.
| [Reprinted from The
Freeman, January 1939] |
In recent months there have appeared a number of magazine articles,
written by prominent educators, in which the curricula and methods
obtaining in intermediary and higher schools of learning have been
scrutinized.
Characteristic of this self-examination is the admission that our
educational systems have not kept abreast of our social requirements.
Yet, in none of these articles has there been any attempt to show that
our social structure in itself has tended to break down educational
standards. If there is any fault to find it is not, in the main, with
education; it is with those economic forces which shape the world our
young men and women must eventually face. It is this world that
determines the courses of study.
The object of education is to prepare youth for life. The kind of life
for which educators would like to prepare their charges exists only in
the memory of these teachers. A life of culture, in which the greatest
happiness comes to those with the fullest knowledge of "the best
that has been thought and said," is reserved for an insignificant
few of their graduates. Yet. because in times past a considerable number
of students could look forward to such life, because such living is the
very marrow of idealism., our teachers cling to the fantasy of its
existence even in the face of grim reality. Cultural curricula remain
not only because of inertia, but also because of hope.
But, the frustrations of former graduates, the complaints of distraught
parents, force upon our educators the realization that the life for
which they would like to prepare youth does not exist. Reluctantly they
change from classical literature to business English, from logic to
bookkeeping, from philosophy to agriculture. Instead of teaching the
science of living they are forced to teach the art of making a living.
The process is difficult and slow. New teachers who understand weaving
and printing must replace those who, delight in rhetoric and Latin. The
scientist must adjust himself to the teaching of applied sciences. A
quarter century ago the private secretarial schools prepared our high
school graduates for jobs; that is now the business of public high
schools, and at the sacrifice of cultural subjects.
The inevitable struggle with poverty so dominates the consciousness of
youth that the workshop must replace the ivory tower. The prevailing
standards of education do not determine life; it is the other way
around. And as the fight for mere existence increases so that education
is no longer an effective weapon it will be discarded altogether. For
when a high school boy sees the despondent Phi Beta Kappa man eking out
an existence no better than that of any WPA worker, his desire for a
college education must cool. Indeed, it has already become a prime
object of education to merely keep youth a little longer out of the
competitive labor market -- a sort of high class, charitable sanctuary
-- an escape.
We must not blame educators for lowering their ideals; they are being
forced to it. If any blame is attached to them, it is in not pointing
out the cause for the constantly lowering standards of life for which
their students must prepare themselves. And the finger of scorn may most
justly be pointed at those entrusted with the teaching of political
economy. Theirs is a grievous fault.
|