I stand for the motion that education is development for a person; because when a person is educated, it most of the time reflects on how the person speaks, dress or behave. Not to say we don"t have some people who are uneducated that act in a similar manner but most people who get educated have broader knowledge of things.
As Hirsch will say and I quote from the "Culture Literacy" "the chief function of literacy is to make us masters of this standard instrument of knowledge and communication, thereby enabling us to give and receive complex information orally and in writing over time and space". To me it will be pointless for someone to tell me otherwise because the person wouldn"t know the true meaning or understand what education is.
Education is not a guarantee development of a person; a person has to decide if he or she wants education to establish them or not. Some people can be educated and may never use it or use it improperly. Been educated is like having a car, it does not give one a car but gives one the chance to buy car. Also there are all types of education like the banking concept of education, which Paolo Freire has stated "Education thus becomes an act of depositing, in which the students are the depositories and the teacher is the depositor. Instead of communicating, the teacher issues communiqu"s and makes deposits which the students patiently receive, memorize, and repeat." This form of education corrupt the minds of students, with this form of education there is no development of a person happening because the person is not relating the information to his or her own life. Also this form of education is more towards studying than learning. When one study he or she memorizes it and forget it, but with learning one understands it for a very long time. Kofi had stated that "most people who get educated have broader knowledge of things." This statement is not true when comparing it to banking concept of education
First of all Dorinda, I did not say education was a guarantee to development of a person. But what I was trying to say was that it helps to make a person more knowledgeable and eventually Leeds to the development of a person. I don"t think if education was bad as you trying to paint it you will spend thousands of dollars trying to acquire the same education you talk against which will give you the personal development you need. When we also talk about development of a person it involves a whole lot and not just the things you have listed. As Hirsh will say and I quote " Literacy is a necessary condition, or necessity for literacy ;some of the reasons he said was like the need to fill out forms or get a good job, are so obvious that they needn"t be discussed. But the chief reason is broader. The complex undertakings of modern life depend on the cooperation of many people with different specialties in different places. Where communication fails, so do the undertakings. So to tell me education is not all that important for personal development means you do not really understand what"s needed. And moreover regardless how the teachers teach as they still have a good influence on their students. You make it also sound very general when you say teachers because not all teachers use the same trend to teach.
I never stated education as being unimportant, what I said was that education is important as a person wants it to be. I am going to school to get a degree to help me get a job just like so many other college students. Most college students want to better themselves for finical reasons and nothing else. The development of a person is thought at home and built upon at school. It is up to a person to decide what they want to get from their education, and this is what I might by education not being a guarantee of to better a person. Kofi for you to say that "Regardless how teachers teach as they still have good influence on their students." This statement is false not every teacher has a good influence on their students, some teachers teach as if they are robots. They do not ask questions and do not involve their students in their teaching. Paolo Ferirer said that students learn best when there is a connection between the material and their life, and not many teachers are able to do this
Dorinda, when you say most college students want to better themselves by getting education are you not saying the same thing I am saying or affirming to what I said? If you get education to better yourself as you saying then is it not the same as development for yourself. I understand when you say some teachers teach as if they are robots and they do not ask questions and do not involve their students in their teaching; but that does not mean they cannot influence their student in a positive way. And more over my argument is based and focused specifically on personal development not to say the influence part is been ignored. Dorinda, if you will have the time to sit and look around, most of the people holding top positions in this nation have been educated one way or the other. I don"t think Hirsch will bother to point out his view about education if it wasn"t that important. He said and I Quote "Illiteracy and semiliterate Americans are condemned not only to poverty, but also powerless of incomprehension. Knowing they do not understand the issues.
There are many ways a person can self-improve him or how self apart from education. There are very intelligent people that have not had any form of education. For instance, our great grand parents, grandparents, and parents. They have achieved many great things in their life without school education; before a person can be self-improve with education, one has to willing to do so. First, how does a teacher influence a student without connecting with him or her? Secondly, holding a high position in cooperate America does not make you a well-developed person or an educated person. Some people got to that position by someone they knew, through their family and luck. Education can help develop someone so can other things. Not everyone can afford highly qualified education and can still be come a well-respected person in a society and advance person.
Reasons for voting decision: Con does not actually argue against the resolution that "the purpose of education is development of the person". Whether or not it's successful does not take away its purpose.
You are not eligible to vote on this debate
This debate has been configured to only allow voters who meet the requirements set by the debaters. This debate either has an Elo score requirement or is to be voted on by a select panel of judges.