Teachers vs Indoctrinators

[gitano]

I've been in a friendly discussion with a friend of a fellow that used to date one of my daughters. I think he is about 21. Anyway, I was questioning some of the things he says he "knows". I wrote:

I might want to investigate how you "KNOW" that "taste and aesthetics are wholly subjective". Or is that something you were taught by an "expert", AND that you believe. "Belief:" faith in something taught, as opposed to "knowledge:" which is awareness borne of experience.

Thinking about my ending comments, I re-examined the roots of some of my own comments and had a bit of another epiphany.

Indoctrinators impose upon you a set of rules within which you are expected to function, operate, and behave. You are expected to 'have faith' that THEY "know" what is "right".

Teachers instead show you how to think without the chains of dogma and "faith".

The vast majority of college professors are indoctrinators.

Paul

[JaDub]

A-MEN !
 
  Apparently common sense is a forgotten `science` these days.

[LvrLover]

The best thing an education teaches you is HOW to learn, not what.

[kombi1976]

The vast majority of college professors are indoctrinators.
Paul

This is true.....to a point.
You sorta need to understand the context.
If you goal is to achieve a graduate degree then there are fixed requirements for achieving the degree they are handing out.
In that sense you have to jump through their hoops to achieve said degree.
Some degrees have more scope than others but most professors adopt a particular school of thought and their perspective with undergrads is that you learn what you're told until you know enough to know what to choose.
That seems dictatorial but it has some sense to it.
When you reach the end of your graduate degree and decide if you want to do honours, masters or PhD then you pick your area of study.....which may or may not conflict with your professor's views.
It's the reason why people often go to a different uni/college to do their post grad degrees.
I try to be an encouraging teacher (that being my profession) but at times you have to be an indoctrinator to achieve your outcomes.....i.e. what the kids come out with.
What I would say is that often you inspire kids to extend their own learning by indoctrinating them in the first place.
Indoctrination in itself isn't terrible in the right application.
It can form a sort of excitement about something.....so long as you don't do it as a tyrant.
If you are zealous and positive then it'll inspire someone to continue.
How many of you guys have indoctrinated you kids about guns? And I mean seriously.
Most if not all, right?
And that's fine, so long as the indoctrination stops at some point and then you teach them.

[j0e_bl0ggs (deceased)]

Teachers instead show you how to think without the chains of dogma and "faith".

I have yet to meet a teacher who can show a student how to think, most are "tied with the chains of dogma and faith" in my experience.
It would appear that most, unfortunately, do not seem to be anchored in the real world and suffer an elevated self-opinion to boot. Note I say 'most', there are some exceptions but they are few and far between.
The current 'green' obsession is a useful example, instead of teaching critical thinking the poor kids are taught the green dogma.

[kombi1976]

I can't speak for teachers in the UK but here in Australia teachers can ill afford a loose grip on the real world. Nor do they have an elevated opinion of themselves. Politicians, bureaucrats and sectors of the community (although the not the majority, thank goodness) constantly focus on their shortcomings and dump new societal responsibilities onto their work load, many of which have little to do with education. Currently our principal is forced to find emergency accomodation for students who have to be removed from their living situation for any reason (abuse/neglect/etc) because our equivalent of social services seems only to focus on preschoolers and rarely responds when we report issues to them.

Meanwhile our current conservative government at both a state and federal level is busily lopping funding to state schools whilst shifting the hard decisions from a departmental level to a school level. It's so they can pass the buck to principals and blame them for the systemic issues in public education, all of which are the result of decades of poor decisions or stopgap measures made at ministerial levels.

Years ago my father, a retired state school deputy principal, would hear comments like "I went to school so I know what it's like for teachers. They get too many holidays, too much pay, they work a 30 hour week, are always on strike and they whinge all the time." I hear that about once a year when a TV station gets together a "focus group" for discuss education in an "open forum". It's invariably from a fat 50+ yr old nutjob who was expelled from school at 13 for serial vandalism, bullying and harassment.

There was a time....in some places....where teachers were arrogant and elitist and sneered at parents and the students. But that vaguely accurate and extreme charicature from Pink Floyd's "The Wall" wouldn't make it in a modern classroom. Nor would they hold their job for very long.

Whew....wordy! In simple terms, I've met about 3 teachers like that in my 13 years in the game here in Oz, and the rest of us treated them with thinly veiled contempt and deep distrust.

P.S. Three of my colleagues are regular shooters and like any workplace we have our fair share of greenies, Labor supporters, conservative voters and special interest supporters like myself (Shooters & Fishers Party). I don't doubt things are different in the city but across the country I think teachers have similar divisions in society to any other middle class profession groups.

[sakorick]

Terrific thread. My daughter-in-law, Amy, teaches special ed for English challenged primary schoolers. She works directly for the district vice superintendent in the Leavenworth, Kansas school system and works with kids from 6 different schools on a rotating schedule. You guys would not believe the stories. Regards, Rick.

[kombi1976]

Oh, I probably would but it would still make me wince or raise an eyebrow.

[gitano]

I'd say you have been well and truly indoctrinated, Kombi.

That comment is not to be construed as "assault", regardless of the use of the term "indoctrinator" above. I was WELL and truly indoctrinated myself, having gone through the entire process you outlined personally, including teaching at the university. However, throughout my life, I have had one characteristic that my Dad was able to instill in me ata n early age that I didn't even realize until much later in my life: I can admit I'm wrong.

Lot's of people give lip service to "I can admit when I'm wrong", but such comment is great testament to "You will know them by their fruit". EVERYONE will admit small errors, mostly because "small" errors are easily proven and only a fool will refuse to admit that they are wrong when the unassailable proof is forced on them. The more important admission of error - the one the vast majority of people fail to make - is when that admission would mean 1) a change in their life, and 2) that some, or much, of the behavior of their earlier life was very likely harmful to someone else. THOSE are tough admissions of error that very few people make.

In my case, I swallowed the "indoctrination" I got, hook, line, and sinker. I was a true "believer", an accolyte. It was only after decades of SEEING the falsity of much of what I was taught, AND THE METHODS USED, that I had to acknowledge that I had "bought" a great deal of ****, through "faith" in "experts". What I realized was not that science was "bad", but that:

1) The MODELS of science that were given lip service to - primarily adhering to TRUTH - was only necessary when
. . . . . a) it was convenient, and
. . . . . b) not at all necessary when fighting the "good" fight.
2) The methods used for "teaching" were not for "teaching", they were for INDOCTRINATION. Took a long time to recognize the subtle difference when the indoctrination is practiced by the well-trained.
3) OBFUSCATION was a  foundation stone of modern science. In fact, it is a fundamental element of the training for advanced degrees. Not only was arguing "for" something that was patently incorrect practiced, (much like moot court for lawyers), those that "won" the scientifically incorrect side of the argument, ARE PRAISED for their "skill".
4) We are making "bad" scientists - biostitutes - at an alarming rate. Integrity and scientific skill is secondary to "being good boys" within the confines of dogmas established by the indoctrinators of the current political norm.

I admitted I was wrong and changed my ways. I acknowledge that I behaved - for a while - like a "good boy". When "behaving" kept feeling more and more and more uncomfortable, I had two choices: 1) Turn my back on the TRUTH that was staring me in the face in order to keep from admitting my "sins", or 2) Admit I had been WRONG to embracing the indoctrination I had so enthusiastically embraced. That admission did NOT mean that I threw the baby out with the bath. Science - True Science - is not only NOT bad, it is GOOD. However, science, like every other gift of God, has been completely corrupted by evil. It has become a false god.

While the scientific community practices indoctrination with relish and abandon, they are "chumps" compared to the Social Scientists (and I use the term "scientist" loosely). The indoctrination in those areas of "education" is breath-taking.

In my professional career, teaching has been - officially - part of, or completely my job description. My wife is a teacher of 18 years. I know a little about both the government school system and the university system. I understand and appreciate the necessity of teaching "basic concepts". However, when one presents those basic concepts as "law", one becomes an indoctrinator, not a teacher. Furthermore, one can SAY one thing - all very scientifically "correct" - in a classroom, but if in PRACTICE one punishes -subtly - those that question hypocrisy and dogma, then the LESSON is not "basic concepts", it is "correct" behavior.

I didn't expect to "change your mind" with the above, but your comments are fundamentally the 'company line'. "Well, there are always a few bad apples in every barrel", is a commonly TAUGHT deflection. "Yes, we know these are only 'theories', but we have to teach 'the basic concepts'" is not only more deflection, but also justification to 'punish' those that reject dogma. While likely there ARE a few scientists - I haven't met any in a 40+-year career - that haven't "fudged" some data either by commission or omission, even those have CERTAINLY "looked the other way" when they KNEW wrongs were being done. Part of my 'mission' now that I have "seen the light", is NOT to be one of those that stands by and looks the other way - or remains silent - because it is 'uncomfortable' to stand up and say, "The emperor is naked".

It is not my intent to 'offend', but your comments were a direct contradiction of what I started this thread to communicate.

Paul

[Jamie.270]

And now you understand how and why I ended up in a technical school.

Well, the fact that I couldn't keep my mouth shut when I knew the prof(s) were full of Bull Soda probably had something to do with it.

[drinksgin (deceased)]

Objective people know the public and private schools, from pre school to post doc are in the business of making , good, obedient subjects of what ever government is in power at that time and any subsequent governments.
The vast majority of teachers are fully with the program, those who are not, just shut up and hunker down.
I am not sure which are the worst, pure public schools or religious schools.
In my case, I developed a serious  case of terminal doubt about the 4th or 5th grade and had a hard time in school after that, becoming known as a smardass and troublemaker.
Have not changed materially over the years, either.

[kombi1976]

What a wonderfully subjective comment, Don. Of course, nothing has changed in education in 65 years.

[drinksgin (deceased)]

From what I have observed, very little.
Mostly just more institutionalized and tightly organized by the governments.
The primary objective of the government has not changed, it is to make obedient subjects.

[rockinbbar]

This was given to 5th grade students by their indoctrinator.

[drinksgin (deceased)]

For an objective position, rather than subjective, observe the government's present states.
I do not know much about several, but the U.S. is very rapidly becoming a socialist democracy, it is NOT supposed to  be a democracy, but a constitutional ,representative republic.
A true democracy is a complete dictatorship, U.S.S.R, Nazi Germany, G.B., the Islamic states, China,actually most of the states of the world, other than the ones where 1 person rules as an absolute dictator, such as N. Korea.
I do not know of any of the countries that do not use the educational system to promote the government position.
I am not very familiar with the governments of OZ and N.Z., what info I have indicates OZ has a socialistic democratic dictatorship, I have very little info on N.Z..
The U.S. is very close to being a socialist democratic dictatorship, just a few more years on the present course and it will be.
The post by RBB is a very good example of the current program of brainwashing being done in the schools.