Referring to Chapter 2 about Education and
Culture, it can be seen that Culture has a strong impact in Education. When a
country practises structuralism, the learning of languages reflects one’s
culture, belief and behaviour. The language doesn’t mean just by learning the
language for communication purpose. Language can mean in writing forms and art
forms. The poets, poems, novels and books tell the culture of a certain place
or country. Different kinds of arts and paintings give different kinds of
feelings and messages. It can also be semiotic. Well, there have been two
different culture groups of people at the same time.
One group thought that it is through education;
someone will gain more knowledge and secure a job. Their parents, neighbours,
people around them made them believe this. This is the culture. However, as in
Paul Willis’ theory, there is another group that thought, it will only form an ‘arm
chair’ group of people who are not realistic. They may just want to be like
their parents. This group is the working class group of youth. They may be
treated as lower class people. They could not agree with the government. Thus,
they didn’t want to attend school because they hated the masterminds which were
controlling the education system. It was quite pathetic that they were at work
at a very young age and there wasn’t any suitable education which would attract
them to study and learn.
This situation is quite often to be seen in
this 21st century. There are people who really study very hard to be
professionals. However, being a teacher, lawyer or engineers, there are also
limitations in performing their tasks. The other group of people are concern
about how to make money. Everything is about money. They may not be highly
educated but through business or skill works, they can earn the sum they are
satisfied with. They find teaching bored. They don’t find education in school
is relevant to their working life. They could see clearly how the people around
them making money and success.
However, as to my opinion, there is a need
to bring these two groups together in order to have better development in
education, a balance in job supply and demand and to make the country grow. The
country would have to nurture students. Feeding them knowledge is not enough,
they must also be taught some relevant skills and recognises their talents. The
government must also support them to achieve their dreams.This is not something that can happen within a short period of time. However, we might see a good result in the long run.
- Eagle -
- Eagle -
Hi Eagle,
ReplyDeleteThis is another thought provoking entry from you :-) Although I don't fully understand your first paragraph, your discussion on Paul Willis' study is interesting. I especially like the part which you mentioned that even lawyers, engineers, and etc had limitation too.
Now, the question is that how do we bring the two ends together. Any suggestion from you?
WKToo
I was trying to say that languages reflects the culture of people in my first paragraph.
ReplyDeleteAnswering to your question, the government, ministry of education are the most important bodies as to what kind of students do they want in the future.
The government should fully support schools for teaching and the ministry of education should have a set of curriculum which has a balance on academic and also physical activities.
As from my own experience, I had never find science to be an interesting subject until I watched an American TV programme. I remember that there were always not enough equipments in the science lab for us, students, to do experiment. My chemistry teacher would do the experiment on the table he was sitting surrounded by about 45 students. I think, only 10 - 15 students who could see clearly but not the others. After experiment, we were to answer all the questions from what we have learned. Everything is based on the textbook and workbook. I didn't find any relationship of learning science and how could I apply it in real life. It was like trying to figure out how does an apple taste like from papers.
From the TV programme, I was so surprise to see young scientists as young as 7 competing in an indoor stadium. They were so active and innovative. Their work was unbelievable. In school, they learn and put them into practise. They were so innovative because they have the confidence on what they are doing. It shows how well they could understand their lessons and how could they apply into the real world.
I have also experienced that some students don't even know why are they learning English. They don't know how English will help them in the future. They learn it because it is compulsary. I think, if they are given a chance to expose to other students in other parts of the world, they will find the importance of learning English. How many hours do students use English in school? What is the percentage of changes using English at home and in the society which dont speak English?
I have seen students who have improved their English 4 core skills through chatting from internet but not from the lessons they have learnt from school. That is real life experience.
From the examples above, teachers are the ones who has the direct power to influence students. Teachers must always update themselves on how to make classes fun and interesting.
Therefore, a supportive government, a set of good curriculum and with teachers who have the passion to teach and encourages intellective teaching, we could bring two ends together. For the group who only believe education doesn't have any relationship to their real life, would have acceptance for education. Both the groups would benefit from this kind of learning. They would realise the importance of learning and the application to the real world of which they would fully commit themselves into learning.
Thanks for the clarification. Your examples on science labs and learning English language help me understand your points.
ReplyDeleteWKToo