Re: [OT] Re: shuttle disaster
On Mon, Feb 03, 2003 at 03:52:17PM -0800, Craig Dickson wrote:
> Daniel Barclay wrote:
>
> > Kenward Vaughan wrote:
> > >
> > > ...
> > > In a completely rational society, the best of us would aspire to be
> > > _teachers_ and the rest of us would have to settle for something less,
> > > because passing civilization along from one generation to the next
> > > ought to be the highest honor and the highest responsibility anyone
> > > could have. - Lee Iacocca
> >
> > Wouldn't that be society resting on its laurels? And stagnating?
> > (With no one creating additional civilization.)
>
> I had the same reaction. It would be interesting to see the context of
> that Iacocca quote. If he was suggesting that the most noble thing in
> the world is to be a schoolteacher, that's sort of inane, as it implies
> that it's more important to pass on knowledge than to generate new
> knowledge. Both are important.
The quote came from an instructor in an education course I took, so I can't
provide contextual clues. It wouldn't surprise me to find that he was
speaking to a group of educators. That doesn't change the force of the
message, though.
I think one of the unstated goals Iacocca has in making this statement is
that the best education possible will lead to more accomplishments by
_all_. This would hardly lead to stagnation. And there are no
accomplishments without the past as a foundation; its provision is critical
to any success. "I stand on the shoulders of giants."
An important career goal of those who teach at the higher levels is to stay
on top of current knowledge while figuring out how to pass it on to others.
This is a part of scholarly research. Those who teach at the lower levels
are presumably preparing the minds of those budding citizens to handle that
knowledge... :) Both of these activities do best with the brightest and most
dedicated folks at the helm.
Certainly there are many parts to the progression of society. Iacocca is
simply pushing the importance of education.
> I suppose the need to both generate and pass on knowledge is probably
> the basis for the fact that at the university level, professors must
> both teach and conduct research.
See above.
> There are some very good teachers out there, but I've found that some of
> the world's emptiest heads belong to schoolteachers who just teach
> what's in their textbooks without ever really thinking about anything.
> The notion that these people are the noblest of beings, or indeed that
> there is anything the least bit noble about them, is so idiotic it's not
> even funny.
This is out of context with the quote (but I don't disagree with the
sentiment). Do you really think we are a completely rational society? Check
the local store for one of the latest Murdock-styled publications, and see
how many people buy those instead of the local paper (much less a serious
national paper).
Education is not valued enough, so people don't go into it. Our social
focus is too egocentric.
It is far less common to see bright people, who rue the state of education,
do more than jump on the local school board about their business. They
don't step up to do the job. If we ever put our money where our mouths are,
and make the business of education really important, things will change
for the better.
In the least, it should make things much harder for the politicians.
Cheers,
Kenward
('Nuff said by me. Getting way OT here. Sorry.)
--
In a completely rational society, the best of us would aspire to be
_teachers_ and the rest of us would have to settle for something less,
because passing civilization along from one generation to the next
ought to be the highest honor and the highest responsibility anyone
could have. - Lee Iacocca
Reply to: