Three talking points:
1. “Changing education would lead to changes in other aspects of our society as well.”
I started thinking about other possible areas system changes would impact. We’ve already seen a reduction in physical text books due to technology. What if classes were conducted online? School uniform, food distributing, bus, and paper supply companies would lose business. Technology companies and internet service providers would benefit.
2. Previously, I never thought about how our education system began. I found it interesting to learn that the United States implemented the Prussian system and later resulted in our public school system.
3. The notion that testing is a process of exclusion suggests that in addition to measuring how well a student has learned, they also determine who belongs and who doesn’t.
Connections:
The education system continues with minor changes over time because according to Khan, it is “what we’ve always done”. Relating this to privilege, testing students and rewarding them based on their results gives an unfair advantage to some while others suffer. For example, students who are privileged may have access to tutors, test prep classes, parents at home who are there to help, or other resources that help them get ahead. Those without access to such benefits may get left behind.
Argument Statement:
Khan argues that the our current education system is outdated and impedes curiosity, imagination, and creativity. It remains slow to evolve due to traditional beliefs and ideas. Testing is not an accurate indicator of intelligence or understanding. It can deprive some students of reaching their full potential by filtering them out. The system needs to change in order for students to achieve success.
Links:
History of Public Education in the U.S.
https://www.ebsco.com/research-starters/history/history-public-education-us
U.S. Education Timeline
https://www.future-ed.org/u-s-education-timeline/
Your first talking point really struck me. I think viewing "who benefits" from this in almost every situation gives a lot away about why our system is set up in the way it is. And hint hint: the "who benefits" is almost never the people who are already disadvantaged/ on a lower step of the equity ladder. The idea about online education reminded me a lot of my COVID education. I was a Sophomore in High School when COVID struck and we were all pushed online. I did online school ( as did the rest of my high school) the entire rest of the year Sophomore year and then a hybrid model for the majority of Junior year. It was difficult in that moment because it really felt like no one was benefitting. Not only was it difficult to make sure every family had a laptop to use and internet (which cost the school) but it was difficult for teachers to hold the interest of their students, it was difficult for students to continue to try to stay focused. The "hypothetical" that you proposed in your first talking point-- about online education-- stroke me so much because it happened to me :(
ReplyDeleteI agree with your point that testing often functions as a process of exclusion rather than simply a measure of learning. It makes me think about how many systems in our society have historically been designed to sort and separate people—deciding who belongs, who is “capable,” and who is not. Even as progress toward inclusion has been made, these systems often evolve in ways that continue to divide, beginning as early as elementary school through tracking, labeling, and testing. When students are categorized so early, it can shape not only their academic opportunities but also how they see themselves and their potential. It also raises the question of how we define success in the first place, because so much meaningful growth happens through lived experiences, relationships, and personal discovery outside of academic performance. Yet students are often taught—implicitly and explicitly—that their value is tied to productivity and achievement within the system. I often wonder what would happen if we taught young people the value of working and succeeding have a fruitful and enjoyable life over just making money and becoming part of the "machine".
ReplyDeleteI am also curious about the whole fundamental shift that this would require if we were to pull away from some of the traditional things that just "always were." DO you see this issue of benefits related to the other readings we have done? I see Johnson in here for sure. And SCWAAMP.
ReplyDelete