To think in general English people do not value education?

[clairemcnam]

It always dismays me how little education seems to be valued in England. Lots of people say they do value education, but in closer questioning this is nearly always a utilitarian approach to education.
So education is valued to get you a good job, or help you earn more money - to help you achieve something else.
But relatively few people seem to value education for its own sake.

Oh and I agree that some of the people disagreeing with the OP seem not to have understood her point at all. Fighting to get the school you want is no indication of an appreciation of learning for learning's sake.

I agree with OP and think it’s partly based on educators constantly telling their students you must do well, you must get good results when tested, then you’ll get a good job. When people hear this over and over again they will believe that education is all about getting a good job due to good results when tested

If students are constantly told to enjoy education and look at learning for themselves and researching and find out things do you think it would be different?

What utter rubbish OP. Some people don’t value education, some do. You can’t make sweeping generalisations like that about an entire nation.

It’s like saying all English people don’t like dogs, or all Scottish people don’t like hockey etc

For what it’s worth, in this family of three adults, we have two people who adore academic study and do it for the sheer joy of learning and one person who doesn’t particularly enjoy academia and wouldn’t choose it as a leisure pastime (but who is still postgrad level qualified).

But relatively few people seem to value education for its own sake.

My colleagues and I wouldn't agree with that sweeping statement.

If it's the result of a prevailing attitude caused by a country's education system, then I think you can make sweeping statements to a certain extent. I've read a bit about the education systems in Scandinavia for example, and they sound much less utilitarian. I think the OP is generally quite right about this attitude in England - I just suspect that a lot of other countries (but not all) are now probably like this too. From what I've heard of the US system, it sounds even more like this than in England.

My colleagues and I wouldn't agree with that sweeping statement.

Do you and your colleagues really think that the majority of people in England believe that learning for the sake of learning is desirable and valuable, in the sense that the earning potential and career opportunities provided by the subject of study are of secondary importance? I'd be really surprised if that were the case tbh.

I come from a family who love to learn for the sake of learning, I pursue education for myself regularly and love to learn new things, often it's self taught through books or internet as I find learning in a classroom setting much harder.
I always tell my children that education isn't just about school, I teach them about nature/animals/food everyday, I encourage them to ask questions and share their musings and then find out more about them, my youngest son finds the Egyptians and ancient Egypt fascinating so he's always encouraged to learn more about it through library books, museums and even building his own mummy in a sarcophagus for a more crafty activity.
We're very much a family of exploration, if they ask "I wonder how you make this?.." we say "well let's have a go!"

What I don't value however is the rigorous testing in schools, the exams, the pressure, the inability to be flexible with fixed topics, the fact that I can't take my children somewhere educational without getting a fine. Mental health isn't supported in schools and that's a problem.

I get what you are saying.

The culture of education is different from many countries, obviously there are anomalies in every country though. I’ve found England to be very ‘rules is rules’ about school, a culture of the majority not questioning poor quality work or seeking educational pursuits in their free time quite so much. My two eldest have gone abroad to university, it’s not only cheaper but has more respect and focus there. Here it is routinely for many either the only way to a job/ about the student lifestyle.

The curriculum here is bloated, but seems removed from pedagogy. For example rote learning to be human calculators and facts, but this huge void for philosophy/ history/ classics or debate in schools (and possibly a lack of interest in wider society). I’m amazed what I see parents accept in local state schools, why there aren’t riots I don’t know. It feels like once something is off the national curriculum or not examined it disappears from public consciousness. There’s schools here where kids have gone months, or even a year, at ks3 with non-specialist supply teachers in core subjects. I mean, pay more, raise tax if you have to- but educate the populous! Unless there’s a hidden agenda. It feels like a cycle of hopelessness, not producing (beyond an elite few) the next teachers or educationalists.

On mumsnet there are a lot of stories of fighting for schools etc, I’m talking about the average. It just doesn’t seem to have value culturally in the same way. A lot of ‘I did all right without school’. ‘I didn’t learn anything useful at school’, ‘as long as you get the grades to do xxxx you’re fine’.

I think it depends on how you ask the question.

When I was at school I worked hard to pass exams to go to University to get a good job BUT I always knew I wanted to go to Uni because I loved learning.

When I went to work I did lots of different courses. I would have couched it in terms of career progression etc but actuary it was because I liked learning.

I'm doing OU degree now to go into teaching but if I won the lottery I would study something like Palaeontology just for fun.

I think lots of people focus on the career advantage but that's only half the story. And many Many OU students do it simy for learning sake

I'm not English, but I don't think people complaining about things they learned in school or about how useless some of it is automatically means they don't value education as a whole. Kids in schools and even many out don't get a choice of what they study or much options or time to find better options if the teacher or resources aren't good at teaching the subject. Just like my having no interest in garlic or squid no matter their health benefits doesn't mean I don't value food, my lack of interest in quadratic functions or my spouse's lack of interest in RE doesn't mean either of us don't value education.

Some things we learn because they're needed skills, some we learn because it's culturally or politically viewed as important to learn, and some we learn from our own interests. Some of those overlap, but not all, and there is no way anyone can learn everything and I've yet to meet someone who actually wants to learn everything and approaches learning all topics with enthusiasm. I don't think that's a problem, the problem comes when there is a big disconnect between them. I home educated all of my kids and when my older daughter started at a state secondary, her transition went very well, but one of her first complaints like many students was not getting why they were studying certain topics. Just like with my still home educated kids, I say 'because someone thinks it's important. You get to decide if it's important to you, but you have study it either way. If it's not important to you, use it to build your learning skills."

I think there is a big difference between the areas valued by those in power to add to exams and curriculums and what many people of any background value. There is certainly a cultural hierarchy of subjects and there are issues when what we want to learn about isn't valued. So, I wouldn't say English people don't value education or are entirely utilitarian though some individuals or schools come across that way, but that there is a massive disconnect between what is currently politically viewed as important (I think they chase trends and ideology a lot) and what is generally seen as important and the skills people need for life, and that is a big issue.

But that's exactly what the OP meant, I think. People do think it's important, but only really as a means to an end. For example doing history GCSE because it's a good thing to have on your list if you later want to do X, Y or Z, rather than because you want to learn more about history. I would never home school my own dc, but I can see the appeal of it in terms of the freedom to explore subjects they enjoy in detail and in a less prescriptive way.

"Education for its own sake is the privilege of those who have the time and the means to access it"- discuss.

I take the point that a lot of older people doing OU studies are doing so precisely because they love learning.

choccy It is easier than ever to learn new things online. There are lots of free courses fpr example.

completely agree, OP. And you see it all the time on MN. I can't remember the number of times posters have felt that because they didn't learn about something at school, that's a good enough reason for their ignorance - absolutely no concept of educating yourself outside of the classroom.

And agree that 'swot' is still used negatively and culturally our vacuous sleb culture absolutely celebrates the moronic over the educated.

Scottish people do value it.

ChoccyBiccyTastic
I do have to agree with that statement. I said earlier that I was brought up with a love for learning for learnings sake. I was strongly encouraged into studying an arts subject that I loved but that had almost no job prospects. Didn't bother me when I was younger but now after years of minimum wage jobs and almost no earning potential it all seems a bit futile. You're a long time an adult needing to earn a living. Learning is great but real life gets in the way for lots of people. If the OP is right and English people don't value education in itself then maybe that's because of a pragmatism rather than anything else.

I think the OP is correct, to a certain extent. (stats below) .

Broadly people dont value what they dont pay for. We are lucky, we have access to a free education (that includes libraries and most museums) but it isnt utilised. This is why first and second generation immigrants , despit being on FSM, do so much better - they value education, education is the route out of poverty.

That said, our current education system is not fit for purpose. (thatsa whole new debate)

[https://literacytrust.org.uk/parents-and-families/adult-literacy/]

16.4% of adults in England, or 7.1 million people, can be described as having 'very poor literacy skills.' They can understand short straightforward texts on familiar topics accurately and independently, and obtain information from everyday sources, but reading information from unfamiliar sources, or on unfamiliar topics, could cause problems.

Some slightly odd sentences there...walking and typing!!!

I think it should be s mix. I'm from Wales not England but presume you mean the UK as a whole. I chose my a levels mainly on what interested me - English, welshi, history and RE. Incidentally, I never did well at the sciences and maths - subjects I hated, couldn't 'get' and barely scraped a pass. I passed my maths GCSE finally aged 21. That was only because most places want a c in maths, there was certainly no desire to learn that!

However I do think my good grades in the subjects I enjoyed were linked to the fact that I liked them. History in particular. I really enjoyed it and enjoyed lessons so I did well, it helps when you have a teacher who makes the lessons fun too.

Although let's be honest, learning for learnings sake, won't get you a job. Id have loved to not have done science, it or maths in school. But my chances of getting into uni and then getting a job, would be crap.

Children shouldn't just be allowed to do only the subjects they enjoy. They might do better in them, but ultimately school and learning isn't just for enjoyment. Enjoyment is an important part and you'll do better if you enjoy school, but the goal of school is to pass qualifications that allow you to progress in your chosen career, to be literate so that you can find a job etc. Letting. Child who only likes PE to just do PE, is doing them a disadvantage.

So I don't see the problem in focusing education on getting qualifications and a good job. In fact it's probably a good incentive for teenagers who don't want to revise. Telling them they might enjoy doing English might not help, but giving a sharp reminder that unless they do get some qualifications they might well struggle financially or not go into their chosen job, is much more of an incentive.

Yes it should be enjoyable where possible. But the basic aim of giving children an education is to enable them to progress in life.

Madein No I am not using England to mean the UK. I don't know enough about the other countries to say whether their culture values education or not for its own sake.

Although let's be honest, learning for learnings sake, won't get you a job. Id have loved to not have done science, it or maths in school. But my chances of getting into uni and then getting a job, would be crap.

Actually there is some work and research being done on getting young people to understand the skills they are learning in a range of subjects whether they excel in the subject or not. It's about developing employability skills and recognising that all subjects help us develop these.

I recognise that we all need to do qualifications that help us get jobs. I have done that. But there needs to be a balance.

What type of education are we talking about, and why do you think it isn't valued?
In experience, adults are learning all the time.

Do you mean degrees and the like? Generally, courses that lead to formal qualifications are time consuming and expensive, often prohibitively so.

Day to day, I would say most people I know have watched a youtube video to learn a specific skill, e.g., icing a cake, repairing a car, etc.

A lot of learning is silent. Many people won't tell you that they've just finished a crocheting course or that they've just done a training course at work to get better at whatever thing it is they do, and I bet you don't know what people are reading.

What about learning through experience? Formal education is, in many ways, only theoretical. Living life is also a means of learning. Do you think it's preferable to be the perpetual student, doing multiple bachelor degrees for no apparent end game?

I agree OP ? General knowledge in UK its really shockingly bad. Especially history /geography and art. Not to mention spelling.

I’m not English but I did attend university in England and found the opposite OP! That could have been the environment I was in though.

I find the people who appreciate education for education’s sake are the ones who can afford to. Hate to jump to it - but I think it’s quite often a class issue. If parents are struggling to pay the bills on a minimum wage income of course they’re going to encourage their children to study towards a career that will earn money. And of course they’ll roll their eyes and see a degree in say, philosophy, as a waste of time/money/effort and will be reluctant to fund it. At least that’s how my parents were and most of my friend’s parents.