The desire to be educated is a natural instinct that should be encouraged in a healthy manner. It is good that people seek to know more about the world around them, how it works, and how to successfully manage it. Recent indicators within the United States education system, however, have pointed toward an underlying shift that renders this curiosity for learning unhealthy. For instance, while America has been noted to have “spen[t] more than other developed nations on its students’ education each year,” results unfortunately show that “U.S. students still trail their rivals on international tests” (CBS News, 2013). On the other hand, many famous American figures, such as Bill Gates or Mike Zuckerberg, have been widely known for their successful endeavors upon the national and international stage – despite having dropped out of college. Such a discrepancy between what is termed “education” and what is deemed actual success should strongly encourage educators, parents, administrators, and students to rethink education’s definition, its cost, and its execution within the American education system. Such an unhealthy thirst for knowledge can devastate the fundamental principles of how knowledge is transferred and received within the classroom, especially when already controversial issues such as standardized testing or working toward a college degree are involved. These issues can strongly influence teachers and students to respond very poorly in the classroom. While there may be widely differing opinions regarding these policies, the great demand and insistence for education to thoroughly permeate and benefit individuals of our society has had a great effect on our nation’s psychology, gradually culminating in an extreme desire to be educated no matter what the cost. Despite the obvious benefits of education, the obsession for education is very harmful to our body of students and educational professionals because it strips away the true essence of education and its purpose, which is to help individuals learn how their world works and how to effect benefit from that world for themselves and others.
The obsession for education has greatly affected the American education system first through the advent of standardized testing. America’s unhealthy obsession with education can clearly be seen by how often students are tested within a year and how much time teachers spend preparing students for these annual assessments. The Washington Post reports that the “average student in America’s big-city public schools takes some 112 mandatory standardized tests between pre-kindergarten and the end of 12th grade,” which is an “average of about eight a year” (Strauss, 2015). While perhaps not a surprising number at first, this calculation is relatively high when considering how “often” these standardized tests “overlap” and how students may also take “teacher-written tests” alongside standardized ones that are also within “the very same subject” (Strauss, 2015). Such an epidemic of over-testing students for the sake of achievement becomes a serious problem when it starts to detract time from useful learning and teaching by both students and teachers, especially when considering how that number of standardized tests “eats up between 20 and 25 hours every school year” and how “there is no evidence that adding testing time improves student achievement” (Strauss, 2015).
With the introduction of government policies such as No Child Left Behind or Race to the Top, teachers and educational professionals have entered a frantic frenzy to enforce students to do well academically on standardized tests. This testing hysteria is commonly attributed to such policies since they claim that “states could win federal education funding by promising to undertake specific reforms” – even through “evaluating teachers” by their students’ test scores (Strauss, 2015). By rewarding schools based on performance and simultaneously threatening a teacher’s position due to poor student output, the obsession for education has increased as many teachers have unfortunately shunned good, solid teaching strategies for the sake of keeping their jobs. By “teaching to the test” (Jerald, 2006, p. 2), teachers have opted to implement “item-teaching” strategies rather than “curriculum-teaching” ones (Popham qtd. Jerald, 2006, p. 2). A preference for such strategies is harmful, as Jerald explains that “[i]tem teachers narrow their instruction, organizing their teaching around clones of the particular questions most likely to be found on the test” and instructing students with “only the bits of knowledge students are most likely to encounter on exams” (Jerald, 2006, p. 2). Unlike “curriculum-teaching,” which focuses on the “full body of knowledge and skills represented by test questions even though tests can employ only a sample of questions to assess students’ knowledge about a topic,” teachers – understandably obsessed with their students’ scores – have decided to simply offer rote and predictable items for students to memorize and regurgitate, rather than teaching them how to understand and apply the information they have been given for practical and profitable use (Jerald, 2006, p. 2).
Despite the debatable enforcement of issues such as standardized testing and the clear stakes such test results have upon a teacher’s livelihood, teachers and educational professionals should not allow the obsession for perfect scores to get in the way of true learning and education by implementing strategies that promote “curriculum-teaching” (Jerald, 2006, p. 2). In fact, evidence suggests that “the choice between good instructional practice and good test scores is really no choice at all” (Jerald, 2006, p. 1). In one study, students who were given “more authentic intellectual instruction” actually “logged test-score gains” on a “commercially developed, nationally norm-referenced” Iowan assessment. These students “exceeded the national average by 20 percent”; in comparison, students who did not receive the same type of teaching and were given “few authentic assignments” received scores that were “much less than the national average” (Jerald, 2006, p. 4). Indeed, despite the hysteria for perfect test scores to keep teacher jobs, Jerald states that “[c]learly, it is possible for educators to make better choices about how and when to teach to the test than the alarmist newspaper articles and editorials would seem to suggest” (Jerald, 2006, p. 5). Such experiences serve as proof that both teachers and students do not need to sacrifice integrity and sound teaching practices in order to effectively achieve an exceptional education.
The obsession for education not only affect students within the traditional K-12 system as they work from grade to high school in order to graduate, but also as they decide whether or not to enter college, thus having a much larger impact on their future lives as a whole. Of course, there is no contest against the argument that attaining a college education and a college degree – especially a bachelor’s – is very beneficial, and that doing so can benefit a student and his future family financially. Not surprisingly, the “possession of a BA is statistically associated with higher income across the life span” and “this economic benefit persists after controlling for measures of human capital (e.g., IQ scores), field of study, and other background variables,” thus proving the benefit of a college education within a four-year time span (Murray, 2008).
The desire for a college-level education, however, becomes a problem when students mistakenly believe that they must attain a college degree in order to succeed in life, “echoing a sentiment that suggest[s] that a college degree is required for most people to have a good career” (Singh, 2014). Many jobs, in fact, do not require a diploma from a center of higher learning. The U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics estimates that “only 27 percent of jobs in the U.S. economy currently require a college degree,” indicating a fairly low number of people who will be entering the work force that actually needs to attend college (Singh, 2014). Furthermore, the Bureau “projects that the proportion of jobs requiring a college degree will barely change – increasingly to only 27.1 percent by 2022,” proving to students the unnecessary cost of pursuing a college education (Singh, 2014).
Despite these numbers, the U.S. Census Bureau also reports that “47 percent of workers today have an associate degree or higher” (Singh, 2014), demonstrating the obsession that students have with the idea of college, going to college, and getting a degree there. Singh notes that this fascination with attaining a college degree most likely stems from the prestige associated with a college degree or notion that having one automatically allows for a more successful career post-college, since “[e]arning a post-secondary degree or credential is a prerequisite for 21st century jobs” (White House qtd. in Singh, 2014). Singh further explains that “we do everything possible to encourage people to go to college, whether it works or not,” even when knowing that “about a third” of those attending college will “pick majors that have very poor job prospects” such as the “social sciences […] education […] psychology […] and visual and performing arts” (Singh, 2014). By obsessing over college or a college degree and neglecting to opt out of one, students can greatly affect their learning by mistakenly overlooking other options and opportunities like a trade or vocational school that could benefit their learning much more or much better fit their goals and talents. In fact, Singh notes that as “we’re pushing more people to get college degrees, we’re also facing a worsening shortage of skilled workers in many categories that does not require a college degree” – options that could very well satisfy a student’s interests, needs, and pocket-book much more effectively.
By witnessing the harmful effects that an unhealthy obsession with education can have upon the American education system, teachers, parents, administrators, and students all need to rethink what education is and what we are willing to pay in order to achieve its ideal form. According to the Oxford English Dictionary, the term education, defined as a noun, means “[t]he systematic instruction, teaching, or training in various academic and non-academic subjects given to or received by a child, typically at a school” as well as “the course of scholastic instruction a person receives in his or her lifetime.” Certainly, receiving such an education from any high school or college presents a person with a certain set of educational advantages that will have a notable impact on that person’s future life and opportunities. As learners, we need to learn the fundamentals and basics, and at times, rote memorization is completely necessary to achieve these goals.
I would like, however, to push the definition of education a bit further. I would like to argue that education is much more than simply receiving or giving the “systematic instruction, teaching, or training” of a particular set of information (“Education”). Instead, I would like to consider Jonassen’s definition of education, which he re-defines as “meaningful learning” (2011, p. 2, emphasis added). Concerning this new approach, Jonassen defines this type of learning as having students “willfully engaged in a meaningful task” and also explains that meaningful learning promotes a learning environment that is “active, constructive, intentional, authentic, and cooperative” (2011, p. 2). Jonassen further explains that “meaningful learning,” unlike the mindless, “inert” consumption of facts, “helps students to learn how to recognize and solve problems, comprehend new phenomena, construct mental models of those phenomena, and, given a new situation, set goals and regulate their own learning (learning how to learn) (2011, p. 2).”
I believe Jonassen’s definition of education is, in a sense, widely different from our daily interpretations of “education” or being “educated.” By adhering to this specific definition of education, teachers and students can have a better perspective on how to deal with certain issues that intrude upon the classroom because the intent behind “meaningful learning” shuns a simple regurgitation of information – it focuses on thoroughly understanding the material and applying that knowledge to problems, benefiting the individual and others within the real world (Jonassen, 2011, p.2). Like Jerald, I believe that such an education will be successful because teachers are “employing a variety of strategies to ensure that students develop basic skills and can apply those skills to complex tasks grounded in real-world challenges” (2006, p. 4). Moreover, applying this definition to education and turning away from those that only promote the simple transfer of information between an instructor and receiver builds a level of intellectual trust between the teacher and student that allows for a more honest, meaningful, and trustworthy classroom and environment. Although the cost of paying for such a definition of education can be fatal at times – especially for teachers who are tied closely to their jobs – I believe that such a cost is a small price to pay for the promotion and continuance of good ethics and for true, personal benefits within an educational community that is shrouded by a constant flux of complications and problems.
Despite the obsessive nature that is prevalent within the educational community, teachers and students can be reassured that they can truly thrive within the classroom when they choose to promote a meaning of education that advocates for the sound acquisition and profitable application of information. As can be seen when observing classes within the K-12 and college hierarchy, students and teachers always have the opportunity to reject the simple transfer of knowledge, despite the pull of undesirable educational policies. Succumbing to such faulty educational policies for the sake of a passing grade or a certain status ultimately degrades a child’s education and undermines any meaningful learning that can be done. By making a conscious choice to implement teaching strategies that promote learning for the sake of being able to know more about the world and how to apply such knowledge for a better life, teachers and students can finally benefit themselves as well as future classrooms. I am certainly not saying that there is not a place for factual transfer or more rote methods of learning; I am saying, however, that there must be a balance when trying to equip oneself with fruitful knowledge, not an obsessive nature. Learning should be a process done for the purpose of discovering and knowing more about a person’s surroundings and how to benefit others, not for the cost of simply obtaining graded success. By doing so, true intellectual relationships can form between students and teachers, thus strengthening individuals, families, and communities.
References
CBS News. (2013). U.S. education spending tops global list, study shows. The Associated Press. < http://www.cbsnews.com/news/us-education-spending-tops-global-list-study-shows/ >
Education. (2016). In The Oxford English dictionary. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Jerald, Craig D. (2006). ‘Teach to the test’? Just say no. Issue Brief.
Murray, Charles. (2008). Is college worth it? Cato Unbound. < http://www.cato-unbound.org/2008/10/06/charles-murray/down-four-year-college-degree >
Singh, Raghav. (2014). The obsession with college degrees: are too many people seeking a degree for the wrong reasons? Ere Media. <http://www.eremedia.com/ere/the-obsession-with-college-degrees-are-too-many-people-seeking-a-degree-for-the-wrong-reasons/ >
Strauss, Valerie. (2015).Confirmed: standardized testing has taken over our schools. But who’s to blame? The Washington Post. <https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/answer-sheet/wp/2015/10/24/confirmed-standardized-testing-has-taken-over-our-schools-but-whos-to-blame/ >