23 March 2009

Laptops, iPods, cell phones, brand name clothes, bags, shoes...

No, this is not my list for Santa Claus. Nor do they constitute my wish list for the birthday fairy. I was just mentioning some of the gadgets that many of my students have in their possession. Students attending international schools have earned a bit of a reputation for themselves: rich, privileged, smart elites. . . . They come from the socio-cultural status and milieu unfamiliar to many of their teachers and others who support their learning and school life in general. This discrepancy results in perceptive differences, and often adults see them as affluent and privileged youngsters or ‘spoiled brats'.

But are they? Let us take a look at the historical development of international schools to understand where many students and their families come from. International schools owe their existence and developments to expatriate workers' needs for their children's education. These expatriates ranged from missionaries to civil engineers to business entrepreneurs to people in uniform. Different groups or communities of expatriates came together to establish schools that could provide fine education for their children. Things were not exactly like ‘back home', but they had a vision for the kind of education that would appropriately prepare these young global nomads for their eventual repatriation or future educational and vocational endeavours.

Well, this sort of thing could have happened in any pioneering frontier in any country. But then, the world began to develop at a faster rate. Strong economies merged and sought new business frontiers. Capitalism as such saw capitals being built on a variety of commodifiable items, from financial capitals in the traditional sense to political, cultural, linguistic, and other symbolic capitals. In education, these can be found in different forms and media, and international schools became an attractive new device to cater to these different ‘capital' investments. Educationally, however, they are and should be non-profit, self-sufficient organizations. But in reality, fees are high and collected from business enterprises, either directly in the form of employment benefits package or individuals opting for this type of education. It is undeniable that many private, fee-collecting international schools excel in the curriculum design and delivery compared to state-funded schools struggling to maintain their operation. International schools can thus be regarded as institutions founded on financial capital for investment in symbolic capitals to maintain and develop their
operations.

So, can the smart-looking children with expensive gadgets and dress be simply regarded as rich, spoiled brats? No, because they represent a certain social class and the education they receive is more likely to contribute to the sustenance of what that class represents than not. Is that all there is to it? No, because instilling the kind of values to let individuals discern the good use of capitals from the potentially harmful and egotistical uses can only be achieved through sound education. And a whole community of learning needs to be behind such a vision to teach the youngsters how to appreciate material goods, put them to good use, both for their own community and beyond, and for their own individual potential. Education should focus on decision-making abilities as well as cultivating an eye to appreciate quality, aesthetics, efficiency, and cleverness of design and functions of human creations. So, materialism in this sense is an art to be taught. It is what to do with our perceptions, understanding, and compassion for others that remain crucial in the educational dialogues of the late-capitalist society we inhabit with all types of capitals to invest in.