Criticizing schools which either teach a narrow and specific set of skills, e.g., how to write in C++ for various operating systems, or teach lots in information, scholar Noah Yuval Harari describes a common sentiment that schools should teach the broadest and most flexible skills:
So what should we be teaching? Many pedagogical experts argue that schools should switch to teaching ‘the four Cs’ – critical thinking, communication, collaboration and creativity. More broadly, schools should downplay technical skills and emphasise general-purpose life skills. Most important of all will be the ability to deal with change, to learn new things, and to preserve your mental balance in unfamiliar situations. In order to keep up with the world of 2050, you will need not merely to invent new ideas and products – you will above all need to reinvent yourself again and again.
Yet precisely those schools which claim to implement the idea ‘four C’ education are in fact violators of those very principles.
Schools which present themselves as teaching ‘critical thinking’ often use various slogans - ‘inquirers, risk-takers, thinkers, open-minded, balanced, reflective’ - but in reality have a set of axiomatic beliefs which together constitute a worldview: a worldview which they seek to inculcate into the students.
This becomes clear when examining political, religious, and social questions. If one examines how a school indirectly and subtly nudges its students toward various viewpoints, it becomes clear that the school is not teaching a neutral skills of ‘how to think critically,’ but is rather seeking to indoctrinate.
Likewise, schools may claim to teach the skill of communication, but often shy away from the rigor needed to give students the ability to write clearly and concisely. Whether writing persuasively or informatively, a student needs a facility for spelling, grammar, mechanics, vocabulary, idioms, devices, and styles.
Many schools, however, avoid the discipline of teaching clear communication, claiming that instruction in composition is ‘oppressive’ and an exercise in imperialism.
Is it possible to have schools which are truly neutral purveyors of thinking and communication skills? Or would it be better for schools to simply and openly state their cultural and social prejudices so that parents and students become informed consumers?
