Kathy, question 2 of 2. Below is next portion I need help with regarding the West High School debate. Due tomorrow.
Respond to at least one peer from the opposite group with a critical evaluation of their argument. Propose a counter-example or two to show the fallacy of their argument and/or ask for additional evidence to support their viewpoint.
The opposite group-students post:
Ms. Nichols apparently subscribes to the essentialism view of education. Essentialism “blends elements of both Idealism and Realism” (Stallones, 2011, Idealist Educational Theory, para. 3). Even though essentialists feel that schools should teach uses methods that have worked in the past, they are not as worried about ideas; rather, they feel that the emphasis should be on rudimentary knowledge and skills and stressing that hard work will have the reward of knowledge in the long run. People who subscribe to this theory also feel that when it comes to authority, the teacher has the final say.
Mr. Lopez seems to be more in favor of an existentialist method of education. He does not believe that there should be a specific list of courses that must be taught to all students. Rather, he feels that students should be able to make their own decisions about what courses to take based on their interests, which is self-knowledge. Existentialists believe that “the process of growth is what gives life meaning” (Stallones, 2011, Existentialist Educational Theory, para. 2).
Ms. Nichols has a point that students do need to know the basics, such as basic math functions and grammar rules. Her argument is valid that many students who are left to their own devices will simply choose the easier courses rather than challenge themselves and pursue their interests.
Mr. Lopez, on the other hand, believes that students do have the maturity to consciously make decisions for their futures and that they are capable of making good choices if given the chance. The natural result of allowing students to choose their own courses is that they will do well because the material is stimulating to them and it will be relevant to their future career choices.
Mr. Lopez is correct. There is a legitimate argument for allowing students to choose courses that will pertain to their futures. While a student may not have a definite career choice, they most likely have interests and skills in certain areas, which will likely lead to a career in the future. There is no sense in making students sit through courses that have little or nothing to do with their futures. Students are more likely to pay attention and do well if the subject matter of the course interests them.
Stallones, J. (2011). Philosophy of Education. San Diego, CA: Bridgepoint Education, Inc.