Learning to earn vs learning to learn - Essay
- Source: EdMuse
- Tags: #education #philosophy
- Notes: Miscellaneous Notes/Literature Notes/Learning to earn vs. learning to learn - Literature Notes
As part of his vision for democratic education, Dewey believed that education should do more beyond training students to fill a job. He believed that ==learning should be deeply personal and students should learn a broad range of subjects to allow them to participate in greater democracy==. This was in contrast to the administrative progressive who favored a more pragmatic view on educated: ==a vocational approach in order to train workers to fuel the economy.==
In response to this, Dewey wrote 2 articles to address vocational education. Dewey argued that vocationalists like Snedden erred in two respects:; their vision of vocational education is too closely allied with the interests of industrialists to serve the greater public interest, and; it suggests an imprudent approach to educational reform, whereby no meaningful change is ever forthcoming. ==Vocationalism merely props up the status quo==, a disappointing state of industrial relations warranting the continued exploitation of workers by management.
This line of thinking falls into Snedden’s view of education and society: ==people are either consumers or producers==. In this model of education, ==education is a tool to increase their potential earnings and escape poverty==; the status quo is always upheld. When someone is educated, another uneducated person slots right into the role.
On the contrary, Dewey’s vision of democratic education serves more beyond increasing earning potential. He envisioned that ==with proper rich education experience, people will be better equipped to cure social ills== that need to be addressed including poverty and crime as well as health concerns.