“Education today should involve more than the study of academic subjects.” How far do you agree?
The world today is fraught with complex challenges that require people from various fields to collaborate and solve by using their joint expertise. Since children and teenagers are deemed to be the future pillars of society, it is imperative that the education system equips them for the knowledge and skills necessary for them to succeed in this rapidly changing world. Unlike in the past, education authorities must not only teach students academic subjects, but also channel their efforts into developing students’ problem-solving skills, safeguarding their mental well-being and preparing them to be lifelong learners. I opine that a holistic educational approach that infuses the instruction of academic subjects with other disciplines is the key to nurturing our young in today’s educational system.
Literacy and numeracy skills still remain relevant and beneficial in today’s world. Notwithstanding the quantum leap in artificial intelligence, students must comprehend and process the information available to them at their fingertips. Thus, it makes sense for teachers to teach their students how to read, write and do arithmetic problems so that the latter are empowered to develop their intellectual capabilities and be discerning consumers of information. Besides English and Mathematics, other academic subjects are essential to help prepare students for the future. For instance, Singapore has introduced new GCE “O” Level subjects for secondary school students, among which Computing and Drama are examples. Computing imbues students with the ability to code, whereas Drama enables them to understand more about the human condition. If the instruction of academic subjects is not emphasised in schools, students would not be able to acquire a baseline of knowledge that would let them navigate today’s complex realities. However, schools must complement their instructional programmes with an intentional approach to groom students in an all-rounded manner.
Schools would do well to impart their students with problem-solving skills. Since problems that plague the world today are often multifaceted in nature, students need to understand myriad perspectives and synthesise knowledge from various disciplines to tackle such challenges effectively. Not only that, they have to learn how to collaborate with their peers because working in cohesive teams allows them to leverage one another’s strengths and conceive more comprehensive solutions. This desire to nurture its young to become competent and cooperative problem-solvers is the reason why the Finnish educational system has introduced Phenomenon-based Learning (PhenoBL) to great success. Students are given the autonomy to select the phenomena and apply inquiry-based strategies to investigate it. Therefore, in today’s globalised world, educators must be mindful to guide their charges to apply hard knowledge from academic subjects in multidisciplinary ways.
Another vital responsibility of schools is equipping students with the skills to manage their well-being. The rapid advancement in technology has led to our young facing stress from multiple sources, such as online bullying and traditional jobs being rendered redundant. Coupled with the fact that many families choose to have less children, students today often find it hard to build solid friendships and confide their problems.
[to be continued]
In an ideal world, schools would be doing all this, but 99% of schools in the world are of the old cookie-cutter model that dates back to an industrial age when the goal was to train factory drones to be obedient workers for 10 hours a day or whatever. obey authority, don't question what you're told, suppress any thoughts that might get you in trouble.
the people in teach the subjects themselves are usually woefully under-equipped; they don't understand what is coming in the future, finance, economics, and emotional health. then on top of that, they have dick head parents to deal with who probably spend 2 hours a day with their own children and want to outsource their whole upbringing to a school, which is basically a government institution.
But in a nutshell, sure, education should also be teaching soft skills, emotional intelligence, and solution-based thinking. The future of work and jobs is probably going to look very different and the education system should also be adapting
Ouch. But there is much truth in what you say. I have often found it ironic how the personnel entrusted to prepare our youth for a volatile dynamic world don’t have actual much real-world experience under their belts. (Some of them teach at the same school from their graduation to retirement.)
💯
Keep it simple. Study and excel in subjects you are interested in. Aim to be the best or be satisfied being in the top 10-20% of that particular field.
Don't just study what you are interested in. Be curious, and become interested in more of what you study.
Lay Your Bricks (Study What Sparks You) → “Pick the clay you actually like molding.” Stack Strong (Excel in That Subject) → “Lay each brick with care so your tower doesn’t wobble.” Capstone or Side Wing (Top vs. Top 10–20%) → “Aim for the gleaming spire if you want the crown, or a solid wing if comfort matters—either way, it’s still Manhattan.”
Lay Unexpected Bricks (Be Curious) → “Grab some odd-shaped clay—you don’t know where it will fit yet.” Shape the Mortar (Grow Interest) → “Smooth the edges, let curiosity glue new bricks to the old ones.” Expand the Skyline (Broaden What You Like) → “Before you know it, your tower has wings and spires you didn’t plan, all made from clay you once ignored.”
Somewhere inside, the human spirit is like a hidden room behind reinforced concrete—mostly inaccessible, but definitely still there.
Great analogies. It was a pleasure to read and digest. You must have put a lot of thought into thinking into education
Building a Company: Roy O. Disney and the Creation of an Entertainment Empire by Bob Thomas ‘(education is a dirty word)
I literally love this post. I think something that is surely and direly missing in Indian schools is the aspect of teaching civic sense , like how it is done in schools of Japan/China and other south East Asian countries. There is in general a lack of civic sense in adults, which I hope will be bridged in couple of generations, hopefully, by educating the children.
It depends who's saying it and what "non-academic" subjects they are pushing to teach.
Many in the US will push to teach kids to focus on historical grievances and political activism. I disagree with these people and think they are damaging the minds of young individuals.
Others may want to teach kids more vocational skills, or life skills like personal finance. I am on the side of these people. I think it's criminal that many students graduate high school and even college and don't know what a bond is, or how to calculate return on investment.
Reminds me of the saying, you may not be interested in politics but politics is interested in you.
Education is inherently political.
I'd hazard to suggest that politics is one way in which society organizes and tries to reconcile its collective biases. Education seeks to systematize them.
Some of the Soviets took this idea to its extreme.
I'd agree or disagree depending what you mean by that.
There's lots to unpack, but there's two main angles:
I agree with both your points.
I'd say that in terms of curriculum choice, I'd call a teacher "political" if their goal is to impart students with a particular political point of view rather than to help them understand multiple points of view from multiple angles
Certainly.
Teach inquiry, not dogma.
Lead your student to the well, but do not try to fill their bucket.
In public schools, there's a lot of very poor quality teaching going on, even in vocational classes. And I'm talking about "good" public schools, not inner-city hellscapes.
For instance, a young person I know was taking a cooking class. It was overall not terrible, but:
Another example - I took a woodworking evening class at a public high school recently. I had high hopes, but the actual teaching was absolutely miserable.
Good teaching, with good, high quality teachers, is very rare in the public school system.
Do you think any worthwhile lessons are conveyed through AP History courses?
We face a similar situation in Singapore. Let me zoom in on financial literacy. We do have those classes, but we sound like a broken record since the main thrust of these lessons tends to be spend below your means and differentiate between needs and wants for both primary and secondary school students. Like duh. How often do you want to repeat the same mundane stuff?
But as a teacher at the frontlines, I dare say that our curriculum lacks the space to incorporate all these useful things. Just this term alone, I had to ensure that all my form class students completed an online lesson on 1) drug prevention, 2) AI literacy and 3) water conservation. Their minds are bombarded left right and centre, and I’m barely surviving in this cramped system myself haha
Financial literacy includes being able understand what an interest rate is, what are the different types of loans, credit cards, checking and savings accounts, retirement plans, insurance, mortgages, business loans, different types of corporations, etc, etc. All of these things, kids come out of school knowing very little about, but these are a part of everyday lfie.
It would be easy to fill a semester of financial literacy, imo.
That's not accurate, no public school in the nation is pushing kids to become political activists. Informing students about history is essential so we don't repeat it, as we are unfortunately seeing right now with the actions being taken by the Trump administration. Just because the facts of history make.white people look bad doesn't mean we shouldn't teach it. The real goal here is to try and rewrite textbooks to keep students from learning about these past atrocities and events so they can be repeated. Also, it's a well known fact that the states that score the worst in the country academically for the most part are red states. The actions the Republicans take in attempts to defund public education and try and force universities to bow to their agenda is all because Republican politicians know that if they can keep these young people uneducated they can convince them to vote for them. The war on public education is real and it's scary. TEACHING HISTORY ACCURATELY IS NOT POLITICAL. ITS SIMPLY PRESENTING THE FACTS.
the problem with history is that people don't agree on facts , outside of the very basic 'person was born in this year, person died this year'. This battle was won/lost.
Russia has changed its school history syllabus like 3 times in a decade and every new version is presented in as the absolute 'truth'
History is about looking at the past and the events and thinking about who reported what and what their bias was/is and how a situation was perceived by all parties , it's not a hard science
It is as hard as any other science. All science is only as relevant as the currently known facts. It all adapts and adjusts over time. It is called progress.
the problem is, one man's facts are another man's lies, outside of very generic history facts like caser was killed in X by X.
Pol Pot thought he was a great guy until he died and didn't think he did anything wrong. People will say Stalin was a great leader and nobody can agree on how many deaths he caused, or if he caused them
I'm sorry, but your arguments are weak and seem uninformed. What does Pol Pots thoughts or opinions have to do with facts. His regime rided the society of educated people. As this one seems to want to do, by the way.
Facts are facts and lies are lies and even if the majority believes the lie - it does not change the facts.
Recorded history is, of course, subject to human fallicy. This is why it is correctible.
pol pot is an example, becuase it shows that people are, generally, not capable of having consensus on subjective things that happened in history and historic figures.
you say a lie is a lie, but what you hold to be a lie, can be held to be a truth by someone else. You think your truth and sense of 'right' is the only one, but it's not, it's yours.
What i think is right and wrong, based on my moral compass, can differ from someone else, doesn't matter how convinced i am.
and when this is put into a school curiculum, it gets messy.
if history was a hard science like maths, a Russian and an american wouldnt have to debate who 'won' the war, a North Korean would agree with a south korean about who started the Korean war.
but it's not, hence history is not a hard science. History studies human events, interpretations, and evidence that can’t be replicated or tested in a lab.
Historians can examine the same evidence and reach different conclusions, depending on their perspective or methodology.
I love history btw, I'm just saying it's not a hard science and, at the end of the day, learning it in school, means you get the government approved version of whatever aspect they are teaching.
All those words to say to you think opinions are facts.
Verbose weakness.