# data[].attributes.headline
Purpose and perspective on inclusion of Social Science curriculum in schools - a look at the changing course

# data[].attributes.subject
Purpose and perspective on inclusion of Social Science curriculum in schools - a look at the changing course

# data[].attributes.body
I always questioned the relevance, purpose and broader outcome of including social science in curriculum and then expecting students to mug up the whole content and vomit it out in examination, without analysing or reflecting on it. This article sheds light on the some of the issues confronted by NCERT and challenged by many authors and also elucidates why and how NCERT Social Science curriculum has undergone changes over the years in its structure and content. According to me, the article though undeniably substantiates the need to include social science studies, it is restrictive in providing a way out to do away with rot memorisation of social science content. However, the article is very helpful and authentic in charting out the journey of reforms made in social science curriculum and its criticism by different scholars. Furthermore, the article also discusses the inefficacy of current nature of pedagogy and curriculum of social science on the ground that learners find it difficult to associate the content with their real life (especially while learning History). Besides, it questions the need to include recent events (in view of inclusion of disaster management in Geography) where there is no backed up research to prove that including a topic will lead to specific outcomes. I found the article a significant study to understand how social science curriculum has been shaped up to its current form but still remains deficient in justifying the need to burden learners with load of content. In my view, instead of assessing how well learners can memorize content and reproduce it in their answer sheets, learners should be engaged in meaningful, significant discussions on historical events, civic responsibilities and political structure and our relationship with our environment. Classroom learning of social science needs to be focused on debates and discussions, role plays, analytical study of historical events, developments in economy and other topics which help us understand what has shaped our attitudes and identities today and why the society functions the way it functions.

# data[].attributes.body
Today’s child has lot of exposure coming from all kinds of gadgets he grows with. Parents are occupied with a desire to provide the most comfortable life to their kids,leaving very little time for value education. This becomes the responsibility of the school to inculcate ethical values in them as they spend most of their time at school.Character education should be an integral part of the curriculum.It is particularly important for the children as they will face many opportunities and dangers as they grow up.

This article informs about the need of character education , the role of teacher, school and parents ,implementation and the activities which we can take up in the classroom through academic subjects to foster moral reasoning in our learners.

# data[].attributes.body
Learning to learn is the key :
http://www.unesco.org/education/pdf/15_15.pdf

# data[].attributes.body
An eye opening article about the skills we teach and the requirements of the unknown future. The article focuses on the dilemma of teachers in terms of providing knowledge and the fact that knowledge not used for long is forgotten, hence wasted. How many of us remember what we learnt in primary school? Except the basic skills of reading, writing and Math, we hardly remember the so called content.

# data[].attributes.headline
It is my ardent belief that a school culture needs to be built in tandem with the essential skills, attitudes and beliefs we want our children to mirror. In keeping with the rapid changes in the world, it is  integral that we inculcate a culture of 'resilience' in an honest attempt to make our generation 'future ready'. My particular favorite is where the author reinforces the value of growth over the value of perfection. If we as educators are able to pave the way for our children who see merit in adopting this mindset, it would go a long way in not only fostering self-belief,sustaining them as life long learners but also facing unforeseen challenges.                        *Watch out for the activities ...

# data[].attributes.subject
It is my ardent belief that a school culture needs to be built in tandem with the essential skills, attitudes and beliefs we want our children to mirror. In keeping with the rapid changes in the world, it is  integral that we inculcate a culture of 'resilience' in an honest attempt to make our generation 'future ready'. My particular favorite is where the author reinforces the value of growth over the value of perfection. If we as educators are able to pave the way for our children who see merit in adopting this mindset, it would go a long way in not only fostering self-belief,sustaining them as life long learners but also facing unforeseen challenges.                        *Watch out for the activities ...

# data[].attributes.body
https://positivepsychology.com/teaching-resilience/

# data[].attributes.body
Designed Curriculum  should prepare each and every child to play his or her role in best possible way in  future by using learning and experiences of the past.That, s why I selected this article to share.

# data[].attributes.body
https://theoakdalepost.com/feature/is-school-teaching-you-the-skills-youll-need-to-succeed-in-life/

This article accurately brings to light the frustrations that many students feel with their school education. While most schools focus well on classical subjects like Maths, Science, Languages etc.. they fail to include practical studies that students can appreciate in their daily lives, like cooking, managing money, household repairs etc. All of this is essential for a child's holistic development

# data[].attributes.body
http://www.alignthoughts.com/are-schools-teaching-you-the-real-life-skills-you-need/

# data[].attributes.headline
We need to teach children how to think, not what to think

# data[].attributes.subject
We need to teach children how to think, not what to think

# data[].attributes.body
The article belongs to Gary Keogh, a researcher in Religions & Theology, University of Manchester. He proposes in the article that in order to make our learners autonomous in decision making, we should teach them how to think rather than directly injecting in them what is right or wrong in which case we as teachers might try to seep through their natural process of thinking.

In order to make them socially progressive, we should allow students to take their call in deciding about acceptance or rejection of any ethical issue. They ought to explore – as a substitute than be informed – how moral selections are made and what issues must be taken into account.

Authenticity or applicability of the information given to the students in the form of direct infusion by the teachers may be in question too when looked in different contexts. We have rather no right to hinder their brain development, potential of which can never be underrated.

What we can do at our part is we can make them autonomous so that they take well informed, well thought, rational decisions suitable to their needs and also are able to take accountability of the same and are ready to bear the consequences.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Should teachers dictate what's right or wrong? Blackboard via pupunkkop/Shutterstock

In its ideal form, education should be socially progressive. We teach the next generation of scientists, engineers and medical researchers who will improve our quality of life: they will learn more about the world, build better and safer modes of transport, cure diseases and overcome scientific boundaries.

We also want education to lead to a more ethically refined society. So from a young age, we teach children lessons in morality. But this is easier said than done, because of the quite subtle difference between teaching right and wrong - and teaching how to discern what's right and wrong. If we want education to be truly socially progressive, then teaching students right and wrong can be counter-productive: it can be socially inhibiting and even regressive.

Growing moral consensus

I am an optimist. I believe that, on the whole, humanity is getting better and becoming more ethical. This optimism is of course often called into question when we see poignant examples of violence and blatant disregard for human life.

But progress has been made and many moral problems have essentially been solved: slavery and gender equality for instance, are no longer moral questions. This is not to say that gender inequality or slavery no longer exist, but in general, a consensus has been reached that both must be abolished.

Senseless violence and unjust economic policies still occur, but doesn't more outrage ensue now than in previous generations? Look too to the establishment of a human rights charter, the Geneva conventions and the United Nations. However flawed these endeavours may seem to some, they represent points where humanity tried to establish a moral consensus or is still trying to work towards one.

Moral failings of the future

So how can education be a vehicle for this progress to continue? Eventually, we will need to rely on the children we are teaching to point out the moral failings of our generation in the same way that we can now point out how our ancestors were wrong about slavery, women's rights and other questions.

This might be an uncomfortable process as our successive generations ascend into public leadership, political life or academia and knock us off our high moral horses. If we really wish to facilitate social progression, then we cannot teach in ethics classes what is or isn't right from our perspective, because that would hinder this progression.

Teachers need to be careful not to allow their ethical views to seep through their practice. Of course there are questions which are uncontroversial - such as racism is bad - but there are a lot of unsettled moral questions such as abortion and religious freedom.

Teachers might not always be 'right'

Many teachers feel that they have the "right" answer on such issues and feel they can promote these views in the same manner as uncontroversial questions. They feel they have a duty to transfer their views on religious freedom or abortion in the same way that they feel they have a duty to transfer the more established moral norms of racial equality.

This is not just bad practice, but it is offensive to the very nature of what education should be about. Socrates, all the way back in ancient Greece recognised the perils of transferring knowledge and values from teacher to student. As he proclaimed: "Education is a kindling of a flame, not the filling of a vessel". So education should not be just about the transferal of information, especially when it comes to moral values.

Education and teaching can be patronising at the best of times. They are too often geared towards rote-learning to succeed in exams and earn a place at university. We take as a given that the information we teach is correct, without thinking too much about whether we are teaching the next Einstein or Newton. Who is to say that our students won't revolutionise the mathematical theories we currently teach in schools?

When it comes to ethics, it is even more likely that our society is "doing it wrong" and it will be the generation of students we are teaching that will (hopefully) point this out to us in the future. In order for this to occur, education should provide a training ground of sorts for students to hone their critical, rational, and ethical capacities.

They should explore - rather than be told - how ethical decisions are made and what considerations should be taken into account. Lessons in considering empathy, rational argument, previous models of normative ethics such as utilitarianism, and libertarianism should take the place of learning what is right and what is wrong. In this sense, we must start teaching children how to think, and not what to think.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
We need to teach children how to think, not what to think

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
In its ideal form, education should be socially progressive. We teach the next generation of scientists, engineers and medical researchers who will improve our quality of life: they will learn more about the world, build better and safer modes of transport, cure diseases and overcome scientific boundaries.

# data[].attributes.headline
When Guidance and Curriculum Collaborate

# data[].attributes.subject
When Guidance and Curriculum Collaborate

# data[].attributes.body
The prevalent mostly insular approaches of teaching Science in Schools have created generations of learners who lack the inherent inquisitiveness so paramount to scientific investigation. This paper offers some suggestions as to how inquiry based Science Teaching could be the way forward. Though one must guard against complete adherence to said ideas in the article. After all, one must be conscientious and take it with a grain of salt. Yet, importance of inquiry based learning cannot be ignored.

# data[].attributes.body
This article talks about what to teach the students to make them future ready. The traditional system of closed schools with specific subjects and specific teachers is not going to work in the future rather the integrated system of subjects, schools, society is the need for the future. Making the students flexible and adaptable and capable to think for themselves is more important than making them knowledgeable who score good grade in the assessments.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
How should countries equip people to understand, engage with and shape a changing world? This is the age of accelerations, a speeding-up of human experience through the compound impact of disruptive forces on every aspect of our lives. It is also a time of political contestation. The priority of the wider international community is to reconcile the needs and interests of individuals, communities and nations within an equitable framework based on open borders, free markets and a sustainable future. But where disruption has brought a sense of dislocation, political forces emerge that are offering closed borders, the protection of traditional jobs and a promise to put the interests of today's generation over those of the future.

In these times, we can no longer teach people for a lifetime. In these times, education needs to provide people with a reliable compass and the navigation tools to find their own way through an increasingly complex and volatile world. As future jobs will pair computer intelligence with the human knowledge, skills, character qualities and values, it will be our capacity for innovation, our awareness, our ethical judgement and our sense of responsibility that will equip us to harness machines to shape the world for the better. This is the main conclusion OECD countries working on a new framework for curriculum design, referred to as 'Education 2030', have drawn. Not surprisingly then, schools increasingly recognise the need for fostering ethics, character and citizenship and aim to develop a range of social and emotional skills, such as empathy, compassion, mindfulness, purposefulness, responsibility, collaboration and self-regulation.

In their Education 2030 framework for curriculum design, OECD countries have put creating new value, dealing with tensions and dilemmas and developing responsibility at the center. Creating new value, as a transformative competency, connotes processes of creating, making, bringing into being and formulating; and outcomes that are innovative, fresh and original, contributing something of intrinsic positive worth. It suggests entrepreneurialism in the broader sense of being ready to venture, to try, without anxiety about failure. The constructs that underpin the competence are imagination, inquisitiveness, persistence, collaboration and self-discipline. Young people's agency to shape the future will partly hinge on their capacity to create new value.

In a structurally imbalanced world, the imperative of reconciling diverse perspectives and interests, in local settings with sometimes global implications, will require young people to become adept in handling tensions, dilemmas and trade-offs. Striking the balance, in specific circumstances, between competing demands - of equity and freedom, autonomy and community, innovation and continuity and efficiency and democratic process - will rarely lead to an either/or choice or even a single solution. Individuals will need to think in a more integrated way that avoids premature conclusions and attends to interconnections. The constructs that underpin the competence include empathy, adaptability and trust.

The perception and assessment of what is right or wrong, good and bad in a specific situation is about ethics. It implies asking questions related to norms, values, meanings, and limits.

The third transformative competency is a prerequisite of the other two. Dealing with novelty, change, diversity and ambiguity assumes that individuals can 'think for themselves' with a robust moral compass. Equally, creativity and problem-solving require the capacity to consider the future consequences of one's actions, to evaluate risk and reward and to accept accountability for the products of one's work. This suggests a sense of responsibility, and moral and intellectual maturity, with which a person can reflect upon and evaluate their actions in the light of their experiences and personal and societal goals; what they have been taught and told; and what is right or wrong. The perception and assessment of what is right or wrong, good and bad in a specific situation is about ethics. It implies asking questions related to norms, values, meanings, and limits. Central to this competency is the concept of self-regulation, in the spheres of personal, interpersonal and social responsibility, drawing on constructs of self-control, self-efficacy, responsibility, problem-solving and adaptability.

The challenge is that developing these qualities requires a very different approach to learning and teaching and a different calibre of teachers. Where teaching is about imparting prefabricated knowledge, countries can afford low teacher quality. And when teacher quality is low, governments tend to tell their teachers exactly what to do and exactly how they want it done, using an industrial organisation of work to get the results they want. Today the challenge is to make teaching a profession of advanced knowledge workers who own their profession and who work with a high level of professional autonomy and within a collaborative culture.

The past was about received wisdom, the future is about user-generated wisdom. The future needs to be integrated - with an emphasis on the integration of subjects and the integration of students.

But such people will not work as exchangeable widgets in schools organised as Tayloristic workplaces that rely mainly on administrative forms of accountability and bureaucratic command and control systems to direct their work. To attract the people they need, modern school systems need to transform the form of work organisation in their schools to a professional form of work organisation in which professional norms of control replace bureaucratic and administrative forms of control. The past was about received wisdom, the future is about user-generated wisdom.

The past was also divided - with teachers and content divided by subjects and students separated by expectations of their future career prospects. And the past could be isolated - with schools designed to keep students inside, and the rest of the world out, with a lack of engagement with families and a reluctance to partner with other schools. The future needs to be integrated - with an emphasis on the integration of subjects and the integration of students. It also needs to be connected - so that learning is closely related to real-world contexts and contemporary issues and open to the rich resources in the community. Powerful learning environments are constantly creating synergies and finding new ways to enhance professional, social and cultural capital with others. They do that with families and communities, with higher education, with businesses, and especially with other schools and learning environments. This is about creating innovative partnerships. Isolation in a world of complex learning systems will seriously limit potential.

Instruction in the past was subject-based, instruction in the future needs to be more project based, building experiences that help students think across the boundaries of subject-matter disciplines. The past was hierarchical, the future is collaborative, recognising both teachers and students as resources and co-creators.

Now schools need to use the potential of technologies to liberate learning from past conventions and connect learners in new and powerful ways . . .

In the past, different students were taught in similar ways. Now school systems need to embrace diversity with differentiated approaches to learning. The goals of the past were standardisation and compliance, with students educated in age cohorts, following the same standard curriculum, all assessed at the same time. The future is about building instruction from student passions and capacities, helping students to personalise their learning and assessment in ways that foster engagement and talents, and its about encouraging students to be ingenious. School systems need to better recognise that individuals learn differently, and differently at different stages of their lives. They need to foster new forms of educational provision that take learning to the learner in ways that allow people to learn in the ways that are most conducive to their progress. We need to take to heart that learning is not a place but an activity. As well as countering educational disadvantage, this will capitalise on the strengths of the most talented students.

In the past, schools were technological islands, with technology often limited to supporting existing practices, and students outpacing schools in their adoption and consumption of technology. Now schools need to use the potential of technologies to liberate learning from past conventions and connect learners in new and powerful ways, with sources of knowledge, with innovative applications and with one another.

In the past, the policy focus was on the provision of education, now it needs to be on outcomes, shifting from looking upwards in the bureaucracy towards looking outwards to the next teacher, the next school and the next education system. In the past, administrations emphasised school management, now the focus needs to be on instructional leadership, with leaders supporting, evaluating and developing teacher quality and the design of innovative learning environments. The past was about quality control, the future is about quality assurance.

The challenge is that such system transformation cannot be mandated by government, which leads to surface compliance, nor can it be built solely from the ground. Governments can't do the innovations in the classroom, but they can help in building and communicating the case for change and articulating a guiding vision for 21st century learning. Government has a key role as platform or broker, as stimulator, incentiviser and enabler, and it can focus resources, set a facilitative policy climate and use accountability and reporting modifications to encourage new practice.

But education needs to better identify key agents of change and champion them and to find more effective approaches for scaling and disseminating innovations. That is also about finding better ways to recognise, reward and give exposure to success, to do whatever is possible to make it easier for innovators to take risks and encourage the emergence of new ideas. The past was about public versus private, the future is about public with private.

These challenges look daunting, but many education systems are now well on their way to find innovative responses to ensuring that the next generation is learning for their future, not our past.

Andreas Schleicher is Director for Education and Skills, and Special Advisor on Education Policy to the Secretary-General at the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). As a key member of the OECD's Senior Management team, he supports the Secretary-General's strategy to produce analysis and policy advice that advances economic growth and social progress. In addition to policy and country reviews, he oversees the Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA), the OECD Survey of Adult Skills (PIAAC), the OECD Skills Strategy, the OECD Teaching and Learning International Survey (TALIS), and the development and analysis of benchmarks on the performance of education systems (INES).

Mr. Schleicher is the recipient of numerous honours and awards, including the "Theodor Heuss" prize, awarded in the name of the first President of the Federal Republic of Germany for "exemplary democratic engagement". He holds an honorary Professorship at the University of Heidelberg.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Educating students for their future, not our past

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
How should countries equip people to understand, engage with and shape a changing world? This is the age of accelerations, a speeding-up of human experience through the compound impact of disruptive forces on every aspect of our lives. It is also a time of political contestation.

# data[].attributes.body
Something that our children need to learn before the need arises - home economics.

# data[].attributes.headline
Soft skills , a combination of attitudes, attributes, skills , values and competencies enable us lead a life better.

# data[].attributes.subject
Soft skills , a combination of attitudes, attributes, skills , values and competencies enable us lead a life better.

# data[].attributes.body
Published in 2014, (5 years ago!!), this is an interesting perspective that is questioning some of the structures and systems we follow in our schools.
The writer, Ingvi Hrannar Omarsson is an elementary school teacher is Iceland, an Apple distinguished educator, certified Innovator by Google for Education. He has his own blog and podcast- http://ingvihrannar.com/

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Saying that it has always been this way, doesn't count as a legitimate justification as to why it should stay that way. Teachers and administrators all over the world are doing amazing things, but some of the things we are still doing, despite all the new solutions, research and ideas out there are, to put it mildly, incredible.

I'm not saying we should just make the current system better... we should change it into something else.

I have compiled a list of 14 things that are obsolete in 21st-century schools and it is my hope that this will inspire lively discussions about the future of education.

1. Computer Rooms

The idea of taking a whole class to a computer room with outdated equipment, once a week to practice their typewriting skills and sending them back to the classroom 40 minutes later, is obsolete.

Computers or technology shouldn't just be a specific subject, that's not sufficient anymore but rather it should be an integral part of all the subjects and built into the curriculum.

2. Isolated classrooms

Classrooms can be isolated in two ways. One where parents, teachers or guests are not welcome because the door and drapes are always shut... which has the words "Don't come in here" written all over it. The other way is being isolated to all the knowledge outside the 4 walls. For example from the internet, videos, blogs, websites, and visits from authors or scientists through Skype, to name a few.

Tony Wagner, the author of the Global Achievement Gap says: "Isolation is the enemy of improvement". The classroom should be open, teachers should be able to walk in and learn from each other, parents should visit often, f.x. with so-called Extra Open Schooldays (where all parents are encouraged to visit classrooms anytime during the day). Isolated classrooms are therefore obsolete.

3. Schools that don't have WiFi

Schools that don't have a robust WiFi network for staff and students are not only missing a big change for teaching and learning but robbing the students of access to knowledge and also limiting their chances to learn about the internet and using technology in a safe way.

21st-century schools make it possible for students and staff to learn anywhere, anytime and schools that don't allow that are obsolete.

4. Banning phones and tablets

Taking phones and tablets from students instead of using them to enhance learning is obsolete. We should celebrate the technology students bring and use them as learning tools.

Phones are no longer just devices to text and make phone calls... when they were, then banning them was OK. Today there is more processing power in the average cellular telephone than NASA had access to when they sent a man to the moon in 1969. Yet most students only know how to use these devices for social media and playing games.

Today you can edit a movie, make a radio show, take pictures, make posters, websites, blog, tweet as a character from a book, have class conversations over TodaysMeet and Google most answers on a test with the device in your pocket. We should show our students the learning possibilities & turn these distractions into learning opportunities that will reach far outside the classroom.

5. Tech director with an administrator access

Having one person responsible for the computer system, working from a windowless office in the school basement, surrounded by old computers, updates the programs and tells the staff what tech tools they can and cannot use... is obsolete.

Today we need technology co-ordinators that know what teachers and students need to be successful and solve problems instead of creating barriers. Someone who helps people to help themselves by giving them responsibility and finds better and cheaper ways to do things.

6. Teachers that don't share what they do

Teachers who work silently, don't tweet, blog and discuss ideas with people around the world are obsolete. Teachers are no longer working locally but globally and it's our job to share what we do and see what others are doing. If a teacher is no longer learning then he shouldn't be teaching other people.

We should all be tweeting, blogging and sharing what works and doesn't work, get and give advice to and from co-workers around the world. We should constantly be improving our craft because professional development isn't a 3-hour workshop once a month but a lifelong process.
"We do not learn from experience...we learn from reflecting on experience." -John Dewey
7. Schools that don't have Facebook or Twitter

Schools that think putting a news article on the school website every other week and publish a monthly newsletter is enough to keep parents informed are obsolete.

The school should have a Facebook page, share news and information with parents, have a Twitter account and their own hashtag, run their own online TV channel where students film, edit and publish things about school events.

If you don't tell your story, someone else will.

8. Unhealthy cafeteria food

School cafeterias that look and operate almost like fast food restaurants where staff and students get a cheap, fast and unhealthy meals are obsolete.

A few schools in Iceland and Sweden have turned almost completely to organic foods and given thought into the long term benefit of healthy food rather than the short term savings of the unhealthy. For example at Stora Hammar school in Sweden, 90% of the food served is organic.

Children should put the food on their own plate, clean up after themselves and even do the dishes. Not because it saves the school money on the workforce but because it is a part of growing up and learning about responsibility. What 21st-century schools should be doing as well is growing their own fruits and vegetables where students water them and learn about nature. Setting up a farm to feed students would be optimal, but if that is not an option (for example in big city schools) then they can at last set up a window farm in some of the school windows.

The goal of providing students a healthy meal is not only to give them enough nutrition to last the school day but to make healthy food a normal part of their daily life and get them to think about nutrition which is something that will benefit them for the rest of their lives.

9. Starting school at 8 o'clock for teenagers

Research has shown over and over again that teenagers do better and feel better in schools that start later. Often parents or administrators get in the way of that change. Research (f.x. from the The Journal of Developmental & Behavioral Pediatrics and University of Minnesota - video) show that delaying school start as little as 50 minutes and making it longer by 30 minutes instead has a positive effect both on learning and activities after school. Schools that don't do this are obsolete.

Starting later is easy and teachers could use the extra time in the morning to prepare class... it's a win-win situation.

10. Buying poster-, website- and pamphlet design for the school

When your school needs a poster, pamphlet or a new website they shouldn't buy the service from somewhere else (although that can sometimes be the case) and have students do it instead. In the best schools of the future, they will be the ones doing it as a real project that has meaning and as a collaborative project in language and art....using technology.

11. Traditional libraries

Libraries that only contain books and chess tables are obsolete.

A 21st-century library should be at the heart of the school and a place where both students and staff can come in to relax, read, get advice, access powerful devices, edit videos, music, print in 3D and learn how to code to name a few. This 21st-century learning space should give people an equal chance to use these devices and access information. Otherwise, these libraries will turn into museums where people go to look at all the things we used to use.

12. All students get the same

Putting kids in the same class because they are born in the same year is obsolete. School systems were originally set up to meet the needs of industrialism. Back then we needed people to work in factories, conformity was good and nobody was meant to excel or be different in that environment. That doesn't fit our needs today, let alone the future but many schools are still set up like the factories they were meant to serve 100 years ago.

We should increase choice, give children support to flourish in what interests them and not only give them extra attention to the things they're bad at. In most schools, if you are good at art but bad in german you get german lessons to get to par with the other students instead of excelling at art... All even, all the same!

Education should be individualized, students should work in groups regardless of age and their education should be built around their needs.

13. One-Professional development-workshop-fits-all

A school that just sends the entire staff to a workshop once a month where everyone gets the same is obsolete. Professional development is usually top-down instead of the ground up where everyone gets what they want and need. This is because giving everyone (including students) what they need and want takes time & money.

With things like Twitter, Pinterest, articles online, books, videos, co-operation & conversations employees can personalize their professional development. (Read about my article on Personalized Professional Development here)

14. Standardized tests to measure the quality of education

Looking at standardized tests to evaluate whether or not children are educated or not is the dumbest thing we can do and gives us a shallow view of learning.

The outcomes, although moderately important, measure only a small part of what we want our kids to learn and by focusing on these exams we are narrowing the curriculum. Alfie Kohn even pointed out a statistically significant correlation between high grades on standardized tests and a shallow approach to learning.

The world today and the needs of society are completely different from what they used to be. We are not only training people to work locally but globally. With standardized tests, like PISA, we are narrowing the curriculum, and all the OECD countries are teaching the same thing. Because of that, we all produce the same kind of workers, outdated workers, to work in factories. People who can comply, behave and be like everybody else.

In the global world today it is easy to outsource jobs to someone who is willing to do the same job, just as fast for less money. Therefore we need creative people that can do something else and think differently.

Andreas Schleicher (2010) said:

"Schools have to prepare students for jobs that have not yet been created, technologies that have not yet been invented and problems that we don't know will arise."

Standardized education might have been the answer once but saying that it's obsolete is putting it mildly and is only a way to try to repair the broken system. The results of those tests are, according to Daniel Pink (A Whole New Mind, 2005) in direct contradiction to the skills we need today. Those skills are for example design, story, symphony, empathy, play, and meaning.

We should be solving real problems, asking questions that matter instead of remembering and repeating facts. Adults' accomplishments are linked far more strongly to their creativity than IQ ( source) and we should be celebrating diverse knowledge and interest instead of trying to standardize knowledge and skills.

I wonder if schools would finally change their direction if we designed a new standardize test that wouldn't measure numeracy, science, and literacy but empathy, creative thinking and communication skills... Maybe that is all we need.

Final thoughts

All the education systems on the planet are being reformed, but I don't think reform is what we need. We need a revolution and change the education system into something else. It isn't an easy task, but as S.E. Phillips once said:

Anything worth having is worth fighting for.

Doing something new and getting poor results on the old test shouldn't surprise anyone. What is the point of doing something new and different if we get the same results on standardized tests... then we might as well just do factory schooling, conform and comply.

"If I had asked the people what they wanted, they would have said faster horses"

That is exactly what we are doing today. We are asking our students to remember more, write better and repeat faster than before... just like we wanted the faster horse when really we should be asking for the car. Sure the car wasn't better than the horse in the beginning and our education system won't be perfect either. It will never be perfect, it should be constantly evolving and we should strive to make it better every day.

I don't know what a perfect education system looks like, and don't think it even exists. But I believe that if we talk, try something different, fail forward, investigate and share what we do, not only locally but globally, we can get a lot closer.

If you want to see a change in education, you should start in your own classroom.

"Education can be encouraged from the top-down but can only be improved from the ground up" - Sir Ken Robinson
Icelandic Educator. Creator. Designer. Stanford Graduate School of Education Alumn
Ingvi Hrannar Ómarsson

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
14 things that are obsolete in 21st century schools

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Saying that it has always been this way, doesn't count as a legitimate justification as to why it should stay that way. Teachers and administrators all over the world are doing amazing things, but some of the things we are still doing, despite all the new solutions, research and ideas out there are, to put [...]

# data[].attributes.body
The great importance of the 6 Cs have thoroughly been established. Everyone of us is familiar with the what of them. Still, when it comes to the how of enabling students to develop such competencies is an altogether different discussion in itself. One of the research based practices is problem based learning to develop communication and critical thinking in young children. You need to catch them while they are still young. The present article offers an in-depth look at such a scenario. I believe this is one of the whats we can focus on in our schools.

# data[].attributes.headline
I do agree that schools are not teaching all the necessary lifeskills to students. For example a student who gets an A everytime may not be as competent in the real world as a students who gets a lower grade. Knowledge is important but how to translate that knowledge into work is skill which needs to be learnt and mastered. From my individual experience I do feel that it is the average child who struggles and emerged victorious in most cases and sometimes we're surprised to see that the students who did extremely well at school are placed not so well in life.

# data[].attributes.subject
I do agree that schools are not teaching all the necessary lifeskills to students. For example a student who gets an A everytime may not be as competent in the real world as a students who gets a lower grade. Knowledge is important but how to translate that knowledge into work is skill which needs to be learnt and mastered. From my individual experience I do feel that it is the average child who struggles and emerged victorious in most cases and sometimes we're surprised to see that the students who did extremely well at school are placed not so well in life.

# data[].attributes.headline
The article highlights the importance of building soft skills among students. The benefits of having soft skills is elaborated. I also feel that students need to manage emotions and work in teams in the coming times. Hence the need to build these skills.  

# data[].attributes.subject
The article highlights the importance of building soft skills among students. The benefits of having soft skills is elaborated. I also feel that students need to manage emotions and work in teams in the coming times. Hence the need to build these skills.  

# data[].attributes.body
This article gives an insight into the problems the students face in social sciences. Since teachers are not trained to teach they are not able to do justice to the subject. The real life connection , I feel, should be there in every subject otherwise the purpose of teaching is just confined to clearing the examinations. If we want our students to be future ready we have to teach them to face the struggles of real life and be adaptable and flexible to mould themselves to everchanging world

# data[].attributes.body
Those who wish to understand vision outlined in NCF 2005 regarding purpose of including Social Science in school, this document offers an insightful read. It further brought me to an understanding though NCF had a thoughtful consideration behind teaching social sciences in school, somewhere delivery of instruction and nature of learning of this subject deviated from the  vision and purpose.

# data[].attributes.headline
"If we change how teachers, parents and even students themselves react when students struggle, then we can dramatically improve how they learn. Neuroscience and educational research shows that times of struggle are some of the most productive times for brains, and they should be celebrated. If students face struggle and think that it is a time of challenge and brain growth, rather than assuming they are failures and not “math people” — not “science people” or “history people” or simply incapable of any subject — their paths to learning will change. This takes different messages from teachers and parents, especially around times of struggle."

# data[].attributes.subject
"If we change how teachers, parents and even students themselves react when students struggle, then we can dramatically improve how they learn. Neuroscience and educational research shows that times of struggle are some of the most productive times for brains, and they should be celebrated. If students face struggle and think that it is a time of challenge and brain growth, rather than assuming they are failures and not “math people” — not “science people” or “history people” or simply incapable of any subject — their paths to learning will change. This takes different messages from teachers and parents, especially around times of struggle."

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
There Is a Better Way to Teach Students with Learning Disabilities

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Scientists now believe that our brains have incredible potential for change, write Stanford's Jo Boaler and Tanya LaMar

# data[].attributes.headline
How Schools Train Us to Fail in the Real World-  Stephen Guise Stephen Guise is a worldwide thought leader and authority on habit formation strategies. He is best known for writing ‘Mini Habits’ , an international bestselling book with over 300,000 copies sold across 17 languages. “School train us to have the mindset that a given amount of effort will always bring a measurable, predictable, and successful result. The real world doesn’t work like that.”A Hindi movie released recently has thrown light on a very sensitive topic that plagues not just India, but students world over. How do we deal with ‘real’ life, the life where don’t always get what we deserve, or the one that can throw any challenge on to us? In schools we prepare students for exams, for activities, for sports, competitions and everything else that we do in school. We teach them to give their best, and then to expect an outcome that will match that effort. But as adults we know that sometimes success doesn’t come immediately. We ourselves have faced setbacks and disappointments. Do we teach our children how to deal with failure? This particular article by Stephen Guise discusses how schools are not doing enough to prepare students for life after school, for adulthood. The context of the article is USA, but many points are applicable for our country too. He argues that developing “critical life skills” are more important than focusing on how to memorize information. He suggests that there should be classes for important life skills like money management, interpersonal communication, goals etc. Further, he argues, students must also be told how to build credit, how to do savings etc., and this be taught before they go to college, because not everyone goes to college. This is an important observation made by the writer. Most of our students who pass out of school are not aware of very basic knowledge which may be required for banking etc. Also, schools should incorporate personality development in their curriculum, as this is what is very critical in job interviews and even college admissions. Guise then goes on to add that schools are an unsuitable learning area for many jobs. He quotes several figures to show the high unemployment percentage in USA. He states that most professions need hands on training and mentorship and that schools do not provide enough learning opportunities for the development of these skills. Although the context of the article is USA, we can see this same trend in our country as well. I feel that even though schools may provide an opportunity, we have to motivate our students to take advantage of those opportunities. The unfortunate part is that even though students may be motivated to develop those skills, if these skills are not part of their assessment, these skills are not valued. Thus, my suggestion would be that if we want our curriculum to be developed, and include the incorporation of skills, we have to some way attach importance to these skills by assessing/ evaluating students on the basis of skills too. What we do today is that we assess students on their knowledge of information more than skills. The author also points out a very significant lesson of life- “You can get straight ‘A’s in school, but nobody, no matter how successful, gets straight As in life. No, in life, you tend to get As by getting Fs first. Lots and lots of Fs…There will always be talented authors whose books remain unknown, superior athletes who never get a chance, and brilliant people who remain jobless. Meanwhile, some others who are in the limelight may not be deserving of it.”The style of writing the article has un undertone of pessimism but he wraps up the article on a positive note saying  “while you can flunk out of school, you only flunk out of life if you give up”. The writer uses easy language and relatable examples to explain his arguments. Life skills is not given the importance it should be given in schools. We hear of unfortunate cases of students committing suicide because of performance pressure. What schools do or at least try to do is equip students with information and knowledge, but we don’t teach them how to deal with success and failure. We are obsessed with results and numbers because that is the only way we are assessed.Thus, while we ponder on what is worth teaching in schools today, we have to give a serious thought on basing our assessment in such a way that students and parents are also interested in developing skills. 

# data[].attributes.subject
How Schools Train Us to Fail in the Real World-  Stephen Guise Stephen Guise is a worldwide thought leader and authority on habit formation strategies. He is best known for writing ‘Mini Habits’ , an international bestselling book with over 300,000 copies sold across 17 languages. “School train us to have the mindset that a given amount of effort will always bring a measurable, predictable, and successful result. The real world doesn’t work like that.”A Hindi movie released recently has thrown light on a very sensitive topic that plagues not just India, but students world over. How do we deal with ‘real’ life, the life where don’t always get what we deserve, or the one that can throw any challenge on to us? In schools we prepare students for exams, for activities, for sports, competitions and everything else that we do in school. We teach them to give their best, and then to expect an outcome that will match that effort. But as adults we know that sometimes success doesn’t come immediately. We ourselves have faced setbacks and disappointments. Do we teach our children how to deal with failure? This particular article by Stephen Guise discusses how schools are not doing enough to prepare students for life after school, for adulthood. The context of the article is USA, but many points are applicable for our country too. He argues that developing “critical life skills” are more important than focusing on how to memorize information. He suggests that there should be classes for important life skills like money management, interpersonal communication, goals etc. Further, he argues, students must also be told how to build credit, how to do savings etc., and this be taught before they go to college, because not everyone goes to college. This is an important observation made by the writer. Most of our students who pass out of school are not aware of very basic knowledge which may be required for banking etc. Also, schools should incorporate personality development in their curriculum, as this is what is very critical in job interviews and even college admissions. Guise then goes on to add that schools are an unsuitable learning area for many jobs. He quotes several figures to show the high unemployment percentage in USA. He states that most professions need hands on training and mentorship and that schools do not provide enough learning opportunities for the development of these skills. Although the context of the article is USA, we can see this same trend in our country as well. I feel that even though schools may provide an opportunity, we have to motivate our students to take advantage of those opportunities. The unfortunate part is that even though students may be motivated to develop those skills, if these skills are not part of their assessment, these skills are not valued. Thus, my suggestion would be that if we want our curriculum to be developed, and include the incorporation of skills, we have to some way attach importance to these skills by assessing/ evaluating students on the basis of skills too. What we do today is that we assess students on their knowledge of information more than skills. The author also points out a very significant lesson of life- “You can get straight ‘A’s in school, but nobody, no matter how successful, gets straight As in life. No, in life, you tend to get As by getting Fs first. Lots and lots of Fs…There will always be talented authors whose books remain unknown, superior athletes who never get a chance, and brilliant people who remain jobless. Meanwhile, some others who are in the limelight may not be deserving of it.”The style of writing the article has un undertone of pessimism but he wraps up the article on a positive note saying  “while you can flunk out of school, you only flunk out of life if you give up”. The writer uses easy language and relatable examples to explain his arguments. Life skills is not given the importance it should be given in schools. We hear of unfortunate cases of students committing suicide because of performance pressure. What schools do or at least try to do is equip students with information and knowledge, but we don’t teach them how to deal with success and failure. We are obsessed with results and numbers because that is the only way we are assessed.Thus, while we ponder on what is worth teaching in schools today, we have to give a serious thought on basing our assessment in such a way that students and parents are also interested in developing skills. 

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
I've never let my school interfere with my education.
Mark Twain

The modern American school system does not encompass or define learning, it is a dominant subset of it. Do you want to know why I dislike school? Homework, sure, but more important than that are these four ways that school trains us to fail in "the real world."

Schools teach knowledge, but life requires wisdom

"Never mistake knowledge for wisdom. One helps you make a living; the other helps you make a life." - Sandara Carey

Instead of learning critical life skills on how to manage money, how to negotiate, or how to communicate, kids are mostly taught to memorize information. This is helpful to learn, but not at the cost of not learning critical life skills. Many people put these "life" skills on the onus of the parents to teach their kids, but not all parents are qualified to teach these lessons, and many assume that school is "enough learning." The school system would be a perfect place to learn these indispensable skills.

I can't give school a hall pass on this one, because it is set up as a core way that kids are prepared to live in the world. Why is it positioned as such when it lacks personal growth training, financial management training, communication training, emotional intelligence training, and healthy living training? Psychology is the closest course to any of these, but it's mostly in college and typically optional.

You could come up with a few examples of where these skills are taught in school, or where some wisdom is imparted by a particularly great teacher. But this is a general problem of focus that schools have. Schools are not set up to teach us what matters most.

School (noun) - A place where students suck on an information teat instead of learning how to feed themselves. ( tweet this)

Here's what I would love to see changed. What do you think?

1. Classes for important life skills - money management, interpersonal communication, miscellaneous psychology, habits, goals, etc.

2. Incorporation into existing classes - in math, talk about smart credit card usage to avoid freaking 18% interest rates, how to build credit, how to pick the right health insurance, why new cars are a horrible investment, etc.

3. Start teaching this sooner than college. Not everyone goes to college, but everyone needs to know this stuff.

School is an unsuitable learning environment for many jobs

For those that say school is not the place to impart wisdom to youngsters, but to prepare them for the workplace, I hear ya, but sorry. You just walked into a nasty trap with that point of view. If school is to prepare us for a career, then why is it that it's absolutely horrible at accomplishing that?

Let's look at some stats that make colleges cringe (from a Mckinsey consulting firm report):

Warning: these stats are disturbing...

In 2011, 1.5 million, or 53.6% of college grads under age 25 were out of work or underemployed.

And for those that do have jobs? 48% of employed U.S. college grads are in jobs that require less than a four-year degree.

30% of college graduates don't feel college prepared them for the world of work.

Six times as many graduates are working in retail or hospitality as had originally planned.

It used to be that apprenticeships were the norm; you'd learn the hands-on skills and expertise from a mature worker in your field. The downside was that back then, it was more like, "hey kid, you're going to be a carpenter because that's what your family has always done." Today we have more choices, but with it has come an inferior form of learning. Most professions, even today's digitally-based jobs, need hands-on training and mentorship.

back then, it was more like, "hey kid, you're going to be a carpenter because that's what your family has always done."

Programming boot camps are popping up, showing how horrible the current school model is. In 2-3 months, 90% or more of graduates have a job making more than $80,000 a year (within just a few months of graduation). Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't that better than the typical college's "study for four years and wait tables to get by when you graduate jobless" plan? And yes, the data is coming to back up that statement. Read on.

Programming boot camps are old-school intense apprenticeships where students learn to code from knowledgeable programmers already working in the field. It's all hands-on "real world" work, and the graduates are highly valued for the skills they possess when they enter the job market. I hope this emerging format continues to grow and expand into other areas as an alternative to college. Even if you disagree with everything I've said, competition is a good thing and will promote the improvement of schools.

I wrote a full article about programming boot camps at Dumb Little Man.

College claims to be the safe, sure way for a great career (it's not)

Everyone must learn at some point that nobody cares much about their "potential."

When a company selects from a sea of faces and they all have identical or similar degrees, the value of those degrees shrinks, and they will look for the people who can do what they need right now. That's exactly what we're seeing, and the 2008 recession amplified it. And don't count on them seeing your potential like I did.

Example: Candidate A has 95% overall potential but can only do 15% of the job now - she must be trained. Candidate B has 63% overall potential but can do 85% of the job right now - he's ready to go. Candidate B gets the job almost every time.

Potential is exceedingly difficult to gauge accurately (see: Ryan Leaf), and so it is often not considered by employers. The answer to "where do you see yourself in 5 years?" question doesn't quite nail down your potential. Specific job skills, however, are readily knowable by employers with observation and questioning, and are given much greater weight in the world.
My Frustrating Story
I graduated with a B.S.B.A. in Finance in 2010. I'm not saying I expected a job to be handed to me on a golden platter, but I thought I'd get a chance with reasonable effort over many months. I searched for a year, had some interviews, and finally landed a sales floor job at Lowe's for $10 an hour. I was supposed to be happy about it because I had gotten a job in a lousy job market. But how could I accept losing so much time, money, and effort at college to work the same job I had in high school? I quit after the first day.

I was supposed to be happy about it because I had gotten a job in a lousy job market. But how could I accept losing so much time, money, and effort at college to work the same job I had in high school? I quit after the first day.

There was a trend. I noticed that for the jobs I wanted, my lack of experience was an issue. I learn things quickly, so I never saw it as an issue, but they did. One interview with a bank ended prematurely when it was found that my sales experience was "of a different kind." After a promising 2nd interview at an online brokerage company, in which I know I impressed the interviewers with my knowledge of investing, I received a call days later. They said that I was a top candidate, but they were withdrawing the opening altogether because they wanted someone who already had the required certifications.

Now I realize that this is common sense. Why pay $5,000 and take time to get someone certified when you can hire someone who is already certified and ready to go? As awesome as I think I am, there is almost always a plurality of people who can do a job well.

Some may think that employers love to train employees their way, but I think the truth is more often a "plug and play" preference. Would you rather hire someone who has proven they can do the job well, or someone who has a piece of paper that says they "might be a good employee, after training of course?" It hurts to be rejected on the basis of limited experience, but it's an employer's market out there, and businesses tend to play it safe when they can.

BUT...Do you know what changes everything and makes companies do backflips for you? When you have coveted, elite skills. I wrote the copy for a client's tumblr template sales page, and he told me sales were converting at 27% for him. My skills brought him real results (money). Maybe someone with a copywriting degree could do the same, but maybe not.

For the last two years, I have ignored the piece of paper that says I'm probably good at stuff, and instead I practice writing every day. I'm giving myself a chance by building my skills as freelance marketer, writer, and blogger.

Update: Since a lot of people are reading/sharing this article, I thought I should update this. I'm no longer a freelancer because I now make a good living from my three books, which have been translated into 17 languages. I think this exemplifies the "skills over credentials" argument. My finance degree remains as useful as an unpaired sock, but the skills I've developed (writing, researching, analyzing, marketing, etc.) have given me my dream career.

Whether or not you go to college, and whether or not you want to work for yourself or for a company, build skills and experience in your desired field. And if you want to be even smarter, network heavily. These things matter; they bring results. And take it from me - don't expect your diploma to get you anywhere unless you have the applicable work experience and skills to go with it; having the ability to learn a skill set doesn't mean much when your competitors already have that skill set.

Grades distort our perception of reality

You can get straight As in school, but nobody, no matter how successful, gets straight As in life. No, in life, you tend to get As by getting Fs first. Lots and lots of Fs.

Stephen King probably still has his huge stack of publisher rejection slips. Those were "real world Fs," folks. Stephen King, one of the most successful authors in history, got dozens and dozens of Fs before he got his first real life A. School trains us to have the mindset that a given amount of effort will always bring a measurable, predictable, and successful result. The real world doesn't work like that.

Colonel Sanders had 1,009 rejections he received for his chicken recipe before the first yes. And many of his rejections were humiliating, like an F- or something. If you give an "A" effort in school, you succeed every time. If you give an "A" effort in life, you're lucky to succeed on the 30th try.

Successful blogger, author, and entrepreneur James Altucher said that about 17 out of his 20 businesses have failed. But the ones that did well were worth millions of dollars.

When students enter the real world, and are turned down for a job in favor of the secretary's nephew, they will be mentally unprepared for it unless they learned outside of school. To put in a measured amount of work, compile an impressive resume, say all of the right things in the interview, and be turned down is a shock after predictable results for 20 years.

Perhaps the interviewer didn't like them because of an unfair, deep-rooted bias. Here's one example of clear "anti-Cyrus bias" I found on a forum:

"Today, at a job interview, I was asked what I thought of twerking (a Miley Cyrus dance move). It was a bizarre question, but trying to get on the interviewer's good side, I said I thought it was pretty cool. He snorted and said I'll be job-seeking for a while yet."

Ouch.

If not biased, maybe the interviewer liked the early interviewees so much that later candidates never stood a chance, as was shown to be the case in a study covering 9,000 interviews. Or maybe they were simply misunderstood or underestimated. Whatever the case, an "A effort" does not always get an A result on the first try.

There will always be talented authors whose books remain unknown, superior athletes who never get a chance, and brilliant people who remain jobless. Meanwhile, some others who are in the limelight may not be deserving of it. Unlike test grades and GPAs, life is rarely fair.

The best thing about school preparing us to fail in the real world, is that while you can "flunk out" of school, you only flunk out of life if you give up. And even better than that, it only takes one great "A" to succeed. 🙂

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
How School Trains Us To Fail In The Real World

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
I've never let my school interfere with my education. Mark Twain The modern American school system does not encompass or define learning, it is a dominant subset of it. Do you want to know why I dislike school? Homework, sure, but more important than that are these four ways that school trains us to fail in "the real world."

# data[].attributes.body
Values’ education  a integral part of our life . It is a term used to name several things, and there is much academic controversy surrounding it. Some regard it as all aspects of the process by which teachers (and other adults) transmit values to pupils.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Value Education: Definition and the Concept of Value Education (With Example)!

Values' education is a term used to name several things, and there is much academic controversy surrounding it. Some regard it as all aspects of the process by which teachers (and other adults) transmit values to pupils.

Others see it as an activity that can take place in any organization during which people are assisted by others, who may be older, in a position of authority or are more experienced, to make explicit those values underlying their own behavior, to assess the effectiveness of these values and associated behavior for their own and others' long term well-being and to reflect on and acquire other values and behavior which they recognize as being more effective for long term well-being of self and others.

This means that values education can take place at home, as well as in schools, colleges, universities, offender institutions and voluntary youth organizations. There are two main approaches to values education. Some see it as inculcating or transmitting a set of values which often come from societal or religious rules or cultural ethics.

Others see it as a type of Socratic dialogue where people are gradually brought to their own realization of what is good behavior for themselves and their community. Value education also leads to success. It has values of hard work, how nobody is useless and loving studies.

Explicit values education is associated with those different pedagogies, methods or programmes that teachers or educators use in order to create learning experiences for students when it comes to value questions.

Implicit values education on the other hand covers those aspects of the educational experience resulting in value influence learning, which can be related to the concept of hidden curriculum. This discussion on implicit and explicit raises the philosophical problem of whether or not an unintentional action can be called education.

Objectives of Value Education:

a. To improve the integral growth of human begins.

b. To create attitudes and improvement towards sustainable lifestyle.

c. To increase awareness about our national history our cultural heritage, constitutional rights, national integration, community development and environment.

d. To create and develop awareness about the values and their significance and role.

e. To know about various living and non-living organisms and their interaction with environment.

Value Based Environmental Education:

Let us see how environmental education be made value-oriented:

1. Human Values:

Preparation of text-books and resource materials about environmental education can play an important role in building positive attitudes about environment. The basic human value 'man in nature' rather than 'nature for man' needs to be infused through the same.

2. Social Values:

Love, compassion, tolerance and justice which are the basic teachings of most of our religions need to be woven into environmental education. These are the values to be nurtured so that all forms of life and the biodiversity on this earth are protected.

3. Cultural and Religious Values:

These are the values enshrined in Vedas like 'Dehi me dadami te' i.e. "you give me and 1 give you" (Yajurveda) emphasize that man should not exploit nature without nurturing her. Our cultural customs and rituals in many ways teach us to perform such functions as would protect and nurture nature and respect every aspect of nature, treating them as sacred, are it rivers, earth, mountains or forests.

4. Ethical Values:

Environmental education should encompass the ethical values of earth-centric rather than human-centric world-view. The educational system should promote the earth-citizenship thinking. Instead of considering human being as supreme we have to think of the welfare of the earth.

5. Global Values:

The concept that the human civilization is a part of the planet as a whole and similarly nature and various natural phenomena over the earth are interconnected and inter-linked with special bonds of harmony. If we disturb this harmony anywhere there will be an ecological imbalance leading to catastrophic results.

6. Spiritual Values:

Principles of self-restraint, self-discipline, contentment, reduction of wants, freedom from greed and austerity are some of the finest elements intricately woven into the traditional and religious fabric of our country. All these values promote conservationism and transform our consumeristic approach.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Value Education: Definition and the Concept of Value Education (With Example)

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
ADVERTISEMENTS: Value Education: Definition and the Concept of Value Education (With Example)! Values' education is a term used to name several things, and there is much academic controversy surrounding it. Some regard it as all aspects of the process by which teachers (and other adults) transmit values to pupils.