More handpicked essays just for you.
Moral and cognitive development
Moral and cognitive development
Moral development and its implications for learning
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
In "Becoming a Real Person", Davis Brooks weighs on the notion of the purpose of college. He claims that there are three ways that college aims to lead us. The cognitive objective teaches us knowledge and how to correctly use it, the moral role helps us build a unique individual self, and the commercial role leads us toward a future career. These three roles play a part in improving an individual's future prospects. While I agree on the importance these roles take, Brooks undermines the significance of moral education in higher education.
Brooks, in William Deresiewicz words, describes moral education as an 'interval of freedom'. During this time, students can learn through interactions with others. However, students are focused more on advancing than experiencing that freedom. "[Universities] have been absorbed into the commercial ethos. Instead of intervals of freedom, they are breeding grounds for advancement...The system pressures them to be excellent, but excellent sheep." (Brooks, 2014) Brooks
…show more content…
He explains that cognitive education would be a much easier method to work with than that of the moral one. He expresses his difficulty that moral education in teaching. "I have no idea how to get my students to build a self or become a soul. It isn't taught...we've never evaluated a candidate on how well he or she should accomplish it." (Pinker, 2014) Brooks observes the same problem. "…authority no longer feels compelled to define... moral, emotional, and spiritual growth...as Pinker put it, they don't know." (Brooks, 2014) Pinker and Brooks both agree that moral growth is a difficult task to teach an individual. This difficulty lies primarily in lack of knowledge and lack of focus in building a student's unique selves. Overcoming this problem would lead to the moral growth of students in higher
Colleges and community colleges have their share of faults, and these three writers express what should be done to repair the broken system; if Carey were to attempt upholding his view that for-profits have their place in education, the result would be complete annihilation. Yes, for-profits benefit those who reap gains from the system, but Hacker and Dreifus and Addison would tear apart this view with the true meaning of education. Educated graduates with jobs that help create a better society are essential to the function of societies all over the world; therefore, colleges exist for the purpose of producing these graduates capable of making a difference. Students need education—students are the purpose of education. Although Carey’s claim—the government should not interfere with the success of for-profit owners—has integrity, Hacker, Dreifus, and Addison all believe that it is not in the right place. In their view, for-profits have no value to anyone but the owners. In sum, Carey would be shut down with the reality that an education system with the central purpose of earning profit does not value providing an education that benefits both students and society—the main focus is money. In turn, what is available could hardly be considered an education, according to Hacker, Dreifus, and Addison. However, the marketing scheme of for-profits still successfully entices people to enroll by offering accessibility with quick and easy degrees, which would infuriate Ungar and
Owen and Sawhill maintain that college can positively affect one’s life by “affecting things like job satisfaction, health, marriage, parenting, trust, and social interaction. Additionally, there are social benefits to education, such as reduced crime rates and higher political participation” (Owen and Sawhill 640). By expressing this, Owen and Sawhill are trying to bring to mind the idea that by going to college, you will be an all around better citizen, which definitely plays with emotions because who doesn’t want to be a good citizen. Furthermore, Owen and Sawhill remark on the college decision process. Here, thier general claim is that when choosing a college, it is better to choose a college that will benefit you financially, not just the one you
One of the evidence that I found worthy of consideration in Zinsser's text is that "In the late 1960s", "the typical question that I got from students was 'Why is there so much suffering in the world?' or "How can I make a contribution?' Today it's 'Do you think it would look better for getting into law school if I did a double major in history and political science, or just majored in one of them?" (Zinsser 197) This evidence shows that the views on college education is transient and can be changed. At the same time it gives us an idea of what kind of college education Zinsser favors. Real purpose of a college education should not be forced by career or parental influences but by personal choices especially by taking classes in the fields of liberal arts.
In the article “College is Not a Commodity. Stop treating it like one,” Hunter Rawlings explains how people today believe that college is a commodity, but he argues that it’s the student’s efforts; which gives value to their education. Rawlings states that in recent years college has been looked at in economic terms, lowering its worth to something people must have instead of earn. As a professor Rawlings has learned that the quality of education has nothing to do with the school or the curriculum, but rather the student’s efforts and work ethic. Rawlings explains the idea that the student is in charge of the success of his or her own education, and the professor or school isn’t the main reason why a student performs poorly in a class. Rawlings
As a young girl in school, I always believed that I would one day would be successful and had the hope that a college education would assist me in being successful. I exceled in school even with circumstances such as hurricane Katrina and September 11 and had a thirst for knowledge. At the same time, the teachers that influenced me in life convinced me to attend college for the betterment of knowledge and a potential for a job or a career. However, those same teachers were teaching me textbook methods and no real on hand training that is essential in an education especially a college education. In "Vocation or Exploration? Pondering the Purpose of College”, Alina Tugend ponders the idea of college being either Vocation—job training— or Exploration learning. She starts off by referring to her oldest son is about to graduate high school, but quickly goes straight to the point of her essay with “What exactly is a university education for?” She provides answers such as college is a way to automatically receive a job if one majors in science, technology or a major that can be applied to a changing world that we live
...a career to something that guarantees a successful life. This negative light gives many student the ugly side of college that maybe it isn't as good as it sounds. The function of the essay to deter students from becoming like sheep and following social norms, Murray wants students to become informed before making decisions that can change the outcome of their life for many years.
It should not be a surprise that many people believe that a college degree is a necessity in today’s world. We are taught to believe this at a young age. The average citizen will not question this statement due to how competitive the job market has become, yet does graduating college guarantee more success down the road? Peter Brooks is a scholar at Princeton University and publisher of an essay that questions the value of college. He obviously agrees that college can help securing a job for the future, but questions the humanities about the education. He uses other published works, the pursuit of freedom, and draws on universal arguments that pull in the reader to assume the rest of his essay has valid reasons.
The right and privilege to higher education in today’s society teeters like the scales of justice. In reading Andrew Delbanco’s, “College: What It Was, Is, and Should Be, it is apparent that Delbanco believes that the main role of college is to accommodate that needs of all students in providing opportunities to discover individual passions and dreams while furthering and enhancing the economic strength of the nation. Additionally, Delbanco also views college as more than just a time to prepare for a job in the future but a way in which students and young adults can prepare for their future lives so they are meaningful and purposeful. Even more important is the role that college will play in helping and guiding students to learn how to accept alternate point of views and the importance that differing views play in a democratic society. With that said, the issue is not the importance that higher education plays in society, but exactly who should pay the costly price tag of higher education is a raging debate in all social classes, cultures, socioeconomic groups and races.
McNeel, S. (1994). College teaching and student moral development. In J. Rest, & D. Narvaez (Eds.), Moral development in the professions: Psychology and applied ethics (pp. 27-49). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
In recent years, many have debated whether or not a college education is a necessary requirement to succeed in the field of a persons’ choice and become an outstanding person in society. On one hand, some say college is very important because one must contribute to society. The essay Three Reasons College Still Matters by Andrew Delbanco shows three main reasons that students should receive their bachelor’s degree. On the other hand, many question the point of wasting millions of dollars on four years or maybe more to fight for highly competitive jobs that one might not get. Louis Menand wrote an article based on education titled Re-Imagining Liberal Education. This article challenges the main thought many americans have after receiving a secondary education. Louis Menand better illustrates the reasons why a student should rethink receiving a post secondary education better than Andrew Delbanco’s three reasons to continue a person’s education.
Murray believes that students should receive a liberal education, yet they should not have to wait until college to do so (Murray 225). Murray states that a person should not be forced to obtain a college-level liberal education, simply because they are capable of doing so (Murray 228). On higher education, Murray says, “A large proportion of people who are theoretically able to absorb a liberal education have no interest in doing so.” (Murray 228). Regardless of the fact that a person fits the criteria enabling them to pursue a college degree, does not necessarily mean that they should, if they are not interested. It is more logical to teach students extensively before the time of college, instead of leaving out information and forcing them to attend a school (Murray 225). However, Addison disagrees with this ideology, and believes that a college education is essential to growing up.
Imagine telling that to a student who just finished four years of hard, grueling, expensive work; or, even worse, a parent who paid for their child to finish that same grueling work. But, in some ways, that statement can’t be any further from the truth. College can prepare a student for life in so many more ways than for a career. However, in the way that college is supposed to prepare soon-to-be-productive students, that statement could be right on. As a student myself, I’ve found college to be a little bit of both. I often find myself asking, "How will this help me later in life?" But, then again, college gives me more control over my life and where I want it to go. In trying to figure out what exactly made college like this, and whether the way I felt was felt by others as well, I interviewed an Anthropology teacher at Las Positas College, Mr. Toby Coles, and I examined an essay by Caroline Bird called College is a Waste of Time and Money. The two sources offered interesting views from both side of the spectrum.
Throughout the years, America has always debated whether education is needed- if it helps people succeed or not. The argument in the past was always over high school education, which is now mandatory. That decision has helped the US rise economically and industrially. Today, the US is in the middle of the same debate- this time, over college. Some, like David Leonhardt, a columnist for the business section of The New York Times, think a college education creates success in any job. Others, such as Christopher Beha, an author and assistant editor of Harper’s Magazine, believe that some college “education” (like that of for-profit schools) is a waste of time, and can even be harmful to students. Each stance on this argument has truth to it, and there is no simple answer to this rising issue in an ever changing nation full of unique people. Any final decision would affect the United States in all factions- especially economically and socially. However, despite the many arguments against college, there is overwhelming proof that college is good for all students, academically or not.
“The moral quality of education is inevitably affected by the moral character of educational institutions.
Goodlad, J. I., Sirotnik, K. A., & Soder, R. (1990). The moral dimensions of teaching. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass