Social Capital

SOCIAL CAPITAL

Social Capital is the capital (or wealth) that is measured by strong family bonds, integration in community and social opportunity. A few decades ago, children spent the day at school, then were able to go unsupervised to the local park to play with their friends. They could walk two blocks on their own to visit Auntie Charlotte. They had many opportunities to discuss the world with their peers (even if the discussion was not blatant, but knowledge attained through the interaction of one another through play or fighting). There was a richness to their lives because they saw a lot of their family (often only one parent worked) and had many opportunities to be surrounded by peers without adults in proximity (to experience and learn on their own).

Walking to the shops without Mum to buy meat from the butcher meant that they learnt valuable interaction skills.

Today's social climate is rather different. It is true that there have always been dangers to our children (cars, paedophiles etc) but in recent years, the population explosion has meant that even if the proportion of say, paedophiles to non-paedophiles, remains the same, the numbers are much greater. Few of us feel it is safe to leave our children at the park without us watching on anymore.

Unfortunately though, such experiences are limited for many children. Both parents may be forced financially to work long hours, or there may be only one parent. Babies from 6 weeks old can be left in child care centres for many hours of the day. There may not be the time for children in these situations to often get to a park, because Mum and Dad simply can't make the time.

So even the wealth derived from strong family bonds has been reduced somewhat, if wealth is calculated by physical time and proximity to each other. Much of the extended family may live interstate or overseas because of advancements and price reductions in transport.

The opportunity of pure peer interaction (no grown-ups around) has become limited as parents fears for their children's safety increase. Many families have a variety of play equipment in their own yards, as well as Playstations, DVDs and the Internet. Children are able to entertain themselves now when they are alone (or only linked to others through interactive media).

Where much learning therefore, occurred outside the school, the speaker in this video claims that now, because social opportunities are more limited, education is almost fully school-based. I find this position hard to accept. With advancements in information and communications technology (most notably the Internet), children can now receive information and knowledge from around the world from the comfort of their own home. Is this knowledge any less valuable than knowledge gained through intimate connection to others within a community?

It may not be safe to walk alone to Auntie Charlotte's house, but with interactive mediums, we can see her live on our computer screens for a (virtual) face to face chat on Skype. We can text or talk to her via a mobile phone or email her. Grandparents living in another state can likewise be contacted at the press of a button.

A child may not be allowed to go to the butcher's shop alone, but can instead be taught how to order and purchase products online using e-commerce (I wouldn't recommend giving them your credit card number, though!)

The world has indeed changed, but I do not feel that the education system has borne the brunt of it.

'Why change now?' the headline over the video asks? As the speaker says, the education system has not been totally effective in engaging students for a long time, though it has been successful in turning out people ready to face the world as it was. We need to change now because the world is a much different place today and so we need to turn out students accomplished in an entirely new set of skills.

Such courses as the BLM (Bachelor of Learning management at CQ University) focus a teacher's training on a leaner-centred pedagogy, rather than traditional teacher-based 'lectures'. Emphasis is placed on showing learners how to access and utilise knowledge from a variety of sources with minimal assistance, though frequent teamwork. If children are exposed less in the real world to social interaction with their peers, then let that become an important activity within the classroom. Let activities be team oriented and involve discussion.

Perhaps social wealth needs to be defined, not by a child's opportunity for independence and inter-personal skills in the world, or whether a family has one parent or two, but by how a child will succeed in an evolving society. Social wealth may come to be measured by competence in communication with others around the world over a computer. There are certainly far greater opportunities today to learn more directly about other cultures. Social wealth should include such knowledge about understanding the diversity of the world, relating to others with diverse backgrounds and needs and being creative thinkers in a climate of constant and rapid innovation.

Education systems need to change, but the values that need to be prioritised are ones that should have always been important, such as creativity, empathy and open-mindedness. The social wealth available to learners, and differing individually, will have less impact than the pedagogical strategies employed by a teacher to teach learners how to access, process and manipulate globalised information from around the world.