Essay On Knowledge Based Education

  • Skill leads to knowledge,not knowledge lead to skill

    When we go to buy a car the engineer there tell us about the car and its system but cant have the skill to do so but a road side can do so as he has skill rather than knowledge and is much better than a well educated engeneer thanks

  • Education is more important but skill is most important

    It is true Our young generation needs to be skilled in order to get employment.It is very much important to get skills and only then we can think of a bright future of a country. Nowadays we usually face this problems that a person is knowledgeable but not skilled enough to do a particular job.

  • Education should be skilled based rather than knowledge based

    In a class all the students may not be excellent in their studies alone so they have other projects in which the weaker students can come up . In our society it is not only knowledge that matters but if u have the skill to do something u can guarantee work

  • Skilled based education

    Yes i support the motion that education should be skilled based rather than knowledge based because the education which does not give any advantage so what is need of that education if a person can do well in skilled based education so he must support the topic skilled based education

  • Yes it's true

    The majority of jobs are in the skilled trades, yet it wouldn’t be hard to build programs
    around the needs of information technology companies, tech start-ups and 21st century
    manufacturing firms. With a strong network of community colleges and online schools and a
    diverse industry base here in Kansas City, our leaders should be making connections with
    initiatives such as Skills for America’s Future a top priority.

  • Debates are mandatory

    Debates are mandatory because today if we have only knowledge its equivalent to having nothing . Todays job industry is mainly focussing on skill based people who can bring success and will prosper with help of skill. I am not saying that education is useless it is usefull but only with the skill to apply them

  • It is true

    Our young generation needs to be skilled in order to get employment.It is very much important to get skills and only then we can think of a bright future of a country. Nowadays we usually face this problems that a person is knowledgeable but not skilled enough to do a particular job.

  • Vocational skills need to be encouraged.

    If the argument is that we should teach more vocational skills in school, then I support that. I see no reason to say the current school system is at all effective. For starters we need to encourage individual initiative, where students who try hard whether academically, vocationally, socially or physically are both looked at in high regard. While those who may not succeed in these categories are encouraged to try harder, possibly through taking courses more centered on these skills. I also say we teach kids more day-to-day skills and knowledge, such as how mortgages work and easy ways to pay them off, sure these kind of things may be talked about now but if we emphasize them then students would be a lot better off in life after high school.

  • Vocational skills need to be encouraged.

    If the argument is that we should teach more vocational skills in school, then I support that. I see no reason to say the current school system is at all effective. For starters we need to encourage individual initiative, where students who try hard whether academically, vocationally, socially or physically are both looked at in high regard. While those who may not succeed in these categories are encouraged to try harder, possibly through taking courses more centered on these skills. I also say we teach kids more day-to-day skills and knowledge, such as how mortgages work and easy ways to pay them off, sure these kind of things may be talked about now but if we emphasize them then students would be a lot better off in life after high school.

  • Skills are needed rather than knowledge

    Yes, I support the motion that education should be skilled based rather than knowledge based. It is very much important to get skills and only then we can think of the bright future of our country. Nowadays, we usually face problems regarding jobs. We can see peoples who have knowledge but are not skilled enough to do that particular job. Therefore skill is more important than knowledge. Practice is the way we can acquire skills which are more important in our lives. Skills are practicing while knowledge is theoretical. If we all unite and spread this message that it will change the society which thinks that knowledge is more important that skill. Skill based education is important as if we have only knowledge and dont posses skills then there will be no value of that knowledge. For Eg. We can see many people having knowledge on electric circuits but unable to put up a fuse in a circuit. Vocational skills should be encouraged in schools s that we can have a better future for our new generations. A student can acquire knowledge by just reading book but he will have to practice to acquire skills which would put his knowledge into work in future. At last i want to say that skill are important for lifetime whereas the knowledge that we gain in our schools are hardly relevant

  • It is a truth, universally acknowledged, that our education system isn't quite up to snuff. And at that point virtually all agreement ceases. There are those on which we might loosely term the "right" of the divide who point to PISA scores, claim that we're in the middle of a crisis and suggest that a return to traditional values is the way forward. Oh, and Free Schools are good too.

    Then there are the proponents of the "left" who think that the current emphasis of schools does not fit us for a future in which compliance will no longer be rewarded.

    Maybe at the heart of this debate is a fundamental disagreement about the curriculum and pedagogy. Should education be about getting students to know more facts or should it be about encouraging them to solve problems? Knowledge or skills?

    I am, by instinct, a constructivist; that is, one who believes that students should construct their own meaning and discover new knowledge by doing. This slots in neatly with the PLTS agenda.

    The more traditional approach is termed "direct instruction", often misrepresented as some sort of Gradgrindian, didactic, teacher-led talking from the front, but is in fact the essence of the modern three (or four) part lesson where the teacher decides the objectives and success criteria; models how tasks should be completed; provides feedback and finally reviews the learning objective.

    Now the bad news for constructivists is that direct instruction is shown by researchers to be the most effective strategy for transmitting knowledge and has the biggest effect on students' grades. So where does that leave discovery learning, problem solving and inquiry based teaching? Are they simply surplus to requirements?

    Well, that's what the "right" would have us believe: students collaborating in teams is messy, time consuming and ineffective. And maybe that's true. But it boils down to what you think the point of education is. Is it to ensure that students take exams that test how good they are at regurgitating knowledge, following instructions and passing exams? Or is it to produce learners who can solve problems; think creatively and compete in a world where white collar jobs can be cheaply outsourced elsewhere?

    Because if you believe in what Ian Gilbert calls The Great Educational Lie (do well at school and you'll get a good job) then passing exams is fine. But if you believe that "to succeed in business you need to break the rules" then we have a responsibility to teach content in a way that also teaches skills, dispositions and competencies needed to make our children indispensible in an uncertain future.

    As usual the answer lies somewhere in the middle ground. Both sides have a point and the best approach lies in making sure we are teaching students knowledge and skills and that they leave school with a fistful of qualifications as well as being prepared for a brave new world in which following instructions won't count for much.

    No one, or at least no one I'd take seriously, advocates content free lessons or claims that knowledge is not worth having. Cognitive psychologist Daniel Willingham says that students don't like school because teachers are always trying to make them think and that the human brain just isn't that good at thinking. In fact it's wired to help us avoid having to think: almost everything we do is a product of stuff we hold in long-term memory, which allows to literally act without thinking. If you accept this then it's entirely reasonable that in order to perform any kind of skill efficiently (driving, writing essays, solving quadratic equations etc) we need to know how to do it deep down in our souls.

    As an English teacher I rock at writing essays because I write so many of the damn things and have an expert knowledge of how to do it well. Knowledge and skills are inseparable. You can't have one without the other.

    So how to square this circle? One idea is to use SOLO taxonomy to design learning experiences which focus on acquiring knowledge and then the skill of applying this new knowledge in new and interesting ways.

    As learning progresses it becomes more complex. SOLO (Structure of Observed Learning Outcomes) is a way to classify learning outcomes in terms of their complexity, enabling us to assess students' work in terms of how interesting it is rather than whether it's right or wrong.

    To begin with we will have a few unconnected pieces of knowledge which we can apply to a task, but as our understanding grows we become able to relate this knowledge to the whole and then to see how this information could be used to connect with other seemingly unrelated ideas.

    It's daft to simply ask students to tell us what we've already told them. Much better if they tell us how they could apply what they've learnt. They should be able to do this if we start with the outcomes we intend students to learn and make sure teaching and assessment match these outcomes. Outcome statements need to use verbs (apply, explain, evaluate etc.) which describe the activities that students need to undertake in order to meet the intended outcome. In this system learning is constructed by what the students do, not what us teachers do. The SOLO taxonomy helps to map levels of understanding that can be built into the intended learning outcomes and to create assessment criteria which are based not so much on what students know as on how skilled they are in applying that knowledge.

    Confused? Here's a handy introductory lesson that can be successfully used with almost any group using Solo Taxonomy based on the X Factor!

    • David Didau has been teaching for 12 years and is currently Head of English at Priory Community School in Weston-super-Mare. He keeps his own counsel on his Learningspy blog and you can follow him on Twitter @LearningSpy

    Read David's blog on the case for teaching texting here.

    This content is brought to you by Guardian Professional. Sign up to the Guardian Teacher Network to get access to over 70,000 pages of teaching resources and join our growing community.

    Could you be one of our bloggers?

    Do you have something you want to share with colleagues – a resource of your own and why it works well with your students, or perhaps a brilliant piece of good practice in teaching or whole school activity that you know about it? If so please get in touch. If you would like to blog on the Guardian Teacher Network please email emma.drury@theguardian.com and please don't be shy about commenting on blogs on this page.

    0 Thoughts to “Essay On Knowledge Based Education

    Leave a comment

    L'indirizzo email non verrà pubblicato. I campi obbligatori sono contrassegnati *