![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
(no subject)
May. 27th, 2007 11:02 amDon't have time to write an extended comment on ![[livejournal.com profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/external/lj-userinfo.gif)
sowa's post about selection as the main function of education. Just wanted to note that any organized environment comprising multiple types of destinations and multiple objects of different properties moving, in space and time, toward these destinations has to incorporate various selection procedures. This is true for all kinds of systems and processes, from evolution to parts manufacturing to presidential elections.
However, when we talk about education, it is important to understand that selection has to be transformative, and not degrade into a simple sorting routine performed by a disinterested bureaucratic machine. The issue here is not so much the existence of the selection process itself, but rather the balance of responsibility for individual's development that has to be shared between different players within the system. Obviously, an individual stands to lose the most if he or she does not devote sufficient efforts to self-transformation. Given that, the education system's service to the individual would be to provide adequate guidance and resources. Positioning selection as its main function tends to absolve teachers and administrators of their direct responsibility to educate. The problem is exacerbated by the fact that best university faculty is often recruited among best scientists, who are not necessarily best teaches.
sowa's post about selection as the main function of education. Just wanted to note that any organized environment comprising multiple types of destinations and multiple objects of different properties moving, in space and time, toward these destinations has to incorporate various selection procedures. This is true for all kinds of systems and processes, from evolution to parts manufacturing to presidential elections. However, when we talk about education, it is important to understand that selection has to be transformative, and not degrade into a simple sorting routine performed by a disinterested bureaucratic machine. The issue here is not so much the existence of the selection process itself, but rather the balance of responsibility for individual's development that has to be shared between different players within the system. Obviously, an individual stands to lose the most if he or she does not devote sufficient efforts to self-transformation. Given that, the education system's service to the individual would be to provide adequate guidance and resources. Positioning selection as its main function tends to absolve teachers and administrators of their direct responsibility to educate. The problem is exacerbated by the fact that best university faculty is often recruited among best scientists, who are not necessarily best teaches.
