3 ms·

What we need to do is to discern between education and training. Once we do that, we can begin to elevate the vocational back to a place where it's valued, and

What we need to do is to discern between education and training. Once we do that, we can begin to elevate the vocational back to a place where it's valued, and institutions dedicated to education can get back to it and not have it's resources diverted to a task outside the charter of education. I look forward to engaging in the debate of the line between the two.

seanflyon 12y ago
Could you elaborate on the distinction between education and training and why you think a single institution should not do both? I think colleges should teach things that are things that are directly applicable to a job as well as things that are not.
- mlitchard 12y ago
  First, when I say education, I mean Liberal Arts education. In this, I would include the humanities, and pure maths. The difference could be found in the approach to technical skills. For example, when I was a student of Attic Greek, our teacher liked to point out that our technical mastery of English grammar would serve us well if we chose a career in publishing. The acquiring of this technical skill was a side-effect of our pursuit, the study of Attic Greek, not the point of it. In vocational training, the entire point is in the acquiring of technical skill. I believe this is as important, and must be a separate pursuit so that it gets the resources it needs. A STEM example would be the difference between how engineering is treated in Canada, versus the U.S. After an education of engineering theory, a student in Canada is then qualified to enter into an apprenticeship where they then have the opportunity to become a qualified engineer, after their vocational training is completed. In the U.S., there's not as much discernment between theory and praxis, and one may not be entirely sure of receiving the right amount of each. The official certification one receives in Canada seems to signal the valuing of vocational training. Receiving an education in theory as a pre-requisite signals the value of theory.

seanflyon 12y ago

Could you elaborate on the distinction between education and training and why you think a single institution should not do both? I think colleges should teach things that are things that are directly applicable to a job as well as things that are not.

mlitchard 12y ago
First, when I say education, I mean Liberal Arts education. In this, I would include the humanities, and pure maths. The difference could be found in the approach to technical skills. For example, when I was a student of Attic Greek, our teacher liked to point out that our technical mastery of English grammar would serve us well if we chose a career in publishing. The acquiring of this technical skill was a side-effect of our pursuit, the study of Attic Greek, not the point of it. In vocational training, the entire point is in the acquiring of technical skill. I believe this is as important, and must be a separate pursuit so that it gets the resources it needs. A STEM example would be the difference between how engineering is treated in Canada, versus the U.S. After an education of engineering theory, a student in Canada is then qualified to enter into an apprenticeship where they then have the opportunity to become a qualified engineer, after their vocational training is completed. In the U.S., there's not as much discernment between theory and praxis, and one may not be entirely sure of receiving the right amount of each. The official certification one receives in Canada seems to signal the valuing of vocational training. Receiving an education in theory as a pre-requisite signals the value of theory.