One would expect to not find many similarities between attending school in communist Poland and in a suburban town in Connecticut but I can see many similarities between the two. Yes, of course I can also see many vast differences but I will address them later in this blog.
Communist Poland used a set of strict guidelines to allow admittance to their universities. The first group was family of university workers, regardless of their intellect or abilities. I know this may not happen on the same scale at modern day universities but I have defiantly seen favoritism to family of workers and athletes. I know at Quinnipiac that family of University employees have a much easier time getting into the school and are held to lower standards then non-family members. The admissions department will overlook a family members shortcoming to be loyal to their employees. This also occurs with student athletes. Thousands of athletes are admitted into universities because of their athletic skills and not their intelligence. It would seem that these two groups of individuals are first priority over other potential students at universities today as well as communist Poland. By no means am I saying that the admissions process is the same for both time periods because at Quinnipiac today no student would be rejected because they own a lot of land or their parent are entrepreneurs. It almost seems the opposite, because Quinnipiac would like wealthy people attending their institution. Another difference would be the “elimination of those of incorrect origin,” stipulation that universities would use to reject a student for any reason they see fit. In communist Poland they would use this rule to turn a student down because of political views or parents who had served in the military. Today this would be considered discrimination and the Universities are not supposed to ask a student about their religious or political views.
In communist Poland, Universities used their control over learning materials to alter the student’s viewpoints. It was a rarity for a student to find books printed after the 1930’s because they were afraid of student’s learning righteous information. By limiting the materials available to students the communists were able to isolate Poland from other countries. I think this is the largest difference between communist Poland and my experience as a student. Ever since elementary school I was taught to use the Internet, browse our large brick and mortar libraries, and seek out third party resources. I never felt as though my teachers were hiding information from me or wanted to limit my ability to learn. If my school didn’t have the proper resource they would order it, or find a way for me to be able to read it. I could not imagine utilizing books decades old to conduct research from. Another foreign idea is that at the congress meeting very few students would speak and those that did were in agreement with the congress. Students that questioned what they were being told were kicked out of school and lecturing. All of my English courses at the university level asked me to think critically and question what I was reading at all times. I would receive a high mark on my papers if I were able to step away from the situation and fabricate a new way of looking at it. How did communist Poland ever expect to grow if they did not foster critical thinking? Communist Poland wouldn’t have existed in the first place if it weren’t for critical thinking. The country could only remain static for so long, maybe if they allowed some free thought it could have flourished for longer.
I'm glad you pointed out the “elimination of those of incorrect origin,” stipulation that universities would use to reject a student. I think that's a perfect example of how Communist countries discriminated on any basis they seemed fit or wanted to and how in the US that would never happen.
ReplyDeleteI also totally agree with you on how you feel teachers are never 'limiting your ability to learn.' I could not imagine being a student back in that time, with no text books, no library, no outside resources and no means of putting your own interpretation on your work.
I agree with you on what you stated about the resources that were/are available to us. As a student I have always had the best and most current resources at my fingertips when I needed them. I could not imagine how difficult it would be to no have current resources at my disposal. I think that people don’t think twice about the many luxuries that we have at our disposal.
ReplyDeleteI believe that the government had combating goals. They wanted to have an educated workforce, in order to further the progression of the country. However, they also wanted to keep individuals from "critically thinking" about his/her situation. A fully educated indvidual will become very self-aware, learning of new ways to think. This is exactly what the government did not want. The last thing they needed, especially when their influence became fragile, was to be overthrown by a population of educated individuals, who have begun to surpass the government.
ReplyDeleteI agree with what you're saying about the inconsistencies of the admittance process at schools here in the U.S. and I do agree with what you said about a lot of athletes being taken into schools for their athletic ability and not necessarily their academic work, but just be aware that a lot of schools will turn down top recruits if they don't have a good enough SAT score, or GPA coming out of high-school. I was getting recruited for field hockey at Harvard, and I had talked to the coaches and I was almost ready to verbally commit to the school, but then they received my SAT scores. Now my scores were not terrible but they weren't a 2400 or whatever the scores are out of on the new test, but I remember sitting in my brother's room at home on the phone with the Asst. Coach and them saying that they weren't interested in me anymore because of my SAT scores. So I do agree with what Dan's saying about showing favoritism towards athletes, but just realize that being an athlete is not a 'get into school free card.'
ReplyDelete