situations where I cannot get them to respond otherwise.That fear persisted with me until a couple of years back,after therapy and coaching. I cannot precisely recall how primary shaped me as a learner, I do remember having acquired order and pragmatism a lot of which were lost in secondary, (funnilly enough!) but it did give me a lot more creative freedom. As far as social classes and schooling in Argentina, the public schooling system in many parts of the country, was and still is today, concerned about keeping kids in schools and out of streets, and getting them to have breakfast and lunch. Socially, shcooling was much more intersperesed.There were kids from the lower classes, middle low, plain middle class and middle to upper classes al attending the same school, though oddly enough,I recall that many of the richer kids were somehow put together in the same course too. I do not think that we learnt any different learners but have to agree some learnt faster than others depending on social class.There were no private schools in my city back then, no uniforms or the kind. We did have, the same as in South Africa, technical or commercial schools and that was about it at the time.Being schooled and nothing fancy In what ways do you think your own schooling could have been improved, and what priorities do you think are the most important for schools today? Could it be said that we were taught for a change of the world?Hardly. In both countries we were part of a system and could see no further beyond it, specially between ages 7 and 14, later on at 16 or 18 we saw what was happening around us but were not involved with current issues the way they are today,much more informed. I like this concept on Lifelong learning; The idea of lifelong education was first fully articulated in this century by Basil Yeaxlee (1929). He along with Eduard Lindeman (1926) provided an intellectual basis for a comprehensive understanding of education as a continuing aspect of everyday life. I did appreciate the fact that my primary school had carpintery, photography,cooking class and some other subjects that I did not even have in secondary which prepared for life,so in a way,it was topsy turvy, when I was about to leave for the "real world" I was not getting ready in high school. Neither was I aware of the concept of lifelong learning, I thought it was University next and then life. Is it good for a teenager to know of it? Maybe not at that time but I was not taught about it and my teachers in University did not mention it as a concept per se.It would have been good for me to know about it at the time. . What priorities do you think are the most important for schools today? I do not think that any of the 3 schools I went to had a vision that kids would ultimately be the creators of a new world which is what should have been done back then. To be fair, I cannot know if that was the case, maybe they did and this world is the result.I believe that ultimately schools should prepare us for the real world, develop emotional intelligence at all social levels, but not to prepare us for what´s to come but to mould it,to change it for what we really need, considerate to the environment and to other human beings.Ultimately get an education that does that and all else will follow suit.

From the Greeks to the present

I believe that the analysis of education and pedagogy stems from a single root, it has been looked at through one particular lens, for eons. Most of our western world´s takes on education stem from the metaphysics,the classic greek phylosophers and their conceptions which forged belief systems ,deeply rooted systems that still stand to this day. We have observed and read and analysed education from a perspective that is common ground to us all in the western world. I wonder what information we have on education prior to Communism or even during,why not?- in China or Asia or other forms of education in the ancient worlds of Latin America? Why not amalyze them? We keep going back to the same sources for most everything, the Greeks. And we study people who have studied them in turn. That´s why I most enjoyed these last series of videos with professor Moore as I enjoyed his take, one where Emotional Intelligence is mentioned and considered, where we accept that we are flawed individuals who make mistakes and we are, as individuals, a work in progress, one where there is no longer a stigma with making mistakes and the student is considered a human being. Also,I found particularly useful and I agreed with the point of view of Eisner or Mcintyre for example on teaching being an art, being able to adapt and improvise to get through to the student, is truly an art. I wonder then, if ,to get good teachers, the arts should not be as important as other subjects in school curriculums as Prof. Ken Robinson states? I remember having a good teacher when I returned from South Africa to Argentina and having had mostly bad teachers too, around that time. In South Africa I was bullied by both students and teachers; most teacher lacked empathy and in a system that enforced physcal punishment, and as a sensitive child who had migrated,I was made to suffer as my needs, I recall, were overlooked. I was made to swim without being havinf been actually being properly taught to swim for instance (I learnt at age 40), so I had plenty of bad teachers if in fact, a teacher should adapt to his student,observe his/her needs, be empathic and the like. Another bad teacher here in Argentina just was more of the same; I remember her because she could not understand how I had no idea of Argentine history and it´s political figures. When I finally spoke up,I was changed to the afternoon shift where my new teacher was comforting,created the right environment for me to learn, was considerate and understanding, and that, though I had plenty of reasons to be sad at this move back to a strange and unstable country, was enough for me. That for me, at least at the time, was a good teacher , she helped me to adapt One thing which we have yet not studied in this course is education in a world that is changing faster than we can adapt to it. What role for education and educators then? To prepare the world or to prepare for it? We have prepared for it,while we have changed it so much that we have to prepare in order to fix it up again and education systems seem to still be working around the idea of preparing for the world and not so much in making it a better place. So, here I would agree with Freire and his take on Pedagogy of the Oppressed. “Education either functions as an instrument which is used to facilitate integration of the younger generation into the logic of the present system and bring about conformity or it becomes the practice of freedom, the means by which men and women deal critically and creatively with reality and discover how to participate in the transformation of their world.” This still holds very true today. Educator Politicians who draw up Educational syllabuses and systems will keep us in the same loop. We are-ecologically and with other threats such as A.I.- at a time in the world were we cannot afford this luxury. Although I believe that we could learn more easily by letting go of the "classics" and their lens through we which we have observed the world, I do agree with the initial idea of a pedagogue being someone who accompanied and prepared for life, I believe it is still valuable today, kids feel really lonely and isolated adn we don´t seem to be using the right tools to help. A good teacher must therefore prepare for life but for the life to come, a life which we will create for each other. How to do it? By teaching firstly what it is like to live as a community, in harmony,addressing each others needs. As professor Moore so aptly put it, there is Education "for the poor" but "why should there be poor in the first place"?

Standardized tests,cultural issues and opportunities

• I was made to take computerized tests in primary school,with general knowledge evaluations for which I performed on an average of 7 points. I was evaluated and judged by my teachers as above average but not superb, that If I just put my back into it though,I would probably excell.I was also evaluated in sports at which I improved over the years, I was given the opportunity and did very well, reaching the provincial trials. I was not asked or evaluated on my intrapersonal skills,that I remember,It was more of a personal quest. Later, having gone from an anglo saxon educational system and culture, moving to the Argentine system proved to be a tough challenge. Opportunities were different on account of a difference in national education budgets and a different cultural perception and approach to education. There were no standardized tests that I recall, just the regular testing for each subject. The only standardized test I took was for my English FCE evaluations I don´t recall space for much reflection either, this was done outside school though in other spaces but not on our learning or mistakes in learning for improvement. At the third level, initially we did not consider public university as an option on account of poor facilities and a compulsory 1 year general leveling course common to all 1st year entrees which we regarded as a waste of time. We opted to study by post with the University of Cape Town which proved nigh impossible as the postal service was very slow and telephone communications were difficult. As a result, the judgments people have made about me that have been affected by an assessment of my "intelligence" in this case it was not considering these kind of issues that affected my feedback and learning; teachers and the university were inflexible and I failed to qualify for the final test by 5 points, in short,context was not taken into account. Notwithstanding, I do believe myself to be a learner as I have learnt from all these different experiences. Being a human being is to undergo constant change and learn constantly. “No man ever steps in the same river twice, for it's not the same river and he's not the same man” Heraclitus

I believe that education should be adaptive to the culture of the nation, even specific area or region where it is to be delivered, adaptive to the individual and his/her environment as well as the needs of the time. It does happen for example in my country,Argentina, that education is sometimes purpose driven,given to children in agricultural villages or small towns, whereas in big cities, such as Buenos Aires, it tends to be more generic with some sort of major (2 or 3 to choose from). In both cases,however, as in many other parts of the country, there is a lack of focus on some sort of connection with one´s body for example, be it through dance or some sort of physical expression, other than gym classes. I agree with the belief that being connected with one´s being is essential for interaction with other human beings.As Sir Ken Robinson states, there are other subjects-such as dance or music- which are considered less relevant than others but that have nowadays been proven to be important for a person´s development. Many of the forms of learning mentioned are –in my opinion-useful and adaptive to this purpose and at the same time incomplete for it and a little outdated unless they can adapt to the current age. On the one hand ,for example, Behaviourism can help to change people´s attitudes, Humanism, on the other hand, seems appropriate for the inner quest that current philosophers state that is needed for a change in the world. Most of them, however, if not all, having being established with a train of thought in which the western world was founded, that of the Metaphysical Philosophers (Aristotle,Socrates and Plato) which has ultimately lead us to where we are in the world, fall under the same scope of vision. As a result, a change in our philosophical foundations would be needed in order to establish new forms of learning based on a different philosophical perspective based on the likes such as Heidegger ,Nitsche and Wittgenstein.