It is fucking dire because its message is so infantile and easy to understand that it is immensely more attractive than reality. — jastopher

But as a teacher it ought to be your duty to nod sagely and ignore those bastards that are clueless and get on with your job for the sake of the next generation.
Box tickers make bad teachers.
Those who can, teach. Those that cannot, lead.

you ask the person to only pick a single purpose — LD Saunders

I think you're reading this into my initial post. I'm not demanding a singular answer or a dissertation, I'm just asking them, conversationally, amongst many other questions, what they think that the purpose of education is. As I've already said, I like to hear a reasoned reply, but not necessarily a prescriptive one. I mean, do you or anyone else think that having chosen to be a teacher, having undergone the necessary training required, and in many cases having years of experience it is reasonable not to have, at least, considered at some point this seemingly relevant question?

I, clearly, do think it's important, and I also think an inability to even attempt an answer, says something about the depth of commitment to a profession that really does require commitment over and above the merely transactional. No less important is that having a global vision of why you do what you provides an axiomatic basis for developing a pedagogy. In order to achieve x,I first need to know what x is before I can approach x.

Imagine two Spanish teachers. One believes that the purpose of his subject is to allow his students to become expert in Spanish linguistics, whilst the other believes that the purpose is to allow allow her students to gain access to other cultures and be at home in a distinct language context. You would expect these two to have wildly differing methodologies since the outcomes they desire are wildly differing.

Sounds a bit like word salad to me. At best weasel words. — charleton

I take it you're not familiar with Berlin's Two Concepts of Liberty.

But as a teacher it ought to be your duty to nod sagely and ignore those bastards that are clueless and get on with your job for the sake of the next generation.
Box tickers make bad teachers.
Those who can, teach. Those that cannot, lead. — charleton

So what's your point?

This is true, but so general as to be useless. — jastopher

No, it is the main activity of a teacher.

Your definition of behavior is too narrow. You take it as whether they are good or bad boys and girls.

Everything that you do, from what books you pick to read to whether you pick your nose in public is part of it.

The purpose of any education is to impart ways of behaving that conform to the needs of the society.
Education in the rain forest tribe is not about sitting in a classroom learning from books but about learning what plants and animals you can eat, how to look after the forest, how to build shelters, in other words the needs of the society.

Today we need engineers and chemists, doctors and nurses, cops and politicians so the education system is geared to making people behave like them.

If "basic knowledge that will be useful in everyday life" is all you have to offer, then you have a problem. — tim wood

Critical thinking, investigation and evaluation, written and oral communication skills are some of the things I call basic knowledge. I expect my high school kids to be able to wipe their own noses and asses.

Most students are already masters of their lives - we might well call it mere survival - but it's what gets them through their days. It's what they trust and know, even if it amounts to their making virtues of their vices. — tim wood

Unfortunately they are not masters of their own lives, they only think they are. Most of them still are very dependent on mom and dad to keep their lives going. I would seriously have to disagree that most of these kids are fit to survive in the real world.
The kids today think that the internet, farcebook, twatter and so on are most important thing their is. Getting likes and followers out ways almost anything for some of them. And the sad thing is that some of them actually believe that there is nothing more they need to know than how to use these damn things.

On the basis of your description, I doubt that you have much to offer there. — tim wood

I will invite you to class one day so that you can judge from a better perspective. Mainly because there is not really a way to give a good description here.

And you forgot two: salesman and manipulator — tim wood

There are a lot more, I did not not really see the need to be exhaustive in the list. :wink:

Critical thinking, investigation and evaluation, written and oral communication skills are some of the things I call basic knowledge. — Sir2u

What is the name of what you teach?

I offered this, above. "A teacher is a person in possession of a body of knowledge, with the skill to impart that knowledge." If you agree with the first part, and you're (apparently) a teacher, then what do you say the body of knowledge is that you can impart?

What is the name of what you teach? — tim wood

If you mean by this, what subjects do I teach, then the answer is quite a few over the years. I have worked mostly in bi-lingual schools so it is not as easy as you might think. Some of the course I have taught are;
English lit, grammar, writing.
Introduction to psychology.
Introduction to sociology.
Cultural history.

If you agree with the first part, and you're (apparently) a teacher, then what do you say the body of knowledge is that you can impart? — tim wood

Not sure exactly what you are asking here.

If you agree with the first part, and you're (apparently) a teacher, then what do you say the body of knowledge is that you can impart?
— tim wood
Not sure exactly what you are asking here. — Sir2u

I try to give my students basic knowledge that will be useful in everyday life. — Sir2u

My understanding of a teacher is that he or she possesses knowledge.... You try to give your students basic knowledge. Is that your body of knowledge? What of Eng. Lit., grammar, writing, psych., sociology, cultural history? It's possible - likely - you're an asset to your school's administration. It's not clear so far you're a teacher. Maybe counselor or coach or any of the other things you mentioned, but not a teacher.

My problem is that I've met good teachers - but very few. I can more-or-less measure the rest by them. The bad ones, and there are too many of those, to a man each thinks he's great! The measure, of course, is Do They Teach? The bad ones don't.

So it's up to you to say: do you make your students better in some sense with Englsh, Psych., Soc., History? Or in basic knowledge?

My understanding of a teacher is that he or she possesses knowledge.... You try to give your students basic knowledge. Is that your body of knowledge? What of Eng. Lit., grammar, writing, psych., sociology, cultural history? — tim wood

It would be impossible for most teachers to go beyond giving students anything more than the basics of their knowledge. How could a teacher that has a university level of education be expected to pass on all of that knowledge to school kids.
Being able to write a proper essay, perform math at a reasonable level, understand that people around the world do not all live the same kinds of life, know that laws exist for reasons, are all necessities, basic knowledge that is needed for students to succeed in university. This is what most teachers try to pass on.
How many kids do you know that have left high school without the basic knowledge that they are going to need to survive?

So it's up to you to say: do you make your students better in some sense with Englsh, Psych., Soc., History? Or in basic knowledge? — tim wood

What did you learn in high school? Was there anything earthshaking about it? Or was it just a basic look at the different areas of human knowledge to give you an opportunity to get a feel for what you are good at?
After leaving high school, were you prepared to go out into the real world and fend for yourself. Most people that don't want jobs at Walmart want to go to university, did you go? Were you prepared for learning at the university. If you were then you probably had good teachers that gave you the basic skills and knowledge that were necessary.
As you said too many teachers don't do a good job, but it is not always their fault. And as universities all over the world are finding out, a lot of the students are not being properly prepared to learn and study at their level.

I have, at least I believe I have, made a difference to the lives of some of my students. I doubt any teacher can claim they made a difference to all of their students. I have presently an ex student at Harvard(on a full scholarship), 2 at the university of Munich, and quiet a few at other good universities around the world including Japan and Korea. Several others have graduated from universities in France, the UK, Switzerland.
I cannot nor will not claim responsibility for any of my ex students being where they are, they got there because that was what they wanted to do. But the first person they look for when they come to visit the school is me. No, I am not bragging. Even the owner and principal are left waiting.

Education is an indoctrination into a world that forbids creativity, individuality, and promotes conformity through competition and measurement of 'progress'. It is the industrial production of adults depressed into compliance with a vacuous and self-destructive world of production/consumption. — unenlightened

Are you referring to another brick in the wall?

I wasn't, but I am an ageing hippy, so they probably read my mind.

No doubt you're as wonderful as you represent. But we're at cross purposes. The OP asks the purpose of education. My approach to the answer to that question is to ask what teachers do, assuming that teachers educate. (I think of teaching and educating as for the moment being similar enough to be synonymous.)

You've self-identified as someone who teaches various subjects - without qualifying yourself as a person in possession of knowledge about these subjects - but that what you teach is "basic knowledge."

We're in a Socratic aporia.. Perhaps simplicity is the shortest path out. Suppose your living required you row your dory off the beach into the ocean to catch fish to sell and to eat. Suppose someone approached you to teach them how to fish. They might ask you what you know, and could you impart that knowledge, teach it. You might answer, "I know how to fish, and I can teach someone how to fish." Similarly with sailing, carpentry, the care of horses, etc. If you will, please answer along these lines. What do you know, that you can teach?

Perhaps simplicity is the shortest path out. — tim wood

I don't think it is. Imparting knowledge, both propositional and 'knowhow' is only one aspect of education. An educational establishment is also a social institution. Children do not in general approach teachers to ask them to teach; rather more so, teachers approach children and ask them to learn. This changes everything. It makes a joy into a duty.

You've self-identified as someone who teaches various subjects - without qualifying yourself as a person in possession of knowledge about these subjects — tim wood

Does it not stand to reason, even by your own definition, that one must be in possession of knowledge to be able to impart it to others? I impart some of my knowledge to the students, it is then their job to learn it.

but that what you teach is "basic knowledge." — tim wood

As I explained before, teachers would not be able to impart all of the knowledge they possess to their students. Much as one might try to do so, not many students would be capable of learning it.

For example, a math teacher should be capable of high level equation solving, working out prime numbers to the thousandth, working out square roots . He might try to teach everything he knows but it is doubtful that he will get past the basics of math. University level math might include things like the square root of 2. A high school teacher would be able to teach about square roots but it is not really likely that the students would grasp the concepts of the square root of 2. So he teaches the basics and prepares the kids to go to university as best he can.

Suppose your living required you row your dory off the beach into the ocean to catch fish to sell and to eat. Suppose someone approached you to teach them how to fish. They might ask you what you know, and could you impart that knowledge, teach it. You might answer, "I know how to fish, and I can teach someone how to fish." — tim wood

But does the fisherman teach the person everything he knows? Would he be able, in a short time, to show the person how the tides, shore lines, water temperature, time of day, type of bait, the depth of the the water, the depth of the bait in the water, the size of the hook and line, the type of boat needed and a lot of other factors that affect the catching of different type of fish? And that is not taking into account which fish to keep and which to throw back for some reason.
Unless he was being paid very well, had plenty of time to dedicate to teaching it and that the person was really, I mean really interested in learning I doubt that his teachings would go beyond the basics. He would try to teach what the person would need to know to catch fish.

What do you know, that you can teach? — tim wood

That would be a long list.
Let's see if I can make a short list of things that are taught both in and out of school.
I am a heavy goods vehicle, heavy machine driver/operator and mechanic. I have taught, although informally, both.
I am a qualified, certified welder, gas and electric. I have trained people to do both.
I have training in technical drawing and have taught that.
I can plot multiple boat's or ship's courses on a chart using radar and GPS. Never had the chance to teach it but I am confident that I could do.
I have a Microsoft certificate that means I can give computer classes, which I am presently going. I am not going to try to teach the kids everything I know because it would be a waste of time. So I teach them the basics of computer literacy that they need to do assignment and that will be useful in university or most of the jobs they get.
I have plenty of knowledge of the English language, grammatical, written and spoken and try to teach it. Some kids just don't get the idea of being bilingual.
I have a certain amount of knowledge about sociology and psychology, not enough to say that it is university level but more than enough for a high school curriculum. I teach what is in the curriculum in a way that applies to peoples lives.

There is a lot of other stuff that I sometimes apply in short practical courses as well but time is short today.

An educational establishment is also a social institution. — unenlightened

And in this sense the purpose of education is to change their behavior to suit the society. Behavior as in the way they live their lives, not as in discipline.

Children do not in general approach teachers to ask them to teach; rather more so, teachers approach children and ask them to learn. This changes everything. It makes a joy into a duty. — unenlightened

Ain't that the truth. So few students nowadays want to ask questions because the fear being shown up for a dunce in front of the other dunces. And to make it worse, now we have to worry about them laughing at each other on the internet.

I wasn't, but I am an ageing hippy, so they probably read my mind. — unenlightened

You're a legend now, unenlightened.

It really depends on the level you are teaching at.

Foremost is the ability to reason.

Ain't that the truth. So few students nowadays want to ask questions because the fear being shown up for a dunce in front of the other dunces. And to make it worse, now we have to worry about them laughing at each other on the internet. — Sir2u

I read some book a while ago about a guy who went to an ivy league school who said that there was competition among the students to constantly ask questions and gain recognition. The point was that it put the Asian students at a disadvantage because their culture demanded that the teachers be respected and listened to, and that it was also disrespectful to the other students to force them to listen to you when there was a more learned professor in the room.

I used to see it in corporate meetings as well. The same guy would always drone on about nothing just to show his great interest in everything corporate to the boss, which was really annoying during the meetings and doubly annoying when he became the boss.

Despite all this, I still have faith that the world is built on a solid foundation of truth, justice, and righteousness upon which this house of cards cannot stand, but that might also be wishful thinking, but I've not given up hope.

I read some book a while ago about a guy who went to an ivy league school who said that there was competition among the students to constantly ask questions and gain recognition. The point was that it put the Asian students at a disadvantage because their culture demanded that the teachers be respected and listened to, and that it was also disrespectful to the other students to force them to listen to you when there was a more learned professor in the room. — Hanover

I am sure that Plato would disagree with the orientals. I do too, even my avatar does.