What is the Definition of Education do you have?

What is Education?

A Quality education is, of course, an education that ...? Try a second to answer for yourself.

It's Not that obvious. Besides, the number of definitions that can be found is infinite. To describe it, one can introduce dozens of more or less measurable factors: acquisition of knowledge, skills, introduction to an ideology or even socialization; finally, all these factors can be conceived variably. What knowledge, skills, or ideology are we talking about?

Thus, announcing that we are in favor of "quality education" means nothing, Since our definitions can be extremely different. You may think that an education of obedience and rigor is a good thing, and someone will answer that it must be centered on autonomy and freedom; you will both talk about different ideas, without knowing it, using the same term "quality education."

For those who refer to the Sudbury Schools model, quality education is based on autonomy and freedom. There are two points of view.

In The second, we leave absolute freedom to the children, which can be harmful to them. But In the face of these many definitions, we have only limited time and resources to ensure the education of our children. So, a question is needed:

What do we mean by "quality education"?

The Answer to this question is crucial for our future, and we can not pretend to reform education before we agree on what it should be. To do this, I will discuss (more or less objectively) two ways of formulating such a definition.

First approach: From the scale of the individual to that of the community

The first way to define a quality education is to start from the individual and its Range of thinking about what adult it should be tomorrow. We are not trying to change a context or a system, but rather to adapt as much as possible to the student who will be confronted with it.

So it's about:

A preparation imperative, a particular vision of the future that defines quality education.

However, There is no concern about the ability of individuals to initiate positive change, to seek out the community; instead, it is considered that the best interests of the population will come from their investments. It is from this premise that the concepts of equality and standardization of education derive: We must ensure that we all have equal opportunities to succeed. The school must provide all the same tools, the same guarantees to carve a place in the world of tomorrow.

Concrete examples of this vision of quality education include the American idea of "College and Career Ready," or "Common Core Standards" (which are very similar to the process of competitions in the 6th grade, the 9th or bac home).

This approach is problematic:

First, when we talk about equal opportunities, we talk about something that in itself It is not scientifically measurable. It is a set of factors, some of which are beyond the control of the School (social origin, entourage, and access to culture/knowledge, facilities, and intellectual particularities).

It is an obstacle to the desired ideal of neutrality and impartiality, that one tries to overcome by enameling the educational system of controllable and measurable elements (system of evaluation: tests, contest) to ensure that despite all the differences between students, they are given the The same chance of success.

But the fact is that sometimes we tend to forget that the problem (inequality) is not measurable, and we tend to take the encrypted control elements (the falsely Notes) for the obstacle to overcome. In other words, instead of attacking the causes of the disease (inequality), one tackles its symptoms (the bad marks).

Secondly, Who says standardization of education says standard. Objectives need to be defined: "In the sixth grade, the average student must be able to do such and such in mathematics." However, the "typical pupil" to which we refer will only correspond to a minority of students. Let me explain: to say that at the age of twenty, the age at which the sixth grade is generally passed, all pupils must have such a level of knowledge in such a subject does not make sense since the pupils have facilities, predispositions and an environment of different origin.

Even physically, they are incredibly different; take the 9th class, you will notice That students of the same age seem to be several years apart. How do you want to ask the same thing about a student whose stage of brain development is that of a teenager / young adult, then another still having a child's physique?

These standards are not adapted to all, because of the difference of social environment as well as of tendencies, facilities, and characteristics: the pupils are fundamentally unequal, and one will never be able to standardize Their level. For this reason, the numerical results of exams are often disappointing: statistically, there will always be a proportion of students who Do not meet expectations. However, it is essential for the image of the rulers that The numbers are right to show that the machine works. To improve them, 

They will tend to:

1- Reduce the rigor of the standards, to keep a success rate that does not annoy the population too much (The example of "note adjustments to the bac" in France, in Tunisia, the 20% Tunisians having been removed from the 2017 session by the outgoing Minister of Education Neji Jalloul)

2- Reform the education system to focus even more on numerical objectives (more course hours, different coefficients assigned to different subjects) to the detriment of values and skills that are more difficult to measure (often what has Relating to creativity, culture, innovation).

3- Increase pressure on teachers and schools: since they can not directly improve the environment in which students evolve, but that they still have an obligation of result, the governors will reject the responsibility of the Failure on the professionals of education, and press them to improve the scores.

4- Invest in educational technologies or private projects (schools, training programs), hoping to find the "panacea" that will enhance student performance.

One last thing:

the model of success and adaptation that is expected for the individual is not Necessarily the one he wants. Because of this excessive desire for equalization moreover, standardization, we lose extraordinary potentials, those of brilliant students who can not get into the mold we have planned for them; those who want to choose another path.

Still, it is a way like any other to define a "quality education."