benefits of education for technology

Not quite philosophy discussions, debates, various thought experiments and other topics of interest.

benefits of education for technology

Postby Athena on July 24th, 2015, 11:10 pm 

"If we reflect upon the various ideals of education that are prevalent in the different countries, we see that what they all aim at is to organize capacities for conduct. This is most immediately obvious in Germany, where the explicit avowed aim of the higher education is to turn the student into an instrument for advancing scientific discovery. The German universities are proud of the number of young specialists whom they turn out every year, - not necessarily men of any original force of intellect, but men so trained to research that when their professor gives them an historical or philosophical thesis to prepare, or a bit of laboratory work to do, with a general indication as to the best method, they can go off by themselves and use apparatus and consult sources in such a way as to grind out in the requisite number of months some little pepper-corn of new truth worthy of being added the store of extant human information on that subject. Little else is recognized in Germany as a man's title to academic advancement than his ability thus to show himself an efficient instrument of research.

In England, it might seem at first sight as if the higher education of the universities aimed at the production of certain static types of character rather than at the development of what one may call this synamic scientific efficiency. Professor Jowett, when asked what Oxford could do for its students, is said to have replied, "Oxford can teach an English gentleman how to be an English gentleman." But, if you ask what it means to 'be' an English gentleman, the only reply is in terms of conduct and behavior. An English gentleman is a bundle of specifically qualified reactions, a creature who for all the emergencies of life has his line of behavior distinctly marked out for him in advance. Here, as elsewhere, England expects every man to do his duty. "


William James "Talks to Teachers on Psychology: and to Students on Some of Life's Ideals", 1899.

I have expressed concern about the economic, social and political ramifications of the 1958 National Defense Education Act, and this seems to have misled people to think I am against technology. It has resulted in some unpleasantness I regret and CanadysPeak suggested I start a thread about the benefits of education for technology and also preparing the young for participation in a democracy.

James' explanation of the different paths of education in Germany and Britain is the perfect beginning. Britain did not want education for technology because education for technology results in an equality of the masses that went totally against Britain's desire to protect their class divisions and what made a British gentleman a British gentleman. It is easy to make a good argument that the US should have taken German's side in the first world war. The German working class had a higher standard of living than the laboring class in Britain's factor cities. Following WWII past president Eisenhower praised the Germans for their contributions to democracy, and it was education for technology behind the German contribution to democracy.
Athena
Banned User
 
Posts: 1936
Joined: 22 Apr 2012
Location: Eugene, Oregon


Re: benefits of education for technology

Postby Athena on July 25th, 2015, 1:55 am 

The other half of CanadysPeak's suggestion is a question of how to prepare our young to participate in a democracy. You might have noticed in James' description of Germany's education there was an insinuation that something was lacking.

In 1915 Charles Sarolea praises the Germans as congenial, creative and intellectual people and questions why they allow the Prussians to rule over them. When the Prussians took control of Germany, they centralized public education, destroyed Germany's heroes and praised efficiency as they also gave Germans education for technology for military and industrial purpose. Sarolea, expresses much concern about everyone's obedience to authority.

When we get to WWII, Richard M. Brickner, M.D. publishes "Is Germany Incurable" in 1943, with an introduction written by Margret Mead. Brickner suggested Germany was suffering from paranoia and defines paranoia as an excessive need to be superior and in control. We look with shock at what obedience to authority lead to in Germany. Germany like the US was a Christian republic. It was the first to have a National Pension Plan, National Worker's Compensation and National health care. Its masses enjoyed a higher standard of living and greater equality than the masses of Britain. So what is wrong? What made our Christian Republic go to war against the German Christian Republic in defense of democracy?

It is a matter of authority. William James, John Dewey, Bertrand Russell, and Carl Sagan are just a few who addressed this matter of education and authority.

http://www.brainpickings.org/2014/09/19 ... education/
Athena
Banned User
 
Posts: 1936
Joined: 22 Apr 2012
Location: Eugene, Oregon


Re: benefits of education for technology

Postby Positor on July 25th, 2015, 8:34 am 

Athena » July 25th, 2015, 4:10 am wrote:Following WWII past president Eisenhower praised the Germans for their contributions to democracy, and it was education for technology behind the German contribution to democracy.

Does education for technology tend to promote democracy (as in Germany in 1919-33 and in West (not East) Germany from 1949 up to Eisenhower's time), or autocracy and obedience (as in Germany in 1871-1918 and 1933-45)? There does not seem to be a clear correlation.
Positor
Active Member
 
Posts: 1058
Joined: 05 Feb 2010


Re: benefits of education for technology

Postby CanadysPeak on July 25th, 2015, 9:12 am 

I again must apologize. I meant to post here and, instead, posted on the ignorance thread. I have difficulty when the same posts are repeated in different threads. I will try to be more careful.

But, can you please give us a source for Eisenhower's comments on Germany? In his jobs at USEUR, NATO, and the Presidency, he sometimes may have found it useful to praise German rebuilding progress, but I would like to know the context.

Positor, perhaps egalitarian might be a better word for the German characteristic. Their educational system served to reduce autocracy in the military. The Wehrmacht was one of the more democratic armies in the world prior to the Israelis.
CanadysPeak
Resident Expert
 
Posts: 5931
Joined: 31 Dec 2008


Re: benefits of education for technology

Postby Athena on July 25th, 2015, 12:26 pm 

Positor » July 25th, 2015, 6:34 am wrote:
Athena » July 25th, 2015, 4:10 am wrote:Following WWII past president Eisenhower praised the Germans for their contributions to democracy, and it was education for technology behind the German contribution to democracy.

Does education for technology tend to promote democracy (as in Germany in 1919-33 and in West (not East) Germany from 1949 up to Eisenhower's time), or autocracy and obedience (as in Germany in 1871-1918 and 1933-45)? There does not seem to be a clear correlation.


That is an excellent question!

I would say education for technology advances autocracy and is very destructive to the democracy we had.

Eisenhower was a military man, and he didn't do that well in school. He was a great military leader and national leader, but he didn't have an understanding of culture and that it was culture that made us different from Germany, and made our liberty a good thing and not anarchy, and that it was education transmitting that culture. He did not understand, only when democracy is defended in the classroom is it defended.

How democratic would you say the military is? It can level everyone, and get men and women, Blacks and Whites to work together and eat together and even bunk together, but those folks are not going to walk into the general's office and tell the general how they want things done, with the attitude that they hold the authority and responsibility to determine how things are to be done.

Our Declaration of Independence holds us responsible for our institutions. That is not military order.
Athena
Banned User
 
Posts: 1936
Joined: 22 Apr 2012
Location: Eugene, Oregon


Re: benefits of education for technology

Postby Athena on July 25th, 2015, 12:45 pm 

CanadysPeak » July 25th, 2015, 7:12 am wrote:I again must apologize. I meant to post here and, instead, posted on the ignorance thread. I have difficulty when the same posts are repeated in different threads. I will try to be more careful.

But, can you please give us a source for Eisenhower's comments on Germany? In his jobs at USEUR, NATO, and the Presidency, he sometimes may have found it useful to praise German rebuilding progress, but I would like to know the context.

Positor, perhaps egalitarian might be a better word for the German characteristic. Their educational system served to reduce autocracy in the military. The Wehrmacht was one of the more democratic armies in the world prior to the Israelis.


I seriously wish I could fulfil your request, and if this thread continues to be a positive experience, I will make the extra effort to find the document at the U of O Knight Library, Document Department. I about fainted when I read in those documents, Eisenhower's praise of Germany's contributions to democracy! But think about military order and merit hiring and merit promotion, and how education does level us. The problem I see is not just a change in bureaucratic organization, and not just a change in education, but the combination of both.

Yes, you are right about the increased democratic effect of education on the German army. I am so excited as this thread is going so much better than the other one. Can we burn the other thread? Seriously, can a mod close it? It turned into a terrible experience for me, and I would love if that thread just disappeared.

I have to walk my dog, and when I get back I will give you the exact quote from Charles Sarolea's 1915 book, "The Anglo-German Problem". It will be Sarolea's quote of Dr. Friedrich Naumann, about the war of yesterday and the war of to-morrow. This will hopefully clear up the paradoxical issue of education for technology being more autocratic than democratic, but also making the army more democratic.
Athena
Banned User
 
Posts: 1936
Joined: 22 Apr 2012
Location: Eugene, Oregon


Re: benefits of education for technology

Postby CanadysPeak on July 25th, 2015, 1:11 pm 

I look forward to learning the citation for Eisenhower's speech, but you need not trouble yourself with quoting Sarolea. I believe him a hack German hater (you may have a legitimate opposite view, but I always associate him with the "Hun bayonetting the Belgian nun" crowd).

The chain of command and democracy are not mutually exclusive. You may recall that American militia units were very democratic, electing their own officers, but then obeying those officers, even under pain of death. The Wehrmacht was democratic, in my opinion, because of the emphasis placed on the individual soldier being able to reason for himself what the correct action was in any situation. Small units in the Wehrmacht did not require an officer to tell them what to do.
CanadysPeak
Resident Expert
 
Posts: 5931
Joined: 31 Dec 2008


Re: benefits of education for technology

Postby Braininvat on July 25th, 2015, 1:26 pm 

Yes, you are right about the increased democratic effect of education on the German army. I am so excited as this thread is going so much better than the other one. Can we burn the other thread? Seriously, can a mod close it? It turned into a terrible experience for me, and I would love if that thread just disappeared.


Sorry. Best course, AFAIK, is to deliberate carefully before posting or starting threads. Many people wrote on the Ignorance thread, and their comments shouldn't be disappeared.

I think social science threads have a natural tendency to meander, lose focus, and prove unsatisfying. That's my bias, I realize, as I'm not big on social sciences.
User avatar
Braininvat
Forum Administrator
 
Posts: 6479
Joined: 21 Jan 2014
Location: Black Hills


Re: benefits of education for technology

Postby Athena on July 25th, 2015, 3:45 pm 

Okay, CanadysPeak, watch this slight of hand card trick carefully. I am going to make this Jack of Spades turn into the Queen of Hearts and you are going to think the King is not ruling.

"The war of the future is a problem of economic organization of the most difficult nature and the highest technical achievement, such as has never hitherto been demanded from any army. The old military qualities must give way to the organizing qualities. No doubt the courage and endurance of the individual soldier must remain for all times the foundation of military power, but orgainizing genius is required in order not to waste that courage and endurance. This is clearly shown from a mere examination of the colossal numbers engaged. To transport, to locate, and to feed these masses of men is the daily preoccupation of the military authorities. That they rightly understand the problem is certain, but it is very doubtful whether the problem can ever be adequately solved by commanders who are recruited from the Junkerium. Mere military capacity does not suffice here. Both enemies and friends admit that our corps of officers possess such military capacity. Anxiety only arises with regard to their other qualifications. We know that our nation possesses in its industries successful organizers, brains to direct great quantities of material and "personnel"- men who create new conditions of life for whole economic districts without having to appeal to any mystical authority. As democratic politicians we may often have to oppose bitterly those captains of industry, but if it comes to war we shall be willing to be led by them, because we know that they have the brains. It is true that they must not meddle with the technical duties of the officers, but the administration of the war material must be their province. And even with regard to the technique of war, it becomes from year to year more questionable whether this can be managed more efficiently by a corps of noblemen than by the representatives of middle-class technique. However much we may value the moral qualities of the old ruling class- and, with all political differences of opinion, we shall not minimize those qualities- we must admit that we are witnessing a transformation of methods of attack and defence which in addition to the old question; how far shall we be able on the battle-field to replace the human unit through machinery? it is obvious that this will never succeed completely for there does not exist a machine which does not need a human soul to work it. At the same time it is doubtless that in this direction mighty changes are at hand. We can see here a repetition of the process which we notice in nearly all industries- the subordination and displacement of human labour in mines, machines, and means of transport..... War is becoming impersonal, and is becoming reduced to rivalry of money and economics. That even here military members of the nobility may achieve great results is shown by the admirable example of Count Zepplin. But the impression remains that there still survive in the army the traditions of the pre-industrial age- traditions not only of loyalty and discipline, but also of technological ignorance."


The quote is extremely long, and I copied most of it so the contrast between noblemen and technologically inventive industrialist is in one place. We can agree I believe that technology brought on a shift in power and organizing human effort. Now we can reflect back on the 1917 addition to education in the US of vocational training. As we entered the first world war the military presented a huge demand for technologically trained personnel, and industry agreed our failure to include this education for technology was a problem for our industry as well. As military technology increases so does the demand for technological educations.

Now we come to merit hiring. The US was organized by family order and if your uncle ran a big industry you were assured a good job. If your Dad worked for the railroad, you were assured a good job with the railroad. Before we were so industrial and had so much education for technology, we were in line with England or India's cast system. Meaning who your father was pretty much determined your position in life, or for a woman, who she married determined her position in life. Hopefully everyone can argue what is good or bad about this. One huge problem is the person hired to do the job may be completely incompetent. Merit hiring is impersonal and completely changes not only the organization of industry and the military, but the whole of society, and this is good and bad.

At the 1917 National Education Association Convention one man argued we must imitate Germany. A female teacher used an East Indian seer and poet, Tagore to define the evil of our enemy. "Whatever their efficiency, such great organizations are so impersonal that they bear down on the individual lives of the people like a hydraulic press whose action is completely impersonal and therefore completely effective in crushing individual liberty and power."

This is way too much to say in one post- leaping over several important points, we no longer have the moral judgment and control of nobility. We do not have the social ties that kept us moral, and now we mistake anarchy for liberty. We are no longer ruled by kings who came from a line of kings, but we treat our CEO's like kings. We have re-established authority above us, only the names of royalty have changed. Royalty now holds the titles of "experts" and like the Prussian military, everything is run by policy that is written by people we never see, and if that policy makes our lives hell, oh well, it takes an act of congress to change the policy, and is it worth the hassle? Do you even know how to effect the decisions of your city, state legislature, the federal government? How much say have you had in your local school? How about a say in how your local hospital is run? If you find your friend in the morgue tagged as a dead person, but only in a deep coma, don't worry, medical insurance will pay the bill, and after your friend gets the medical help he should have gotten much sooner, you can both go watch a good movie. I promise you, the experts are in charge and as Tocqueville foretold in his 1830 book "Democracy in America" you are so well taken care of, you don't even have to think. Education for technology, prepares us to be dependent on the experts, and the 2012 Republic agenda was to prevent education for the higher order thinking skills.

I am very thankful for the good done by science and technology, but I am a bit worried about "such great organizations are so impersonal that they bear down on the individual lives of the people like a hydraulic press whose action is completely impersonal and therefore completely effective in crushing individual liberty and power", and most certainly am not alone with this concern. Many great thinkers have brought up this concern and the Borg of Star Trek is one of several Star Trek shows that bought up a concern about living under the control of a computer. We have realized is we are living under the control of the a computer, only it is organic, not electronic. It is what Tocqueville warned us of, and speaking of warnings, I hope there is interest in Eisenhower's warning of the Military, Industrial Complex and the Bush family's New World Order.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8y06NSBBRtY
Athena
Banned User
 
Posts: 1936
Joined: 22 Apr 2012
Location: Eugene, Oregon


Re: benefits of education for technology

Postby CanadysPeak on July 25th, 2015, 4:32 pm 

Athena » Sat Jul 25, 2015 3:45 pm wrote:Okay, CanadysPeak, watch this slight of hand card trick carefully. I am going to make this Jack of Spades turn into the Queen of Hearts and you are going to think the King is not ruling.

"The war of the future is a problem of economic organization of the most difficult nature and the highest technical achievement, such as has never hitherto been demanded from any army. The old military qualities must give way to the organizing qualities. No doubt the courage and endurance of the individual soldier must remain for all times the foundation of military power, but orgainizing genius is required in order not to waste that courage and endurance. This is clearly shown from a mere examination of the colossal numbers engaged. To transport, to locate, and to feed these masses of men is the daily preoccupation of the military authorities. That they rightly understand the problem is certain, but it is very doubtful whether the problem can ever be adequately solved by commanders who are recruited from the Junkerium. Mere military capacity does not suffice here. Both enemies and friends admit that our corps of officers possess such military capacity. Anxiety only arises with regard to their other qualifications. We know that our nation possesses in its industries successful organizers, brains to direct great quantities of material and "personnel"- men who create new conditions of life for whole economic districts without having to appeal to any mystical authority. As democratic politicians we may often have to oppose bitterly those captains of industry, but if it comes to war we shall be willing to be led by them, because we know that they have the brains. It is true that they must not meddle with the technical duties of the officers, but the administration of the war material must be their province. And even with regard to the technique of war, it becomes from year to year more questionable whether this can be managed more efficiently by a corps of noblemen than by the representatives of middle-class technique. However much we may value the moral qualities of the old ruling class- and, with all political differences of opinion, we shall not minimize those qualities- we must admit that we are witnessing a transformation of methods of attack and defence which in addition to the old question; how far shall we be able on the battle-field to replace the human unit through machinery? it is obvious that this will never succeed completely for there does not exist a machine which does not need a human soul to work it. At the same time it is doubtless that in this direction mighty changes are at hand. We can see here a repetition of the process which we notice in nearly all industries- the subordination and displacement of human labour in mines, machines, and means of transport..... War is becoming impersonal, and is becoming reduced to rivalry of money and economics. That even here military members of the nobility may achieve great results is shown by the admirable example of Count Zepplin. But the impression remains that there still survive in the army the traditions of the pre-industrial age- traditions not only of loyalty and discipline, but also of technological ignorance."


The quote is extremely long, and I copied most of it so the contrast between noblemen and technologically inventive industrialist is in one place. We can agree I believe that technology brought on a shift in power and organizing human effort. Now we can reflect back on the 1917 addition to education in the US of vocational training. As we entered the first world war the military presented a huge demand for technologically trained personnel, and industry agreed our failure to include this education for technology was a problem for our industry as well. As military technology increases so does the demand for technological educations.

Now we come to merit hiring. The US was organized by family order and if your uncle ran a big industry you were assured a good job. If your Dad worked for the railroad, you were assured a good job with the railroad. Before we were so industrial and had so much education for technology, we were in line with England or India's cast system. Meaning who your father was pretty much determined your position in life, or for a woman, who she married determined her position in life. Hopefully everyone can argue what is good or bad about this. One huge problem is the person hired to do the job may be completely incompetent. Merit hiring is impersonal and completely changes not only the organization of industry and the military, but the whole of society, and this is good and bad.

At the 1917 National Education Association Convention one man argued we must imitate Germany. A female teacher used an East Indian seer and poet, Tagore to define the evil of our enemy. "Whatever their efficiency, such great organizations are so impersonal that they bear down on the individual lives of the people like a hydraulic press whose action is completely impersonal and therefore completely effective in crushing individual liberty and power."

This is way too much to say in one post- leaping over several important points, we no longer have the moral judgment and control of nobility. We do not have the social ties that kept us moral, and now we mistake anarchy for liberty. We are no longer ruled by kings who came from a line of kings, but we treat our CEO's like kings. We have re-established authority above us, only the names of royalty have changed. Royalty now holds the titles of "experts" and like the Prussian military, everything is run by policy that is written by people we never see, and if that policy makes our lives hell, oh well, it takes an act of congress to change the policy, and is it worth the hassle? Do you even know how to effect the decisions of your city, state legislature, the federal government? How much say have you had in your local school? How about a say in how your local hospital is run? If you find your friend in the morgue tagged as a dead person, but only in a deep coma, don't worry, medical insurance will pay the bill, and after your friend gets the medical help he should have gotten much sooner, you can both go watch a good movie. I promise you, the experts are in charge and as Tocqueville foretold in his 1830 book "Democracy in America" you are so well taken care of, you don't even have to think. Education for technology, prepares us to be dependent on the experts, and the 2012 Republic agenda was to prevent education for the higher order thinking skills.

I am very thankful for the good done by science and technology, but I am a bit worried about "such great organizations are so impersonal that they bear down on the individual lives of the people like a hydraulic press whose action is completely impersonal and therefore completely effective in crushing individual liberty and power", and most certainly am not alone with this concern. Many great thinkers have brought up this concern and the Borg of Star Trek is one of several Star Trek shows that bought up a concern about living under the control of a computer. We have realized is we are living under the control of the a computer, only it is organic, not electronic. It is what Tocqueville warned us of, and speaking of warnings, I hope there is interest in Eisenhower's warning of the Military, Industrial Complex and the Bush family's New World Order.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8y06NSBBRtY


I asked a few simple questions, but I don't see any response in the above. Who is the source of the big quote? Where do all these assertions come from?

Of course I know how to take part in the decisions of my borough, my county, my state, and my country. You ask as though I were a simpleton tyro. I have taken part in politics since 1957 when I began passing out campaign flyers.

So, do you have any sources?
CanadysPeak
Resident Expert
 
Posts: 5931
Joined: 31 Dec 2008


Re: benefits of education for technology

Postby Athena on July 25th, 2015, 5:02 pm 

CanadysPeak » July 25th, 2015, 2:32 pm wrote:[quote="[url=http://www.sciencechatforum.com/viewtopic.php?p=284812#p284812]

I asked a few simple questions, but I don't see any response in the above. Who is the source of the big quote? Where do all these assertions come from?

Of course I know how to take part in the decisions of my borough, my county, my state, and my country. You ask as though I were a simpleton tyro. I have taken part in politics since 1957 when I began passing out campaign flyers.

So, do you have any sources?


Charles Sarolea's 1915 book, "The Anglo-German Problem". It will be Sarolea's quote of Dr. Friedrich Naumann, about the war of yesterday and the war of to-morrow.

Wow, I am really doing a whole lot worse than I thought, I thought I had provided my source of information for everything. Eisenhower's praising of Germany's contribution to democracy comes from the U of O knight Library, document department. I do not have a copy of it at home. It is one of volumes of books of documents for 1958. Other than Charles Sarolea's book I used information from the book of the 1917 National Education Association Conference, and I have referred to Tocqueville's book "Democracy in America".. I am not exactly sure what resources I failed to mention.

No, I do not ask as though you are simpleton but this is not a private letter and do you assume everyone knows how to be politically active? The example I gave of finding a friend tagged as dead in the morgue, was my granddaughter's experience, and they took no action to be encourage the hospital to be more careful in the future. However, so many of these mistakes have been made, an organization has been formed. One would like to think, one exposed mistake would have resulted in correction in the past, and not require people organizing to get something done. The organization to effect change holds the position that it is the organization of the hospital that is leading to so many mistakes. I will gladly explain why I think our system is failing, after I give someone a ride. I have chosen to post to this forum, because I expect to find more well-educated people, with superior reasoning skills in this forum. I am confused about why I am doing so poorly? I have to run. Excuse me for a moment.

On second thought, I just realized I am very tired and have worked several hours on the post I made. I started before 7 AM, it is now 3 pm and the only other thing I have done today is walk my dog. The return on my efforts does not justify me putting in more effort. You picked up on none of the points made, and made absolutely no effort to reason through any of them, not even how technology has been driving change, but have only criticized my post. Maybe after I have rested I will be interesting in attempting to meet the challenge of having a satisfying communication with you, but right now I am going to go take a nap.
Last edited by Athena on July 25th, 2015, 6:24 pm, edited 2 times in total.
Athena
Banned User
 
Posts: 1936
Joined: 22 Apr 2012
Location: Eugene, Oregon


Re: benefits of education for technology

Postby CanadysPeak on July 25th, 2015, 6:05 pm 

Athena » Sat Jul 25, 2015 5:02 pm wrote:
CanadysPeak » July 25th, 2015, 2:32 pm wrote:[quote="[url=http://www.sciencechatforum.com/viewtopic.php?p=284812#p284812]

I asked a few simple questions, but I don't see any response in the above. Who is the source of the big quote? Where do all these assertions come from?

Of course I know how to take part in the decisions of my borough, my county, my state, and my country. You ask as though I were a simpleton tyro. I have taken part in politics since 1957 when I began passing out campaign flyers.

So, do you have any sources?


Charles Sarolea's 1915 book, "The Anglo-German Problem". It will be Sarolea's quote of Dr. Friedrich Naumann, about the war of yesterday and the war of to-morrow.

Wow, I am really doing a whole lot worse than I thought, I thought I had provided my source of information for everything. Eisenhower's praising of Germany's contribution to democracy comes from the U of O lKNight Library document department. I do not have a copy of it at home. Other than Charles Sarolea's book I used information from the 1917 National Education Association, and I have referred to Tocqueville's book "Democracy in America".. I am not exactly sure what resources I failed to mention.

No, I do not ask as though you are simpleton but this is not a private letter and do you assume everyone knows how to be politically active? The example I gave of finding a friend tagged as dead in the morgue, was my granddaughter's experience, and they took no action to be encourage the hospital to be more careful in the future. However, so many of these mistakes have been made, an organization has been formed. I will gladly explain why I think our system is failing, after I give someone a ride. I have chosen to post to this forum, because I expect to find more well-educated people, with superior reasoning skills in this forum. I am confused about why I am doing so poorly? I have to run. Excuse me for a moment.


Thanks. I do expect everyone who posts to have some idea of what they're talking about. Don't you? But you asked about me, not some unknown reader.

I know who Sarolea and Naumann were. I give no credit to Sarolea as he had no expertise in either war or education, and was a propaganda hack. Naumann had some legitimacy, but he takes a whole bunch of words to repeat what Frederick the Great (might have) said, "An army travels on its stomach." His ideas about giving control to the captains of industry are a little ahead of his time, and are quite well developed. There is little doubt that, without the US War Production Board, Russia would have lagged in winning the war against Germany, and England would have sued for peace by 1942. I still doubt the Eisenhower quote.

I fail to see how this answers my question: Are you talking about education for technology (vocational training) or education for research (primarily science). Can you clarify this before we go on?
CanadysPeak
Resident Expert
 
Posts: 5931
Joined: 31 Dec 2008


Re: benefits of education for technology

Postby Athena on July 25th, 2015, 6:31 pm 

CanadysPeak » July 25th, 2015, 4:05 pm wrote:
Athena » Sat Jul 25, 2015 5:02 pm wrote:
CanadysPeak » July 25th, 2015, 2:32 pm wrote:[quote="[url=http://www.sciencechatforum.com/viewtopic.php?p=284812#p284812]

I asked a few simple questions, but I don't see any response in the above. Who is the source of the big quote? Where do all these assertions come from?

Of course I know how to take part in the decisions of my borough, my county, my state, and my country. You ask as though I were a simpleton tyro. I have taken part in politics since 1957 when I began passing out campaign flyers.

So, do you have any sources?


Charles Sarolea's 1915 book, "The Anglo-German Problem". It will be Sarolea's quote of Dr. Friedrich Naumann, about the war of yesterday and the war of to-morrow.

Wow, I am really doing a whole lot worse than I thought, I thought I had provided my source of information for everything. Eisenhower's praising of Germany's contribution to democracy comes from the U of O lKNight Library document department. I do not have a copy of it at home. Other than Charles Sarolea's book I used information from the 1917 National Education Association, and I have referred to Tocqueville's book "Democracy in America".. I am not exactly sure what resources I failed to mention.

No, I do not ask as though you are simpleton but this is not a private letter and do you assume everyone knows how to be politically active? The example I gave of finding a friend tagged as dead in the morgue, was my granddaughter's experience, and they took no action to be encourage the hospital to be more careful in the future. However, so many of these mistakes have been made, an organization has been formed. I will gladly explain why I think our system is failing, after I give someone a ride. I have chosen to post to this forum, because I expect to find more well-educated people, with superior reasoning skills in this forum. I am confused about why I am doing so poorly? I have to run. Excuse me for a moment.


Thanks. I do expect everyone who posts to have some idea of what they're talking about. Don't you? But you asked about me, not some unknown reader.

I know who Sarolea and Naumann were. I give no credit to Sarolea as he had no expertise in either war or education, and was a propaganda hack. Naumann had some legitimacy, but he takes a whole bunch of words to repeat what Frederick the Great (might have) said, "An army travels on its stomach." His ideas about giving control to the captains of industry are a little ahead of his time, and are quite well developed. There is little doubt that, without the US War Production Board, Russia would have lagged in winning the war against Germany, and England would have sued for peace by 1942. I still doubt the Eisenhower quote.

I fail to see how this answers my question: Are you talking about education for technology (vocational training) or education for research (primarily science). Can you clarify this before we go on?


I am tired. What do you think is the difference between education for technology and vocational training? What do you think technology did to changing warfare, and why did Dr. Friedrich Naumann say it would be an economic challenge? Can you make a connection between the technological change, education change and the economic challenge, and what is happening in the US?

Did you check out Eisenhower's warning? What is he warning us about? Does it maybe have anything to do with what Dr. Friedrich Naumann said about modern warfare?
Athena
Banned User
 
Posts: 1936
Joined: 22 Apr 2012
Location: Eugene, Oregon


Re: benefits of education for technology

Postby Athena on July 25th, 2015, 8:06 pm 

CanadysPeak » July 25th, 2015, 11:11 am wrote:I look forward to learning the citation for Eisenhower's speech, but you need not trouble yourself with quoting Sarolea. I believe him a hack German hater (you may have a legitimate opposite view, but I always associate him with the "Hun bayonetting the Belgian nun" crowd).

The chain of command and democracy are not mutually exclusive. You may recall that American militia units were very democratic, electing their own officers, but then obeying those officers, even under pain of death. The Wehrmacht was democratic, in my opinion, because of the emphasis placed on the individual soldier being able to reason for himself what the correct action was in any situation. Small units in the Wehrmacht did not require an officer to tell them what to do.


Here is an on- line copy of "The Anlgo German Problem" everyone can see that Charles Sarolea had a very high opinion of Germans. https://www.questia.com/read/3609092/th ... an-problem

If you find anything in Charles Sarolea's words to support what you said, please draw my attention to it. I think an evaluation of his book will prove he was very highly qualified to write about Germany, and he was also right. The Prussians were preparing Germany for war, just as the US has been preparing for war. You need not take my opinion for any of this, because it is all in the book, except of course the centralization of own education, and destruction of our own heroes, and added praising of efficiency when democracy is not efficient, and of course the path our own education for technology has taken, and the social, economic, and political ramifications of that.

I am sorry I would have to search the U of O document department to find the document you question about Eisenhower praising Germany. I am having trouble understanding why you aren't working with my explanations of merit hiring and bureaucratic organization?

You do not have to take anything I say about Eisenhower's warning because there are so many on line sources of information and here is a u tube of Eisenhower giving the speech ttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8y06NSBBRtY

Do you mind providing the source of your opinion?
Last edited by Athena on July 25th, 2015, 9:02 pm, edited 2 times in total.
Athena
Banned User
 
Posts: 1936
Joined: 22 Apr 2012
Location: Eugene, Oregon


Re: benefits of education for technology

Postby Athena on July 25th, 2015, 8:48 pm 

I wanted to say something positive about education for technology considering that is the title of this thread. One of the most important technologies advanced ever since Washington and Jefferson, is agricultural technology.

The US feed the allies during both world wars. This was an amazing feat and I don't think it would have been possible without the railroad and advances in agriculture and agricultural machinery. The US used public schools to mobilize the US for war and support the war effort. Part of that support was encouraging women to substitute corn meal for flour, so the wheat could be sent overseas, and encouraging victory gardens. Of course during the Great Depression and the dust bowl, government intervention was even more important. This lead to classes in science teaching children about soil erosion. We also learned to use electricity to freeze food and especially the technology to preserve and transport food developed during the second world war, is responsible for giving us an absolutely amazing supply of food, year round! We eat so well today because of advances in technology and those advances were made possible by education for technology.

Another extremely important advancement is our understanding of disease, sanitation, and pasteurization. This was one of the first things to greatly increase the number of children who survive giving us our aging population. The absolute thrill of what pasteurization did to prevent childhood deaths was a pleasure for me to read, I wish I could find that book so I could quote from it. Reading about the thrill of pasteurization saving the lives of children, helps us realize why spirits were so high in the roaring twenties. With science and technology, we were achieving the impossible. This brings us to eugenics and the excessive hope of what technology can do for us. Things we really need to talk about to understand history, where we are today and where we might go from here.
Athena
Banned User
 
Posts: 1936
Joined: 22 Apr 2012
Location: Eugene, Oregon


Re: benefits of education for technology

Postby CanadysPeak on July 25th, 2015, 9:19 pm 

I fail to see how this answers my question: Are you talking about education for technology (vocational training) or education for research (primarily science). Can you clarify this before we go on?

If you will not answer my one, rather simple question, I cannot know what more to say. I am not asking you to prove anything, or defend anything, merely to say which you are talking about.
CanadysPeak
Resident Expert
 
Posts: 5931
Joined: 31 Dec 2008


Re: benefits of education for technology

Postby vivian maxine on July 26th, 2015, 6:52 am 

Another route to education for technology. It is not a new idea by any means but seems to be coming to the fore again. Apprenticeships. Certainly cheaper than university training nowadays.

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/07/14/busin ... .html?_r=0
vivian maxine
Resident Member
 
Posts: 2837
Joined: 01 Aug 2014


Re: benefits of education for technology

Postby CanadysPeak on July 26th, 2015, 8:57 am 

vivian maxine » Sun Jul 26, 2015 6:52 am wrote:Another route to education for technology. It is not a new idea by any means but seems to be coming to the fore again. Apprenticeships. Certainly cheaper than university training nowadays.

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/07/14/busin ... .html?_r=0


This may be part of this discussion, but I cannot yet get Athena pinned down on whether she is referring to this or to the German university system. To be fair, the two have always been intertwined, so that may be her focus.

We do have programs similar to this in the US. Many of the community college programs have included apprenticeship elements, for example for machinists, electricians, and pattern makers. Newport News Drydock and Shipbuilding has long had a strong program. Several decades past, industrial giants such as Westinghouse had programs.

But, we differ from Germany in that we have no great history of craft work, favoring the large assembly line instead, and we now have broken much of the strength of unions. To make good use of the apprenticeship model, we need to make a strong turn to the left, limiting offshoring and giving unions shared ownership of industry. We need also to be willing to say that only journeymen may practice many of the trades and crafts, e.g., bricklaying, welding, etc.
CanadysPeak
Resident Expert
 
Posts: 5931
Joined: 31 Dec 2008


Re: benefits of education for technology

Postby vivian maxine on July 26th, 2015, 9:50 am 

I keep wondering why we are comparing ourselves to Germany and wanting to copy them. Perhaps much has changed since I stopped keeping track of "over there" but at one time their entire educational system was so different from ours as to make us often debate "which is better.

In Germany and Great Britain - perhaps many other places, children were given a very special test at age 11. This test determined whether they'd get to attend university for an academic education or go to trade school for what we are now calling "education for technology". Great Britain has now changed their system so that children are not forcibly channeled into particular fields based on a single test. I think Germany has also changed. I'm not sure.

I'm sorry. I'm being a bit muddled in what I'm trying to say. We educate our students differently. The last I knew, we let every child - all the way through university - choose his own way and decide whether he will or will not follow through. This has it negatives and positives. Does Germany let every student decide whether he will go to university or trade school? How does Germany decide who will or won't?

This thread is - as you remind us - about education for technology. We have several ways of educating for technology in our country. The simplest is basic apprenticeship. It is as old as the hills. Father teaches son. Now it is becoming more specialized but it's still one good way. We have trade schools for those who know this is what they want. We do not tell any child he has to go to trade school when he says he wants to go to college or apprenticeship. And, of course, we have our universities who have begun offering technology courses but at such a cost as to bury the student in lifetime debt. How today's young people manage to pay that tuition is beyond me and I think this explains in part why college students do not want to spend time on the humanities when they need to get a job fast. If you need a job fast and employers are demanding that you have a college degree to work for them - as many are - you are not interested in Shakespeare or Napoleon.

All right. You have tried hard to explain the benefits of the German way. Our system is most certainly not perfect. We are losing whole generations of students with our slipshod methods. (I am talking elementary school now. It starts there.) How is Germany different? What are they doing better? I'm sorry to be so dense about it. I'll re-read some of what you've written but can you put it more simply?
vivian maxine
Resident Member
 
Posts: 2837
Joined: 01 Aug 2014


Re: benefits of education for technology

Postby CanadysPeak on July 26th, 2015, 12:43 pm 

I don't want to copy Germany. I would like to copy part of their system, in the same manner I would like to copy part of the English system. I think we can incorporate good elements from a wide variety of sources. Athena's point seems to be that we did copy the Germans by passing the NDEA, but I can't get her to clarify what that means.

By the way, we have a system in America that is just as rigid as the German testing scheme. If you were, for example, to be born into the Wilkinsburg School District near me, you are not destined for a certain kind of high school, nor for a certain university, but you may be certain that you will not attend Wharton, nor get a job with a prestigious New York law firm. We call our system neighborhood schools and local funding.
CanadysPeak
Resident Expert
 
Posts: 5931
Joined: 31 Dec 2008


Re: benefits of education for technology

Postby vivian maxine on July 26th, 2015, 1:52 pm 

I just spent some time reading two articles about NDEA and I am remembering rightly what it was and why it was abandoned. So, we are talking about two different things and I shall let my comments go to rest. I am on the wrong page. What you are talking about cannot be taught in trade schools or apprenticeships. You are talking about a much higher form of education. I need to return to the original OP and see what the original topic was.
vivian maxine
Resident Member
 
Posts: 2837
Joined: 01 Aug 2014


Re: benefits of education for technology

Postby vivian maxine on July 26th, 2015, 2:31 pm 

CanadysPeak » July 25th, 2015, 5:05 pm wrote:
Athena » Sat Jul 25, 2015 5:02 pm wrote:
CanadysPeak » July 25th, 2015, 2:32 pm wrote:[quote="[url=http://www.sciencechatforum.com/viewtopic.php?p=284812#p284812]

I asked a few simple questions, but I don't see any response in the above. Who is the source of the big quote? Where do all these assertions come from?

Of course I know how to take part in the decisions of my borough, my county, my state, and my country. You ask as though I were a simpleton tyro. I have taken part in politics since 1957 when I began passing out campaign flyers.

So, do you have any sources?


Charles Sarolea's 1915 book, "The Anglo-German Problem". It will be Sarolea's quote of Dr. Friedrich Naumann, about the war of yesterday and the war of to-morrow.

Wow, I am really doing a whole lot worse than I thought, I thought I had provided my source of information for everything. Eisenhower's praising of Germany's contribution to democracy comes from the U of O lKNight Library document department. I do not have a copy of it at home. Other than Charles Sarolea's book I used information from the 1917 National Education Association, and I have referred to Tocqueville's book "Democracy in America".. I am not exactly sure what resources I failed to mention.

No, I do not ask as though you are simpleton but this is not a private letter and do you assume everyone knows how to be politically active? The example I gave of finding a friend tagged as dead in the morgue, was my granddaughter's experience, and they took no action to be encourage the hospital to be more careful in the future. However, so many of these mistakes have been made, an organization has been formed. I will gladly explain why I think our system is failing, after I give someone a ride. I have chosen to post to this forum, because I expect to find more well-educated people, with superior reasoning skills in this forum. I am confused about why I am doing so poorly? I have to run. Excuse me for a moment.


Thanks. I do expect everyone who posts to have some idea of what they're talking about. Don't you? But you asked about me, not some unknown reader.

I know who Sarolea and Naumann were. I give no credit to Sarolea as he had no expertise in either war or education, and was a propaganda hack. Naumann had some legitimacy, but he takes a whole bunch of words to repeat what Frederick the Great (might have) said, "An army travels on its stomach." His ideas about giving control to the captains of industry are a little ahead of his time, and are quite well developed. There is little doubt that, without the US War Production Board, Russia would have lagged in winning the war against Germany, and England would have sued for peace by 1942. I still doubt the Eisenhower quote.

I fail to see how this answers my question: Are you talking about education for technology (vocational training) or education for research (primarily science). Can you clarify this before we go on?


Or education for politics? This is what lost us the NDEA. It was political before it left Washington and landed on the Deans' desks. So, are we talking about how to improve education? Or are we talking about how to use education to further our political agendas? If the second, I'm glad I woke up.
vivian maxine
Resident Member
 
Posts: 2837
Joined: 01 Aug 2014


Re: benefits of education for technology

Postby CanadysPeak on July 26th, 2015, 5:47 pm 

VM,
I have no idea what we're talking about. I keep asking, but Athena never answers. Do you want to highjack the thread to what you're interested in? Which political agenda do you see using education to further, and who is doing that? Get it started and I'll try to pick it up from there.
CP
CanadysPeak
Resident Expert
 
Posts: 5931
Joined: 31 Dec 2008


Re: benefits of education for technology

Postby Athena on July 27th, 2015, 12:43 am 

vivian maxine » July 26th, 2015, 12:31 pm wrote:Or education for politics? This is what lost us the NDEA. It was political before it left Washington and landed on the Deans' desks. So, are we talking about how to improve education? Or are we talking about how to use education to further our political agendas? If the second, I'm glad I woke up.



Vivan, my concern is the extreme focus on a narrow range of subjects, education that is now exclusively for higher education, and if a child is not so inclined the child is basically cheated out of a useful education. and leaves school feeling stupid and worthless. Math has changed so much, parents can no longer help their children with math, and we should help these parents by giving them classes too, so they can help their children.

Vocational training programs have been cut, along with music and art. This is insane as music and art are directly related to math and science!

I have seen training in logic come back, but for awhile is was cut and there was a full reliance on memorization. I am afraid in many schools this is still so because the pressure is to get children to pass the limited, narrow IQ range test from the federal government, so the schools can get federal dollars. Memorizing facts and passing test doesn't mean children are getting useful educations. To be citizens of this country, they need to understand concepts and principles, and they need critical thinking skills.

We need a culture determined by worthy people, not commercials, ads, and those in media who appeal to our lowest interest, sex, drugs and rock and roll, killing and crime, and chasing zombies. Our school libraries should not be filled with books glorifying antisocial behavior, and having none of the classics because children will read trash but not classics. Reading is a technical skill we learn, but old school books taught culture and values and history, not antisocial stuff like a school principal flying around in his underwear!

Not all children have good parents and when we started spreading education in 1840 it was to Americanize the immigrants and teach everyone how to be good citizens. We knew the parents would learn from their children. Today a growing number of parents are completely clueless of the concepts, principles and values that all children were taught, so they sure can't teach their children. We are now mistaking anarchy for liberty. The cost of our prisons is hurting us badly and is money better spent on education so we prevent the social problems in the first place.

We once prepared every student for civic and industrial leadership. Today we are preparing our young to be products for industry and we are developing a third world economy, but can't pay wages low enough to compete with third world countries.. Maybe this is not true where you live, but where I live we are totally dependent on outsiders to bring us industry. The only major high-tech industry to come here was here because they were given such a good deal, but as soon as they had to start paying taxes, they left. Their high-tech building has stood empty ever since. We are so bloody helpless because we are so dependent on outsiders, and this is not good for our economy.

Perhaps my purpose for writing is political? The founding of our nation was political. I have this crazy idea that we are supposed to be political. I kind of thought that was the meaning of being American? And public education is about preparing our children to meet our national needs, right?
Athena
Banned User
 
Posts: 1936
Joined: 22 Apr 2012
Location: Eugene, Oregon


Re: benefits of education for technology

Postby vivian maxine on July 27th, 2015, 7:20 am 

No, Athena, I think you are writing as I first interpreted your OP. But we seem to keep bringing in something else. I can't quite put my finger on it but referring to the NDEA is part of my confusion. NDEA didn't work because it was wrapped up in politics. when we start discussing the value of NDEA in furthering education, I think (but not sure) we are discussing its value and the fast cancellation of it. History shows that there was quite a political dress on it to which universities objected. Hence its fast demise. From there we go to how education furthers democracy. Is this part of the OP question?

At any rate, the confusion is mine. I shall sit back and see where this goes. It may just be that I have too simplistic an answer to your original question. I thought you were asking how how to improve the methods. I get edgy when I see politics entering in. How to improve politics is a hot potato. Pay me no heed. Leave me to observe where you all are going with this. Carry on.

By the way, your last paragraph helps. I think I know your aim now. And you are right, yes. I just wasn't expecting it from that angle.
vivian maxine
Resident Member
 
Posts: 2837
Joined: 01 Aug 2014


Re: benefits of education for technology

Postby Athena on July 27th, 2015, 11:45 am 

CanadysPeak » July 26th, 2015, 10:43 am wrote:I don't want to copy Germany. I would like to copy part of their system, in the same manner I would like to copy part of the English system. I think we can incorporate good elements from a wide variety of sources. Athena's point seems to be that we did copy the Germans by passing the NDEA, but I can't get her to clarify what that means.

By the way, we have a system in America that is just as rigid as the German testing scheme. If you were, for example, to be born into the Wilkinsburg School District near me, you are not destined for a certain kind of high school, nor for a certain university, but you may be certain that you will not attend Wharton, nor get a job with a prestigious New York law firm. We call our system neighborhood schools and local funding.


In Oregon there is pride in imitating German education. Can we get very clear about this? As soon as we had specialist in education, they got that way by studying education around the world, and Germany was the leader in education. This thread is suppose to be about the benefits of education for technology.

I think I said the National Defense Education Act replaced our liberal education. I think I said the Prussians centralize public education, destroyed Germany's heroes, almost made a God of efficiency and focused education on technology for industrial and military purpose, and in 1958 this is what the US did.
What is there to not understand?

We added vocational training to education in 1917 for industrial and military purpose. All learned skills including reading and math are learned technologies. Did anyone pay attention to the benefits I explained?
I was hoping people would respond to them and wanted to add to them. Adding vocational training to education was a huge benefit to our country! No one had to send their children to school, and until vocational training was added to education, many parents saw no reason to send their children to school. It was customary to man our factories and mines with children. We still let our children out of school for the summer, because we were agrarian and needed their labor. When we developed technologies like typing, and similar machine work and trained children for this in schools, suddenly there was hope for much better lives because now children could learn skills that meant better wages.

I am afraid as the words tumble out of me, so much is being missed. There is the new hope for better lives. Better because of learned skills and better wages. Better because of changes in food production and sanitation, and medicine and therefore, children have healthier lives and many, many more surviving childhood. And also better, because well education people are more refined, and hopefully more law abiding because they understand the reasoning for the laws, and have learned to think critically and have better moral judgement they have better taste and are more apt to go to the theater than go to the bar, get drunk and beat someone up, or stay home get drunk and beat the wife and children. Education means an end to beating the devil out of our children, and taking more baths. Education means changes that have some Muslim fanatics up in arms defending their way of life against our good lives. Come on, do we have no memory of a past that was not so safe, clean and gentle? Education brought people out of poverty and gave us a large middle class , and greatly improved our lives in many ways, including AMERICANIZING THE IMMIGRANTS, AND MAKING US A STRONG AND UNITED NATION THAT COME TOGETHER IN TIME OF WAR, AND DO SOME REALLY AMAZING THINGS TO WIN A WAR. THESE ARE BENEFITS OF EDUCATION FOR TECHNOLOGY. DO I NEED TO NEED TO FIND BETTER WORDS?

I know I have explained how the National Defense Education Act changed things, so instead of doing it again, I will ask, How did the National Defense Education Act change things, besides giving science classes better funding?

Vivine, I just got called for work and I better run, but want to respond to your concern that I am being political. I am a mother, my children came of age when we had a national youth crisis, and a commentator was proud because his statement that teachers should not have to spend on poor students was so popular. I want to make this clear, I write as the granddaughter of a teacher who I think benefitted our nation as a teacher! I write as a mother who lost her children to a national youth crisis, and saw the damage this caused my grandchildren, and see the damage passing on to great grandchildren. How much more human and personal can I be?

I have called to work and have run.
Athena
Banned User
 
Posts: 1936
Joined: 22 Apr 2012
Location: Eugene, Oregon


Re: benefits of education for technology

Postby CanadysPeak on July 27th, 2015, 4:51 pm 

Athena, you are all over the place. Let me lay out some of the undisputed history of education in the US.

Prior to the American Civil War, fewer than 5 % of people attended high school or university. Those that did were usually well-off, and their programs of study were primarily the classical ones of the Oxbridge type.

The Civil War was the mother of the teen-ager, with attendant time between childhood and adulthood that could be used for education. The Morrill Act (1862) provided for the establishment of colleges dedicated to agriculture and the mechanical arts (technology). It also expressed the intent that students not neglect the liberal arts in doing this.

High schools proliferated after the Civil War, with the result being that, by 1890, half of all teen-agers attended high school (not necessarily to graduation). Those high schools were all over the place, some tending toward preparing students for the land-grant colleges, some modeled along the lines of the traditional private academies.

It became obvious that the US significantly lagged many other nations in science and technologies. We had no respectable engineering programs here. You are right that higher educators, wishing to correct this, looked to Germany. It is useful to look at the establishment of Stanford in 1891 for the express purpose of providing a world class engineering education. Stanford was deliberately modeled after the German research universities; you might consider the (unofficial) motto of Stanford.

Educators (NEA, college presidents, others) began looking at what high schools should be doing. They decided in 1893 that the curricula should focus on liberal arts and classical studies. This was more or less implemented. By 1918, educators had figured out that this type of high school was doing a piss-poor job for the working classes and for the student not so interested in academics. A report, Cardinal Principles of Secondary Education, was issued that year calling for increases in vocational and practical education, specifically these objectives were given:
1. Health
2.Command of fundamental processes
3.Worthy home membership
4.Vocation
5.Citizenship
6.Worthy use of leisure
7.Ethical character

Industry found this useful. The workers found this useful. The military found this useful. Millions of immigrants found this useful. Most colleges and universities found this useful. It was far more democratic than the corresponding education systems in many European nations. Almost anyone could attend high school and benefit from it.

The NDEA was passed in 1958 in reaction to Sputnik. It was generally beneficial, but had some downsides. Specifically, Latin and Greek were not funded; on the other hand, African-American and Latin-American studies were eligible for funding. Title X of the act called for a loyalty oath. Nobody much liked that and it was repealed a few years later.

There were several GI bills. All focused on providing vocational and professional education for vets. All were beneficial.

We did not copy the German gymnasium system. We did not copy the German craft education system on any wide-scale basis, We did emulate the German research university.

I am a product of a post-NDEA high school. I attended a largely vocational oriented college on the GI Bill. I worked most of my life as a technologist. Yet, I have voted in every election I have ever been eligible to register for. I have supported campaigns. I have stood for public office. I attend public meetings and sometimes speak. I have taken part in protests against, or for, various things. I know the names of all the SCOTUS justices. I know the Constitution. I can explain how a law is passed. I can explain, at least on a simplistic level, how the economy works. WHAT WAS THE PROBLEM WITH MY EDUCATION? HOW DID IT MAKE ME A POOR DEMOCRAT?
CanadysPeak
Resident Expert
 
Posts: 5931
Joined: 31 Dec 2008


Re: benefits of education for technology

Postby vivian maxine on July 28th, 2015, 8:10 am 

Speaking of benefits, is this relevant to your conversation? Free two year colleges. As the article says, it isn't a new idea but is a "currently new" idea in that it is coming to the fore again.

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/20 ... ceDaily%29

Athena, good to see that Oregon is onto this idea.
vivian maxine
Resident Member
 
Posts: 2837
Joined: 01 Aug 2014


Re: benefits of education for technology

Postby CanadysPeak on July 28th, 2015, 8:17 am 

Am I here? Can anyone see me? Might I be a Cosmos Topper doppelganger?

As Mr. Wonderful likes to say, "I'm out."
CanadysPeak
Resident Expert
 
Posts: 5931
Joined: 31 Dec 2008


Re: benefits of education for technology

Postby Athena on July 28th, 2015, 1:31 pm 

CanadysPeak » July 25th, 2015, 7:19 pm wrote:I fail to see how this answers my question: Are you talking about education for technology (vocational training) or education for research (primarily science). Can you clarify this before we go on?

If you will not answer my one, rather simple question, I cannot know what more to say. I am not asking you to prove anything, or defend anything, merely to say which you are talking about.


You gave me a question I can work with, and have made a helpful distinction. In 1917 we added vocational training, and I would say that is a shift from a focus on literacy, to a focus on technology, but as long as our national defense was mostly about patriotism, because we did not have the technological ability to engage in war and feed our nation, literacy and especially history and an education for a culture, democracy as a way of life, remained very, very important.

The Prussian focus would be research and while this is was always in my thought, grounded in what William James said of Germany's education, it was not as sharp in my mind as your question makes this distinction. We completely dumped all education for culture and our focus on history is totally shifted because we are no longer trying to establish our nation and culture as distinctly different from all the others. Our patriotism, and knowing why our democracy must be defended is not neccessary for the military to enter a war in 4 hours and do more damage than could have been done in several months. All we need now is the research, and a fully employed population that can pay for this high tech military might.

If you will not answer my one, rather simple question, I cannot know what more to say. I am not asking you to prove anything, or defend anything, merely to say which you are talking about.


From my point of view, I have not only answered your questions repeatedly, but I have given up my entire mornings to do so, spending many hours reading my books, and copying letter by letter the quotes into the post. This has been a lot of work with no satisfaction of achieving understanding, and this frustration is followed by blaming me for your failure to understand whay I am saying. I don't think the fault is all mine. I am quite sure I quoted William James early on.

We replace the Conceptual Method with the Behaviorist Method, which is also used for training dogs, and has nothing to do with thinking and dream coming out of the Enlightenment! All the IQ testing and school funding has followed this path of programming humans to do specifical task, making them products for the Military and Industry Complex, and this has nothing to do with the democracy our forefathers gave us coming out of the Enlightenment.

Democracy is a complex concept, and that means we must understand many simple concepts to understand the complex concept. We are no longer educating for this. However, we can do the research and add to our store of information, JUST LIKE THE BORG. There are not words that adequately express my deep pain when there is no understanding of what I am saying. You have argued like there are right and wrong facts, instead of complex and difficult concepts, and repeatedly say I have not answered your questions, instead of acknowledging the time and effort I have put into answering your questions. I am hurt and tired, and would also like things to be different.
Athena
Banned User
 
Posts: 1936
Joined: 22 Apr 2012
Location: Eugene, Oregon


Next

Return to Odds & Ends

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 9 guests