I remember after preschool, it was so important to my parents that I
go to this prestigious school. It was a Chinese school, and we weren't
Chinese, so they had to make me go through a Chinese crash course
tutorials just so I could pass the entrance test. I passed, and spent
half of my elementary years there. When we moved to Iloilo, it was a big
sigh of relief because FINALLY, I didn't have to study Chinese anymore.
I asked my parents why they had to send me to that school when we
weren't Chinese. They said they wanted me to learn Chinese, because it
will be useful in the future, when I go into business, when I go out of
the country, etc---- it was the trend back then. I really didn't
understand why.
Fast forward to my senior year in high
school; that year was just all about ATENEO. It was the only option, it
was everyone's dream school for me, and all the preparations I did for
entrance tests, were geared towards passing ACET. I'm very grateful for
having received wonderful and exceptional education, but looking back--
why did I really want to go to Ateneo? According to many, having ATENEO
plastered on your resume was a sure ticket to a career. That was it. So
did I go to Ateneo for the right reasons? Would it be the same logic as
buying a Chanel bag just for the label, and not for its functionality?
This
was the big question that I had in mind for our class. After reading
Kohn's article on "What it Means to be Well-Educated", I reflected on my
beliefs in education, my experiences as a student and as an educator.
When Steve Jobs died, a lot of memes circulated online, about him
dropping out of Harvard and ending up the way he did--- successful and
filthy rich. Bill Gates and Mark Zuckerberg were just some of the names
that had the same fate as Jobs did. So should students follow the
footsteps of these tycoons? Would it be okay not to go to school? During
the time of Plato and Aristotle, these scholars went to school to learn
and to broaden their knowledge. It's very different now; people attend
these establishments, sit in four-walled classrooms for hours, listen to
the experts, mindlessly highlighting words on their textbooks to absorb
these facts in the short-term memory--- they go through all this
trouble for what? Do these nursing students really want to become
nurses? Or do they do it just so they can go abroad, earn bigger, and
support their family in the future?
This is what society
wants us to accomplish. This is the ideal. In this day and age, is it
even "acceptable" not to go to school at all? In the Philippines,
everyone's end goal is always to finish college at the very least. In
the US, going to a university is a privilege that only a few can enjoy.
In other countries poorer than our own 3rd world Pearl of The Orient,
education in itself is a privilege. BUT DOES IT HAVE TO BE? What is
education? Does it happen inside a classroom? Outside? Should there
always be a teacher who gives out grades? Or can it simply be an
exchange of ideas, or learning or expanding your knowledge with other
colleagues?
I am getting carried away with my
thoughts, or rather, questions on education, after having read that
article. Who dictates what we do, and who we are anyway? Who dictates
these ideals? Who says what is beautiful and what is not? Knowing these
ideals would perhaps lead to a better understanding on our goals for
education, to knowing why we really need to go to school. Perhaps to
understand our reasons of why we go through all these to become
"well-educated". How important is it to stay true to these ideals? And
where does individualism come in?
