Academia

Rote memorization vs. creativity & innovation makes for a somewhat uncommon but scholarly debate in academia. Every nation's education system possesses a curriculum that has embedded layers of the two. Many students are victim to the dog-eat-dog routine of rote memorization for high test scores for occupational - and perhaps social - advancement See also: http://www.slate.com/id/2284502/

There is a tendency for nation's now, especially the US, to regain our competency on test scores and exams, for in the eyes of the world we are being seen as a nation that can be easily surpassed. However, consider this: testing is a metric system for students' capacities for objective memorization - objective intelligence, subject to education standards that have not been updated for (I can't prove this one but one friend claimed) 50+ years. This brings up another debate about whether our education requirements for primary education even need an update but it is truth that the modernized and modernizing world has adapted a mutual understanding of the need for a necessary level of knowledge in mathematics, science, and reading comprehension. Then comes subjective knowledge - a need for a foundation in the humanities, an understanding of concepts (the biggest ones being right vs. wrong [if it exists; damn you philosophy!], a feel for those concepts, the knowledge necessary for one to pursue one's own individuality and potential - self-reliance. Education cannot create a surefire way to guarantee a level of self-reliance (nor has it a standardized way to test it) but can we not create a tendency for the development of children's self-reliance and potential? Can we not equip them with the skills necessary to easily pick up knowledge when needed and let that work the magic? What do logarithms, derivatives, and fruit flies have to do with anything? (Don't answer that, it's actually a stupid question) Let's not forget America's Founding Fathers consisted of men with an education in the humanities - Liberalism (Locke), separation of powers (Montesquieu), checks and balances, etc.

Woah! About face! Now, speaking of Founding Fathers, let's remember the ideas going on in Europe concerning whole a government should conduct was quite the debate back in the day to. However, to some people - like Thomas Hobbes - the masses could not control themselves. They were uneducated and angry, unfit for their own opinions. Centralized power is not evil, just like how guns don't kill people. The misuse of centralized power and guns are. And sometimes, checks and balances possess their own repercussions. But where was I-

Rote-memorization vs. creativity & innovation. One could say creativity & innovation should be the one to side with, or be Buddhist and affirm that a 'Middle Path' extrapolates consistency and near-zero volatility. One could say rote-memorization yields the money and success and by the time success is achieved, you've succeeded either way. Maybe it's the idea of getting the masses educated in such a way that the status quo updates itself, kind of like now, for better or for worse. What do we want the status quo to be a generation from now?

I conclude there is no right or wrong way, but it certainly is chill to do what you love via creativity & innovation, while still honing a general discipline for the basics without the hodgepodge of GPA wars or anything akin to flipping off the world because you won a pin for knowing the most algorithms and stuffing more scenarios into your head than these guys and gals from other countries can. It's certainly practical, but this time, it ain't us. Americans aren't practical? Go figure. We innovate, bitch