Editor’s note: The following column was truncated in Saturday’s edition. It is being run in its entirety today.
To get a good job, one needs a good education, — usually, but that’s not how our education system always works. To have a good life, get an appropriate education, — but that’s not how our education system always works. The bureaucratic system’s motivation is not the same as the clients’.
Let’s start at the beginning. Early development is important, so important that many parents obsess with getting their child into the best kindergarten, or even best preschool. Any preschool is probably better than none. (Even the maligned McMartin turned out to be OK) Children learn social skills from exposure to other children and to good examples. A Gates foundation study concluded that a dollar spent on preschool saved $45 in the long run. Unfortunately, the savings benefit different pockets than the preschool budget pocket, so it’s hard to appreciate. An important start for children is to appreciate learning and to learn the predominant local language.
Traditionally education might end with the three Rs (Reading, wRiting and aRithmetic). Those are important because once a pupil has acquired those basic skills, they have what they need to progress, no matter what life has to offer. A popular meme says “One more day I did not need algebra.” This is one place the bureaucracy priorities diverge from the pupils’ needs. In many ways the system priority seems to be to develop college professors for a world that needs tradesmen too. I jokingly predict that in 20 years welders will earn more than doctors because they will be harder to find. Plumbers can do quite well even though they get their hands dirty. Certain trades will never be replaced by computers.
It is difficult to predict at an early age what capabilities the pupil might ultimately develop and some systems still put pupils on a rigid schedule based on a decision made at an arbitrary age or grade level. The late bloomer can be locked out of a promising career path based on one test or evaluation. A few years ago, I started a list of people who made major accomplishments without completing a formal education; two pages so far, from Jesus of Nazareth to George Hearst to Mark Zuckerberg.
There is of course another side to education. The scion of a wealthy family does not need to think of a career but some level of education beyond the 3 Rs can lead to a happier life, even if it comes from majoring in 18 th century French poetry, or getting an Mrs. degree (old misogynist joke). The exposure to the vast world via education might spark an interest that can lead to an interesting or productive life that would not have occurred by just enjoying the benefits of inherited wealth. Just learning what you don’t know might have unexpected benefits.
Part of education goes beyond learning information. Some traditional education was based on rote, a memorized response to standard questions. This is obsolete. An important basic skill is critical thinking, the ability to separate useful information from nonsense or misleading claims. This is especially important in the semi-reality world of politics. We all anticipate that politicians and other advertisers will treat facts loosely.
Some call it spinning. Others commit outright lies. Is the candidate what he (or she) claims to be, a fraud or the antichrist? I can think of one example currently.
One precaution is to ignore whatever any candidate says about their opponent, unless you can confirm the claim independently. Another is to examine their allies, candidates get pretty good at covering their flaws, their henchmen less so. Candidates seem to feel that the most important thing is sincerity. Once you learn how to fake that, you have it made. It’s OK to be wrong as long as you are surely the most sincerely wrong. Then you can be a folk hero like Clyde Barrow and maybe get elected.
Better for us to listen to those whose stake in the election matches our own: family, classmates, coworkers, neighbors, or officeholders you would vote for again. Critical thinking – testing what one just heard against that which you know for sure — can help one decide which pundits are fair or biased; which ones are merely entertainers.
Ken Obenski is a forensic engineer, now safety and freedom advocate in South Kona. He writes a biweekly column for West Hawaii Today. Send feedback to obenskik@gmail.com
