“Education does not develop autonomously: it tends to be a mirror of society and is seldom at the cutting edge of social change. It is retrospective, even conservative, since it teaches the young what others have experienced and discovered-about the world. The future of education will be shaped not by educators, but by changes in demography, technology and the family. Its ends - to prepare students to live and work in their society - are likely to remain stable, but its means are likely to change dramatically”. “Schools, colleges and universities will be redefined in fundamental ways: who is educated, how they are educated, where they are educated - all are due for upheaval. B Ut their primary responsibility will be much the same as it is now: to teach knowledge of languages, science, history, government, economics, geography, mathematics and the arts, as well as the skills necessary to understand today’s problems and to use its technologies. In the decades ahead, there will be a solid consensus that, as Horace Mann, an American educator, wrote in 1846, “Intelligence is a primary ingredient in the wealth of nations”. In recognition of the power of this idea, education will be directed purposefully to develop intelligence as a vital national resource”. “Even as nations recognize the value of education in creating human capital, the institutions that provide education will come under increasing strain. State systems of education may not survive demographic and technological change. Political upheavals in unstable regions and the case of international travel will ensure a steady flow of immigrants, legal and illegal, from poor nations to rich ones. As tides of immigration sweep across the rich world, the receiving nations have a choice: they can assimilate the newcomers to the home culture, or they can expect a proliferation of cultures within their borders. Early this century, state systems assimilated newcomers and taught them how to fit in. Today social science frowns on assimilation, seeing it as a form of cultural coercion, so state systems of education are likely to eschew cultural imposition. In effect, the state schools may encourage trends that raise doubts about the purpose or necessity of a state system of education”. (Diane Ravieh).

Precis:
Education and society are important for social change. Education informs about previous inventions and discoveries. The future of education depends upon changes in demography, technology and family rather than in educators. Fundamental reforms in educational institutions will be taken but their primary purpose would be the same; to give intellectual education along with learning of social skills for social problems. Such education is regarded important for national progress. State system of education cannot provide that change in education. However, educational institutions may face some problems. In near future, political chaos may compel people to migrate towards developed countries. In past cultural adoption was encouraged for the progress of receiving nation but today it is regarded as cultural coercion and social system will enhance the problem.

Given words: 360
Given words: 127

Topics:
i-Educational progress and social/national progress
ii-Education, as an agent of change

no body checked