1.
In
an ideal world, how do you think education should be organised?
In an
ideal world communities would organise their own education. The central government might fund, or perhaps
local councils, but central government would define the nature of the qualifications
that students could attain based on principles student relevance, not some
archaic idea of cultural need.
Communities
could decide curricula, teaching principles (as opposed to evaluation criteria)
and priorities for funding. Teachers,
parents and students would all be part of the decisions.
2.
What
priorities do you think it should reflect? and who should be responsible for
ensuring that it is of a good quality?
A priority
should be made for students to be democratised to be the citizens of tomorrow
and not just the consumers of today. They would need to be educated with the skills
and knowledge needed to lead a more open, convivial and collaborative
society. (It is an ideal world after
all).
Community
3.
Is
there anything from the padlet wall that has informed your position?
The post
about the problems between unions and the Government of Mexico resonated with
me. Firstly because it paralleled
arguments about teacher evaluation in Stephen Balls’ article Secondly because it
relates to our Registered Teachers’ Criteria used here in Aotearoa/New Zealand.
The ideas propounded by Balls in the reading were very interesting and reminded
me of Ivan Illich in “De-schooling Society” and, to some extent, “Tools for
Conviviality”. I liked the idea of a collaborative service to communities and
it as from there I got the idea of teacher principles not criteria as referred
to above.
I am keen
to read more in this area.
