Letter
from Lhasa, number 289. Stop Stealing Dreams
by
Roberto Abraham Scaruffi
Godin, S.,
Stop Stealing Dreams. What is school for?, 2012.
(Godin 2012).
Seth Godin
This work is a kind of
Illuminist manifesto full of good ideas and inevitably partial as whatever
essay on education.
The educational system
(as, for instance, the health system and the military) has followed the usual
pattern of bureaucratic proliferation, exponentially growing without any
connection with people and economy’s needs and without any real
sustainability.
Education is centred on
obedience and conformism. Should and could it teach disobedience and
a-conformism. It should, but how? What are reasonable doubt, risk-taking, bravery
etc? Is it possible to teach them?
For (Godin 2012), school
destroys dreams. Is school or life to destroy dreams? Can real dreams be
destroyed?
For (Godin 2012), school
should amplify dreams and inculcate passions. Can dreams be amplified and
passions inculcated? Which passions, the passions of a teacher or professor?
It is certainly true
that competence be indispensable, however it is not necessarily enemy of
change. Routines and a routinary way of thinking are enemies of change. Just do
not put people thinking or operating in a routinary way in ‘innovation
departments’...
For (Godin 2012), a
great teacher wants to communicate emotions, not just facts. Actually, a person
may be great orator, transmit emotions and to be listened with pleasure from his/her
students and not to be a good teacher if one cannot transmit what is reputed to
transmit. Manipulators and cheaters are generally skilful in communicating
emotions even if, of course, not everybody communicating emotions necessarily be
a manipulator and a cheater.
It is certainly true that
a teacher should coach. While it seems more doubtful that everybody could be transformed
in a creative leader instead of remaining a happy obedient servant.
About the so-called ‘freedom
of teaching’ one should define what precisely be. It is frequently typical of undeveloped
and under-developing areas. It does not make them more developed and
competitive.
‘Freedom of teaching’
can be a chance and a limit at the same time. It can become the cover to
indoctrination from a teacher, because also where there is the ‘freedom of
teaching’, or where it is claimed there is, there are curricula for each
subject. Finally, ‘freedom of teaching’ is some ideological/political freedom
while a teacher should teach in the most aseptic way, more concerned with
improving student learning mechanisms, the cultural and spiritual development
of the student, etc than with transmitting teacher’s personal
(ideological/political) values.
‘Freedom of teaching’
became a great mystification of underdeveloped and under-developing areas. On
the contrary, the previous knowledge of the contents of the provided services
(a certain course, the services provided from a certain teacher or professor)
is a consumer/student guarantee for not wasting time and energies in something
not wanted from the student-customer. Even that is not so easy because a lot of
people attend educational institution not precisely for knowing more, but
overall for a formal certification where the need of eventually acquiring some
skill and the parallel need of acquiring a formal certification variously
combine. There are career advancements needing only education formal
certifications. There are job supposing that at least some ‘technical’
education correspond to a formal certification. Various forms of learning-by-doing
characterize working places, jobs, professions. Nowadays, formal education tends
to be overvalued while there are other ways of acquiring and transmitting
skills.
According to (Godin 2012,
p. 115), the hacker mentality can be taught. In a general way, everything can be
taught even if it be impossible to know actually from whom and from what, and
what is learned of what is taught. People skills and behaviours are the outcome
of mysterious chemical combinations.
How not to agree with
that: “Isn’t that our most important job: to raise a generation of math
hackers, literature hackers, music hackers and life hackers?” (Godin 2012, p.
115). However, why to do that? A lot of people have no interest in excelling in
anything or would like to excel but without studying and hard working for
excelling.
Everywhere, there is a
lot of courses and classes about personal development. They supposedly teach
creativity and excellence too. Is it really possible to teach that? Do creative
and outstanding persons really teach other people how to become creative and outstanding?
Or they are just good businesses providing some positive suggestion and showing
some possibility to unsecure or simply curious people.
Also States/governments
sometimes declare they like and wish innovators. Acritical and obedient,
conformist and submitted, but ‘innovators’. It is sufficiently ridiculous. They
are absolutely ridiculous, ...while real innovators are regularly lynched and
assassinated from States/governments and connected interests.
The passion for
something is not necessarily competence in something. One would need
determination too, for achieving competence. Obedience could actually surrogate
passion, if there is determination. It is not true that a genius be necessarily
more competent and successful than a determined mediocre person. It depends on other
various factors.
“When access to
information was limited, we needed to load students up with facts. Now, when we
have no scarcity of facts or the access to them, we need to load them up with
understanding.” (Godin 2012, p. 143). Overall do not assume that there be
everything online, if you are not capable to find and use what you need when
you need it. Yes, people need understanding and a way to build paths of
understanding and for understanding. If facts or supposed facts, notions, are
not inside your head too, it is useless to abstractly know ‘understanding’.
For (Godin 2012), subjects
connected with problem solving are not taught in traditional schools. For (Godin
2012), one should teach how to learn not how to become perfect.
Perfection may be an
aspect of conformism, although it be a solid base for further achievements too.
Real people make the difference. Perfection is not a defect. Perfectionism may
be a problem while dealing with reality’s imperfection.
Universities sell
degrees not necessarily education. Employers frequently need to minimize risks.
A McDonalds certainly feel safer if you are a university student or a graduate
instead of an illiterate chap from a slum. Goldman Sachs too.
How to fix school in
twenty-four hours? (Godin 2012, p. 187).
“Don’t wait for it. Pick
yourself. Teach yourself. Motivate your kids. Push them to dream, against all
odds.” (Godin 2012, p. 187).
“When we teach a child
to make good decisions, we benefit from a lifetime of good decisions.
“When we teach a child
to love to learn, the amount of learning will become limitless.
“When we teach a child
to deal with a changing world, she will never become obsolete.
“When we are brave
enough to teach a child to question authority, even ours, we insulate ourselves
from those who would use their authority to work against each of us.
“And when we give
students the desire to make things, even choices, we create a world filled with
makers.”
(Godin 2012, p. 188).
You should also teach
your children and student to become invisible because a chap educated in this
way would be immediately selected from a CIA-SIS-military computerized program
for being liquidated, perhaps even physically by a drone. ...Do not hope that a
President, or a Queen/King, or a Prime minister, does not sign the liquidation
decree!
Actually, everybody
reacts in different way to indoctrination, to whatever taught, to learning
processes and how to approach life. Consequently, education produces different
results according to different people. One can create a favourable environment
for certain values or attitudes one wish to transmit. Later, each student
interacts in different ways with this environment. Or would Godin like to replace
the current totalitarian vision with another totalitarian vision reputed as the
right one?
Finally, there is the
usual question: who does teach whom and how? Geniuses do not become teachers...
In addition, frequently geniuses are not good teachers. In the same
universities there is a lot of geniuses. Generally, they do not know how to
teach. Certainly, one could find some technique for making mediocre teachers
and professors transmitting a more useful education.
And we would be again to
the original question: who and what would need more critic and innovative
people? Perhaps the spontaneous production of them is already more than
sufficient.
Godin, S.,
Stop Stealing Dreams. What is school for?, 2012.
