Is Learning Fun?

A line from Kim's response to a question on a previous post of mine has gotten me thinking. Kim asserted that "It is true that learning is fun." But is it? I'm not so sure.

http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/who-we-are/201104/how-educators-misunderstand-students

In the above article, the author, Steven Reiss, a Professor Emeritus of Psychology and Psyciatry at Ohio State University, says that the answer is, quite simply, "no." His assertion is that learning is not, in fact, fun, except for a small number of people who are so enamored with it that they become educators. These individuals make the mistake of assuming that something that is true for them must be true for everyone.

In fact, google "is learning fun?" and the results come up with a plethora of results on how to MAKE learning fun. This should cause some pause. If learning is inherently fun, why must we take extra effort to MAKE it fun? Shouldn't it be fun in and of itself?

This error, the assumption that learning is fun for ONE person must mean that learning is fun for EVERYONE, reeks of the sort of blindness that can commonly be seen in evangelists. They are firm in their belief that THEIR church is the right way and the best way to reach , and thus feel compelled to try to convince others that their way is right. But just because this religion is right for the evangelist does not necessarily mean it will be right for the family next door, the politician down the street, or the atheists across the country. Intelligent, reasonable people would find this idea absurd. So why do we cling to the notion that learning must be fun, when most children (and adults!) clearly do not find it either fun or worthwhile?

This post is filled with questions, so feel free to answer any one of those, or indeed the title of the post: Is learning fun?

The Talking Heads of School Reform

This article lays out some of the major problems of the education reform "debates" that have been going on in this country: http://www.nytimes.com/2011/04/10/weekinreview/10reform.html

As is often the case with morally charged policy issues — remember welfare reform? — false dichotomies seem to have replaced fruitful conversation. If you support the teachers’ union, you don’t care about the students. If you are critical of the teachers’ union, you don’t care about the teachers. If you are in favor of charter schools, you are opposed to public schools. If you believe in increased testing, you are on board with the corruption of our liberal society’s most cherished educational values. If you are against increased testing, you are against accountability. It goes on. Neither side seems capable of listening to the other.

The above quote illustrates a problem that, while certainly prevalent in all forms of political discourse today, is especially disheartening when dealing with an issues as important as education. Any real discussion is drowned out by the entrenched partisan interests that seem to do nothing but talk past each other about little details, while completely missing the heart of the issue. The worst of it is that (charitably, perhaps) these are well-meaning people with genuine concern for our education system, who are simply woefully ignorant of the big picture, clinging madly to details like standardized tests or charter schools, trying to find a panacea for our ailing school system without seeming to realize that meaningful reform will require much more than this or that fix.

The issue is much bigger than just looking at schools. Our schools mirror our society. If we want to fix failing schools, we cannot do it by simply trying to institute more standardized tests or replacing public schools with charter schools. We need to fix the inequalities in the economic and political system that lead to the issues we face in schools. When there are no jobs, when crime is the only way to make a living, when children go to sleep hungry because their parents can't afford food (and 15 million children in this nation live in poverty), it's absurd to think that a standardized test is going to help their education. They need stability at home to succeed in school and beyond, and to achieve this, we need to bolster our social welfare programs, and reorganize our economy to bring decent jobs so our struggling families can make ends meet.

To end with a question: Schools are undoubtedly vital institutions for the perpetuation of our society. Given that, can meaningful school reform be successfully enacted absent reforms to the surrounding political and economic systems?

On the Utility of Higher Education: A Response

Bryan asked: "Do you agree with the idea that college is not meant for everyone?"

I most certainly agree with this idea. As Bryan pointed out in his post, there are many jobs for which a college education is not required, and there are certainly a number of people who are in college only because of the oft-touted belief that one needs a college education to be able to get a good, high-paying job.

There are, of course, certain merits to college education. It can provide specialized skills that one might need for certain careers, like those in medicine. Extended schooling also gives the student the time and resources to develop a deep body of knowledge, useful for careers in education or research-based fields like the natural sciences.

But there is no need for everyone to pursue an advanced degree. Indeed, a large body of college graduates can have very negative effects. A number of fields are facing the issue of too many qualified candidates -- great for the companies (and colleges!) that are hiring, but not so much for the candidates who spent years getting a degree only to be unable to find a job as each position they apply for is heavily contested by other equally qualified candidates. And of course, our country has far too many lawyers.

The question of who should get a college education ultimately comes down to finding the skills of the individual, and the sometimes difficult project of matching those skills to an occupation that will pay a decent wage.

To end with a question: Is pursuing a college education worthwhile if one does not intend to use the skills from that education (for example, perhaps, going to medical school if one does not want to practice medicine)?