Zach McCurter

UNST 101
10/07/2007
Short Analysis Paper on Education
My philosophy of education and view of the world are directly related. Education

in general is possibly the single most important thing in defining the world from our

perspective. It gives us ways in which to communicate and interpret ideas, create new

ideas, and apply existing or created ideas to aid in the development of modern culture,

new technology, and the expansion of our world. There are many different variables that

effect education: the region or political state it is shared, the background, previous

knowledge and capability of the student, the purpose of the student(in their mind)

learning the topic and the purpose of the educator teaching the topic. Before one can find

the most effective way to teach all variables should be considered. Although all the

attributes education brings may indeed be good for the betterment of mankind, education

may also be used as a type of construction of the soul that can most effectively be used in

the setting it is provided(a type of unavoidable propaganda). The argument would not be

is education a good thing, however what does the betterment of mankind mean and who

makes that decision. My view of the world was very closely related to the region and

culture in which I lived and the source in which it came from(the public school system),

until I became more educated. After realizing the complexity of the world, the people and

things in which it is composed of, and the ideas of the political state I was educated in,

my view became much more vast and is still developing.

An example of how education can differ from a regional and political standpoint

is an indigenous culture versus an aristocratic culture. An indigenous culture may teach

important topics such as how to catch food or how to properly plant a crop for the
purpose of survival. Where as a student at a university may be learning how to design

automobiles or how to form a business with a competitive advantage in the market place

which after they graduate will be applied in the workplace in order to keep their economy

going. Both examples are a form of education however the purpose, student, and “frame”

in which they are taught differ. In Eviatar Zerubavel‘s The Fine Line: Making

Distinctions in Everyday Life, The Free Press, 1991, Zerubavel explains the concept of

frames of reality in which we often use and may not realize. “Picture frames also make us

disregard the wall surrounding the picture. Like them, all frames basically define parts of

our perceptual environment as irrelevant, thus separating that which we attend in a

focused manner from all the out-of-frame experience that we leave “in the background”

and ignore.” This can be applied to culture as well. Although the stock market may have

just crashed in the frame of the indigenous reality it would have no effect, yet would have

a drastic effect on the realm of the student in the university. Because of the differences in

these “realms” of existence the education is relative to what is pertinent in the realm.

Teaching a very young student with no real idea of the world outside his or her

“realm” would be very difficult or almost impossible to do unless a basic knowledge of

the physical world is provided for a base to learn from. A young student in an indigenous

culture may have no use for the same basic knowledge as a student in an aristocratic

culture. Once a student in any setting receives a basic knowledge he or she begins to

develop the capability to question his surroundings and think deeper into his or her

surroundings and than perhaps outside it’s surroundings. The previous knowledge they

receive will be concurrent to the purpose of the education. An indigenous culture may

teach important survival skills and roles in society for the continuation of the community,
where as an aristocratic culture will provide a basis for higher learning and tactics to

remain competitive in the world economy.

The natural ability of the student may be repressed by the educator inadvertently

or deliberately. In Pedagogy of the Oppressed by Paulo Freire. New York: Continuum

Books, 1993, Freire explains how the educator uses a type of banking education to fill the

students mind rather than have them think critically. “The teacher talks about reality as if

it were motionless, static, compartmentalized, and predictable. Or else he expounds on a

topic completely alien to the existential experience of the students. His task is to "fill" the

students with the contents of his narration -- contents which are detached from reality,

disconnected from the totality that engendered them and could give them significance.

Words are emptied of their concreteness and become a hollow, alienated, and alienating

verbosity.” If an educator can simply give the student the information and the student in

turn remembers only what was said and not why or how it relates to their world, the

student can easily be manipulated into thinking the way the educator would like them to.

This is conveniently used in many education systems to create a so called “model

citizen”. In my opinion, the system realizes that not every student will become their

model citizen, however most will and that is all they need to keep the structure of their

other wise chaotic society, organized. On the contrary Freire also mentions a type of

autonomous education where the student is encouraged to think freely and not influenced

by the political views or ideals of the educator. The student is also encouraged to question

anything and everything. Use a type of analytical thinking to solve problems which exist

amongst not only his or her realm but the entire fathomable existence of the “world”, and

search for solutions to those problems. In a banking type of education the student would
be looked down upon for questioning the educator and is asked to accept what is for what

is. A student with a high aptitude for learning in a banking style education system will in

turn be repressed from creating insightful conclusions about the topics he or she is

studying due to the style of education they receive.

A truly remarkable attribute of the human mind is its ability to create thoughts.

Ideas and sciences that once, to our race, were non-existent are now used in every day life

and often pleasurably taken for granted. Without the ability for a student of any kind to

think freely and validate a fact or idea this ability to create new thoughts and ideas would

suffer eminently. Therefore a students own reasoning of himself must be analyzed before

learning any motif. In my experience as a student, with other students, the most frequent

barrier between thinking critically and not is one in which he has created. The ability to

comprehend any difficult entity lies within everyone. Even if there are people who

exhibit a finer capability of assimilation more than others everyone is capable of thinking

freely. A mind can make up for what it lacks in natural ability by using pure

determination. An example of a barrier created by a student from my experience is in a

math class a student will simply say a problem is too hard, or a reading is stupid because

it does not make sense. Since the reading or equation does not relate to pop culture, their

friends, or anything that matters to them they see no use in analyzing it further and almost

think to do so would be looked down upon by what does matter to them.

In my philosophy of education it is barriers inside the student that cause the

greatest interference in education. The varying styles in which a student is educated,

cultural and political “realms”, and students natural ability all play a role in creating these

barriers. If the student can collectively take all these variables into account when
approaching education he or she will be successful in any classroom.