Values-based Education… What Could Be Wrong With That?

Skills based education" can be contentious in itself because it doesn't put any priority on learning critical or independent thinking. Which is something that education is supposed to be about, as well as skills

Ah I've always seen skills based as including problem solving, critical thinking, lateral thinking, creativity, debate etc. And had the 'privilege' (I now see it as) to both have those in my own education but also remember them being a big part of teacher training. And many of my colleagues do too.

Independent thinking and practise is a skill in itself. Closely linked to debate skills and creative skills. Critical analysis of sources.

Knowledge is no good unless you know what do with it.

Agree with pp that values is too closely associated with belief and ideology.

I wont boycott either because when trans inclusive values reap no more profit they will move on, because they, not being a person , have made no more profits from that “value”

That makes no sense. Most businesses measure value of campaigns in profit, so if people boycott then profit reduces and they move on quicker. If you don’t support their campaign then boycotting can speed that on.

But even businesses do not exist purely in a capitalistic market place, they are ultimately owned and run by people and those people have their own values. Those values may be make as much money as possible through the selling or armaments and if they are used on civilian populations - well that means they need to buy more. But many business owners and managers have values which place limits on what they are prepared to do, or set up the business to actively promote ideas that align with their values and do so despite loss of revenue.

@MrGHardy i have no idea what you are saying or to whom

But then what is the point of a university? Are your virtue signalling instead of signalling your ability?

Given the cost of US higher education, that seems a steep price for virtue signalling.

upholding Freedom of speech or academic enquiry is not a value at all as it places no value on any point of view or line of enquiry. It says we are free of values. Values are a moral declaration, positional, and exclusive. So a value adopted by a corporation such as a university will exclude anyone who disagrees with said value.

@UnremarkableBeasts

absolutely.

I dont give a flying fuck what retail corporations ethos are because its bollocks they just want me to buy their stuff. I wont boycott either because when trans inclusive values reap no more profit they will move on, because they, not being a person , have made no more profits from that “value”

Values based is far too easily a euphemism
for ideological indoctrination.

My view is that a corporate body of any kind cannot have any values since said body is not a thinking human. The corporate body can have aims and objectives, but not a set of values or even an ethos because values are beliefs that only human individuals can possess or own.

Corporate bodies who from the top tell constituents of their organisation, such a service users, stakeholders or workers what the core values of the corporation are, even after a consultation, are talking rubbish.

A good example is CoE schools who tend to operate under the delusion that all its staff, parents and children, are Christian's because corporately they are. When in reality many of the constituents are not Christian’s, they want a job, or the school is a catchment school, or is the best performer.

Back in my day i spent a good deal of energy protecting my children from indoctrination, of the Christian variety in a school they had no choice but to attend. Cluttered with primary teacher Christian’s who thought they had some moral high ground, and a right to teach my children their values as if they were fact.

Sounds familiar now to the new religion of gender no wonder people chose to home school than run the gauntlet of corporate values.

BinturongsSmellOfPopcorn · Today 11:06

Whether it's a good or bad thing depends entirely on what the values are.

Quite, what if those values are saluting the flag and unswerving loyalty to King and country and getting rid of stupid leftie woke traitors?

Or going back to Year Zero and exterminating all the filthy intellectuals?

I mean, they're values, even if most of us would find them abhorrent.

Who specifies these values? Who reviews them and how often? Who decides how they are expressed in policy decisions? How are parents, teachers and students consulted?
How are conflicts handled? At the very basic level, there are bound to be conflicts around where the budget is spent, because THERE ALWAYS ARE.
I just don't think it's workable - it's too nebulous.

OP that reminds me of this:

I think inclusion is no longer the buzzword. The new one is "belonging"...

I wish they'd just hurry up with the spiral and get on with calling it modern peer pressure already.

Totally agree with this.

It never ceases to amaze me how the whole inclusion movement basically ignores disability. The most excluded group of all.

As pp’s say, all depends on what values. To add another layer, all education is based on sets of values around what we think it’s worth teaching, and how students should be encouraged to engage with the material, etc

What I think would be interesting would be if your new VC was prepared to articulate and discuss exactly what values they were referring to - make it an open process rather than so much of it being assumed. Of course having to defend values might have challenging results…

Agree that "values based" sounds pretty meaningless and immediately raises the questions "which values". Perhaps it just means "not driven purely by market/consumer/commercial concerns"? Though even that is a value.

Any values which are allowed to overwhelm all other values are dangerous. Neither truth nor social justice needs to be a pre-determined "highest purpose" - although for a university truth probably has an edge when there's a conflict.

"Skills based education" can be contentious in itself because it doesn't put any priority on learning critical or independent thinking. Which is something that education is supposed to be about, as well as skills.

I would be asking "whose values?" before i thought about basing an education system on them.

Well it's meaningless in itself, what values do they want to base this on and which values are elevated to the highest position?

The problem with inclusion as the highest order value is that it means there cannot be reasons for exclusion. And obviously there are some good reasons to exclude others in some situations, as we've found.

Also the highest order value depends on the aim of the organisation or the context.
For a university I would presume this should be truth.
In a family it would be love.
In a factory it would efficiency, or quality, or safety?

Also these values that are banded about. Where do they come from? What are they based on? Why should we value these things at all?

In the West they are based on Judao Christian philosophy which we've mostly abandoned but we're left with this hangover or assumption these are all good things we agree on.

But there is no rationale for that anymore.

Presumably without a shared overarching philosophy of the world and human nature we could now just all invent our own values?

Education should be knowledge, fact, evidence based. "Values" could be what the university's social aspects are based on, as in accessibility for students with disability, tolerance for different political views, different religious views or none, etc etc.

Yes to this. But actually the first thing you need to check is who they are talking about when they say inclusion. Often they are talking LBGTQ+ not disability at all. Because it is so much easier to hang up a few flags and than it is to put in hearing loops, lighting filters, sensory rooms, ramps, accessible signage, and in schools TAs, specialist teaching staff, smaller classes etc.