WE MUST ABOLISH SCHOOLING?

I recently read the article:  “Why we must abolish schools written by Ivan Illich in  1970.

Resource:

llich, I. (1970, July 2). Why we must abolish schooling. The New York Review of Books, 15(1), 9–15.

In the article, Illich argues that schools, as institutions of bricks and mortar, are inefficient, inequitable and financially non-feasible.  He further asserts that schooling results in neither successful teaching, nor learning.  This article really got under my skin- I have been thinking it for days! 

His data was compelling about the costs of schools, which got me thinking about the evolution of education and the benefit of 40 years of history and hindsight.   Evidence is not hard to find.  If you look around most school properties these days, you are likely to see at least one or two “portable” classrooms, which are physical reminders of the budget restrictions under which schools tend to operate.   I don’t this serves to punctuate the realities of the financial limitations, not Illich’s argument that schools should be abolished but investments must come with innovation, in order to truly be effective. 

In 2016, the Ontario government committed $1.1 billion dollars to upgrade physical learning spaces, most likely because budget restrictions cannot delay much needed upgrading and maintenance indefinitely.  The goal of this public investment is to create better spaces for, you guessed it, LEARNING!   But appropriate, accessible space is not the only issue, especially when enrolment is a moving target, often showing declines.

In my personal context, I began considering ways in which de-schooling may have already taken place to match with Illich’s recommendations of casual or real life learning.  Cooperative education is one of these innovations.  Being able to lift learning out of the institution and into real workplaces has helped cement learning, without the need for set curriculum.  Many students who don’t remember a thing from geography class, remember their co-op learning in vivid detail.  Another development from higher learning are community projects and field placement, where both the host company and the student derive distinctly different, but mutually beneficial results.    While Illich seemed not to believe in credentials of any type, I feel that he would at least respect that learning is recognized beyond the classroom.

Speaking of learning outside the classroom, I think Illich might also approve of the current trend toward prior learning assessment and recognition as a way to prove competencies over credentials.  In my professional context, I work with clients to develop portfolios, and it is a very effective means to proving to others (and yourself!) the competencies you have acquired through standard and non-standard experiences.  In fact, the post secondary institution in which I work has endorsed “co-curricular records” in order to value both curriculum based learning as well as extracurricular involvement and learning.  In this way, I think Illich’s vision is partially realized with recognition of learning opportunities in and outside of institutional learning.

So many questions remain:

How can Canada provide equal access to education, without overburdening taxpayers?

How can institutions be physically more multi-purpose in order be economically efficient?

What other learning opportunities can business and industry provide as “living classrooms?”