Some people believe that the purpose of education is to free the mind and the spirit Others believe that formal education tends to restrain our minds and spirits rather than set them free

Education, as defined by John Dewey, is the process of learning and acquiring knowledge, skills, values, beliefs and habits. Then, definitely, the purpose of education system is to enlighten and liberate spirits and minds by transferring those qualities. However, the outcomes of present formal education system, due to its rigidity and non-holistic nature, are absolute anti-thesis of its stated goals. Therefore, both the statements are valid given that they are not mutually exclusive.

Education aims to impart knowledge, skills and values to create responsible citizens able to address societal and personal challenges. Education, either home or institutional, must serve to foster creativity to advance human knowledge; conscience to discern between right and wrong; and valour and motivation to fight for the oppressed. These values can only be inculcated within the students only if their mind and spirits are free from external influences. Whether it’s Newton’s pondering to advance Science, Lincoln’s efforts for reforms or King’s struggle for civil rights; all were possible because the education of these greats set their minds and spirits free to reach the stars. Therefore, the opinion that the purpose of education is to free the minds and spirits is indeed true.

On the other hand, formal education is a system formulated by antecedent luminaries with creative thinking to maximize the knowledge transfer process with optimal efforts to set the society free of superstition and biases. Like other aspects of the society, this system has also undergone some decadence over the time. The present education system is characterized by gigantic syllabus, crunch time, assignments, impossible deadlines and tests. All these factors though train students to work under constraints and prepare them for the competitive world; they impede their creativity and free-thinking. Consider, for example, a majority of institutes emphasize on exams and not on the process of learning, where scoring high grades is the only criterion for a student to progress. This pressurizes students to rote learn certain most likely exam questions rather than adopting a knowledge-based learning approach. Under such restrictive ‘pressure-cooker’ environment, students’ minds and spirits will certainly be shackled as contended by the second opinion. Unprecedented number of suicides in the renowned Indian Institutes of Technology (IITs) corroborates this point explicitly.

The other argument to support this view stems from the rampant commercialization of the education. The ‘expensive formal education’ is now being viewed as an investment venture that promises returns by equipping students with employable skills. The demand for courses is dictated by the employment prospects they offer rather than their intellectual reward. With a hefty education loan to payback; desire for creature comforts; and the fierce competition for the bread and butter; students’ mind and spirits would be arrested by materialism, rendering them incapable to contribute anything to the society or science. It is for this reason that while there is a abundance of fat-salaried, 9-5, working professionals; at the same time, however, there is also a dearth of luminaries and reformers working for human emancipation.

However, one must also consider the diversity of education systems around the world and also between different institutions, before stereotyping the output of formal education. There are several countries and institutions, adopting novel methods such as open book test, field project work, optional non-graded courses, etc. to achieve the very objective that the system of formal education was created for i.e. setting the minds and inspiration free while performing on-par with their orthodox counterparts. For example, Finland, known for its unrestrictive and liberal education system, constantly ranks among top ten in the international Program for International Student Assessment (PISA) in all the subjects tested. Moreover, counties like Germany, have laws guaranteeing free education, even up to tertiary level, for domestic and international students alike. Such a move definitely serves to relieve students from pecuniary apprehensions allowing to attain freedom of spirit and mind through ‘formal education’. Finally, the deliverables of formal education system depends upon the personnel viz. teachers, professors, deans, etc. delivering the education.

In conclusion, both the opinions are not contradictory. while education aims to free spirits and minds; the prevalent inflexible and commercial system of formal education indeed impedes and restrain them,. Generalization of the second notion should be considerate of the fact that the outcome of a formal education system - which is quite diverse among countries – is contingent upon the policies and methods of the institutes and professional involved.