Deschooling
College tuitions keep rising faster than the inflation rate. Soon, young people will realize that college is not worth the cost. They can do better in life without it, and, shockingly, they can acquire a better education without it. Thus, the higher-education bubble is due to suffer the same fate as other economic bubbles. Here is a short list of the defects of institutions of higher education that was suggested by Cindy Hill’s essay on adjunct professors as slaves. http://dematerialism.net/educationbubble.htm.
While I search my archives for the comment I wish to make here, let me say simply that everything being taught by the Houston Independent School District (HISD) is either irrelevant in the wake of Peak Oil or wrong. A principal source of error is the religion that causes gang kids sometimes to feel invulnerable.
This is a personal grievance of my own. Originally, it was written as part of a discussion of overpopulation; thus, it appears in Chapter 7 (Geophagy) of On the Preservation of Species.
I now wish to summarize what my thoughts were more than two years ago on the immigration of graduate students in engineering and science by quoting from two letters, the first to Science(not published) and the second to Time (never sent).
The response of engineering faculty members to the survey reported in Science, April 3, l987, [The Impact of Foreign Graduate Students on Engineering Education in the United States]; viz., approval of foreign graduate students, demonstrates disregard for American engineers and, indeed, the rest of the U.S. economy. Professors require research assistants (slaves?) to satisfy their lust for prestige and money; they are blind to the consequences of their greed.
If foreign-born recipients of American PhD degrees leave our country, they transfer technology to competitor nations. (Some foreign-born PhDs work in America for awhile then leave, thus compounding the rapid technology transfer.) The net result is a lowering of the standard of living of American workers. (It is true that in an ideal democratic, egalitarian world with fair play between nations this lowering would not occur.) If foreign-born PhDs stay in the U.S., they compete with American PhDs and drive down the market value of the degree, which becomes less attractive to talented American students.
It is hypocritical to encourage Americans to do graduate work while admitting foreigners into graduate programs. Also, to accept tuition from a student to launch his or her engineering career and then to undermine that career by glutting the employment market is, at best, a breach of faith. Of course, academic, governmental, and industrial employers of engineers benefit from a large, cheap, readily available supply of engineering talent, but why should the exploitation of engineering be more rewarding than the practice of engineering! It is ironic that an American engineer could lose his or her job to a foreigner whose education he or she has supported through taxes.
Even if we are willing to ignore the best interests of American engineers, we should not accept graduate students from countries with governments or social systems of which we do not approve. If they return to these nations, they reinforce a bad political (or social) system with American expertise. If they do not return because, for example, they do not approve of the political system, they decrease the possibility of reform through dissent. (If they approve of the bad political system, they are not likely to have a positive impact on American society.) On the other hand, if the student comes from a “good” country, we do that deserving nation a disservice by increasing the likelihood that its pool of talent will be depleted.
Potsdam, New York
May 10, 1987
[Note in proof: Of course, nowadays, I don’t believe that any “good” nations exist. Moreover, it’s hard to imagine a country with a more repressive government than ours, however Singapore comes to mind. In any case, to argue that things are good here because they are worse elsewhere is the well-known ad metum fallacy.]
Foreign-born engineering graduate students [Education, Jan. 11] transfer technology instantly to our competition if they return home. If they stay here, they are often exploited, particularly by universities, and they drive down the market value of the PhD degree, which then becomes insufficiently attractive to young Americans. Engineers (including immigrants) should petition congress to curtail sharply the number of student visas issued and to prohibit subsidizing foreign students with public funds. It would be ironic if engineers were displaced by (even newer) immigrants whose educations they have paid for through taxes.
Houston, Texas
January 7, 1988
I feel now essentially as I felt then. I have been replaced successively by two foreign-born engineers, both of whom tolerate circumstances of their employment that should be intolerable to most Americans of my generation with my expectations. It is not that these people dispossessed me. I was leaving those jobs anyway; but, if a large supply of ready and willing workers weren’t standing behind me waiting to take my place, my employers would not have been able to get away with some of the employment policies that made working for them so degrading. Thus, management has been able to reverse the trend of improvement of working conditions that engineers enjoyed for a number of decades. I noted recently that the M. W. Kellogg Company, a formerly U.S.-owned engineering construction company, which in the best of times peddles the warm flesh of its employees to its clients who pay by the engineer-hour, now takes sick leave out of vacation pay, an open invitation to work while one is sick and to infect one’s fellow employees. This could not have been done without the help of the U.S. immigration policy and/or competition for jobs from abroad, although it must be admitted that this company obtains a great deal of work that should be done by the nationals of other countries.
Before I make a few additional observations, let me say that I have nothing but the highest regard for most of the foreign-born engineers and scientists I have met. I really like them and I have enjoyed the opportunity to meet and know people whose backgounds and experiences are different from my own. I am not a bigot. I am not even a xenophobe. [Note in proof: At a recent technology conference I heard an older Indian engineer say to a younger Indian engineer who had been educated in the U.S. and a resident for ten years, “Why should they hire you? They can get someone right off the boat from Bombay much cheaper.”]
Observation 1: In the event that the U.S. finds itself at war, it will find itself hard-pressed to fill scientific jobs that require security clearance. Actually, it is unlikely that our enemies, including Japan, have been so stupid that they have not placed spies in the American scientific and industrial community. [Note (12-3-90). Americans used to be concerned about wars with communists, but the war with Iraq for which the country is preparing at this writing is a war among capitalists. Capitalism spawns economic competition and economic competition spawns wars. Japan has been at war with the United States almost continuously since 1941. Nowadays the war takes the form of economic depredation at which Japan excels.]
Observation 2: The American ruling elite has a long history of exploiting immigrants. Now, immigrants are being exploited at a slightly higher level but, essentially, as scabs.
Observation 3: Many immigrants are coming from nations that do not permit foreigners to work.
Observation 4: All things being equal (and they never are), each new immigrant must be accounted for by an additional person unemployed and an additional person without a home. Much of the burden of immigration is borne by disadvantaged American minorities. When new housing is built, animals are displaced. As Calvin of “Calvin and Hobbes” puts it, “Squirrels can’t afford condominiums.”
Fortunately, my higher education was in engineering and mathematics where the only matter of opinion is whether the subject is worth learning. When we study the design of an ethylene oxide plant, we ought to discuss whether or not it is wise to build such a plant. Of course, most professors do not raise such questions. Normally, the professor leaves the student with the impression that it is OK to build such a monstrosity; and my experience with practicing chemical engineers is that almost all of them are unwilling to consider the opposing earth-as-a-garden viewpoint. This leads them into some interesting conflicting logic, which they tolerate quite well with their well-developed ability to doublethink. I could tell some stories here, but let me say only that when I suggested that we ought to phase out big industry in a talk at the Houston Chapter of the American Institute of Chemical Engineers, most of the audience went ballistic – although without loss of decorum. Surprisingly, a nontrivial number expressed agreement and even the president of the Chapter, a vice-president of a major industrial and chemical construction company, defended me; but, then again, he and I are friends.
Before college and in the divisions of universities that shouldn’t exist, e.g., business and marketing (since they teach lies and how to lie), I perceive two major difficulties in the curriculum: (1) students are taught horrendous lies, e.g., America is the greatest nation on earth with the ideal political and economic system, and (2) students are inculcated with the delusion that the sole purpose of an education is to get good grades so they can make more money, which sounds like something written on the back of a book of matches. This latter promulgates the notion that it is the student’s duty to prepare himself to be a cog in the giant industrial-business-governmental machine.
In addition, the schools are troubled by an extremely inefficient top-down hierarchical administration that provides endless impediments to the sincere teacher. As for the universities, they seem to be run for the benefit of a handful of top dogs who benefit the most from the university’s existence. The increases in tuition outstrip inflation every year. Where does the money go?
I have much more to say about education, including my prescription for a good education, in various essays in Vol. II and Vol. III of my collected papers [3]. What really burns me though is the shoddy education I received in music, my first true love (my love of chemistry was a childish infatuation with explosions). Every grade school graduate should be able to recognize intervals, chords, and scales, and be able to sight sing reasonably difficult compositions. Perhaps, then, we wouldn’t have to put up with the horrendous unmusical popular pabulum that permeates our airwaves and, outrage of outrages, our telephones when we are put on hold, which happens nearly every time we call business or government.
The Houston Independent School District (HISD) is considering putting into place a professionally designed Character Education Program. Look at some of the things they will teach and decide for yourself if this enhances the student’s ability to reason. Before you can teach character, you really have to know what it is, and I don’t know anyone at HISD who does know anything about good character – almost certainly not anyone who would be teaching it. Certainly, not anyone who works for a public or private school or university. Most “successful” teachers are good politicians, which might not be compatible with a good grasp of ethics and the attributes of good character. What follows is a discussion of some of the major topics covered in a course in “character education” that the HISD is considering for adoption (if they haven’t already adopted it):
“Write the pledge [of allegiance] on a chart and verify that the students understand the meaning of all the words in the pledge.” How about the word indivisible and the word God? Does anyone know the meaning of the word God? Does this mean that people with good character are anti-secessionist? Further they ask the students to discuss loyalty pledges. Shades of McCarthyism.
“Have the students brainstorm all the phrases they have heard that contain the word ‘justice’. You can help them by providing some examples such as ‘justice of the peace’, ‘Supreme Court Justice’, ‘...with liberty and justice for all’, etc. The students can infer the definition of justice from these phrases.” I very much doubt.
Justice in the real world is discussed. What can they possibly say? “...but we will focus our attention on solving injustice in a positive manner.” Undoubtedly, this means within the establishment. Fat chance.
Teacher (from character-education manual): Everyone has a right to seek justice in the courts.
Teacher (from manual): Observe the city government in action.
Wise-ass student: Do they mean in public or in the smoke-filled rooms?
Teacher (from manual): Invite a judge or an attorney to visit the classroom and discuss the justice system.
[The scene changes]
Attorney: Well, kids, there’s this favor bank. Joe does something for me and I get his client off light.
Judge: We get a little on the side in bribes. For example, I’m owned by the Gambini family. They don’t get no rumble from me. Like the man said, “Be fair, but, if you can’t be fair, be arbitrary.”
Teacher (from manual): Invite a police officer to come and speak to the students on this subject.
Cop: Well, kids, I’m only the bag man, so I can’t speak with authority.
“You can use this opportunity to discuss commitments that politicians make to their constituents and why and how the politicians are held accountable to these commitments. You can invite a politician to speak to the class or collect newspaper articles illustrating how politicians are meeting specific commitments.” Yep, nothin’ beats a politician for good character, I don’t think. I think I read somewhere in my copy of the character-education manual that both (notice, not all) political parties want what’s best for the American people; they just have different ideas about how to achieve it.
This is mostly an attack on drugs and I discuss that below and in Vol. I of my collected papers [3]. But, at least this gives the students a chance to notice that the teachers are liars themselves; so, naturally they are quite competent to inculcate good character. Ha. Another bad habit, though, that is disparaged is staying up late at night, regardless of the well-known fact that nearly all good intellectual work gets done in the middle of the night. They preach day-people chauvinism and bigotry against night people.
As if the lies concerning ethics, private enterprise, and government, including its history, weren’t bad enough, the children have their minds made up for them concerning the desirability or undesirability of taking drugs. As in every other case, there is a time and place for drugs and “Just say no” encourages decisions without contemplation and reinforces stupidity. The efficacy of drugs is an open question and educators may not determine which side of an open question is correct.
Finally, we have the intrusion of religion, especially prayer, into the schools. This encourages unreasonableness to a marked degree whatever positive effects can be achieved by the childish imagination and the self-hypnotic effects of prayer. It is unconstitutional and it is immoral. Moreover, it is blasphemy! The people who encourage this idiocy are irreligious themselves regardless of how they spend their Sundays. If they actually believed in a god who watched their every deed, they could not behave as they do; therefore, I must conclude that they are atheists whatever they call themselves. Again, the rest of this is covered in my essays on religion in my collected papers [3].
I wish to list the seven lessons in Gatto’s excellent paper [4]. It is worth taking the trouble to look up this reference. Now, Gatto’s case is certainly not one of sour grapes because he won the award for the outstanding school teacher in New York State, regardless of the meaninglessness of the award. I, for one, never noticed his seven points while I was in school; so, I was a victim, which accounts for some of the brainwashing performed upon myself, which, by the way, has taken decades to overcome, if, indeed, I have overcome it yet.
Lesson 1 (Confusion). Everything is taught out of context – disconnected facts rather than meaning.
Lesson 2 (Class position). Students are numbered in more ways than ever before.
Lesson 3 (Indifference). When the bell rings, we drop whatever it is we were learning as if it had no more importance than a discussion on the “Larry King Show” when a commercial break is due.
Lesson 4 (Emotional dependency). “By stars and red checks, smiles and frowns, honors and disgraces, I teach you to surrender your will to the chain of command.” Students are hostages to good behavior.
Lesson 5 (Intellectual dependency). “Successful children do the thinking I appoint them with a minimum of resistance and a decent show of enthusiasm. ... Curiosity has no important place in my work, only conformity. ... Good people wait for an expert to tell them what to do. ... [O]ur entire economy depends on this lesson being learned.”
Lesson 6 (Provisional self-esteem). “I teach that your self-respect should depend upon expert opinion. ... People must be told what they are worth.”
Lesson 7 (You can’t hide). There is no private time. Schedules are designed to prevent fraternization. Homework extends constant surveillance into the home even. “The meaning of constant surveillance and denial of privacy is that no one can be trusted, that privacy is not legitimate.”
I have added a five items to Gatto's list:
Lesson 8 If it is not taught in an official class at your school, you shouldn't learn it. In fact, it seems that, besides massaging the child's ego, what the teacher does primarily is establish himself and his paid colleagues as the only agents permitted to inform the child. The parents are to be neglected. Educational opportunities outside school are to be passed over. This is a corollary to Shaw's Principle that every profession is a conspiracy against the laity. Of course, non-discretionary learning, whether embraced voluntarily or not, discourages intrinsically motivated learning.Lesson 9 Market economics including the job market is the only economic possibility.
Lesson 10 The economic circumstances of the world will always be what they are now.
Lesson 11 If you stay in school and get good grades through college, you will be successful. (Therefore, we teach what employers want you to know.)
Lesson 12 Your only legitimate options are formal schooling or normal work.
This topic is covered in Chapter 9 of On the Preservation of Species but not in a compact sub-section. It is distributed throughout the chapter – occurring wherever logic requires it. http://www.dematerialism.net/ops.htm#chapter9