So much information is readily accessible nowadays, and sometimes it seems like we constantly get bombarded with someone's perspective. (Here I am offering mine as well.) How do we decide whom to pay attention to? Such a complicated question, and a blog entry won't do much justice to it, but I'll have a go at it to give you a sense of where I am coming from.
For one thing, professionals in a certain area recognize complexity. As I look at my own knowledge as a counselor and tutor, the intricacy of issues continues to impress me. For instance, judging the quality of a college is not a simple matter. One seemingly simple route is to base quality on the subjective quality of prestige. If the school has some sort of name cache, it must be a good school. But, is it a good school? How much does a student benefit from attending that school? Is he or she more employable, more ethical, a better critical thinker, a better learner for having attended that particular school?
Appreciating that complexity comes only after gaining a solid foundation of understanding usually acquired through experience and research. To draw from the college example, a novice counselor might learn about graduation rates at different schools and use those statistics to judge colleges. A more adept counselor might recognize that graduation rates are largely dependent on the quality of the admitted students. If College A admits 2,000 students with high ACT/SAT scores and high school GPAs, one would expect the vast majority of those students to graduate regardless of that college's quality. College B could do a better job of educating but graduate a lower percentage of students if they admitted students with lower scores.
That's just one example of complexity among many in an area, judging college quality, that's probably less important and complex than say alleviating poverty or improving the quality of education in general. That's probably why I try to be respectfully skeptical when someone walks forward with easy answers.
For one thing, professionals in a certain area recognize complexity. As I look at my own knowledge as a counselor and tutor, the intricacy of issues continues to impress me. For instance, judging the quality of a college is not a simple matter. One seemingly simple route is to base quality on the subjective quality of prestige. If the school has some sort of name cache, it must be a good school. But, is it a good school? How much does a student benefit from attending that school? Is he or she more employable, more ethical, a better critical thinker, a better learner for having attended that particular school?
Appreciating that complexity comes only after gaining a solid foundation of understanding usually acquired through experience and research. To draw from the college example, a novice counselor might learn about graduation rates at different schools and use those statistics to judge colleges. A more adept counselor might recognize that graduation rates are largely dependent on the quality of the admitted students. If College A admits 2,000 students with high ACT/SAT scores and high school GPAs, one would expect the vast majority of those students to graduate regardless of that college's quality. College B could do a better job of educating but graduate a lower percentage of students if they admitted students with lower scores.
That's just one example of complexity among many in an area, judging college quality, that's probably less important and complex than say alleviating poverty or improving the quality of education in general. That's probably why I try to be respectfully skeptical when someone walks forward with easy answers.