DP blog #6: Group Work on Education

Pinche aquí para ver el vídeo

Abstract: I always promised my professor to continue with my thesis of educating for a democratic society and oddly enough my group is focusing on Save the Children and Education. Martha Nussabaum and Amy Gutmann highlight the need for education and the crisis that is arising in education. This blog was developed through my research for my group in regards to education and the need for aid to provide an education that installs a moral and civic foundation.

Democratic Education to Ensure a Future Democratic State

The golden rule: do onto others as they shall do onto you. This moral foundation promotes humanitarian equality. It bolsters the idea that we are all connected and all working towards a common well-being. My personal education has always integrated the learning of academics as well as encompassed morality and civics. It is these principles that stand as the goals for a democratic education. Noah Webster asserts “Education in a great measure, forms the moral characters of men [and women], and morals are the basis of government,”(Webster,64). Individuals should learn to develop autonomous reasoning and critical thinking on the principles of equality of rights and privileges, the importance of knowledge, and the nature of authority that will lead individuals to lead a life that serves the greater good of society. Development and Progress to me means the ability to move forward as well as be willing to go backwards so you can eventually take two steps forward. I believe like food, water and shelter, education should be provided for all. “Education is not just for citizenship. It prepares people for employment, and, importantly, for meaningful lives,”( Nussbaum, 9). The concept of education to me in grade school was always about achieving life goals, life goals that would ensure economic comfort. I never considered the importance of a democratic education until I was exposed to past and current education philosophies in education. I was not aware of the grave discrepancies between education systems until grad school, here at EOI. Development and perspective class has taught me that aid programs and non profits usually put Band-Aids on broken bones. Development and aid needs to work towards long-term solutions and the foundation is education. It is my conclusion that education will give people the skills to move forward in their life this is illustrated by the known saying: give a man a fish he eats for a day, teach him how to fish, he eats for life.

Nussbaum points out that the old education system of facts needs to be expanded. “A healthy democratic society needs independent minded and creative individuals.” To ensure the bounty of democratic nation, educators should cultivate and encourage independent, democratic thought processes within students. Within the safety of a classroom, educators may provide an informative foundation for democracy. When students come to understand their rights and the moral principles set forth by our fore fathers or religious dogma, it will ensure loyalty to our future democratic state. Democratic citizens are those who are able to govern their own lives and share in the governing of their larger society. In order to fully educate a student to be autonomous and committed to the larger society educators must cultivate an understanding and commitment to the morality and civics that stand as the foundation for our democracy.

Gutmann asserts in her introduction to Democratic Education that, “Democratic education supplies the foundations upon which a democratic society can secure the civil and political freedoms of its adults citizens without placing their welfare or its very survival at risk,” (289) Gutmann should be applauded in her critical analysis of what it means to be educated for democracy and why it is necessary to do so. Gutmann continues to illustrate how various social realms and the discord among educational policy makers and critics causes the demise of a democratic education. Furthermore, the lack of education impedes “development.” Gutmann is concerned with the failure in our educational policies in America and in the world and seeks to bring greater awareness and understanding to how very important it is to educate our youth for democracy.

Gutmann’s thesis is that education is the foundation for democracy. It is necessary to educate our youth for a democracy to ensure a future democratic state. Gutmann proposes to answer “Why rely on a theory to decide exercise authority over education? Second; Why a democratic theory? Finally: Why focus on education?”(3). The author’s purpose is to assert a common definition for what it means to be educated for a democracy. She intends to unite controversial educational theory under the common goal of educating for a democracy for the good of the society. Gutmann successfully presents varying theories and assertions on the purposes of education and whose responsibility it is to educate our youth. Gutmann’s tone and commitment to a democratic society is inspiring. Gutmann asserts that “Democratic education is best viewed as a shared trust, of parents, citizens, teachers, and public officials, the precise terms of which are to be democratically decided within the bounds of the principles of nondiscrimination and nonrepression,” (288) However, due to discrimination and repression and unequal educational opportunities, the entire network of education must be reevaluated. There needs to be more responsibility put into the hands of the educators. A universal notion of education needs to be accepted and applied without hesitation. Nussabaum throughout Not for Profit, catalogues the various ways in which to educate yet insist as Gutmann does that moral education is essential and complementary to traditional facts. Educators that unite under the principle of democracy will advocate for civics and moral in addition to the required academia. Educators must formulate and articulate a clear conception of what it means to have a democratic education. Of course it is important to read and write but differences in cultures requires different education approaches but critical reasoning is needed across the board. With a unified perception and understanding and a commitment to the goals of a democratic education, policy makers may work towards the betterment of our current state. Gutmann gives to much weight to the individual; I am not advocating for removing free choice but stating that a stronger unified educational policy that puts more responsibility in the hands of the authorities then the individual could better serve our society. This should be a globalized concept and approached globally.

Gutmann insist that there must stand a more unified conception and understanding of our educational purposes. Gutmann contributes substantially to education by clearing defining that, “The primary aim of a democratic theory of education…considers ways of resolving those problems that are compatible with a commitment to democratic values,” (11). However, as our world continues to ignore core problems in the dynamics of educational policies this will continue to degrade in morality and civics and ultimately cause the disablement of democracy in nations. Gutmann cites in the introduction of her book Democratic Education, the National Commission on Excellence in Education. The National Commission asserts that education “goes well beyond matters such as industry and commerce..(to include) the intellectual, moral, and spiritual strengths of our people which knit together the very fabric of our society,” (4). By providing a democratic education for our children it will ensure the future of a democratic state. Children must understand their rights and the principles of their country. Students should be educated for the greater good so they will ensure loyalty and commitment to the political processes of democracy.

Gutmann believes education and morality are one in the same. “Education,” in a great measure, forms the moral character of citizens, and moral character along with laws and institutions form the basis of democratic government,”(49). Amy Gutmann continues to assert the notion that children are to come to reason under strict disciple. “The earliest education of children is not and cannot be precept or reasoning; it must be by discipline and example,”(50). However, I would assert that children must be given a chance to make the mistake between right and wrong. Amy Gutmann states that “..children will eventually need the capacity for rational deliberation to make hard choices in situations where habits and authorities do not supply clear or consistent guidance,” (51). I think that children from an early age are capable of understanding the good and the bad, if the child is given an adequate foundation for morality and civics, then children will decipher between right and wrong almost immediately. Gutmann puts too much responsibility on the family in her assertion as to how one is to be morally educated. I would question the guidance and moral of parents today and argue that other social institutions have more influence over children then their parents. As the family dynamic is being broken down around the world, it is an ideal to believe that, “As children move outside their original families, their character and their skills are shaped by the example of those whom they love and respect and by the rules and regulating associations to which they belong,” (50), it is an ideal because not everyone is raised in a loving and committed network. In my own country, I do not believe that children are uniformly across America are granted the same moral and civic support from their parents; in fact I fear the exact opposite. The current institution of family in America does not represent what it once was; the diminishing traditional nuclear family is leaving our youth without a proper moral and civic instruction. Gutmann is more accurate to state that “Children must learn not just to behave in accordance with authority if they are to live up to the democratic ideal of sharing political sovereignty as citizens,”(51). A stronger educational institution unoccupied by parental discretion will lead to a more enlightened individual.

Nussbaum’s view about the fundamental importance of the humanities, and worry about its neglect and erosion in contemporary society, I too fear the control of the liberal-left elite education committed to a particular ideological agenda that must be reworked and understand a new global paradigm for a greater democratic community. Democracy as a political ideal, which Guttmann defines as “ a society whose adult members are, and continue to be, equipped by their education and authorized by political structures to share in the ruling,” (Gutmann xi). To ensure the bounty of democratic nation, educators should cultivate and encourage independent, democratic thought processes within students. Within the safety of a classroom, educators may provide an informative foundation for democracy. Educators have the ability to excite children to learn. Learning should not end when children leave the door, the school should entice a thirst for learning in students and encourage students to seek out knowledge. Student’s who seek out the unknown must be equipped with a democratic notion so that they may learn how to navigate their interest and desires. When students come to understand their rights set forth by our fore fathers, it will ensure loyalty to our future democratic state. It is important to realize that educating for democracy directly entails educating moral and civics. I reject Gutmann’s assertion that “Moral education in a democracy is best viewed as a shared trust of the family and the polity, mutually beneficial to everyone who appreciates the values of both family life and democratic citizenship.” (54) I do not believe that for an individual has to come from a strong supportive family in order to be morally conscious. Again, Gutmann places to much value on family and not enough on the betterment of “schools that help develop the cooperative moral sentiments-empathy, trust, benevolence, and fairness-contribute a great deal to democratic education,”(61) I here support Nussabaum assertion for the need for humanities and non profits in education and education for a democratic society. Moral Character developed through reason and habit may be fostered in the educational setting that will enable children to grow into adults that recognize injustice and seek out the good life for all. I think the best way in order to teach a moral education is to lead by example and not coercion, by doing so you allow the “..good of children [to] include not just freedom of choice but also identification with and participation in the good of their family and the politics of their society,” (43). Nussabaum proposes the idea that you are as strong as the weakest link so therefore education needs to be equally provided for all. I find Gutmann more agreeable when she bolsters morality of association instead of morality of authority. I believe children that learn to change their actions and habits out of their recognition of the good and the concern for fairness is longer lasting then installing morality simply out of coercion. Good habits and principles are more easily applicable to children rather then adults, however you must allow children to exercise their natural rights and their freedom of choice so that may independently commit themselves to the good through trial and error. In no way do I believe a child’s natural rights be limited or repressed in order to achieve a democratic education.

The question of how to distribute primary education causes the greatest controversy. This is where Nussbaum points out the failure of nations to provide a global education and the need for humanities in education. Gutmann presents three common theories as to how to distribute primary education maximization, equalization and meritocracy. Maximazation asserts to distribute education to maximize students life chances. “Maximization supports the fundamental liberal values of free choice and neutrality among different ways of life, and distributes the chance to benefit from these values as equally as possible among all citizens, “(236). Equalization asserts to use resources to bring the least advantaged child on par with the most advantaged child. This is the most humanitarian philosophy. Meritocracy is the philosophy that suggest distributing resources based on the child’s demonstrated natural ability. All three philosophies carry their credibility along with their faults. No one solution would satisfy all. I do believe equalization to be the best ideal however, the way our country funds education needs to be completed overhauled so that all students are provided with the necessary education to enable them to obtain whatever concept of the good life they seek. This is where the western traditional education fails and a new globalized paradigm is needed.

Gutmann finds faults in all three philosophies. She states that maximization forces a “moral ransom,” (133), citizens are forced to forgo other public entities in order to maximize education. Public parks, museums and other social goods offer a great deal for the students and public alike. Citizens should not be deprived of these public facilities that contribute to the good life. Meritocracy seems to be the most fallible of all three philosophies. Meritocracy is supported by the notion to distribute “educational resources, they argue, would give educationally gifted children what they deserve and also give society what it needs; a greater human capital to increase social productivity,” (154). Meritocracy, I would argue will only deepen the trench between the elite and the poor. Furthermore, Meritocracy seems to support capitalism and work for the production of wealth. The aims of education should go beyond the aims of providing economic opportunities for students and should create citizens that are more morally and civic driven. This will drive the concept of sustainable development. We need to educate for the future without compromising our future generations. Meritocracy promotes indirectly individuality that has no concern for the other. Meritocracy does claim that it will better the society by educating student that have demonstrated the most natural ability and willingness to learn, yet it does not assert the responsibility of the individual to the whole society. In America, one of the wealthiest of nations, yet as I pointed out in my previous blogs the wealth is controlled by a small percentage, in recent protest on Wallstreet we say the top 1%. Meritocracy will only narrow these statistics further. Education should not aim for the production of wealth, our country should be striving for the betterment of the whole society. As I have concluded before wealth in relation to GDP fails to account for the environment and sustainability. Meritocracy provides an answer to the individual with the assumption that the individual will turn around and benefit the whole. Meritocracy creates too much competition and turns away from the ideals of a democratic education.

Equalization is an ideal that will not be socially sufficient according to Gutmann. Gutmann asks the question, in a tone of doubt, “Must we then create an educational system that eliminates all differences among children’s educational attainment?” I believe this answer to be yes, educational opportunities and resources should be equally distributed. Equalization, “requires the state to supplement and or redistribute tax revenues so that poor districts receive as many dollars per child as do rich districts for the same tax effort (measured by the rate at which districts are willing to tax their property)”(140). Educational resources in America should not be based on property taxes, which inevitably creates inequalities in education. The current educational system of America is driving the gap between the wealthy and the poor further and further apart. The education deviations between zip code to zip code, “can be eliminated only by eradicating the different intellectual, cultural, and emotional dispositions and attachments of children,” (133). The educational foundations of America are in no way equal. Our education is highly undemocratic, as it does not provide for all. Furthermore the rest of the world is even worse off, in developing countries the political power is concerned with making a mark on the map as oppose to really building their country up.

Maximizing resources for educational equality will only better serve for the betterment of other social goods. “Given how much federal, state, and local governments now spend on defense, criminal justice, social security, and other welfare goods, it is implausible to claim that if we provide an adequate education for every child, we would have no resources to spend on improving education above the threshold,” (138) If we are to provide a better democratic education to all then we wouldn’t have to spend as much money on other social programs that result from citizen’s inadequate education. However, as Nussabuam points out non profits are needed to meet the gap in funds for education programs. If children are educated to be financially literate, then the poor will not have to remain in their invisible dismal caste system. Educating all children equally will provide children to move freely up the social latter. The most successful tool for navigating oneself in political processes is with a strong democratic education. In my country it is absolutely wrong that the federal government’s collected resource from our federal taxes only contributes 8% of their means to education. It makes education a local responsibility and education is not something that should be negotiated from school district to school district. America should provide and equal education to all its children. Congress continues to spend their resources without the consent of the public. The government currently spends 31% of it’s collected revenue on current military operations, not to mention 21% spent on past military excursions. Yet, 90% of America disagrees with America’s involvement in the War that seems to be ongoing despite declaration from Obama that it is over. Democracy in this country is crippling and the only way to ensure its survival is to completely overhaul the education system.

Democratic ideal is fading in our country. America must embrace a democratic education. A society that is deprived of a democratic education has a weak civic and political execution. “Democracy thus depends on a democratic education for its full moral strength,”(289). The authority of parents and free choice in the educational institutions are limiting its improvement. The federal government needs to take much more responsibility for providing a democratic education equally to all. Gutmann’s critical analysis of what it means to be educated for democracy, forces the reader to understand the importance of a democratic education and how America’s educational funding is deeply rooted inequalities, suppression and discrimination. This discrimination is seen all over the world and wears different mask from country to country. Gutmann should be commended for it’s offering of a wide variety of critics and critical analyzing the positive and negative attributes of varying philosophies. Gutmann eloquently portrays the necessity for a democratic education to ensure the reproduction (not replication) of our future democratic society. 
 
Nussabaum states “As we tell stories about the lives of others, we learn how to imagine what another creature might feel in response to various events. At the same time, we identify with the other creature and learn something about ourselves.” 
 
 We need education for development we cannot move forward and create a sustainable world without providing education. The key and foundation for education should be a moral education that will create democratic moral citizens.

Work Cited
Gutmann, Amy. “Democracy and Democratic Education.” Philosophy of Education.
Malden, MA: Blackwell, 2007. 159-166.
Gutmann, Amy. “Interpreting Equal Educational Oppurtunity.” Philosophy of Education.
Malden, MA: Blackwell, 2007. 236-243.
Gutmann, Amy. Democratic Education. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton UP, 1987. 3-288.
Nussbaum, Martha Craven. Not for Profit: Why Democracy Needs the Humanities. Princeton: Princeton UP, 2010. Print.

Comments Off on DP blog #6: Group Work on Education / 09 Jan 2012 por Lauren Musiello
IMSD /

Comentarios cerrados.