8 ms·

This is a very old observation and in fact, the suppression of creativity and individualism is one of the key goals of the compulsory schooling system. From Jo

This is a very old observation and in fact, the suppression of creativity and individualism is one of the key goals of the compulsory schooling system. From John D. Rockefeller, Sr.'s General Education Board, Occasional Papers No. 1, 1913: "In our dreams, we have limitless resources and the people yield themselves with perfect docility to our molding hands. The present education conventions fade from their minds, and unhampered by tradition, we work our own good will upon a grateful and responsive rural folk. We shall not try to make these people or any of their children into philosophers or men of learning, or men of science. We have not to raise up from among them authors, editors, poets or men of letters. We shall not search for embryo great artists, painters, musicians nor lawyers, doctors, preachers, politicians, statesmen, of whom we have an ample supply…The task we set before ourselves is very simple as well as a very beautiful one, to train these people as we find them to a perfectly ideal life just where they are. So we will organize our children and teach them to do in a perfect way the things their fathers and mothers are doing in an imperfect way, in the homes, in the shops and on the farm."

analog31 13y ago
This quote, or maybe ones similar too it, have been cited as the "basis" of our school system, and it's not inconceivable to me that people with those motives helped get our public schools off the ground. But is there any evidence that such ideas are actually influential in today's schools? I'll bet that most teachers, if shown your quote, would retch. Maybe I'm lucky (at least, lucky enough to be affluent), but I don't think that my kids are discouraged from being creative at school or in quasi-school activities such as their music lessons.
- vezzy-fnord 13y ago
  But is there any evidence that such ideas are actually influential in today's schools? I'll bet that most teachers, if shown your quote, would retch. I assume you have read John Taylor Gatto's works before. In particular, you might be interested in his most recent: Weapons of Mass Instruction. I don't know how exactly you would gauge their influence. It's certainly much more prevalent in certain countries (the USA and the major Western European forces, where the idea of modern compulsory schooling originated in the first place: Prussia), compared to say, Eastern European countries. The national psychology has always been different there, and after being ravaged by communism, the school system is quite chaotic and ineffectual, though the EU and other powers are trying to enact change (not necessarily for the better). In any event, just look at how the classroom model of schooling works these days: intense focus on rote memorization, adherence to ritualistic and often obsolete or pointless standards, very bureaucratic operation and government, a fanatical concern with and faith in the grading system, standardized testing as the be-all-end-all of education and so on. Then depending on the country, schools are used to instill nationalistic and other forms of propaganda, be it in the history textbooks or throughout the entire atmosphere of the classroom. Typically most states do this, though the exact level and subtlety depends on the individual nation. The teachers would likely retch, but they're just as big of pawns as anybody else. They're not meant to know. They're told to serve a seemingly benevolent purpose in educating the nation's youth, and they must obviously comply with whatever they're given if they'd like to keep their job.
  - barrkel 13y ago
    Prussia was an eastern European country. Most of it is now Poland, some of it Russia. Modern education is less indoctrination than industrialized daycare. Grading systems at least have some hope of removing some of the biases inherent other forms of judging people, which tend to come down to social markers (the way you speak, dress, who you know) and perpetuate elite prejudicial advantage. Similarly uniforms: they're a social equalizer for people from a poor background.
    - vezzy-fnord 13y ago
      Grading systems (at least in their contemporary form) are no more effective, because the grader can be very easily manipulated or show bias themselves. That and it's just a very flat method of measuring progress. It's systemic, ruthlessly bureaucratic and typically within the context of standardized testing. Social equalization was no doubt one of the motivations behind uniforms, though it's also likely a symbolic tool to foster groupthink and a superficial cloak of egalitarianism. There's many different ways to show your influence and being of a higher class than through mere clothing.
codingdave 13y ago
It may not be new, but in regard to education in particular, it is worth repeating loudly and often. I work in the educational governance arena, and am exposed to many discussions that go on at the school district administration level. It is very popular to talk about improving creativity in education. Many educational leaders recognize the issue. But at the same time there are even more discussions about Common Core standards and other ways to standardize education. Sometimes both conversations come from the same people. I was at a conference this fall, with two session at the same time, in rooms right next to each other -- one promoting why the Common Core is the greatest thing ever, the other denouncing it. Both sessions were equally full, and both sessions got the worst reviews of the entire conference, mostly because the people are so conflicted about how to deal with innovation and creativity vs standardization. It is a problem that is easy to identify, but much more difficult to fix. People are trying. For example, Khan academy is a great resource for independent learning, but even their elementary math lessons are categorized by traditional grade levels. The best solution I have to improve creativity in the American educational system is to educate the parents. Make sure that all parents are aware of the issues, and make sure that all parents know that the education of their children is not in the hand of their local school district, but in their own hands. They need to understand the pros and cons of all schooling options, and make the right decisions for their children, and include their children in those discussions when they get old enough. I know this is a huge tangent away from the original article, but this strikes a bit of a nerve with me, and I agree with you that education is an arena in which the issue of creativity is vitally important, probably moreso than in the workplace.
- vezzy-fnord 13y ago
  Any educational solution that works within the framework of the existing system is doomed to failure. Schooling, in its present form, is the greatest lie ever told, I would say. Education is something that should heavily depend on the individual person. The best way to educate is to self-educate. Then there could be certain gatherings like free schools (free as in freedom, look them up if you aren't aware) and democratic schools if one wants to study with a group or requires tutoring from an experienced person. Apprenticeship is also something I would like to see make a comeback. The school system, however, has done a truly horrifying and dreadful act in that it has killed off the desire for people to autodidact, and has convinced generations that it is the only right way. Of course, many people self-educate in their spare time, but they often do not realize it and instead hold faith in formal academics and schooling as the sole credible form of education. Another fallacy the schooling system has perpetuated is the incorrect equivocation of school and education. They have nothing alike. One is a strict and guided system, the other is the acquisition of knowledge by any means that are possible.
Nursie 13y ago
>> the suppression of creativity and individualism is one of the key goals of the compulsory schooling system. This is a popular meme but bears pretty much no relationship with reality.
- vezzy-fnord 13y ago
  Please elaborate. Popular? It's been getting more attention recently due to the work of various authors, but the vast majority of people still see compulsory schooling as an irrevocable necessity.
  - Nursie 13y ago
    The vast majority see compulsory and free schooling as an unmitigated good. The "it's only there to make you conform and obey the elites" meme is certainly getting more popular, but its so far from the aims of educators (and the politicians that continue to fund it) that it's about as well grounded and believable as chemtrails, the illuminati or other conspiracy theory.
    - nickff 13y ago
      1) Government-run schools are not free. 2) The educators' intentions may be good, but the results are much more important. 3) The politicians do not fund things, they appropriate money from tax receipts. 4) There are many defenders of the public school system who justify it on the basis of creating a 'shared experience' for the citizenry, which sounds quite collectivist. Why would singing national anthems and pledges of allegiance be so common in schools around the world, if not for statism? 5) The government schooling system has historically been used as a tool of oppression against minorities; it would be naive to believe that politicians and bureaucrats suddenly stopped using the schools to achieve their ends .
      - Nursie 13y ago
        1) They are free at the point of access, we all pay for them. I'm not sure why you feel the need to point this out as it's a useless distinction 2) Not when we're talking about the subject we're actually talking about they're not. I quote from the OP - "the suppression of creativity and individualism is one of the key goals of the compulsory schooling system". That's what I dispute. It may well be an outcome, and that would be bad and should be changed, but it's disingenuous (to say the least) to ascribe this as a motive. 3) The politicians decide what to fund out of the public purse, yes. Again, useless distinction 4) Is collectivism evil in and of itself? I don't subscribe to this view in the slightest, in case you were wondering, and I've only ever heard a few left-wing talking heads claim that that is what we should be trying to do with schools. Personally I 'justify' it by observing that education is given to people who otherwise would not get it for a variety of reasons, and having a base level of education throughout society being a very Good Thing. 5) It's also verging on conspiracy to ascribe nefarious aims and goals to every person involved in education.
api 13y ago
Wow. How... Leninist of him. Damn commie.
jcromartie 13y ago
Is there anything wrong with this? Not everybody can be an astronaut. Somebody has to plant the corn or pick up the garbage.
- vezzy-fnord 13y ago
  Except they're here imposing this as a global task. Of course we need lower level labor as well, but those do not require much formal education in the first place.

analog31 13y ago

This quote, or maybe ones similar too it, have been cited as the "basis" of our school system, and it's not inconceivable to me that people with those motives helped get our public schools off the ground. But is there any evidence that such ideas are actually influential in today's schools? I'll bet that most teachers, if shown your quote, would retch. Maybe I'm lucky (at least, lucky enough to be affluent), but I don't think that my kids are discouraged from being creative at school or in quasi-school activities such as their music lessons.

vezzy-fnord 13y ago
But is there any evidence that such ideas are actually influential in today's schools? I'll bet that most teachers, if shown your quote, would retch. I assume you have read John Taylor Gatto's works before. In particular, you might be interested in his most recent: Weapons of Mass Instruction. I don't know how exactly you would gauge their influence. It's certainly much more prevalent in certain countries (the USA and the major Western European forces, where the idea of modern compulsory schooling originated in the first place: Prussia), compared to say, Eastern European countries. The national psychology has always been different there, and after being ravaged by communism, the school system is quite chaotic and ineffectual, though the EU and other powers are trying to enact change (not necessarily for the better). In any event, just look at how the classroom model of schooling works these days: intense focus on rote memorization, adherence to ritualistic and often obsolete or pointless standards, very bureaucratic operation and government, a fanatical concern with and faith in the grading system, standardized testing as the be-all-end-all of education and so on. Then depending on the country, schools are used to instill nationalistic and other forms of propaganda, be it in the history textbooks or throughout the entire atmosphere of the classroom. Typically most states do this, though the exact level and subtlety depends on the individual nation. The teachers would likely retch, but they're just as big of pawns as anybody else. They're not meant to know. They're told to serve a seemingly benevolent purpose in educating the nation's youth, and they must obviously comply with whatever they're given if they'd like to keep their job.
- barrkel 13y ago
  Prussia was an eastern European country. Most of it is now Poland, some of it Russia. Modern education is less indoctrination than industrialized daycare. Grading systems at least have some hope of removing some of the biases inherent other forms of judging people, which tend to come down to social markers (the way you speak, dress, who you know) and perpetuate elite prejudicial advantage. Similarly uniforms: they're a social equalizer for people from a poor background.
  - vezzy-fnord 13y ago
    Grading systems (at least in their contemporary form) are no more effective, because the grader can be very easily manipulated or show bias themselves. That and it's just a very flat method of measuring progress. It's systemic, ruthlessly bureaucratic and typically within the context of standardized testing. Social equalization was no doubt one of the motivations behind uniforms, though it's also likely a symbolic tool to foster groupthink and a superficial cloak of egalitarianism. There's many different ways to show your influence and being of a higher class than through mere clothing.

codingdave 13y ago

It may not be new, but in regard to education in particular, it is worth repeating loudly and often. I work in the educational governance arena, and am exposed to many discussions that go on at the school district administration level. It is very popular to talk about improving creativity in education. Many educational leaders recognize the issue. But at the same time there are even more discussions about Common Core standards and other ways to standardize education. Sometimes both conversations come from the same people. I was at a conference this fall, with two session at the same time, in rooms right next to each other -- one promoting why the Common Core is the greatest thing ever, the other denouncing it. Both sessions were equally full, and both sessions got the worst reviews of the entire conference, mostly because the people are so conflicted about how to deal with innovation and creativity vs standardization. It is a problem that is easy to identify, but much more difficult to fix. People are trying. For example, Khan academy is a great resource for independent learning, but even their elementary math lessons are categorized by traditional grade levels. The best solution I have to improve creativity in the American educational system is to educate the parents. Make sure that all parents are aware of the issues, and make sure that all parents know that the education of their children is not in the hand of their local school district, but in their own hands. They need to understand the pros and cons of all schooling options, and make the right decisions for their children, and include their children in those discussions when they get old enough. I know this is a huge tangent away from the original article, but this strikes a bit of a nerve with me, and I agree with you that education is an arena in which the issue of creativity is vitally important, probably moreso than in the workplace.

vezzy-fnord 13y ago
Any educational solution that works within the framework of the existing system is doomed to failure. Schooling, in its present form, is the greatest lie ever told, I would say. Education is something that should heavily depend on the individual person. The best way to educate is to self-educate. Then there could be certain gatherings like free schools (free as in freedom, look them up if you aren't aware) and democratic schools if one wants to study with a group or requires tutoring from an experienced person. Apprenticeship is also something I would like to see make a comeback. The school system, however, has done a truly horrifying and dreadful act in that it has killed off the desire for people to autodidact, and has convinced generations that it is the only right way. Of course, many people self-educate in their spare time, but they often do not realize it and instead hold faith in formal academics and schooling as the sole credible form of education. Another fallacy the schooling system has perpetuated is the incorrect equivocation of school and education. They have nothing alike. One is a strict and guided system, the other is the acquisition of knowledge by any means that are possible.

Nursie 13y ago

>> the suppression of creativity and individualism is one of the key goals of the compulsory schooling system. This is a popular meme but bears pretty much no relationship with reality.

vezzy-fnord 13y ago
Please elaborate. Popular? It's been getting more attention recently due to the work of various authors, but the vast majority of people still see compulsory schooling as an irrevocable necessity.
- Nursie 13y ago
  The vast majority see compulsory and free schooling as an unmitigated good. The "it's only there to make you conform and obey the elites" meme is certainly getting more popular, but its so far from the aims of educators (and the politicians that continue to fund it) that it's about as well grounded and believable as chemtrails, the illuminati or other conspiracy theory.
  - nickff 13y ago
    1) Government-run schools are not free. 2) The educators' intentions may be good, but the results are much more important. 3) The politicians do not fund things, they appropriate money from tax receipts. 4) There are many defenders of the public school system who justify it on the basis of creating a 'shared experience' for the citizenry, which sounds quite collectivist. Why would singing national anthems and pledges of allegiance be so common in schools around the world, if not for statism? 5) The government schooling system has historically been used as a tool of oppression against minorities; it would be naive to believe that politicians and bureaucrats suddenly stopped using the schools to achieve their ends .
    - Nursie 13y ago
      1) They are free at the point of access, we all pay for them. I'm not sure why you feel the need to point this out as it's a useless distinction 2) Not when we're talking about the subject we're actually talking about they're not. I quote from the OP - "the suppression of creativity and individualism is one of the key goals of the compulsory schooling system". That's what I dispute. It may well be an outcome, and that would be bad and should be changed, but it's disingenuous (to say the least) to ascribe this as a motive. 3) The politicians decide what to fund out of the public purse, yes. Again, useless distinction 4) Is collectivism evil in and of itself? I don't subscribe to this view in the slightest, in case you were wondering, and I've only ever heard a few left-wing talking heads claim that that is what we should be trying to do with schools. Personally I 'justify' it by observing that education is given to people who otherwise would not get it for a variety of reasons, and having a base level of education throughout society being a very Good Thing. 5) It's also verging on conspiracy to ascribe nefarious aims and goals to every person involved in education.

api 13y ago

Wow. How... Leninist of him. Damn commie.

jcromartie 13y ago

Is there anything wrong with this? Not everybody can be an astronaut. Somebody has to plant the corn or pick up the garbage.

vezzy-fnord 13y ago
Except they're here imposing this as a global task. Of course we need lower level labor as well, but those do not require much formal education in the first place.