Educational System Is Failing? In His Manifesto,

¶ … educational system is failing?

In his manifesto, Earth in Mind, environmental activist and educator David W. Orr states that his pro-environmentalist policies and his philosophy of education are united. Going against the current tendency, even amongst liberal educators, to embrace standardized testing as a measurement of scholastic success, Orr instead emphasizes the need to create more mindful consumers of the earth's resources. Our failure to produce environmentally savvy students is why our education system is failing the planet. In the field of biology "because of the recent overemphasis on molecular biology and genetic engineering, which are more lucrative but not more important," the study of ecology and environmental biology is being lost, and systems of "vernacular" and indigenous knowledge or 'folk culture' are being completely rejected as worthy of scientific value, and are instead relegated to anthropological curiosities (Orr 9-10).

The problem is not that the United States is failing to 'keep up' educationally with other nations in terms of how student performance is measured. Rather, the problem is how success is conceptualized by educators and politicians alike. We must ask ourselves, writes Orr, in the face of an increasingly threatened planet, why learning new ways to make it serve our needs, and our needs alone, is so important. Above all, we must educate children how to become better consumers of the environment rather than better destroyers of the earth. Unless we do so, our future health as a species is at risk. We must readjust our definition of what it means to be educationally and vocationally successful. Of global warming, Orr says: "this is not the work of ignorant people. Rather it is largely the results of work by people with BA's, BSs, LLBs, MBAs, and PhDs" (Orr 7).

For Orr, viewing education merely as the accumulation of knowledge is fundamentally misguided. This viewpoint is a self-interested way of looking at learning, both for the individual and for the nation. Seeing the advancement of one's own knowledge or welfare as the sole purpose of learning has resulted in the destruction of the planet. Education should lead us to a more mindful relationship with the earth. People must be educated how to live in consort with the planet, not encouraged to strive to change it and tax its already fragile resources to produce more for human consumption.

Orr is open in his advocacy of introducing a strongly moral element to education. True intelligence means learning how to protect the planet and to gain a sense of foresight that transcends the limits of the self. Schools should not be ranked based upon the ability to find graduates high-paying jobs and get them into good graduate schools, since this often perpetuates the cycle of using human intelligence to destroy the earth. Instead, the reputation of the school should rest upon the quality of its ability to produce moral, thoughtful human beings who try to protect the earth for future generations.

Orr's philosophy of education is highly idealistic. An immediately problematic notion with this philosophy is that, in public educational systems today, not all individuals agree with Orr's moral schema. Even the teaching of evolution are protested in many states, and for some parents the separation between 'humanity' and 'the earth' is of moral concern in a manner that is profoundly antithetical to Orr's philosophy. Orr presumes a certain sense of agreement amongst people about the need to protect the planet, but even while he might be scientifically 'correct' on a policy level his educational program may be anything but sustainable in the court of parental opinion.

On a university level, Orr's educational philosophy may be slightly more feasible, as it is more acceptable for professors to put forth their ideas, and for students to contend with them. In light of Orr's analysis, it is striking how many of the finest institutions of the U.S. have produced individuals who have focused not upon improving the planet, but simply creating more money 'on paper' and creative financial 'instruments' that are destructive to the environment and even the human economy. Our society rewards the ability to create businesses that generate goods and services that produce waste rather than the ability to generate new ideas to live more mindfully.

Even on a college level, it is hard to conceive of parents and students shrugging off the need to make a living and instead focusing on students' moral education and responsibility to the planet. Because of the current state of the economy people are more rather than less focused upon less self-directed aspects of the educational process. It could be argued that only a precious few have the economic security to put the planet first when selecting a college. True, there are opportunities within so-called 'green' industries. But Orr's argument is fundamentally more broad-sweeping than advocating the need to invest in new types of businesses. Orr argues for a radical revision in how success and productivity are viewed.