Apparently an overhaul of primary education in this country proposes changing the curriculum so that learning is done in six 'themed areas'. History and Geography will be sucked up into 'Human, Social and Environmental Understanding'.
Pupils should have the "personal, social and emotional qualities essential to their health, well-being and life as a responsible citizen in the 21st Century". This is being paraphrased as 'lessons in happiness'. I tend to the view that it would be beneficial rather to teach children the skills which equip them to get good jobs after school and that will make them happy. But then I like Aldous Huxley's view on this, which I have quoted before: Happiness is not achieved by the conscious pursuit of happiness; it is generally the by-product of other activities.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/education/7770469.stm
I'd be interested to know how much money has been spent on this 'root and branch' review. I'd be interested to know if its authors really think that their recommendations will improve the life chances of the children who pass through the schools of the future.
And I'm very glad that at the end of this year my children will be finished at primary school, because I think it's an absolute pig's ear of a proposal. When did reorganising a curriculum and renaming subjects result in an improvement of education? No, this is another example of change for change's sake, and addressing symptoms rather than looking at causes so that things appear to be better and nothing, absolutely nothing, changes.
5 comments:
I understand that where Huxley was happiest was.... not the writing, or the philosophical pronouncements, or answering the questions from students on his university lecture tours about the meaning of life, expansions of consciousness..... I understand that he couldn't wait to get back to his room to cook up a vegetable stir-fry, particularly with mushrooms.
...what to teach children...
Yuk, imo, it's people with attitudes like yours that turn schools and universities into education factories, to turn out little clones for the milk-round. And, again, I just get the feeling that your views on education have their basis more in terms of what you can push into children than what you can bring out of them. Which isn't education, its training. You know the difference?
Absolutely the polar opposite of what I believe, Andrew. Almost the polar opposite. My communication skills are obviously not what I thought.
E duco. E duco, mate. I believe in education for education's sake. I believe in philosophy and abstract thought and beauty and everything which lifts us above the milk round. I don't FOR THAT REASON think that people should be looking to make education more RELEVANT, because when they say RELEVANT, they mean relevant to the milk round.
But obviously you are entitled to youre own views of my intentions, however erroneous.
And by the way there are no 'people like me'. Just me.
Actually, I can see how you thought that.
You're still wrong though. And I cling to my theory that seeking happiness in and of itself will make you miserable.
I agree with your comment about the futility of seeking happiness for its own sake.
Andrew/amclpreston, not sure how that happened
Post a Comment