8. Banks and money market. How they operate. Stock exchange. Responsibilities to society.

9. The U.S. Postal Service.

10. Public and individual health. Physicians. Disease. Treatment. Hospitals.

11. Housing and construction.

12. Labor unions. Responsibility to society.

13. Welfare. Social Security. Unemployment compensation. Retirement.

14. Education.

15. Cultural activities. Museums. Music. Theatre. Libraries.
16. Communication. Press, TV, radio, publishing.

17. Maintaining the environment. Conservation. Pollution.

18. The responsibilities of individuals to themselves, to their fellow man, and to the environment (a project for the 12th year). The above should occupy approximately half of the student's time, much of it to be spent outside of the schools. Much cooperation would be needed by local business and government. Hopefully every student would do some work in about four of these areas each year, to learn how society really works, not the way it is supposed to work. These experiences could help the students in their decisions about careers and, quite possibly, lead them to recognize that there are many important tasks to be done in society and that a dedicated worker in any is to be respected. Possibly one or more summers could be spent working on farms, construction work, etc.

For the first time something will be said about formal courses. During these last four years a student should have an opportunity to explore in depth areas of knowledge or sorts of activities that will satisfy his intellect, broaden his horizons, and prepare him for his life. Presumably this can be done in something that one could identify as a "course" though I would hope it would have little resemblance to many of the courses now offered a student. If a student has gone through the learning experience I have been describing, I would hope that he would be able to cope with new knowledge at a truly sophisticated level. (I am assuming that he would have enjoyed his schooling--and that would make all the difference in the world.)

This is the end of my specific suggestions for a new type of school, a new type of curriculum and, of greater importance, a new type of student. The proposal is radically different from what we do now, which I believe is necessary because:

1. Existing programs, which have traditionally served the children from middle-class homes, are being rejected by increasing proportions of these children and their parents.

2. The rising expectations of children from underprivileged homes and their parents are not being met in the schools today.

3. If we define an uneducated person as one incapable of dealing effectively with his world, an increasing proportion of our young leave school uneducated.

Today, and to an increasing degree in the future, the life of an uneducated person is doomed to be personally frustrating and socially destructive. The complexities facing life now require not only fa more education, but far more relevant education for these goals:

1. To enhance one's inner resources, which will be far more important for life in an increasingly crowded, tense, and complex environment, and

2. To develop the social and technological skills that will be necessary for even a modicum of personal and community serenity in a more-demanding future.

With the education of today far too small a percentage of graduating students are able to deal effectively with a highly sophisticated technological civilization. Far too many will become passive, or caredfor, bystanders who do not or cannot participate meaningfully in the operations of society.

But the schools cannot do this alone. The education of the young must become the general responsibility of the adult generation. It is no longer feasible to allocate the responsibility of education almost entirely to the teaching profession: a child can only be educated by his whole environment. This fact has become painfully clear for many of the children of the inner city: where home and community support is lacking, the schools cannot ensure that a child will reach his full potential. Parents of the school children and other adults with some time to spare (childless or retired) will be needed to help with work in the classroom and elsewhere. Also the decrease in the work-week should make it possible for working people to contribute. Such a program would, of course, have its adult education aspects: the nonprofessional teachers would have to know nearly as much as the pros. Such groups could concern themselves not only with the education of their children, but also educating themselves: child care, health, community affairs, book clubs, crafts, etc. One could build a group of informed individuals that might become effective spokesmen for education, conservation, control of pollution, etc. Hopefully these people would have their lives enriched not only by participating in a vital enterprise but also by obtaining some intellectual stimulation.

We started with four propositions.

One of these was that the schools should give their students an intelligent understanding of the world in which they live. This is the central concern of the program that I have proposed. The goal is not learning for the sake of learning but learning for the sake of survival.

Another proposition, modified from Darwin, was that all education must be for some purpose. The topics that I have suggested deal explicitly with the purpose of stimulating the student to learn about his world. Formal courses have been replaced with a problem-oriented approach. Mathematics becomes a way of understanding some aspect of the problem: effective reading, writing, and speaking become tools of learning and communicating about the problems; the necessary science and technology are mastered for further understanding. Sociology, economics, psychology, and government have clear and obvious roles. But what about history and the humanities? Both have a vital role to play. History can easily become problem oriented: one could marshal examples of man's previous attempts to deal with the problem at hand. Think of the rich variety of our past experiences with the good and evil of power; the relations of different peoples; the usual failure of war and violence to provide satisfactory solutions; the various attempts to secure justice; the progress of our inventions; the search

for a safer and more meaningful life. The humanities can, better than any other discipline, put all into acceptable perspective. There are no nonhumanistic reasons to prefer love over hate, peace over war, generosity over greed, conservation over destruction, justice over oppression. The list of individual and national priorities that we use for our life and our future must be based on our humanity, not on our science. The name of the game is man.

The third proposition was that education should be directed to the needs of society. I have suggested a program that conceivably could serve these ends.

The plan that I have proposed is so different from existing education that only a revolution could transform one into the other. It would demand an enormous national effort, an effort commensurate with the magnitude of the problem. One would like to think that it could be done by government but, in this case, I believe other associations of men might be more effective.

So now we come to Philip Handler's proposition that science is the most powerful tool the mind of man has yet conceived to alleviate the condition of his fellows. Should we use the methods and men of science to help in educational reform?

And now I really get to the point: Could some large and broadly representative group do the job? Any new educational program that will be truly effective today, and give some hope for the future, must be constructed by individuals who are experts in the natural sciences, social sciences, and technology. The staff of the National Institute of Education must have the expertise required for the creation of such a program.

The job has to be done quite possibly not in the specific form that I have proposed but one of similar scope. It will be extremely difficult to succeed but vastly more destructive to fail.

CONTRIBUTING AUTHORS

(188)

PURCHASED THROUGH
DOC. EX. PROJECT