Wake up! Why our education system isn’t working

In my work, I talk a lot about ‘waking up’ and in this post I’m going to discuss how we end up becoming one of the ‘asleeple’  in the first place. Because the fact is, we’re not born ‘asleep’ – it’s a lifelong process of ‘training’ also known as ‘socialisation’, beginning as soon as we’re able to reasonably function in ‘civilised’ society. All young children are intellectually free and emotionally alive. But in our so-called developed world, it’s impossible to be an adult and retain the creativity and spontaneity of a three year old without being labelled mad or personality disordered – unless you’re employed as an artist of some kind. In fact, these childlike attributes are the cornerstone of mental well-being but instead, as soon as you can walk, talk and adequately use a toilet, these traits are beaten out of you and you’re indoctrinated into becoming a useful tool in our economic system.

‘Education’ is not really about teaching the things that you really need and want to know. What you’re learning is the stuff that the people who control everything ie the people with the most money, want you to know. These big business people who control our economy need a few highly educated people to do the brain work and a larger number of less well-educated people to do the grunt work. Therefore the system is geared towards churning out these two types, rather than catering for each person’s individual needs.

Look up ‘school’ in the dictionary and the definition will inevitably begin with the word ‘institution’. And this is exactly what school is – an institution, much like a prison or a children’s home, governed by a strict set of rules. (Whenever I refer to my school years, I talk about having ‘done my time’ because this is exactly how it felt – forced to attend the same place, day in, day out, and resigned to suffering bullying and boredom for years on end.) The rules are designed to make life simpler for the authorities by imposing their ideas of conformity on you – stand in line, no talking, short hair and other dress codes – and to teach you to unquestioningly obey authority. Teachers are given a lot of power over you and you are taught to obey them and all your ‘elders and betters’. The word ‘respect’ is used a lot – the teachers are apparently teaching you ‘respect’ rather than ‘obedience’ – but how can you truly respect someone who is showing little or no respect for you?

The problem with most teachers of course is that they too are ‘asleep’. Being asleep, they believe in the idea that everything is separate and have long since lost touch with their real selves. The focus is on competition – who is the best, who’s getting the highest grades – and the belief that true worth consists of being better and having more than the separate ‘other’. Consequently, children lose their intrinsic sense of the universal and their community values and learn instead to play the game of differentiation and dissociation, the punishment for refusing to play being abandonment and rejection. Their true self recedes into the shadow where it goes to sleep, often for the rest of their lives, and is replaced by a false self, developed to fit in with what others need you to be, but leaving you with a feeling of disconnection and dissatisfaction which can only be temporarily assuaged by external trappings, rewards for playing the game.

In school, these trappings take the form of grades and exams. Grades are used as a bribe to get you to do the things you don’t want to do – you work for the good grades and not because you’re interested in what you’re doing. Grades become an end in themselves, much like money in the outside world. The people with the best grades (or the most money) are perceived as the best people, regardless of the methods used to gain them and what they’re really like as people. In a similar fashion, exams don’t show how creative or intelligent you actually are – all they demonstrate is who is good at exams ie capable of trotting out parrot-fashion the information which has been drilled into them. During my time at school, I did many exams and received good grades in them all – and cannot remember a single thing that I supposedly ‘learned’.

And then of course, there is the ‘lower hierarchy’ – the one which develops amongst the pupils themselves. Here the trappings are social and psychological and the winners of this game are the ones who have learned to play the other game – the game of differentiation – the best. The children who have the least empathy – who are therefore more ‘separate’ – are the ones who will race to the top of this particular hierarchy. The less you care – or appear to care – about others, the more popular you will be. And the more you conform to the standards our society ascribes to be the best – for example, the more glamorous you are as a girl or the more sporty you are as a boy – the better your chances of being perceived as ‘popular’. Anyone who fails to play the game properly by being ‘too sensitive’ or ‘too different’ must be prepared to suffer the consequences. I am never surprised when I hear of yet another high school shooting. Doug Stanhope summed this up best in one of his stand-up routines:

“High school is horrible. I quit in ninth grade and it was the best thing I ever did. After every school shooting, parents come on television and say: `Rap music is the problem. And drugs. And the lack of metal detectors.’ No. The problem is that a lot of your kids are aggressive dicks and you won’t do shit about it. That’s the problem. You never hear these parents say: `It’s terrible that Andy Williams shot up Santana High School, but I accept it was also our boy Ethan’s fault, because he was a sadistic prick to that kid. Tell that to the cameras, Ethan. Tell them how you pulled Andy’s pants down, then pushed his head down the toilet.’ I never hear that on the news.
Williams was this frail little kid who was bullied, and shot up his school. George W Bush came on the news and called it `the ultimate act of cowardice’. “Cowardice? The ultimate act of cowardice is the fat-headed wrestling guy sitting behind the frail kid in math class, clipping him on the ear, saying: `What are you going to do about that, faggot?’ That is cowardice. When the bullets start flying past that jock’s saucer-shaped ears, that’s not cowardice. That’s payback.”

Ok, so I’m certainly not advocating that every bullied kid should get out there and start shooting the place up. But why are we so shocked when every once in a while someone is pushed over the edge because we’ve brought up our children to believe in differentiation and worship those who conform to our society’s idea of ‘the best’ whilst demeaning and rejecting those who don’t? When the people at the top of these man-made pyramids of power show little respect for those at the bottom, why are they so horrified when the people at the bottom show little respect for them? (You can read more on this in this blog post about last year’s riots in the UK here: http://empathicguidance.wordpress.com/2011/08/08/london-riots-remember-this/)

Home-schooling is on the increase, as is a form of education called ‘unschooling’ where the child’s natural interests are followed and developed. Unlike the school system, these forms of education consider the needs of the individual child, rather than just teaching them what the authorities feel you need to know to join the ‘asleeple’. School is simply a mirror image of our society, a society built on economic power, and a society which is founded on the idea that people exist for the sake of big business, not the other way round. The majority of changes which have taken place in this system are geared towards the people who have the power keeping that power. A recent example of this is the introduction of student loans. By taking on one of these loans, you’re effectively shackling yourself to the economic system before you’ve even dipped a toe into the waters of employment. Interesting, isn’t it, that these loans were introduced round about the same time that property prices zoomed into the stratosphere, making it increasingly difficult for people to be shackled to the system by a mortgage? The powers-that-be will always find a way to get you stuck in that dead-end job, the one that fills their coffers whilst simultaneously depleting yours, with no visible means of escape. Interesting, too, that this system was introduced after the people currently in power had already taken advantage of the ‘free higher education for all’ offered pre-1991.

The majority of degrees these days are not even worth the paper they’re printed on. A degree requires little more than a good memory and an ability to assimilate the academic orthodoxy of the day, which is why employers favour graduates, regardless of the field of study. As you’ve already proved yourself to be biddable and unquestioning, as far as employers are concerned, you’re ideal corporate material. And don’t assume that you’ll be financially rewarded either – graduates now earn only £140,000 more over their lifetime than non-graduates, instead of the £400,000 previously. They also pay back thousands more in tax than their degree will have cost. Furthermore, the higher the education, the cheaper the ‘citizen’ is to the government in terms of benefits (less chance of unemployment) and NHS costs (less illness). Increased levels of student debt, thanks to introduction of  exorbitant fees, also encourage graduates to go for the highest paid available job, rather than going into further study, volunteering or jobs that aren’t necessarily so well remunerated, meaning once again the economic system is the ultimate beneficiary. This introduction of market forces into higher education also results in the selection criteria of universities being based on a student’s bank balance not academic ability. Thanks to the creation of a two-tier education system, the gulf between the haves and the have-nots is widening more and more each day.

(In a future post, I’ll outline what I feel a more enlightened and awakened approach to education would look like, based on my work with young people and my own experience of the education system as a pupil and a parent.)

What’s your parenting style?

As a parent myself, I’m very interested in the psychology of parenting. I read about the four parenting styles some years ago in The Guardian and was pleased to recognise my own style as the one described as ‘authoritative’.  Unfortunately, I feel many parents fall under the category of ”indulgent’ (also known as ‘permissive’) which is why programmes such as ‘Supernanny’ have become so popular, and why there increasingly seems to be an ‘anti-child’ backlash in this country.  People enjoying a meal out or an evening in the pub simply do not want to be disturbed by someone else’s ‘little darling’ running riot whilst Mummy and Daddy turn a blind eye.

It does take a bit of effort to teach basic good manners and acceptable social behaviour to your child  – you have to be prepared to be firm and consistent,  but in  an assertive rather than an aggressive way – but the rewards  for your child, you and the rest of society are well worth it as it makes life easier and much more  harmonious all round. A few months ago, I had a phone call from my daughter’s school from a teacher who was so impressed with Phoebe’s manners when encountering her in the school office, she actually felt impelled to ring me and compliment me on such a beautifully behaved child. Whilst I felt immensely proud of my child, I also felt sad that such behaviour is evidently so rare these days that when it occurs, people feel prompted to comment on it. Perhaps if more parents subscribed to the ‘authoritative’ parenting style (also known as ‘balanced parenting’), our children would begin to receive the appreciation in our society that they deserve  – and our world would be a much more serene and joyous place.

The article below is just a brief introduction to the subject – if you are interested in finding out more,  google ‘parenting styles’ and you’ll find lots more information across the web.

The Four Parenting Styles

By Stan Tian

Since the 1800s, parenting styles have changed dramatically. We no longer believe that children should be ‘seen and not heard’ and disallow any immature behavior in the company of other adults. Yet from family to family, parenting styles still differ greatly and psychologists have identified that parenting usually follows one of four main styles.

That slightly old fashioned way of parenting still goes on today, under the name ‘Authoritarian Parenting’. Authoritarian parents tend to give orders to their children and expect them to obey without asking why it is necessary. There is little communication with the child regarding rules, and when a rule isn’t obeyed the form of punishment is usually physical or taking something away, rather than talking the child through why what they did was wrong. Authoritarian parenting has, however, been shown to be detrimental to a child’s esteem and emotional management techniques. While they do well at school, children who have been brought up this way tend to give up quickly when they perceive a problem as difficult, and get very frustrated with authority during adolescence. This has only been discovered by psychologists over the past century, which is possibly why other parenting techniques continue to become more popular.

One such technique is perhaps the exact opposite of authoritarian parenting and it is known as ‘Indulgent’. These parents interact with their children closely, provide explanations and support, but also don’t make any demands of them or set any boundaries. While this might appear to make for a happy child, as opposed to authoritarian children who are unhappy, this is not necessarily the case. These children often feel they are responsible for things that their parents should be and as a result they feel unsafe and vulnerable. They generally grow up to be quite independent, but are more likely to get involved in drugs and crime, are impulsive and put little importance on academic achievement.

Indulgent parenting usually comes as a result of wanting a child to love them so much they don’t risk upsetting them with rules. For parents who don’t care what their children feel about them, neglectful parenting often occurs. This style doesn’t necessarily mean children are not cared for; often they have everything that they need and even some luxuries, but little interaction with the parents and very little emotional support. This obviously has an effect into adulthood, including difficulties with social interaction, low confidence, immaturity and a higher chance of developing mood disorders.

While none of the parenting styles that we’ve seen so far involve abuse and they do have merits, often the negatives far outweigh the positives in terms of what is best for the child. Don’t despair, the Authoritative Parenting style offers benefits for both the child and the parent without any negatives at all. Authoritative parents set generous boundaries for their children, but when they do so they explain exactly why those boundaries are there. They also encourage their child to achieve, supporting them all the way and ensuring them that if they fail they will be disappointed, but not angry and next time to ‘try harder’. The premises with authoritative parenting are simple; communicate with the child about your rules, let them have a defined level of freedom and when they disobey talk to them about why you are angry rather than giving unexplained punishment. Children of authoritative parents usually grow up focused on their own achievements, whilst coping very well with pressure and having a happy disposition.

http://www.healthguidance.org/entry/10692/1/The-Four-Parenting-Styles.html