The document discusses the traditional path from education to employment and whether it still makes sense. It presents perspectives from a stakeholder who believes:
1) Education is important for developing critical thinking and interpersonal skills, but incorporating some vocational preparation would benefit students.
2) Workplace experience can give students a realistic understanding of careers and help them mature, but personal development in school is important so students are not consumed by their jobs.
3) Students need opportunities to gain skills holistically across cognitive, critical thinking, interpersonal and practical domains in a safe learning environment.
2. Q: Does this traditional path from
education to employment make
sense today for the hundreds of
millions of learners around the
world?
3. Say (1 of 2):
• “Traditional path should be kept in place but with some
modification.”
• “Education is not equivalent to vocational training. And what
students get out of school - critical thinking skills, interpersonal
skills, hopefully, the love for pursuing knowledge and a wider world
view - are too important to skip over.”
• “Learning these cognitive skills before students join the workforce
full time is important because it gives students a chance to develop
as a person; so that when they start working full time, they are not
consumed by the job, by making money, but can keep their
perspectives and see themselves as a member of the bigger
society, of the world.”
4. Say (2 of 2):
• “That said, given the economic reality, incorporating some
vocational preparation would be beneficial to students today.
Work place experience give students a more realistic idea
what jobs their degree are leading to are like, give students a
taste of what real jobs are like, a chance to learn practical
skills such as learning to work with others that will help them
be more mature person.”
• “Ultimately, I think [providing opportunities to gain workplace
experience] is a more humane way of "releasing" students
into the real world. So that they get a chance to make
mistakes in a relatively safe place before landing a real job
where the stakes of making mistakes are much higher.”
5. Think:
• The Stakeholder [S] is very
analytical, understands higher education, and
has thought about issues in higher education.
• S sees that personal/cognitive development is
more important for people in school age.
• S sees a divide between cognitive skills
(developed in school) and practical skills
(developed at work).
6. Feel:
• Stakeholder [S] seems to be quite a bit attached
to traditional education model. (Especially given
that S works in higher education and values what
traditional classes teach students).
• It seems that S thinks work is less rich than
school.
• S cares for the well being of students.
• S is concerned with students developing into
well-rounded beings, that they have a safe
environment to experiment.
7. Insight:
• Should the development of cognitive skills
(presumably developed in school) be separate
form the development of practical skills
(presumably developed at work)? Can we
combine them and provide them in school and
continue at work?
• Students need to develop holistically (develop
both cognitive, critical thinking, interpersonal and
other practical skills)?
• Can we incorporate work experience at school in
a relatively safe environment?
8. Problem Statement
An analytical and dedicated educator, who
teaches at the college level and helps others
learn to be better teachers, who is passionate
about education and who cares about the
development of students as a person needs a
way to incorporate the development of
cognitive and practical skills in the curriculum
for students Because students need to develop
holistically in a safe learning environment.
