- UID
- 716514
- 在线时间
- 小时
- 注册时间
- 2012-2-1
- 最后登录
- 1970-1-1
- 主题
- 帖子
- 性别
- 保密
|
Iagree with the assertion that educational institutes should exert aconstructive influence on students’ decision concerning perusing direction. However,the trait of a prescriber cannot evolve to be dogmatism which strips students’ability to choose their own pursuing field. Education institutes appreciablyought to avoid predict some future fields by means of their alleged experienceand trend analysis. It is supposed to give students adequate basic facts with criticalthinking, broad adaptability with specialization, and optimistic withimperturbability.
Admittedly,for the sake of students’ future direction, schools indeed should advocate somecourses about career planning. For schools, a host of generations graduate fromhere and they more or less gain some experience. The developing tendency is explicitfor them because they may be the professionals or experts on that field. Hence,their recommendations manifest some values to some extent. Yet, these alleged empiricismand mundane short-term forecast cannot dominate their students’ pursing. Wecannot ensure that educational institutes are not related with some company incommercial interests. Underneath the commercial benefits, teachers’ recommendationswill precipitate a wider chain reaction of profits and give pure educationchallenges previously unrivaled in complexity.
Thealleged education’ responsibility is troubling in two respects. On one hand, educationalinstitutes cannot come with a cast-iron guarantee that one field has brightprospects, while another one not. With the rapid development of social need,some realms really gain the market’s inclination. Computer science exemplifiesthis phenomenon. In developing countries ten years ago, especially China and Brazil,a stunning shortage of computer engineers became a serious problem for their society.Then plethora of schools open the relevant courses, feed so many engineers thatthe IT market rapidly expand and stand at a saturation state. Today is awatershed in this market. Therefore, when you were admitted and turned a blindfaith in teachers’ empiricism four years ago, you would sink into unemployment dilemmanow.
Onthe other hand is education institutes’ undue intervention and absentconsideration about students’ interest. Education will lose its essence, ceaseto an incubation of various fields, if it place excessive emphasis on itsdominance, while modicum of priority on students’ initiative. Importance of short-termsociety needs pale in comparison to students’ interests. Students’ inner dreamoriented, education should be responsible for licensing students to court theirinner dream and interests, for lifting students bemused by technology problemsout of doldrums, for cling tenaciously to the orientation for students’knowledge, critical thinking, and broad adaptability.
Detractorsof my above analysis may query that what kind of students is a marriage ofeducation and their own interests? T-shaped students. The vertical bar onthe T represents the depth of related skills and expertise in asingle field, whereas the horizontal bar is the ability to collaborate acrossdisciplines with experts in other areas and to apply knowledge in areas ofexpertise other than one's own. Moreover, only when you have an inclination forit, you will secure the deep skills.
Insum, education institutes should not pose more focus on predicting which fieldis easily successful than feeding students’ basic skills and knowledge. Education’exclusive essence is incubation for all respects of knowledge, and school’ seminalrole is pedestal for supporting students to court dream. |
|
京公网安备11010202008513号 京ICP证101109号 京ICP备12012021号
发表于 2012-6-7 16:30:27
收藏
收藏
