I think that the problem is in this sentence: If the goal of school is to educate, then we need to consider: are our methods of assessing students undermining that goal?
The problem is that the goal is not simply "to educate." Or, on second thought, it is to educate. to develop the faculties and powers of (a person) by teaching, instruction, or schooling. 2. to qualify by instruction or training for a particular calling, practice, etc.; train:
The problem is that our schools are meant to teach skills, and to provide a basis for children to have a platform for going into the workforce. Sounds reasonable, right? Until one starts to realize that the workforce is primarily made up of jobs that don't require one to actually think. Thus, the schools don't provide as much attention to honing children's thinking/rationalizing abilities, because, simply, those skills aren't as required. (And, for those of you in the paranoid audience, those "In Charge" don't actually want their citizens to think.)
So, then, we have a program that instructs, teaches skills, gives a basis for work... but doesn't actually teach that which we of the thinking minority assess to be important: the ability to think.
How does this relate? Those who are going to enjoy books, the imagination, and so on, are going to be, at least on some level, freethinkers. The imagination encourages thinking. This is why controversial books are banned. Not because of the messages within, or, not only because of this, but because those books encourage one to form opinions that are outside the box. Not something that is required for workforce platform building.
The problem is, actually, that schools are there to educate.
no subject
The problem is that the goal is not simply "to educate." Or, on second thought, it is to educate. to develop the faculties and powers of (a person) by teaching, instruction, or schooling.
2. to qualify by instruction or training for a particular calling, practice, etc.; train:
The problem is that our schools are meant to teach skills, and to provide a basis for children to have a platform for going into the workforce. Sounds reasonable, right? Until one starts to realize that the workforce is primarily made up of jobs that don't require one to actually think. Thus, the schools don't provide as much attention to honing children's thinking/rationalizing abilities, because, simply, those skills aren't as required. (And, for those of you in the paranoid audience, those "In Charge" don't actually want their citizens to think.)
So, then, we have a program that instructs, teaches skills, gives a basis for work... but doesn't actually teach that which we of the thinking minority assess to be important: the ability to think.
How does this relate? Those who are going to enjoy books, the imagination, and so on, are going to be, at least on some level, freethinkers. The imagination encourages thinking. This is why controversial books are banned. Not because of the messages within, or, not only because of this, but because those books encourage one to form opinions that are outside the box. Not something that is required for workforce platform building.
The problem is, actually, that schools are there to educate.