What does it mean to "gain an education"?

The learner must be "a biologically and socially adept human being ... susceptible to training ... [with] fundamental trust [in] the authority of the teacher ... [engaged in] socio-linguistic interaction ... transmissible ... through enculturation" (Moyal-Sharrock, 2010, pg 6 - 7)

I will contend that learning and being educated are givens in human experience. We do learn things and we are brought into learning by others. What we learn and whether or not the learning is successful is a different matter. And whether or not the learning is positive is also up to question (e.g. being raised in an environment of crime and learning certain tricks of the trade). So, I am asking people to provide their perspectives on the question, "what does it mean to gain an education?"  

What education entails for the nomadic, pastoral lifestyle of the Masai is different from that of other sectors of the world (Semali, 1994). Should the education in an elite grammar school in Paris be different from that of a school in a working class community in Manchester? Should the two schools and the students' home environments prepare learners for different forms of life? Is it fair that formal educational institutions celebrate certain forms of knowledge (e.g. of poetry or Shakespeare), whilst marginalising other knowledge (the art of car mechanics) at the same time?

How is the educational life of a young person in South Korea different than the education life of one in the surburbs of Sydney, Australia? What would be the ideal education to suit Indigenous children and young people in remote Australia?

Please use the comments field/link below to offer you own perspective on  what does it mean to gain an education?

Dr Michael A. Peters on Wittgenstein & Education

Dr Michael A. Peters is one of the authors of the Book Pick: Showing and Doing: Wittgenstein as a Pedagogical Philosopher. In the following video, Dr Peters speaks about the problems of rationality. In particular, he posits that there is a change in the way that rationality is described from the before and after the turn of the 20th century. He attributes to Wittgenstein a role in this change. Specifically, prior to the 20th century, there was talk of a single rationality (a Western scientific mode); however, in the 20th century and into the 21st century, we must speak of many rationalities, since any mode of reasoning is a byproduct of concepts that are quite familiar to the reader of Wittgenstein. Modes of reasoning are the byproduct of communities of practice, disciplines, discourses, language games, forms of life, etc, which does allow on to reflect on the cultural practices and politics around different ways of reasoning. Please enjoy the video. Dr Peters explains this much better than I.

Uploaded by educationatillinois on 2014-03-05.

The First 20 Hours: Mastering the Toughest Part of Learning Anything

Josh Kaufman is the author of the The First 20 Hours: Mastering the Toughest Part of Learning Anything. Josh specializes in teaching people from all walks of life how to master practical knowledge and skills. In his talk, he shares how having his first child inspired him to approach learning in a whole new way.

Why We Do What We Do? Coda

I'd like to have one last contribution to the series Why We Do What We Do?, which I hope to edit and present in full in an upcoming essays section to the site. Presently, I would like to bring the series to an end by providing a quote from a journal article that I read recently. I feel it sums up what the series attempts to express, particularly if read in conjunction with an except from a related journal article presented in an earlier blog entry.

An excerpt from Gerrans, P. (2005). Tacit knowledge, rule following and Pierre Bourdieu’s philosophy of social science. Anthropological Theory, 5(1), 53-74.

On Bourdieu’s account of dispositional tacit knowledge, agents learn to agree in practice without explicitly or consciously representing concordance as a goal. Thus the hierarchy of respect in the barrio is reproduced even though each individual is not consciously thinking that the rule which governs his actions is to ‘preserve the hierarchy of respect’. The idea goes back at least to Aristotle’s contrast between learning by habituation and learning by intellectual instruction in the Nichomachean Ethics

Now some think that we are made good by nature, others by habituation, others by teaching. Nature’s part evidently does not depend on us, but as a result of some divine causes is present in those who are truly fortunate; while argument and teaching we may suspect are not powerful with all men, but the soul of the student must first have been cultivated by means of habits for noble joy and noble hatred, like earth which is to nourish the seed . . . The character, then, must somehow be there already with a kinship to virtue, loving what is noble and hating what is base. (Nichomachean Ethics 1179b-31)

Aristotle’s point is that virtue, which on his account is a form of knowledge, is originally a matter of character rather than intellect. Furthermore, that character cannot be acquired alone. One acquires a character as second nature through living in a society in which standards for virtuous behaviour are embodied in practice. Aristotle’s word for this type of socially embodied representation acquired through practical immersion in a culture is Hexis: Bourdieu captures the same concept by a term first used by Aristotle’s medieval translators: habitus.

Why We Do What We Do? Part Five: Conclusion

“Practical holism ... is the view that [any theory of language] can only be meaningful in specific contexts and against a background of shared practices’. ... Background practices, equipment, locations, and broader horizons ... are part and parcel of our ability to engage in conversation and find our way about.” (Stern, 2004, pg 163 - 164)

To sum up, Hans Sluga once wrote that “human language games are not based on knowledge but on practice.” (Sluga, 2011, pg 107) I have applied this observation to the broad notion of existence or practice. It is not what we know that gives shape to our existence. It is what we do. Our knowledge comes to serve and - in fact - justify why we do what we do and the standards of excellence that we expect from these endeavours. If I am to conclude, then I would say that a practice is something that we do not just once but on a regular basis. Unlike an activity, the participant in a practice attaches a certain level of significance or commitment  to the action. In the practice, one comes to acquire certain rules that give shape to the practice. The participant comes to act in accordance with the rules, some which are explicitly stated and others which are acquired through experience and understood as conventions of the practice. 

To be fully immersed in a practice requires an understanding of the standards and expectations, the intention behind the activities, and the motivation and significance that underpins the practice. One becomes adept in the practice through experience, and this is assisted through instruction (or guidance) by those who are more experienced. These “masters” set the stage for engagement and they scaffold subsequent engagement and development. This is done in the hope that the practice will be internalised and the participant will “go on” in accordance with the rule. By “going on”, the learner is committed to the practice by adhering to the practice, contributing to the practice and being part of the practice’s evolution. Collectively, one’s practices give shape to one’s form of life within the stream of living. One’s practices provide one with a habitus (or culture), and one’s habitus (or culture) gives rise from one’s practices. 

At the same time, we should never forget any single practice or set of practices is open to disintegration or entropy. Entropy is formally defined as "the lack of order or predictability; gradual decline into disorder." Any system must have energy placed into it so that the system is maintained or preserved. If the practices of a cultural system are not reinforced, then the system and the form of life to which that system is attached will suffer and decay. According to the concept of entropy, the natural state of any system is decay unless efforts are made to maintain it.

Reference

Sluga, H. (2011). Wittgenstein. Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell.

Stern, D. (2004). Wittgenstein’s Philosophical Investigations: an introduction. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

We transmit so much knowledge through the written word

Recently, I have found myself seeking to justify literacy. You would be right to think it is silly that one would need to justify such a thing. Nevertheless, there is a part of me that hears a voice that repeatedly asks, "what's all this fuss about literacy?" And I found that many of my responses were inadequate. I would respond with, "it is a vital skill in today's workforce" or "with literacy one can explore the world of the imagination" or "literacy is central to learning." And the voice would respond with quite reasonable objections. One can learn skills without literacy. One can convey information through the spoken word and through visual representations. One can be apprenticed by a thorough and patient master who shows us the ropes of what needs to be done.

"I can get by without learning to read ... I'm a car mechanic, and I have a cousin whose always up to date. He tells me and shows me what I need to know. Sure, he can read ... He stays up-to-date with all the new technology. That's how he works. But me, I'm hands on. I need to be hands on to learn. Give me an instruction manual, and it's all gibberish to me."

In practice, so much of our knowledge is transmitted through the written word. This is not to say that the written word is all that is required to understand a topic, such as medicine or auto mechanics. One still requires experts to demonstrate skills. One still requires teachers to ask the right questions and to prompt our thoughts. One still requires certain experiences to have the background knowledge that will be necessary to make sense of what one reads (to apply what one reads). Despite all this, if one is not able to read, then one is restricted in the ability to extend that knowledge. To build an extensive understanding one needs quality teachers, enabling experiences, and the ability to further one's understanding. One needs the ability to source information, read it, understand it, critique it and put it into practice.

Reading is not the key to learning. Good teaching, quality experiences and passion & purpose are the necessary keys. Reading and writing are the vital multipliers. They can help quicken the pace at which one learns. Why? Because we transmit so much our knowledge through the written word.

Learning Involves (1) the Building of Individual Capacities and (2) the Initiation of Learners into Social Practices

View fullsize