Chen 1

Daisy Chen

Professor McHugh

Writing 2

21 July 2019

A Tentative Examination of the Purpose of Education In the Age of Mass Consumption

Life is short. However, from kindergarten to college, people spend almost one-third of their

precious lives at school receiving education. Thus, the purpose of education has been a haunting

problem faced by educators and students, who are exposed to pressures from both individual

pursuits featuring personal interests and social expectations embodied by economic concerns. In

the age of mass consumption, the purpose of education is further complicated by corporate

interests, which are mainly concerned with making profits through commercializing education as

a product of particular utilities. However, according to the wisdom of sage, modern education

could be beneficial if the purpose and design of it are in the right track. Confucius, the most

outstanding ancient Chinese educator, once said, “Education breeds confidence. Confidence

breeds hope. Hope breeds peace” (“Confucius quotes”). He believes that education is a

foundation which guides people to a better livelihood. People’s critical thinking skills, as part of

humanity, gives people confidence. Also, problem solving skills and a decent job can supports

people economically and bring them hope and a peaceful life. Based on the quote, it is necessary

to develop a more responsive reconstruction of the purpose of education that can fill the gap

between economic interests and humanistic needs. Therefore, humanities such as critical thinking

and economic ends such as practical career skills are of vital importance in education. In

addition, responsively balancing humanistic education and individuals’ economic interests

 Chen 2

should be established as the purpose of education in the age of mass consumption.

First of all, economic interests play an important role in shaping the design and practice of

education, which should be incorporated into the development of the purpose of education.

According to the study carried out by Carpenter and Hughes, which examines the impact of State

speeches delivered by governors in the United States from 2001 to 2008, economic efficiency

stands as the primary factor shaping the design and practice of education in the United States,

revealing that economic ends serve as the major purpose of education advocated and facilitated

by political rhetoric and government policies (1). In this regard, the current American policies

demonstrate that economic interests have great appeals to policy-makers in designing education.

Politically, it is justified to establish economic ends as one of the key purposes of education,

because economic development and individual employment are closely related to education,

which plays a significant role in enabling individuals with particular skills and qualities to find

desired jobs and contribute to economic development and technology innovation. Without

matching educational purposes with economic ends, schools will not be able to provide relevant

teachings and trainings for students, which can make them struggle to find their desired jobs. The

emergence of various interdisciplinary studies and applied science provides potent evidence

revealing that higher education highlights realistic applications and economic values as

important elements of the purpose of education. Economic ends represent a pragmatic respect for

realistic applications of knowledge and engaged connection between education and social

realities. In this respect, to incorporating economic interests into the purpose of education is to

allow educated minds to better serve the society and their own needs.

If the economic application implies the external ability resulted from education, the

improvement of self-cultivation, which could be considered as humanistic ends, should not be

 Chen 3

neglected. In light of the dominant influence of economic ends in shaping education in the

current society, it is a pressing necessity to balance humanistic ends and economic interests in

designing and practicing education. A recent study over the educational reform in Danish

Primary Schools reveals that teachers and pedagogues are striving to challenge dominant

economic-efficiency-oriented education and restore humanistic concerns into educational

practices and designs (Thingstrup et al. 354). Surging concerns have been voiced against a

lopsided emphasis over providing industrial training and economic-efficiency-oriented education

for students among Danish Primary Schools. It is notably problematic for the current education

to stress economic interests over humanistic concerns in designing education, because it harms

and inhibits the development and growth of humanity and transforms human beings into

particular tools for economic ends. If education is preoccupied with advancing economic

interests, such as economic development and individual employment, the society will suffer from

the loss of humanity and individuals will not be able to resist the manipulation and domination of

interest groups, because individuals will lack humanistic ideas and critical thinking abilities in

resist external manipulation. Thus, it is a requirement for educators and policy-makers to provide

due considerations for the role of humanistic concerns in maintaining, manifesting and

improving humanity when designing the purpose and practice of education.

As discussed above, humanistic ends are as valuable as economic ends and should be taken

into consideration, specifically critical thinking and cultural competence, which play significant

roles in affecting personality and humanity. Philip Guo points out that “the main purpose of

education is to strengthen” individual minds in order to empower individuals against various

challenges (Guo). The idea of strengthening individual minds represents a typical humanistic

concern in cultivating critical thinking abilities in order to help individuals survive various life
 Chen 4

challenges. Here, Guo separates mind abilities from learned knowledge as two main contents of

education, revealing that mind abilities play a more significant role in affecting individuals’ life

decisions and practices (Guo). In this aspect, establishing humanistic concerns as the main

purpose of education has practical meanings for the survival of human beings against setbacks,

challenges and failure. By cultivating humanistic abilities, such as critical thinking and cultural

competence, educators will succeed in preparing students for a life that can be better handled and

managed by students with their own abilities. For instance, students with great cultural

competence will have better understandings of the cultures and traditions that show notable

differences to their own cultures and traditions, which can contribute greatly to the reducing of

biases and stereotypes in their perceptions of others. Contrary to educational devotion to

humanistic concerns, knowledge-oriented education will prove unproductive in helping

individuals address life challenges, because individuals might struggle to use particular

knowledge or find certain knowledge outdated for complicated life situations. Thus, devoting to

humanistic concerns in designing and practicing education should be established as one core

element of the purpose of education, because it can have long-term benefits for human survival

against various challenges.

By combining economic interests with humanistic concerns in a balanced mode in

educational designs and practices, educators and policy-makers will be able to improve humanity

while at the same time avoiding the mismatch between education and social and economic

realities. Humanistic concerns can contribute critical ideas and perspectives for economic

applications of knowledge and skills, while economic ends can help connect social realities with

humanistic concerns. For example, business management departments have made internship

practices during vocations an important part of education, aiming at allowing students to better
 Chen 5

understand economic realities of their disciplines and apply their knowledge to addressing

realistic problems. In this regard, internship practices represent a typical combination between

economic ends and humanistic concerns in providing quality education for students. Students

serving as an intern in the business world will enhance their critical understandings of business

ethics while at the same time building up pragmatic skills in addressing realistic problems. Based

on the above analysis, it can be seen that a balanced combination of economic ends and

humanistic concerns can be a productive approach in building the purpose of education.

Requesting educators and policy makers to juxtapose economic interests with humanistic

concerns as two pillars of the purpose of education is not enough because it is also important to

present the voice from the educated. Klitmøller notes that the purpose of education has long been

shaped by voices of educators, while voices from students have been consciously marginalized

and even excluded (650). In this regard, the purpose of education often fails to meet particular

needs and interests of the educated, because they are not represented as the decision-makers of

educational designs and practices. In discussing the purpose of education, Vadeboncoeur lays out

two competing views, revealing that education should be devoted to two different purposes,

including meeting individual needs and interests, and fulfilling social transformation (25). Here,

these two views demonstrate that education serves both personal interests and social needs. In

this respect, it is a necessity to involve voices of the educated in the designing and practicing of

education, because education directly concerns their interests and their social transformation.

Thus, building education around both economic interests and humanistic concerns would allow

the educated to have their voices represented fully in the designing and practicing of education,

because the educated can gain adequate education from the education that is adapted to realistic

applications while at the same time devoted to humanity. In this sense, balancing humanistic
 Chen 6

concerns and economic interests should be a purpose guiding educational designs and practices.

To conclude, the purpose of education should be to balance humanistic concerns and

economic interests in designing and practicing education, because it can empower the educated

with humanistic perspectives while at the same time accommodating the educated to realistic

tasks and jobs in the society and economy. Meanwhile, this purpose can better represent voices

and needs of the educated without sacrificing either their economic interests or humanistic

concerns in the design of education. Then, they fulfill themselves as well as the society. Overall,

this purpose challenges policy-makers to make responsive measurements of the needs of the

educated and the expectations of the society in order to avoid a simplistic application of

utilitarian perspectives in designing the purpose of education. Efficient education brings people

critical and creative thinking, multiculturism, professional career skills which equipped people

with logic, faith, confidence, and freedom. And these elements are ultimate ability to reach to

happiness.
 Chen 7

Works Cited

Carpenter, Dick M., and Haning Hughes. "Gubernatorial Rhetoric and the Purpose of Education

in the United States." International Journal of Education Policy and Leadership 6.6

(2011): 1-15.

Guo, Philip. “The main purpose of education.” Podcast, October 2010. Accessed from:

http://pgbovine.net/purpose-of-education.htm

Klitmøller, Jacob. “Educational Practice, Student Experience, and the Purpose of Education—a

Critique of ‘Pedagogy in Practice.’” Oxford Review of Education, vol. 42, no. 6,

2016, pp. 646–660.

Thingstrup, Signe Hvid, et al. “The Purpose of Education: Pedagogues’ and Teachers’

Negotiations in Danish Primary Schools *.” Educational Action Research, vol. 26,

no. 3, 2018, pp. 354–364.

Vadeboncoeur, Jennifer A. "Child development and the purpose of education: A historical context

for constructivism in teacher education." Constructivist teacher education.

Routledge, 2005. 25-48.

Chen 8