What I'm Learning About Learning

I'm back at school! (More on that later)

As the first few weeks have rolled by, there has been a common theme running through the majority of my classes. Most of my profs having been talking about the ideas and problems centered around the academic world. I'd like propose a few questions that keep popping up in my readings and lectures, questions which have really started to get me thinking about the other side of the picture. They are presented here with a large degree of simplification, but my hope is that they get us thinking and talking about how academia is practiced.

Question 1: What is education for?

All throughout my life, I have been going to school to learn new things; new facts, new ideas, new theories, new ways of getting things accomplished, etc. This seems fairly self evident - that is until you ask the question, "for what reason am I learning?" So often we assume (or at least I do) that we learn so that we can contribute to our ever evolving story on this planet. A medical sciences student goes to school to learn how the body works so that she may learn how to help others when they are sick. An engineering student goes to school to learn how design buildings that we may some day live in. A history student learns how to categorize our past experiences so that she may continue developing the story that we come to understand ourselves by. The political science student learns theories of governing ourselves so that we may design a better system that works for us all. Essentially, we participate in academia in order to better the world.

David Orr - a professor of political ecology at Oberlin College - questions this romanticized view on academia in his book, Earth in Mind: On Education, Environment, and the Human Prospect by pointing out that it is people with their undergraduate degrees, Master's certifications, and Doctorates who are responsible for an economic system that degrades and exploits the environment. He even goes as far as to use Ellie Wiesel's analysis of those individuals responsible for the atrocities of the holocaust saying that they "were the heirs of Kant and Goethe, widely thought to be the best educated people on the planet" (Orr, 7). What is it about these individuals education that lead them to neglect moral judgement? Was something missing? Do ethics, morality and character building have a place within the academic world? What about action? Does education need to lead us to a place

Question 2: Who's knowledge?

The question implies two notions that, in my opinion, are often overlooked.  The first is that knowledge is a created thing. This idea has been around for a while but it's been most exemplified in my study of Hobbes' Leviathan. Hobbes spends the first few chapters of Leviathan explaining how our senses inform us of our surroundings and help us form an awareness of them. That is to say, our experiences shape our understanding and knowledge. Alongside with this is the obvious notion that we all have different experiences and therefore have different knowledges. My understanding is quite different than yours and collectively - assuming that we have both grown up in the same culture - our knowledge is quite different than someone's from say India. The question then becomes, who's knowledge do we present in University? Which knowledge gets privileged and why? 

I believe in the power of intersectionality. That is, the power of recognizing where two different knowledges intersect. I believe that where these intersects happen, a connection is made and a great deal is learned. Is it the academic world's responsibility to facilitate intersectional dialogue? If so, how do we open the classroom up to knowledges that are not the same as the professor's? What power dynamics are in the way when promoting intersectionality?

Question 3: Who get's to participate? 

Time and time again, I am reminded of how lucky I am to be here. There are many barriers to education, both seen and unseen. Although, I've struggled with the money issue, I've been lucky enough to have a government service provide me with the funding necessary to go to school, as long as I pay it back when I'm done. But what about those who can't? What about those where government funding is just not enough?

It's also important to examine the question of who excels in the academic world and why. I stumbled across a great meme that asks the same question. 

We're not all designed the same way and I think that our education ignores that, thus inhibiting the participation of others. We recently heard from both Kelsey and Danielle about the benefits and joys of learning beyond the classroom. Does the academic world make room for different types of learning? Is it emphasized enough or is it just payed simple lip service with the inclusion of a practicum class here and there?

As I stated in the beginning of this post, these questions are limited and quite simplified. These are questions that I hope I can explore throughout the rest of my academic career. I hope to encourage discussion and thought about the ways in which we approach academia and I hope to expose some of the power dynamics behind the institution. 

Thoughts?