求A SHORT STORY ABOUT EDUCATION

求A SHORT STORY ABOUT EDUCATION
求A SHORT STORY ABOUT EDUCATION

求A SHORT STORY ABOUT EDUCATION
找了两篇文章.供你参考.
1.Morality in Education
More than ever, opportunities should be afforded to families that wish to bring their children up with a moral education in accordance with their beliefs. A system of choice allows parents to choose schools that inject moral or religious themes into their children’s education.
Further Reading:
“Faith Part of the Problem or Part of the Solution?”
by Marvin Olasky
“Can Public Schools Teach Character?”
by Dr. Perry Glanzer
“Leading Children Beyond Good & Evil”
by Dr. James Davison Hunter
An Education for a Good Life
by Clark Durant
FEATURED ARTICLE:
“The Myth of a Value-Free Education”
by Dr. Ronald Nash
Americans love myths. By "myth," I do not mean the old-fashioned myths that my generation read in grade school. Many Americans would find reading at that fifth-grade level too difficult these days. What I mean by "myth" is what older generations used to call a fiction.
One of the more influential myths presently affecting the American family is the myth of a value-free education. A value-free education is described as one in which students are supposed to be free from any coerced exposure to the values of anyone.
One way the defenders of value-free education frame their argument is this: they argue that because America ceased to be a homogeneous society a long time ago, the watchword today must be pluralism. In the new setting of today, they insist, we can no longer stress the values and beliefs of some, while ignoring the values of all. And so, they say, we’ll avoid all the problems inherent in this situation by simply agreeing to ignore all values. This specious argument deceives Americans into thinking this is the only way to achieve fairness in our schools.
College students today are surrounded by an allegedly academic setting in which the things they find most obvious are confusion, conflicting claims and the absence of any fixed points of reference. America’s colleges have become centers of intellectual disorder. As David Gress explains, "Instead of being havens of independent thought, universities have become channels of indoctrination…confirming the prejudices of those who control the agenda of public discourse." Ralph Bennett is surely right when he warns that "behind its ivy-colored camouflage, American higher education is a fraud—untrue to its students, untrue to itself."
The inadequacies of contemporary education are not exclusively matters of the mind. Traditional religious and moral values are under assault at every level of public and higher education. Our educational system is engaged in a systematic undermining of these values.
Our educational crisis is to some extent a closing of the American mind, as Allan Bloom examined in his best selling book of that title. But it is also something more profound, a closing of the American heart. No real progress towards improving American education can occur until all of us realize that an education that ignores moral and religious beliefs cannot qualify as a quality education. Recently, no less a person than Mikhail Gorbachev admitted that the major reason his nation is in such trouble is because his people are ignorant of moral and spiritual values.
The development of the intellect and of moral character are intimately related. Just as there is an order in nature (the laws of science), in reason (the laws of logic), and in the realm of numbers, so too is there a moral order. One thing we need to do is recover the belief that there is a transcendent, unchanging moral order, and restore it once more to a central place in the educational process.
Throughout history, important thinkers have contended that there is a higher order of permanent things (like moral norms), that human happiness is dependent on living our lives in accordance with this transcendent order, and that peace and order within human society require respect for this order. The most important task of education is to continually remind students of the existence and importance of this transcendent order as well as of its content.
If teachers are doing their job properly, they serve as an essential link in the chain of civilization. Without this link, the chain cannot hold. Teachers are the conservers of culture; they are also its transmitters. At least, that’s the role that teachers used to play.
Modern education in America has largely separated virtue and knowledge. The Sophists of our age have severed the link between reason and virtue, between the mind and the heart; there is objective truth out there, which it is our duty to pursue and discover. But there is also an objective moral order out there, as well as in here. An adequate education dare not ignore either the mind or the heart. Just as we dare not divorce education from matters of the heart, so too we must not separate education from religion. Like any important human activity, education has an inescapable religious component.
Religious faith is not just one isolated compartment of a person’s life—a compartment that we can take or leave as we wish. Religious faith is rather a dimension of life that colors, affects and influences everything we do and believe. Human beings are incurably religious, as John Calvin once said. Paul Tillich was right when he defined religion as a matter of "ultimate concern." Every person has something that concerns him ultimately and whatever that may be, the ultimate concern will have an enormous influence on everything else the person does or believes.
Since every human being has something about which he is ultimately concerned, it follows that every human being has a God. No human being can possibly be neutral when it comes to religion. When an individual encounters people who claim that education should be free of any religious content, he should recognize that this is not a religiously neutral claim. Rather it is an assertion that reflects the religious commitments of the person making it. There is a sense in which education is an activity that is religious at its roots. Any effort to remove religion from education is merely the substitution of one set of ultimate religious commitments for another.
It is absurd then to think that a choice between the sacred and secular in education is possible. Whatever the state and the courts do regarding education will only establish one person’s set of ultimate (religious) concerns at the expense of someone else’s.
Nothing will remedy the problems of American education more quickly and more effectively than the introduction of greater freedom and choice in education. We should seek a permanent end to the situation that allows the state to determine where children must attend school, if that child is to receive a free public education. American families should have complete freedom to send their children to any school they wish, without the added financial burden of paying private school tuition. One way to realize this objective is through educational vouchers. Following the institution of a voucher system, public monies for education would not pass directly to schools. Rather, that money would be given first to the families of school-age children in the form of vouchers. Parents would then use those vouchers to pay for their children’s education at a school of their own choosing.
Perhaps the major reason why public schools are so bad is because they have no competition; they are immune to market-discipline. Consequently, public schools have no incentive to offer a better product at a lower cost. A pro-choice movement in education would give public schools serious competition for the first time in more than a century. (Notice the implication here: many Americans are unaware of the fact that for generations, America’s public schools did not enjoy a monopoly with regard to public financial support.)
It is not enough that we simply increase choice among public schools. The governmental monopoly over publicly funded education is a large part of our problem. It is imperative that educational choice be expanded to include the option of attending without financial penalty, without the burden of double taxation, any school that any family wishes, including church-operated private schools. The best and quickest way to improve the quality of education is to allow families to choose their school and let the competition of the market determine which schools prosper and which schools die. In the process, families will be able to select schools, not only on the basis of academic quality, but also with a view to the moral and spiritual values fostered by the school.
Dr. Ronald Nash is Professor of Theology and Philosophy at Reformed Theological Seminary
http://www.acton.org/ppolicy/education/morality/index.html
2Academic Exchange Quarterly Spring 2004 Volume 8, Issue 1
Moral Values for Public Education
Daniel C. Elliott, Ed.D. Azusa Pacific University
ABSTRACT
The continuing degeneration of personal virtue among the world's societies seems to be emerging as the single-most urgent issue of our time. Until recent years, public schools had long since deferred from their original roles in morality and character education, though many outside of the school systems continued political pressure to move schools either toward or away from a values-oriented curriculum. This author analyses this history and poses questions and ideas about the appropriate teaching of the difference between right and wrong in American schools.
The continuing degeneration of personal virtue among the world's societies seems to be emerging as the single-most urgent issue of our time. The 1970’s brought a revisitation of ‘values” but under a personalistic approach called “Values Clarification.” Values were to be presented in a neutral way to students who were to clarify and select their choices. There were no incorrect choices, except those for which the individual failed to formulate a supporting rationale. The 1980’s and 90’s saw a rapidly intensifying pluralistic view of American society. When the question of values came up, people asked, “Whose values should we teach?” Many in North American society believe in a core set of virtues found most commonly in a Christian worldview or a Judeo-Christian philosophy, even many who would not characterize themselves as particularly “religious.” Yet the personalistic approach to identification of “virtue“ failed to bring about a more moral society but has, instead, resulted in moral decline. Public schools had long since deferred from their original roles in morality and character education and even many churches or religious organizations were not picking up the slack (Meade, 1990
A Major Study on the Morals and Ethics of Children
In March 1990, Robert Coles, a child psychiatrist and Harvard professor, one who called himself “a member of the liberal intellectual left”, was quoted as wistfully recalling “the good old days when religion was taught in the schools” (Meade, 1990). Coles sensed a void--something missing from American homes and schools-- missing for years. Coles directed a major research project. The missing element was, they concluded, a strong, unarguable notion of right and wrong, good and bad.
Coles’ findings revealed a nation of children who have a complicated belief system that usually runs counter to traditional values. “There was an unmistakable erosion of children’s faith in, and support for, traditional sources of authority.” More than parents, teachers or authoritative officials, children turned to peers for guidance on matters of right and wrong. Coles described conversations with many kids whose consciences he said were “not all that muscular.” (Meade, 1990)
The New Character Education
A new ground swell is observed forming in the 1990’s seeking to restore ethics, morality, and virtue to a central focus in public schooling. More than 30 educational leaders from state school boards, teachers' unions, universities, ethics centers, youth organizations, and religious groups met in 1992 at the Josephson Institute of Ethics. They formulated eight principles for character education— The Aspen Declaration on Character Education. (Lickona, 1993). In March of 1993, a national coalition for character development formed with representatives from business, government, and education, as well as churches. They began to formulate an agenda for reinstituting morality in public school curriculum and instruction. (Haynes 1994)
Four Reasons for Character Education
Young people increasingly hurt themselves and others because they lack awareness of moral values. Effective character education improves student behavior, makes schools more civil communities, and leads to improved academic performance. Many students come to school with little moral teaching from their parents, communities or religious institutions. We know today that the inclusion of character development emphases within the curriculum of our schools will do the following.
1. Add Meaning to Education
Moral questions are among the great questions facing the individual person and the human race. There is no such thing as a value-free education. Schools teach values every day by design or default.
2. Sustain and Strengthen our Culture
Transmitting moral values to the next generation has always been one of the more important functions of a civilization. Democracies have a special need for moral education, because democracy is government of and by the people themselves.
3. Model Civility
There is broad based and growing support for character education in the schools. Common ground exists on core moral values although there may be significant disagreement on the applicationof some of these values to certain controversial issues (Nyland and MacDonald, 1997). The Boyer Institute has been actively promoting research that reveals North American core values (or “common virtu,” also referred to as “common decency.” Honesty, responsibility, self-discipline, giving, compassion, perseverance, and loving are virtue terms most often cited. However, in application, “honesty” can be applied differently according to other elements of the actor’s worldview or philosophy. Compassion and/or responsibility might look different among the sub-groups citing these terms.
4. Build True Character
Thus, a person of true character, according to experts, is trustworthy, treats all people with respect, acts responsibly, maintains self-control, is fair and just, is caring, pursues excellence, and is an all around desirable citizen.
A State Education Code Basis for Teaching Fundamental Moral Values
Though often humorously critiqued as a state that is less than ‘virtuous’ in its social ethic, nevertheless, California, as a state, has raised the bar for public schools and virtue-based curriculum for several decades. Ever since the 1970s the California legislature has aggressively addressed the question of values and virtue in the curriculum, though this often went unnoticed or unheralded by the media or even the schools themselves. Currently, California Ed. Code 44806 tells us that it is the duty of teachers to “impress upon the minds of pupils the principles of morality, truth, justice, patriotism, and a true comprehension of rights, duties, and dignity of American citizenship...” The code further directs us to teach students to . . .
avoid idleness, profanity, and falsehood, and to instruct them in the manners and morals and the principles of a free government. Each teacher shall endeavor to impress upon the minds of the pupils the principles of morality, truth, justice, patriotism, a true comprehension of the rights, duties and dignity of American citizenship, including: kindness toward domestic pets and the humane treatment of living creatures.
In Moral and Civic Education and Teaching About Religion, the Board directs school personnel to teach students about: morality, including respect for differences and the significance of religion; truth; open discussion; justice; patriotism; self-esteem; integrity; empathy, including the “golden rule” (The Christian Bible, Matthew 7:12); exemplary conduct; moral interaction and ethical reflection; and the capacity to recognize values, including respect for the family, property, reliability, and for law.
Morality
The California Board of Education says, “School personnel must foster in students an understanding of the moral values that form the foundation of American society.” California teachers must teach students that citizens in a free society respect the worth and dignity of others, as well as their freedom of conscience. Religion is to be presented and viewed as primary source for the presence of basic moral principals. While no individual religious system may be prescribed, school faculty must help students recognize the sources of morality in history, law, and experience and must help students appreciate the significant contributions of religion, including the sacredness of human life and belief in freedom of worship. Morality is defined as “responsibility for personal decisions and conduct and the obligation to demonstrate concern about the well-being of others, along with showing respect for living creatures and the physical environment.”
Truth
California teachers are required to help students understand truth and the necessity for truth in a free and democratic society. Telling and expecting to be told the truth is an essential element among free and democratic peoples. Imagine a word study on the concept of truth, drawn from the Bible and other texts, obtaining definitions of truth
Justice
Justice is defined as “fairness in dealing with others, and is considered a hallmark of American society.” The California Board of Education said that “one owes to oneself and to others the obligation to engage in a constant effort to see that justice is attained.”
Patriotism
Jesus, quoted in Matthew 22:21, (The Christian Bible) instructs people to give to the government that which it was due (give to Caesar that which is Caesar's...) and to reflect similar obedience in relationship to God. Loyalty to one’s government is taught throughout Judeo Christian thought and scriptures, being only excepted by loyalty to God. In the case of our nation, we pledge to it as “one nation under God”. Such a concept bears full discussion in our classrooms, though such discussions must be sensitive and appropriate for the age and maturation levels of the students involved.
Self-esteem
The California Board of Education says that “Self-esteem and esteem for others are based on the intrinsic worth and dignity of individuals, not on academic ability or physical prowess. Jesus said that we must love others as we love ourselves (Matthew 19:19 ff), that normal human beings do esteem themselves, love themselves, provide for their own basic needs by nature. It is with God’s permission that we do so. This discussion is authorized in California classrooms.
Integrity
The California Board of Education tells us “School personnel should encourage students to live and speak with integrity; that is, to be trustworthy. To foster integrity is to help build character, to assist students to be honest with themselves, to promote a wholeness unimpaired by self-deceit, and to encourage the development of reliability in relations with others.” In view of recent questions about the integrity among business and government leaders, may would suggest that there is a curriculum related rationale for teachers