After talking about simplicity this week in class, it seems that our society does not embrace anything remotely close to simplicity in our education system. As a junior, I am very interested in "the college search" and finding a school that suits me. I have found that there are so many schools! And getting into certain schools is increadibly difficult. So many schools nowadays require more than hard work and good grades, but good ACT or SAT scores, SAT II scores, teacher recommendations, unique essays and much more. This process is overwhelming.
When creating the typical day at New Trier in class last week, we defined that our person's (Talyor's) goal was to get into a "good college." This goal is much easier said than done. There are so many colleges! And sometimes it's not always fair. Maybe you didn't get in to Stanford because they needed a trombone player. This process, to me, goes against HDT's philosophy and desire for simplicity. Our educations system is so complicated! Is there really even a difference in going to Harvard or going to Illinois? Well, in our society a degree from Harvard will help you get a "good job," but isn't the education at Illinois still the same? Don't they have the same classes and books? So then why is our society divided into "good schools" and "bad schools" and why is it so hard to get into the "perfect school?" I guess it comes down to ambition and determination. If Taylor is determined enough to go to a certain school, (s)he will probably get in. So why not a simpler system? Would it be better if all students received the same education? What if all students went to the same school? Some people might see this as equality, others as communism, but in my opinion it would make the process of getting into college a lot simpler. The reason I would not be in favor of it is because finding your "perfect" college is fun. What do you think?
6 comments:
I think that if we all recieved the same education and went to the same schools etc, there would be no reason for anyone to push themselves and; therefore, we would never see people challenge themselves and reach great heights. Most likely, we would not find any new cures to diseases, or make any more "progress". In my opinion, intrinsic motivation is one of the greatest things that the human being is capable of and without the need for it, humanity itself, would (theoretically) desiccate. I also find the college process fun partly becuase I have worked hard to get to the point of the "college search" process and now I get to see the hard work really pay off in my applications and admitances. If I was getting the same education as everyone else, this would have little importance to me or anyone else, for that matter.
I can see where both you, David, and Heidi are coming from, however, I think that we would not lose any motivation if everyone recieved the same education. I believe that if everyone received the same education, it would be up to each idividual how hard they would work. Some students would just work harder than others and therefore, learn more. I think that there would be MORE intrinsic motivation because there would not be the extrinsic motivation of competing against your peers for admission to a certain college. I think it would be great if we were able to simplify the education process and strip it down to the intrinsic motivation of each student. It would be up to them to determine how they want their life to play out.
What makes places like Harvard and Yale "good schools" is both their teachers and their exclusivity. Their rejection rate is so high, that people say to themselves: "Wow, if Bob or Taylor didn't get in there, then that means that if I get in there, I will be smarter and better off!" Not to say that it is just these two factors that define a "good school". There is a flaw in the system of choosing colleges, yet I feel this is more of the student's fault then the college's. If people realized that maybe they aren't cut out for Stanford, there would be less of a hunt for " THE perfect school", and more of the hunt for "MY perfect school". By saying this, I am also saying that there SHOULD be a difference in schools. Not all people should be given the same education. I know this is a harsh statement, but think about it. What will a C- NT student get with a F from Harvard? He should pay attention to his own personal needs rather then listening to outside factors. If that means that he will have to go to a college with a less-known name, so what? He will receive the education he has EARNED with a C- at NT.
Nice post David!
I believe that while everyone should be provided good education, not all education should be equal. I believe competition in society, such as in the case of getting into college, is crucial to how our society is structured. Competition is what drives our economic system and what drives the world economy. While I believer there should be a limit on what is a minimum "good" education, there should not be an upper limit on how good an education can be.
I feel that it is important to create a sense of competition within schooling so kids will push themselves. If we over simplified things it would not sufficiently prepare the youth for the work world, and would just hurt us in the end. I do agree that the days as a student are sometimes grueling and repetitive, everyday I feel I learn essential things that will carry on with me to college and throughout my life. so I feel that this complicated lifestyle is providing the lessons necessary for the future, and this creates a very competitive and effective generation for the future.
Great discussion! Here's an issue I always find intriguing: competition and a challenge can frequently be a key part of a successful learning environment, but how do we ensure that a quality education is a right and not a privilege? If not all learning environments are equal, should they be? Isn't education (a "good" one) a right in the U.S.A.?
Post a Comment