Education, a necessary element of social development?

[fromderinside]

I got in to a heated discussion with my granddaughter on whether education is being abused by profiteers in the distribution of it's three trillion dollar largess generated by modern societies for the under educated peoples of the world.

My view is humans are basically selfish thus have no basis for making education a moral demand upon those who can available to those who haven't got education built in to their societies.

As a counter, rather than arguing my granddaughter's view, I decided to provide an alternative view from my background as a foil for her case that there is a moral basis for making a social demand on those who have to provide equitably for those who haven't.

Genetics and Learning: How the Genes Influence Educational Attainment https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6635910/

The conclusion I draw is that, despite the relatively high genetic heritability shown in most brain processes associated with learning, educational practices are a key contributor to student development, allowing genetically based skills to be enhanced or alternatively diminished. Therefore one of the main goals of education in a changing an uncertain world should be to form adaptable and versatile people who can, and want to, make the most of their capabilities. Thus, knowledge derived from genetics and epigenetics, as well as from neuroscience, should be used to enhance education professionals’ understanding of the biological origins of differences in mental capabilities, thereby empowering them with the possibility to adopt more respectful and flexible educational practices to attain the goal mentioned above.

There are a lot of knots that need be worked out so I drop this turd into the gentle arms of this discussion group on social science.

Does mankind have an obligation to provide education to those with few resources? Granddaughter points out there is a three trillion dollar largess out there which is being badly administered in the way I would expect it to be administered, in self interest, rather than as should be as in accordance with moral demand.

Go.

 

[rousseau]

Up until recently most of our education was done in the household, teach kids skills to subsist, live, raise a family of their own. It's only in the past few hundred years that education systems came to exist, and that education was re-framed as some kind of emancipatory process raising us out of ignorance.

In my view the basic need is the original need: move people from infancy to requisite skills to survive in the society in which they're born. If someone has the capacity to learn a skill, but not the access to do so their may be a problem.

Granted, on some level we're talking about an issue of space. Schools have finite room: demand is high, supply is low. Can anything really be done about that? Probably something, but fundamentally we're looking at demographics.

 

[Politesse]

I see the social, where does the science part come in?

 

[rousseau]

I see the social, where does the science part come in?

Yea, technically it's morals and principles. I'm pretty much in agreement that social science doesn't or shouldn't answer ought questions.

Nice to see a thread that's not about American politics, though, although I'm not optimistic about the variety of opinions it will draw.

 

[fromderinside]

I see the social, where does the science part come in?

Try this

Genetics and Learning: How the Genes Influence Educational Attainment https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6635910/

So let me take another poke at the beehive. Granddaughter argued there is three trillion dollars available worldwide for improving education in education lacking and deficient countries.. Presume the three trillion comes from those countries where there is adequate education, say from places with 2 billion people. That leaves six billion people sharing the three trillion dollars available for six billion people. Or 1.5 billion people, presuming 1/4 being among those needing education.

Wow 2000 dollars available to educate people over say 6 years each or a bit over 300 dollars per person a year. Not much can be done with that even if it is strictly limited to educating, and not extended to making education a practical option given living is important too.

It's a pittance without fraud and graft, much less with normal double dealing and other manipulations on going for a piece of the charitable pie.

I don't even have to resort to morality here. What is available is insufficient to get the job done. So playing with what's left can't be much of a moral crime.

I'm hoping form more than a morality lesson here. Maybe we need to integrate our genetic proclivities and our genetic histories into whatever we do with whatever aspect of running civilization requires. I certainly don't want to rehash our history of religion led education and social justice work including regulating legal behavior.

Even an utopian approach would be better than that.

Can't we lift the bar a bit.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

So let me take another poke at the beehive. Granddaughter argued there is three trillion dollars available worldwide for improving education in education lacking and deficient countries.. Presume the three trillion comes from those countries where there is adequate education, say from places with 2 billion people. That leaves six billion people sharing the three trillion dollars available for six billion people. Or 1.5 billion people, presuming 1/4 being among those needing education.

Wow 2000 dollars available to educate people over say 6 years each or a bit over 300 dollars per person a year. Not much can be done with that even if it is strictly limited to educating, and not extended to making education a practical option given living is important too.

It's a pittance without fraud and graft, much less with normal double dealing and other manipulations on going for a piece of the charitable pie.

I don't even have to resort to morality here. What is available is insufficient to get the job done. So playing with what's left can't be much of a moral crime.

Actually, I think you could do an awful lot to help the world with education with that kind of budget: Make high quality "online" (fully downloadable) classes for just about every class up though a BA/BS degree. Obviously, some things can't be done through a screen, but most could be. Make multiple versions of every class using different teaching styles. I think we should do that anyway. We don't need a human in front of a group of students being a glorified VCR, teachers should be helping students, not simply addressing the classroom.

 

[fromderinside]

On the other hand some would argue the current pandemic is demonstrating positive effects of personal players in advancing education of our young while conversely showing the limitations of distance methods of learning.

Think about it. We readily acknowledge we are a social species. Language probably developed as the result of children learning how to make tools and stabilize social behaviors at the feet of elders.

When I look at teachers two qualities stand out, charisma and projecting interest in students. Selling the product in person is much better than selling it over distance medium. I live with two, probably three, outstanding teachers and a very good performer. Each has proven their quality over from 10 to to 60 years. All are still convinced and convincing when they get in front of young people.

So much for testimony. What is important is they are convinced of the value of what they do and how they do it. Those who are exposed to them elevate performance above those not exposed to them.