Please or to access all these features

Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

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

81 replies

DrBlackbird · 01/12/2023 10:15

Attended a talk at my uni by the new Pro VC Education whose vision for our education strategy is that it must be ‘values-based’. Caveat is our uni has swallowed the kool aid.

Got me thinking that not so many years ago, I’d have interpreted this vision in a positive light. That having and promoting ’values’ was a part of education. Admittedly, the values in my head would be tolerance, free speech, rigorous debate base on evidence and critical thought.

Now… I’m wondering if having a values based strategy was wrong all along? If ‘inclusive’ values has lead to the erosion of women’s sex based rights and neglect of consideration for some religious observances, not to mention the breathtaking lack of safeguarding for children and young people, should we avoid values as on objective?

Am thinking out loud here. I was going to post this in the academic common room threads, but thought FWR posters might have more to say on this question. Has anything value based always been contentious or is it increasingly contentious because of where we have got to with these putatively inclusive debates?

OP posts:
titchy · 01/12/2023 11:11

It depends what is meant by 'values' doesn't it? If your values are solely around identity then it's all bobbins. If your values are around evidence based debate then great.

(Not sure I agree with a solely skills based approach either - at least not in HE. That's the direction Gov is taking and it devalues the academic.)

SaffronSpice · 01/12/2023 11:08

BinturongsSmellOfPopcorn · 01/12/2023 11:06

The trouble with 'values based' is that as a standalone phrase it is completely meaningless.

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

Quite. My question if someone said they were ‘values based’ would be ‘what values’?

BinturongsSmellOfPopcorn · 01/12/2023 11:06

The trouble with 'values based' is that as a standalone phrase it is completely meaningless.

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

NecessaryScene · 01/12/2023 10:57

This immediately brings to mind this talk by Jonathan Haidt - "Two incompatible sacred values in American universities".

"Haidt concludes that universities should be free to pursue whatever goals – truth or social justice – they want, but that they should make it clear which of these two goals is their “telos” – their highest purpose."

"Two incompatible sacred values in American universities" Jon Haidt, Hayek Lecture Series

On October 6, 2016, Professor Jonathan Haidt gave a Hayek Lecture at Duke. The event was co-sponsored by the programs in the History of Political Economy (HO...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gatn5ameRr8

WarriorN · 01/12/2023 10:50

Those of us in send are also very aware that inclusion is a tricky aspect and doesn't always work.

And the drive to be more inclusive has led to a massive mess in terms of children with send and mainstream, in that there just aren't enough settings now for those who really can't cope in mainstream. Inclusion has always had to be proportionate and appropriate. And doesn't mean treating everyone equally!

WarriorN · 01/12/2023 10:47

Yeah, no, that could easily be disastrous.

Wtaf happened to skills based education ffs? Everyone agrees it's the most useful.

And you can apply to everything.