I've been mulling this thread over in my head, and trying to seperate the need for education, in the real altruistic sense, from what others here are suggesting is indroctrination, built into the education system. It is very tricky, not because I have kids at school and I'm wondering about the merits of it, but simply because I've been through it, as in enculturated, and maybe I can't take an objective stance.
I think I have arrived at some sort acceptance from an ethical or moral point of view, for education being in its present form.
I will leave the religious vs secular debate alone, in essence it doesn't change the result, not here in Australia at least in mainstream religious schools. In general they espouse a similar world view.
Lets start with two givens, one is that education in most Western societies is compulsory; secondly the output, ideally, is literate and numerate graduates, prepared for the type of society they will enter and participate in. That throws up two, maybe three problems: One, as claimed here, that the compulsory nature of this engagement is at fault, that no one should be forced into it; secondly, implicit in this process or preparation is a strong undercurrent of indoctrination, to accept unquestioningly the society that the student will enter (or is already part of); and thirdly, that the system as it stands is not producing the desired outcome, ie. not very literate or numerate graduates. I think the latter is beyond the scope of the present discussion, so I will ignore that now.
The question then is does the compulsory nature have anything to do with ideal preparation- forcing children into a position where indoctrination is the aim.
Some statements here are very adamant this is the case. I will agree that state sponsored education is yet another ideological tool (Althusser's Ideological State Apparatus or ISA) . It definitely has the potential, and the more I think about it, the reason. Students do learn the basics, and I maintain there is an altruistic intent, to educate in a very real sense.
The baggage they pick up to acheive this is intentional. Drummed into them are various beliefs: like work = money; the country's political system being the ideal one; military history, and the nation's past being glorious; etc etc. Even the very nature of 'compulsory', a state edict, is reinforced, with punishment or praise.
The more I think about this, strangely the more I accept the need for it! Shout me down!! School produces a homogenous cultural cement that identifies a country. People that participate in the system share the same ideals, as well as a shared, learnt history. They then leave the formal schooling component with a nation-wide, similarly held, world-view. It therefore identifies them to themselves, and to others.
If that process is too rigid, or too nationalistic (dare I say religious too), the consequences can be ugly, as in Nazism. What I'm saying is, it's essential for a society to operate, as not just an extension of the dominant paradigms/ideologies, but self-replicating. For good or bad can only be judged from outside, and hopefully only by the ideal society! Is there one, and if it is a functioning society itself, how was that propogated if not by education?!
As aside, Australia has not only a choice of state, secular (Montesarian and other independant) or religious schooling, there is also the legal option of home schooling. Usually put in place for students in remote places, it can be undertaken for other reasons, but has a compulsory state-issued curriculum.
are you for real??