John McCreery wrote: "How, then, might we select the tools, a.k.a., useful ideas that might form the core of a 21st education for people who must cope with information overload and all sorts of different people?" I appreciate John's quote from Geertz and his comments. The only hesitation I have is over the above sentence. I don't think we are in a position to anticipate what will happen in the future nor should we be selecting tools for people.* Borrowing from Oakschott, we are at sea and there are no stars to guide us, so the best we can do is prepare ourselves for whatever may come. At this point I would return to John's comments. From experience, we know that math, physical sciences, accounting and human rights are very useful in many different ways, and so we should make training in these disciplines available. I suppose if I were to summarize my hesitation with John's comments, it would be that I would not want to posit an outcome for education beyond providing opportunities for students to receive training in subjects that may be useful in the future. On the other hand, I would want to encourage students to dream and have a vision for a future they can work towards using the tools we provide. I just don't think that we teachers are in the business of providing visions for people. *There is a de facto selection that happens when schools decide what programs to fund and what courses to offer. In a liberal society, the hope is that a wide variety of educational institutions will exist allowing for people to choose. Sincerely, Phil Enns Yogyakarta, Indonesia ------------------------------------------------------------------ To change your Lit-Ideas settings (subscribe/unsub, vacation on/off, digest on/off), visit www.andreas.com/faq-lit-ideas.html