Memory

Neil Postman made several very valid points about America's current educational system and the way things are taught and what is taught in general. He asserts that the current system is more focused on material that can be simply regurgitated as opposed to information that needs comprehended more. His first example of his argument is the theory of language and how many students are just taught the definitions of words but not quite their etymology. Students in modern culture today take words for granted as well as their purpose and words themselves have, in a student's mind, become more like products of nature than products of humankind. Neil also states that he is a fan of the philosophers of education such as Plato, Rousseau and Aristotle. Many have argued that the more important things cannot be simply taught, but only learned. How, Neil points out, do we teach students in such an advancing society, to learn and comprehend necessary material but not in, essence, teach it? This is only supported by his words of "the principal intellectual instrument available to human beings is not being taught in school." Neil's entire argument is that education has become nothing but a script. And students are truly the ones missing out and the teachers of said students are put to some blame. E.D. Hirsch wrote a series of eight books documenting what he believes should be taught in today's schools. Neil Postman argues that E.D. Hirsch's ideologies may only be a problem to the advancing common culture than a solution. Since E.D. Hirsch is establishing what he believes ought to be taught in school, he's limiting Neil's favor of a more philosophical approach, which is more open minded. E.D. Hirsch wants it black and white, not all colors of the rainbow. However, E.D. Hirsch and Neil Postman both agree that comprehension is more valuable than pure regurgitation. Students should take the fundamentals and ask questions and seek answers than simply learning a possibly incomplete answer. Neil Postman makes it clear that E.D. Hirsch has failed to address that many answers to questions made available to students are nothing but mere products and discourages the art of question making in and of itself. Alan Bloom, who favors a more philosophical approach to education as well, wants students to explore their own intellecutal capacities and learn the art of question making. A famous philosopher, Russel, argued that philosophy is merely a science, but when answers are reached it's no longer a science as there is no wonder. This makes it a bit catchy in all of E.D. Hirsch's, Neil Postman's and Alan Bloom's arguments. Does this mean that students should become mini philosophers and take a more hands on approach to their education by straying away from a scripted education and a more "off road" approach? They all seem to agree so. E.D.Hirsch brings up the example that in advancing society, students just "know" how to operate the technology that is constantly being introduced into schools. But he addresses the fact that technology education isn't being taught. Would technology education be considered more of a scripted approach or could it take a more philosophical approach and let the students ask questions and learning the art of doing so without reaching one definitive answer, but several? Would we then be creating better minds by straying away from a standard textbook and feeding our minds with plenty of thoughts ready to nourish for all eternity? One can say so. Neil Postman makes his argument clear: We need to stray away from the norm and teach the more philosophical approach to things. E.D.Hirsch may agree to a point, but by his publication of materials he feels need to be taught, he still stays in the lines of the coloring book while Alan Bloom is pro-philoso-education. It seems interesting that these men all have different opinions but one common goal: to create a better student for a better future.