In the reading “Only Connect”, the author, Cronon, in tackling the question about what it means to be educated and what is a good education itself, ultimately examines what is liberal education. He states that the word “liberal” has been much overused, mainly for propagation by institutions or having its meaning altered to the extremes by political parties. The word in an educational context implies that tradition “celebrates and nurtures human freedom” (1). Liberal has root meanings in several languages, such as Latin and Old English, in which it means “free” or “to grow”, respectively. He asserts that liberally educated people are free to investigate the world around them and take full advantage of their highest talents. Furthermore, Cronon goes explains that current society has created a standard, a list, such as requirements in an educational institution, in order to provide a liberal education. He emphasizes the potentially dubious nature of this system (i.e. standardized curriculums) in providing human freedom when he states that “all the required courses in the world will fail to give us a liberal education if, in the act of requiring them, we forget that their purpose is to nurture human freedom and growth” (2). Cronon provides a list of ten personal qualities that he believes exemplify a liberally education person. I agree with him that the ten qualities he listed embodies an education person, and with his notion that education “is about gaining the power and the wisdom, the generosity and the freedom to connect” (5). His list of values that should be in an education person intrigued and inspired me, as I found them to be true of professors and mentors that have been extremely valuable in my education and development as a person. I also found it proper of him to claim that all of the qualities, and education itself, is about connections – I have continually found myself benefitting from making connections in knowledge, the world around me, with peers (this list is endless) during my undergraduate career. I feel these connections make up my education as a whole, and when I consciously observe such connections, I am fascinated and overjoyed.
On the other hand, Dewey does not go into as much detail or emphasis on the personal qualities that Cronon mentioned, but rather discusses education as the necessity of life. He explains life is the continual “re-creation of beliefs, ideals, hopes, happiness, misery, and practices” and that “education…is the means of this social continuity of life” (2). Education is the means by which the life (traditions, culture, ect) of a society thrives; education is the gap through which the young mature into the adult members who possess the knowledge and traditions of the society. Like Cronon, Dewey asserts that communication is an integral part of successful education, for “without this communication…social life could not survive” (3). Education becomes a necessity because the physical existence of an individual in society has a limit, but through education these individuals become shuttles for the life of a society. He further emphasizes the essential role of communication, “not only is social life identical with communication, but all communication (and hence all genuine social life) is educative” (5).
Moreover, Dewey investigates the implications of informal and formal education, and their conditional necessity depending on the complexity of a particular society. Informal education being incidental learning through living in a society, the unconscious learning, while formal education is deliberate education of the young, particularly through special institutions dedicating to learning. Dewey asserts that formal education is essential in a complex society, yet it is imperative that there must be a proper balance between the informal and formal modes of education. I agree with the author that communication is plays a pivotal in a good education, and that there must be a balance between incidental experience (informal learning) and methodical education (formal) in a society.
Question:
After having read Cronon’s article on liberal education, do you think the educational methods and ideologies of UW-Madison stimulate a student to obtain the personal virtues that the author listed? How or how not? Furthermore, do you even think Cronon’s list of personal qualities are a valid guideline in determining an education person?
While reading Cronon's article, I thought about whether or not my undergraduate education at UW-Madison has led me to gain the qualities Cronon feels a "liberally educated individual" should posses. In many ways, I feel my undergraduate CAREER has caused me to embody more of the qualities listed by Cronon than has my undergraduate EDUCATION. The following qualities, for example, I have learned through my employment opportunities and social interactions while at UW - Madison rather than my educational experiences: the ability to listen and hear (which I am still actively working on), the ability to talk with anyone, the ability to solve a variety of puzzles and problems, the ability to practice humility, tolerance, and self-criticism, the ability to understand how to get things done in the world, and the ability to nurture and empower the people around me. My undergraduate education, on the other hand, has has only impacted the following qualities on a greater scale than my undergraduate career: my ability to read and understand (which is not always the case) and my ability to write clearly, persuasively and movingly. If my education involved more interaction with my professors and fellow students, I think I would feel differently about my undergraduate education versus my undergraduate career.
ReplyDeleteAs for your other question, I do feel Cronon's list of personal qualities is a valid guideline for determining an educated person; however, I don't feel all of the qualities listed require a formal education.
This article definitely stimulated thought about my education both before the University and currently. In general, I feel I have taken away many of these skills Cronon listed at the University as opposed to previous education. At the University students are required to be much more independent, therefore making solving problems, communicating with others, etc essential skills in order to have success inside and outside the classroom. In high school, on the other hand, students have much more guidance and therefore less responsibility and creativity in their everyday lives. Because of these skills I believe have continued to develop, I do think that his guidelines are fairly accurate skills that a well educated person should hold.
ReplyDeleteI kind of agree with what was stated above. I also feel like Cronon's list of personal qualities is a valid guideline for determining an educated person; however, the qualities do not necessarily require a formal education. I feel you make a good point. You can pick up some of the personal qualities outside of formal education, possibly through everyday experiences for example.
ReplyDelete