The Truth About Education

submitted by jwithrow.
Click here to get the Journal of a Wayward Philosopher by Email

Journal of a Wayward Philosopher
The Truth About Education

May 17, 2019
Hot Springs, VA

“The journey of a thousand miles begins with a single step.”Lao Tzu

The S&P closed today’s trading session at $2,859. Gold closed at $1,277 per ounce. Crude Oil closed at $62.70 per barrel. The 10-year Treasury rate closed at 2.39%. Bitcoin is trading around $7,126 per BTC today.

Dear Journal,

It has been nearly two years since I’ve written. And time goes by fast.

As I write to you today, nothing has changed about my outlook or philosophy. Yet, everything has changed about my world.

My knowledge of financial markets continues to grow. As does my understanding of where finance is going.

Your neighbors haven’t noticed yet… But we are on the brink of historic change.

Traditional institutions are crumbling. Traditions and customs are being questioned. Entrenched hierarchy is being challenged. The old way is fading into the new…

Continue reading “The Truth About Education”

The Future of Education

submitted by jwithrow.
Click here to get the Journal of a Wayward Philosopher by Email

Journal of a Wayward Philosopher
The Future of Education

May 6, 2016
Hot Springs, VA

The only thing that interferes with my learning is my education.” – Albert Einstein

The S&P closed out Thursday at $2,044. Gold closed at $1,272 per ounce. Crude Oil closed at $44.32 per barrel, and the 10-year Treasury rate closed at 1.78%. Bitcoin is trading around $453 per BTC today.

Dear Journal,

Last week we talked about transitioning away from coercive social organization and towards voluntary association. We suggested that financial dependency was one of the primary excuses for coercive government policies. Today, let’s take a look at the education piece of the puzzle.

I won’t beat around the bush with this: the 20th century classroom model of education is all but obsolete.

We know that every individual is unique. We know that every individual has different skills, talents, interests, and passions. We also know that every individual has different learning styles. I doubt that you can find anyone who would disagree with those three statements. Continue reading “The Future of Education”

The Truth About Homework

by Author Alfie Kohn – ICPA.org:Homework

Widespread misconceptions about learning keep our children busy with needless assignments.

There’s something perversely fascinating about educational policies that are clearly at odds with the available data. Huge schools are still being built, even though we know that students tend to fare better in smaller places that lend themselves to the creation of democratic caring communities. Many children who are failed by the academic status quo are forced to repeat a grade, even though research shows that this is just about the worst course of action for them. Homework continues to be assigned— in ever greater quantities—despite the absence of evidence that it’s necessary, or even helpful, in most cases.

The dimensions of that last disparity weren’t clear to me until I began sifting through the research for a new book. To begin with, I discovered that decades of investigation have failed to turn up any evidence that homework is beneficial for students in elementary school. Even if you regard standardized test results as a useful measure, homework (some versus none, or more versus less) isn’t even correlated with higher scores at these ages. The only effect that correlates with homework is a more negative attitude toward school on the part of students who get more assignments.

In high school, some studies do find a correlation between homework and test scores (or grades), but it’s usually fairly small, and it has a tendency to disappear when more sophisticated statistical controls are applied. Moreover, there’s no evidence that higher achievement is due to the homework, even when an association does appear. It isn’t hard to think of other explanations for why successful students might be in classrooms where more homework is assigned—or why they might spend more time on it than their peers do.

The results of national and international exams raise further doubts. One of many examples is an analysis of 1994 and 1999 Trends in Mathematics and Science Study (TIMSS) data from 50 countries. Researchers David Baker and Gerald LeTendre were scarcely able to conceal their surprise when they published their results in 2005: “Not only did we fail to find any positive relationships,” they wrote, but “the overall correlations between national average student achievement and national averages in [amount of homework assigned] are all negative.”

Finally, there isn’t a shred of evidence to support the widely accepted assumption that homework yields nonacademic benefits for students of any age. The idea that homework teaches good work habits or develops positive character traits (such as self-discipline and independence) could be described as an urban myth, except for the fact that it’s taken seriously in suburban and rural areas, too.

In short, regardless of one’s criteria, there is no reason to think that most students would be at any sort of disadvantage if homework were sharply reduced or even eliminated. Nevertheless, the overwhelming majority of American schools—elementary and secondary, public and private—continue to require their students to work a second shift by bringing academic assignments home. Not only is this requirement accepted uncritically, but the amount of homework is growing, particularly in the early grades. A large, long-term national survey found that the proportion of 6- to 8-year-old children who reported having homework on a given day had climbed from 34 percent in 1981 to 58 percent in 1997—and the weekly time spent studying at home more than doubled.

Sandra Hofferth of the University of Maryland, one of the authors of that study, has just released an update based on 2002 data. In it, the proportion of young children who had homework on a specific day has jumped to 64 percent, and the amount of time they spent on it has climbed by another third. The irony here is painful, because with younger children the evidence to justify homework isn’t merely dubious—it’s nonexistent.

Why Homework Persists

So why do we do something where the cons (stress, frustration, family conflict, loss of time for other activities, a possible diminution of interest in learning) so clearly outweigh the pros? Possible reasons include a lack of respect for research, a lack of respect for children (implicit in a determination to keep them busy after school), a reluctance to question existing practices, and the top-down pressures to teach more stuff faster in order to pump up test scores, so we can chant, “We’re number one!”

All of these explanations are plausible, but I think there’s also something else responsible for our continuing to feed children this latter-day cod-liver oil. Because so many of us believe that it’s just common sense that homework would provide academic benefits, we tend to shrug off the failure to find any such benefits. Our belief that homework ought to help is based on some fundamental misunderstandings about learning.

Consider the assumption that homework should be beneficial just because it gives students more time to master a topic or skill. (Plenty of pundits rely on this premise when they call for extending the school day or year. Indeed, homework can be seen as a way of prolonging the school day on the cheap.) Unfortunately, this reasoning turns out to be woefully simplistic. “When experimental psychologists mainly studied words and nonsense syllables, it was thought that learning inevitably depended upon time,” reading researcher Richard C. Anderson and his colleagues explain. “Subsequent research suggests that this belief is false.”

The statement “People need time to learn things” is true, of course, but it doesn’t tell us much of practical value. On the other hand, the assertion “More time usually leads to better learning” is considerably more interesting. It’s also demonstrably untrue, however, because there are enough cases where more time doesn’t lead to better learning.

In fact, more hours are least likely to produce better outcomes when understanding or creativity is involved. Anderson and his associates found that when children are taught to read by focusing on the meaning of the text (rather than primarily on phonetic skills), their learning does “not depend on amount of instructional time.” In math, too, as another group of researchers discovered, time on task is directly correlated to achievement only if both the activity and the outcome measure are focused on rote recall, as opposed to problem solving.

Carole Ames of Michigan State University points out that it isn’t “quantitative changes in behavior”—such as requiring students to spend more hours in front of books or worksheets—that help children learn better. Rather, it’s “qualitative changes in the ways students view themselves in relation to the task, engage in the process of learning, and then respond to the learning activities and situation.” In turn, these attitudes and responses emerge from the way teachers think about learning and, as a result, how they organize their classrooms. Assigning homework is unlikely to have a positive effect on any of these variables. We might say that education is less about how much the teacher covers than about what students can be helped to discover— and more time won’t help to bring about that shift.

Alongside an overemphasis on time is the widely held belief that homework “reinforces” the skills that students have learned—or, rather, have been taught—in class. But what exactly does this mean? It wouldn’t make sense to say, “Keep practicing until you understand,” because practicing doesn’t create understanding— just as giving kids a deadline doesn’t teach time-management skills. What might make sense is to say, “Keep practicing until what you’re doing becomes automatic.” But what kinds of proficiencies lend themselves to this sort of improvement?

The answer is behavioral responses. Expertise in tennis requires lots of practice; it’s hard to improve your swing without spending a lot of time on the court. But to cite an example like that to justify homework is an example of what philosophers call begging the question. It assumes precisely what has to be proved, which is that intellectual pursuits are like tennis.

Learning Versus Drill

The assumption that education and tennis are analogous derives from behaviorism, which is the source of the verb “reinforce,” as well as the basis of an attenuated view of learning. In the 1920s and ’30s, when John B. Watson was formulating his theory that would come to dominate education, a much less famous researcher named William Brownell was challenging the drilland- practice approach to mathematics that had already taken root. “If one is to be successful in quantitative thinking, one needs a fund of meanings, not a myriad of ‘automatic responses,’” he wrote. “Drill does not develop meanings. Repetition does not lead to understandings.” In fact, if “arithmetic becomes meaningful, it becomes so in spite of drill.”

Brownell’s insights have been enriched by a long line of research demonstrating that the behaviorist model is, if you’ll excuse the expression, deeply superficial. People spend their lives actively constructing theories about how the world works, and then reconstructing them in light of new evidence. Lots of practice can help some students get better at remembering an answer, but not to get better at—or even accustomed to—thinking. And even when they do acquire an academic skill through practice, the way they acquire it should give us pause. As psychologist Ellen Langer has shown, “When we drill ourselves in a certain skill so that it becomes second nature,” we may come to perform that skill “mindlessly,” locking us into patterns and procedures that are less than ideal.

Practice Makes Problems

But even if practice is sometimes useful, we’re not entitled to conclude that homework of this type works for most students. It isn’t of any use for those who don’t understand what they’re doing. Such homework makes them feel stupid; gets them accustomed to doing things the wrong way (because what’s really “reinforced” are mistaken assumptions); and teaches them to conceal what they don’t know. At the same time, other students in the same class already have the skill down cold, so further practice for them is a waste of time. You’ve got some kids, then, who don’t need the practice and others who can’t use it.

Furthermore, even if practice was helpful for most students, that doesn’t mean they need to do it at home. In my research I found a number of superb teachers (at different grade levels and with diverse instructional styles) who rarely, if ever, found it necessary to assign homework. Some not only didn’t feel a need to make students read, write or do math at home, but they preferred to have students do these things during class, where it was possible to observe, guide and discuss.

Finally, any theoretical benefit of practice homework must be weighed against the effect it has on students’ interest in learning. If slogging through worksheets dampens one’s desire to read or think, surely that wouldn’t be worth an incremental improvement in skills. And when an activity feels like drudgery, the quality of learning tends to suffer, too. That so many children regard homework as something to finish as quickly as possible—or even as a significant source of stress—helps to explain why it appears not to offer any academic advantage even for those who obediently sit down and complete the tasks they’ve been assigned. All that research showing little value to homework may not be so surprising after all.

Supporters of homework rarely look at things from the student’s point of view, though. Instead, kids are regarded as inert objects to be acted on: Make them practice and they’ll get better. My argument isn’t just that this viewpoint is disrespectful, or that it’s a residue of an outdated stimulus-response psychology. I’m also suggesting it’s counterproductive. Children cannot be made to acquire skills. They aren’t vending machines such that we can put in more homework and get out more learning.
But just such misconceptions are pervasive in all sorts of neighborhoods, and they’re held by parents, teachers and researchers alike. It’s these beliefs that make it so hard even to question the policy of assigning regular homework. We can be shown the paucity of supporting evidence and it won’t have any impact if we’re wedded to folk wisdom (“practice makes perfect”; more time equals better results).

On the other hand, the more we learn about learning, the more willing we may be to challenge the idea that homework has to be part of schooling.

Article originally posted at ICPA.org.

What is Education?

by Author Bob Webb – ICPA.org:Education

A burning desire to learn is the key to a fulfilling lifestyle. It’s something school rarely inspires.

What is education? Is it knowledge in basic skills, academics, technical disciplines, citizenship…or is it something else? Our formal education system says only the academic basics are important, emphasizing the collection of knowledge without understanding its value. What about the processing of knowledge—using inspiration, visionary ambitions, creativity, risk, motivation and the ability to bounce back from failure? These skills are associated with understanding the value of knowledge, but many education institutions don’t consider these skills. There is a huge, disconnected gap, which is a problem for high school students in particular.

Thomas Edison and many other super achievers never finished school. They succeeded because they knew how to research information for a selected project and process that knowledge. The classroom environment does not work that way. It focuses on the collection of knowledge with no clear purpose other than high grades. If pleasing the teacher does not motivate, then there is nothing to process, outside of memorizing answers for a test. The typical student is academically challenged while being starved for motivation. Lack of motivation is lack of knowledge-processing skills. The typical college graduate will emerge with a professional skill that can provide for life’s basic needs, but that’s all.

What is education? All the elements in my opening paragraph relate to education, and all should be considered. This would be ideal, but “all” is not possible where performance must be measured. Only what can be measured will be selected, and the measuring tool is the written test. Anyone who does not have the ability to put clear thoughts on paper is labeled a failure. Natural skills, including knowledge processing, do not count. What is exercised grows stronger, and what is ignored stays dormant. The classroom exercises the collection of academics, leaving all other natural skills in the closet.

Tests do not measure intelligence or ability; they do not measure how the mind processes information, how motivating experiences develop persistence, or how the mind sorts out instincts, opinions, evaluations, possibilities and alternatives.

Knowledge by itself has no value; it is like a dictionary filled with words. Words alone have no value; they are given meaning by the process of stringing them together. Unfortunately, our education system is becoming a system that memorizes the dictionary. When students have memorized selected knowledge, then they are given a one-day test, based on dictionary knowledge, which will influence their employment opportunities for the rest of their lives. Natural skills are not considered. Is this how America became the world’s economic leader? No! Knowledge only has value when used with a process, and process in an artificial environment is not predictable or measurable.

Achievers in life use inspiration and motivation to overcome barriers. Teaching to the test does not inspire or motivate anyone. Memorizing does not inspire a love of learning; in fact, it does just the opposite. Education’s goal should be to develop a love of learning that stays with students throughout their lives. Education should be a lifetime experience, not limited to youth.

Educators are switching to tests because there is a crisis in education of their own making, and society wants measurable results. This pressure is passed on to political leaders, who base political decisions on measurable academic testing. These tests are based on acceptance of the educational status quo. Every student must now become an academic intellectual, or be labeled a failure. Natural talent and knowledge-processing skills do not count. More and more students are receiving the “failure” label, all because the system measures selected knowledge on a one-day standardized paper test.

Consider a parent who is having a problem with a word processor. On his own, he can’t solve the problem. He’s been collecting knowledge for years, but his knowledge processor is in hibernation. With any new gadget, someone has to teach him; he can’t figure it out for himself. His 13-year-old son comes to the rescue. The boy has limited knowledge, but he knows how to processes available information. He explores the word processor problem until he finds a solution. He is not unusually smart—this is just a teenager’s natural approach to finding solutions.

All young children have a natural talent for creatively processing information. It’s during the teen years that natural creative processing is replaced with the status quo: memorizing knowledge, without regard to how to process it. In the classroom, memorizing is what counts. Standardized testing reinforces the status quo. It kills creative processing ability. Status quo attitudes will follow children into adult life, where they will have to ask their children for help.

Today, the educational system has a new tool on the market: behavior-control drugs. Any student who refuses to accept the status quo is labeled a troublemaker and will be drugged. The glassy-eyed student will then behave in the classroom, and school officials will receive high performance ratings. The student may get passing grades and land a job with a comfortable wage, but that will be the extent of it. His teenage dreams and great ambitions will be gone.

Fact: Self-made millionaires are not “A” students in the classroom. The way they process knowledge conflicts with classroom priorities. The self-made millionaire has a vision. Then he researches specific knowledge, applies intuitive knowledge and processes all the elements, searching for a workable solution. Millionaires are made by finding alternative ways to do common tasks. The secret is vision, research and processing, not pre-stored knowledge alone.

The typical employer wants employees with dictionary knowledge, not visionaries. Businesses want employees who follow orders, are willing to do repetitive tasks, are happy with a limited role, and accept the status quo. Repetitive tasks means efficiency, which is where profits are made. Also, accepting the status quo prevents the exposure of blunders by leaders. Too many blunders, and profits disappear. In a status-quo environment, visionaries become bored quickly and soon receive the “troublemaker” label when they offer alternatives or expose blunders. This sometimes leads to dismissal, even though their ideas can increase efficiency and create new sources of profits for the company. In the long haul, visionaries are the ones who make above-average wages, no matter their formal education level. But with behavior-controlling drugs, the education system now has the tools to eliminate this type of person.

As I write this, e-learning is becoming an education model that the present system cannot compete with. It focuses on what motivates, rather than what the system thinks is good for students. It is also sidestepping politicians, textbook industries, testing companies and unions. These forces are now fighting back, trying to maintain a system that is in their own interest, instead of the students’. At this time, they are focusing on standardized testing, which seems to be a last-ditch effort to maintain the status quo.

What can be considered a quality education? A quality education is custom designed, addressing the unique abilities of each student, and provides a positive emotional experience. Customized education evaluates natural talent and how a student learns. This is why home-schooled students outperform classroom students. Parents learn what works and what doesn’t, and then focus on what works. With this method, students develop a love of learning, and learning becomes a lifelong process.

Which type of education environment do you think will produce consistent winners?

Article originally posted at ICPA.org.

Does an Oracle Have All the Answers? Flaws With the Current Teaching Model

by Simon Paul Harrison – ICPA.org:Teaching Model

A number of years ago I had the pleasure of teaching a class of 9 and 10-year-olds in my native England. We were in the middle of a history lesson when an incident occurred that created a profound change in my understanding of how to best support children.

One of the children asked a question, and, after thinking about it for a few moments, I answered, “I don’t know.” You would have thought I had just announced that I was in fact an alien sent from outer space to suck out the brains of the children before me. Thirty mouths took an intake of breath, and thirty pairs of eyes swiveled toward me, all looking aghast.

“But Mr. Harrison, you’re a teacher,” said one of the children. “You’re supposed to know everything.” The other children nodded in agreement. This was the way the world is, according to them. Teachers know everything, and students learn from teachers.

Naturally, I explained that teachers certainly did not know everything; nobody does. I added that when anybody tells you anything, you should question it to see if it’s right for you. This went down well with some children, but most of them were visibly shocked by my admission of ignorance.

I have spent the best part of a decade in various forms of teaching, which has allowed me to see a wide variety of different educational models. I cannot stress how much damage the “teacher as oracle” culture is wreaking on the long-term development of our children. Just because this model of doing things is normal, it should not be considered healthy.

One of the major problems it creates is that it sets up an environment where children learn that all the answers they need in life are to be found and acquired from an external source. Children come to a point very quickly where they discard their own paths of discovery and substitute their teacher’s answer for their own. This leaves the child in a precarious position: What will happen when the teacher is no longer around to give answers? At best they accept someone else’s version of the world, and live by the creations of others. The worst-case scenario is that, without the prompting of a teacher to ask questions, independent exploration and discovery simply cease. One of the saddest things to see is a child who has lost the passion to explore life.

If a child cannot find answers internally, or does not have the life experience that has fostered a desire to find answers, what will happen to his creativity? What will happen to his confidence? And what will happen to his independence?

We have set things up like this, deluding ourselves that retention and regurgitation of information constitutes success. Maybe it is success, if we’re trying to create a society of robots. However, it goes without saying that a human being is a creature whose very nature is to want to discover every last nuance of life. It is the very core of us, our soul, that drives us to want to go on adventures, discover the universe, and find out who we really are. If the answers come thick and fast from an external source—an oracle—they deprive children of the opportunity to respond to the calling of their souls. And, once the connection to our soul is lost, it’s very difficult to get it back. Apathy runs deep with children in our modern society, and a large reason for this is that we have taught them that answers come from outside themselves.

It seems the oracle is not really an oracle at all, but a system that has completely lost sight of who we really are. Next time a child asks you a question, see if you can answer not with the little snippet of information, but with another question that helps the child use her creativity to find the answer for herself. Watch as she takes delight in responding to the call of her soul. Watch as the next time she has a question, she has the confidence and ability to find out the answer for herself. My experience is that when we support children like this they discover the most amazing things. They dive deeper into life than even we may have, and they in turn teach us.

This long-term approach obviously requires love, and it requires patience. If we cannot find these basics of life in our relationships with children, it might be time to stop considering the role of the teacher and adult to be that of an oracle. It should quickly become obvious we actually have very few answers at all.

Article originally posted at ICPA.org.

Raising Children in the Modern World

submitted by jwithrow.Family

Journal of a Wayward Philosopher
Raising Children in the Modern World

December 17, 2014
Hot Springs, VA

The S&P opened at $1,972 today. Gold is back down to $1,198 per ounce. Oil is down to $56 per barrel. Bitcoin is down to $322 per BTC, and the 10-year Treasury rate opened at 2.08% today.

Both oil and the 10-year rate are closing out 2014 at price levels much lower than most analysts anticipated which sets up for an interesting 2015. Will crude prices remain at current levels and put the squeeze on the U.S. Shale revolution? Will interest rates remain low and complicit in enabling the Treasury to service the $18 trillion national debt without much fuss? We shall see.

As for the S&P, it has been 6 and a half years since it experienced a correction of 10% or more. But markets cannot go in one direction forever – that 10% correction is coming. I have seen some predictions of a major 10%-plus correction sometime in the spring of 2015. It may be more like 50% if the correction is coupled with the fiat monetary crisis that is on the horizon but I think we may still be a few years away from that one. Instead, it is more likely that a major stock market correction will spur the Fed into QE4. Either way, it is advisable to be very vigilant if you have money in the equity markets.

Shifting gears, I have been thinking quite a bit about child-rearing given the arrival of Maddie Lynn eight weeks ago. I have come to the conclusion that our culture today has become much too rigid and regimented when it comes to raising children in our fast-paced modern world.

School days have gotten longer, homework loads have increased tremendously, grades are now emphasized heavily, standardized testing has been implemented and enforced across the board, the number of adult-organized activities for kids have exploded and, as a result, childhood stress, worry, and fear have increased dramatically.

Studies conducted by Jean M. Twenge at San Diego State University suggest that youth anxiety and depression have been trending higher rather sharply over the last fifty years. Perhaps more troubling, Twenge’s research suggests a shift in motivation amongst kids from intrinsic to extrinsic values; kids now tend to be more motivated by popularity and money than self-acceptance, moral character, and community.

The reason for this shift is rather clear to me: American childhood is now more about meeting adult expectations and less about personal growth and development. Observe the parents at a youth sporting event and see if this statement isn’t true. Now the parents mean well, don’t get me wrong. But too often they think their child’s future depends exclusively upon performance in school, performance in athletics, performance in extra-curricular activities, or some other external measurement of performance so these things are all pushed on kids to the point where their own interests and talents are subordinated.

Studies by Peter Gray show that childhood free time has been declining steadily since the 1950’s including a decrease in free play as well as time spent talking to others at home. Meanwhile, time spent on homework has increased 145%.

The government school system equates more homework with more learning. In reality, homework serves only to replace students’ individual interests with the Department of Education’s mandated curriculum. At best students memorize the mandated curriculum long enough to pass the standardized test and then they let it go. At worst they think the curriculum is useful and they retain it at the expense of pursuing their own passion. The truth is memorization is not learning; it is a waste of time and energy.

Real learning can only occur when the individual has an interest in the topic and is free to explore that topic in his or her own way. Children need to be free to make mistakes, analyze those mistakes, and then attempt to correct the mistakes. Instead, the current model of education teaches children that they will be judged and punished if they make a mistake so students learn to fear mistakes above all else. This mentality has the potential to set them up for a very restricted adulthood in which they shy away from opportunities for fear of making a mistake.

Ultimately we need to ask ourselves what is truly important for our children. This will be different for each family and that should be embraced, not ridiculed. There is no reason to think everyone must adopt the same parenting style or that every child must receive the same education. In fact, a free society requires diversity and the sharing of unique ideas in order to thrive.

So what’s really important for our children?

Good grades and getting into a good college? This looks like an outdated model to me – it is exclusively designed to produce good employees. But we are moving away from a ‘jobs’ based economy and the availability of traditional full time employment with comprehensive benefit packages will continue to diminish over the coming years and decades.

Becoming a superior athlete? My observations suggest that youth athletics are much more important to the adults – school employees, coaches, parents – than they are to the kids. Too often youth sports are a chore rather than a joy.

Participating in as many extra-curricular activities as possible? Again, these are often more important to the adults than the kids. Children should certainly be free to participate in whatever groups or activities interest them but too often they are pushed in the adult’s favored direction instead of their own.

I am convinced that a childhood free to grow and develop in a unique way is the most important gift parents can give their children. I think children need more guidance and less teaching; they should be encouraged to discover and pursue their own passions and interests without the pressure of forceful expectations. Pair this method with sound financial education and an IBC insurance policy that has been capitalized for 18 years and I think you have the makings of a creative, self-driven adult capable of thriving in a rapidly changing world.

Of course these are just this philosopher’s humble opinions.

More to come,
Signature

 

 

 

 

 

Joe Withrow
Wayward Philosopher

For more of Joe’s thoughts on the “Great Reset” and the Infinite Banking Concept please read “The Individual is Rising” which is available at http://www.theindividualisrising.com/. The book is also available on Amazon in both paperback and Kindle editions.

Opportunity

submitted by jwithrow.Opportunity

Too often we associate the word opportunity with the availability of jobs. We tell our young folks to go where the opportunity is so they march off to the nearest metropolitan city to join the rat race.

How come we never tell our young people that they have the ability to create the opportunity themselves?

We think that the answer to this question is largely because we have been shaped by centralized government education. We refer to it as government education because the Department of Education has gradually imposed itself upon our school systems over time. Whereas we once had school systems that were beholden to parents and local communities, we now have federally mandated curriculum, Department of Education approved textbooks, and compulsory education laws bullying parents into compliance.

Our government subsidized educational system is focused on itself, not those it purports to serve.

The primary educational system (K-12) is focused on molding kids into obedient students that can one day be productive cogs in the wheel. Creativity and critical thinking are subverted by the centralized curriculum and the centralized structure. Students are taught to be dependent on the ‘expert’.

The higher educational system focuses on selling degrees at an enormous price made possible by the abundance of government student loans. The system touts the ability of college graduates to obtain high paying corporate jobs after graduation as justification for the high costs.

The result is that we are conditioned to be obedient worker bees that do not question authority and we base success solely upon income level.

And the rat-race perpetuates.

Even if the college graduate is able to obtain a high paying corporate job, the cost of servicing student loan debt offsets some of this income. And speaking from experience we can say that most of these corporate jobs do not offer a very rewarding experience.

Most of these jobs represent nothing more than a cog in a giant bureaucratic wheel in which employees are required to perform the same menial tasks repetitively day in and day out. Their input is not welcomed and their output is not appreciated. These jobs require employees to sit in a small cubicle under a fluorescent light for at least forty hours every week. And it is not uncommon for commute times to be greater than an hour for many employees also.

The quality of pay is high with these corporate jobs but the quality of life tends to be fairly low.

This doesn’t sound much like opportunity to us.

It’s time to re-examine the way we think about what opportunity is. Technology is rapidly changing the marketplace and the jobs that traditional education prepares us for are diminishing.

But this is a good thing! The diminishing jobs are centralized and boring. The new opportunities are decentralized and exciting! One but has to recognize opportunity knocking.