Temporary Archive: Suzanne Brockmann's Message Board

Back to Archive Index

What not automatically right?

Posted by Tom on 9/25/2005, 13:16:48, in reply to ""Courage is..."
I agree—and I think more to the point just because they are Tom’s opinions doesn’t mean he is automatically right : ) But I don’t like getting into conversations of right an wrong—because rarely in complex issues is there a right or wrong—and frequently the desire to prove oneself right becomes the purpose of a discussion instead of trying to find a workable solution.

So, first, let’s look at the original question “what is the one critical virtue that our founders had that enabled them to succeed” Is that a legitimate question? why/why not?

"Tom, my question for you is what educational system would you implement and what goals would you have for this system?" Okay, keeping in mind that I am not a professional educator and that the education system is just one part of a system of systems, (and also that it is Sunday and Hightide is at 2:46) and can’t solve everything nor function without outside support, I would offer this. I would set some goals first. Not all inclusive but:
-Provide educational opportunity for all manner of learners
-Focus education on future requirements not the past

-Create a significant portion of population capable and adept at thinking
-Attain or exceed parody with the educational achievements of all other countries
-Accommodate results as well as means
-Ensure the long-term viability of the nation by providing it with ably prepared raw materials
-Instill the critical and vital strategic parameters

Now, what educational system would do that? Not sure—but it would be very well funded. It would be populated by accomplished thinker/teachers and those teachers would be widely seen as national assets. It would maximize technology and not be fixed in "proven methods". It would be lean and stripped of cumbersome technic or requirements. It would have diverse instructional methods and it would have diverse measures of success. It would be flexible and risk accepting. It would not differentiate* based on race, or social status (*in that, it would acknowledge everyone’s inherent right to succeed—if that required differentiation at a local level, that would be acceptable) It would focus on current events as the closest to future events that you can get. It would be critical of the decisions and actions of the United States as a means of self assessment.


Etc--- Thank you for the challenge and the question!


Responses:


Temporarily archived without permission from Suzanne Brockmann's Message Board.
Contact Donna if questions or concerns.