While the goals of social mobility, social

efficiency, and democratic equality are all

worthy educational goals, by focusing on
Brighouses broader goal of flourishing, we are
able to create an effective balance of the
aforementioned goals as well as to incorporate
key elements missing from an education with
only these three goals in mind. Brighouses
goal, however, overstates the importance of
autonomy and understates connectedness in
his explanation of what is necessary for
flourishing. I will explain the importance of
connectedness as an essential part of
flourishing and give some ideas for
implementing it.

Flourishing as
the Primary
Goal of
Education
How flourishing provides the
best balance of competing goals in
our schools
Ashley Conrad

TE 818

Since the birth of public education in the United States, there have been debates over the
purpose of education within American society. The original public schools were instituted in
order to create educated citizens. Founding father, Thomas Jefferson urged the new nation to,
Educate and inform the whole mass of the people... They are the only sure reliance for the
preservation of our liberty. While this view was echoed by a number of the Founding Fathers,
private schooling and tutors at were far more common, educating students to allow them to gain
or maintain high social or financial status. In fact, the majority of the individuals who originally
created the American democratic system were only able to do so because they were either selftaught or they had received a private education. While they espoused the ideals of a democratic
education, most of them received the benefits of an education much more focused on social
mobility or at least the maintenance of the high social status that their families already possessed.
While schooling continued to stay fairly divided with public schooling being for creating
effective citizens and private education for social mobility or maintenance, a new ideology of
education emerged in the 1920s, when public education began to extend beyond a grammar
school education to allowing students to attend high schools. These high schools, only being
attended by those who could afford not to work after the completion of a primary school
education, left behind much of the democratic focus presented in the grammar schools and put
more focus on high school education as a means of social mobility. As child labor laws
prevented children from working after receiving their basic grammar school education, students
being forced into attending the public high schools did not always find these high schools to be a
good fit for their resources and life goals. Businesses also found that the high school education
that young people received was not especially helpful to those young people when they
attempted to join the workforce. In order to change this, reformers began to promote a new and

different goal for education: social efficiency. Reformers began to create school programs that
allowed for options in more practical training for semi-skilled and skilled labor positions as well
as courses to help students become fully functioning adults with the primary goal of providing
students with an education that would help them to find a job to match their capabilities and
allow businesses to receive more highly qualified workers.
While all three of these educational goals represent positive educational outcomes, the
goals of social mobility, democratic equality, and social efficiency often become great issues of
controversy when trying to examine the running of our schools. In fact, these goals often work at
cross-purposes. For example, in order to promote the goal of social mobility, all students must be
provided with the type of education that would allow them to continue on to college. This,
however, runs contrary to the idea of social efficiency when we realize that first of all, not all of
our students possess the resources or desire to receive post-secondary instruction. Additionally,
there are many positions in our current economy that require workers who possess specialized
skills, skills that may be very different from those needed to be a college student. Similarly, it is
very common for schools to create different performance tracks to promote the goal of social
efficiency, but again, this creates conflicts with the other goals. This conception of tracking goes
completely against the conception of democratic equality, as all students are no longer united by
their shared educational experiences. Furthermore, proponents of social mobility may criticize
tracking because those that come from lower socio-economic backgrounds are often placed in
the lower tracks and thus are denied the requisite education to successfully pursue a college
degree and are forced into the same types of lower-paying jobs that their older family members
currently hold.

The reality that each of these goals has significant value, and that each of these goals is
only more fully pursued at the cost of the others has caused a constant tug-of-war over which
direction to take American public education. While it is difficult to imagine an education system
in which these goals are not present, policy makers, school boards, and individual administrators
are left with the boggling question of what is the correct balance among these competing ideals.
Philosopher Harry Brighouse proposes a solution to this challenge in proposing flourishing as the
central ideal that should drive education (Brighouse, p. 42). Brighouse looks at autonomy,
economic participation, and citizenship as being the key components to an education for
flourishing. I agree with Brighouse that flourishing should indeed be the central goal of
education, and that this goal does effectively balance out the competing interests of democratic
equality, social mobility, and social efficiency. However, I believe that while autonomy is an
essential part of flourishing, an element in the equation for flourishing is missing: connectedness.
Focusing on flourishing takes into consideration the idea that a students education serves
a broader purpose in their life than merely giving them the necessary means to procure gainful
employment, as would be found in either a social mobility or social efficiency model. It also
goes beyond merely how students should view and interact with their society and political
system, as would be the goal with democratic equality. Instead, the idea of shaping a students
education towards leading a fulfilling life would incorporate a broad range of topics so that
students are able to be exposed to potential interests that may guide them toward a career, a
hobby, a volunteer position, or simply a life-long passion. Brighouse explains,
Some children come to a lifelong love of Jane Austen of Shakespeare or Rimbaud outside school
gates, but most of us who develop those enthusiasms do so only because we have studied these (or
similar) authors in a classroom environment in which we have been manipulated or
straightforwardly coerced to put in the effort in takes to read and appreciate their work. Children
who are raised in a monolingual home within a society where their home language predominates
will not usually learn a second or third language unless they are forced to bythe school. Some
children will love the language they learn and some will deploy it in their paid work; but for many

more it will be the gateway to learning about and engaging with a culture other than that of their
society (Brighouse, p. 53)

Such an education would also entail giving students the skills to be functional adults capable of
living fulfilling lives by making sure that students leave with basic adult functioning skills like a
knowledge of proper etiquette in both social and business situations, a sufficient knowledge of
cooking, cleaning, and personal money and time management that students as future adults are
capable of caring for themselves and any potential families effectively (Brighouse, pp. 54-55).
Students need to leave their schooling with a basic level of cultural capital, critical thinking,
discussion and personal interaction skills so that they are able to enjoy rich and meaningful
conversations with others for the rest of their life.
The component upon which Brighouse seems to put the most significant weight of
flourishing is the component of autonomy. Brighouse explains autonomy this way: having
objectively good things is ones life is not enough for a flourishing life. For somebody actually to
flourish, they have to identify with the life that they are leading (Brighouse, p. 16). As part of
this autonomy concept, students need to be exposed to other beliefs and ways of life than those in
which their parents currently partake. He emphasizes the importance of critical thinking and
hearing about different beliefs from the perspectives of those who hold those beliefs.
While I feel that students discovering who they are and what they believe, becoming
individuals who can think critically about the world around them, is incredibly important as an
aspect of flourishing, I worry about autonomy being taken too far. When autonomy is taken to an
extreme, which it often is in American culture, people separate themselves so much from others
that they lose their sense of connectedness to others. The effects of this can be devastating on
longevity, on an individuals response to stress, on immune functions, and on the incidence of a
variety of specific illnesses (Olds & Schwartz, p. 50). Additionally, studies have shown that

social disconnection can increase consumerism, aggressive behavior, the use and abuse of
substances, and increasing rates of depression (Olds & Schwartz, p. 50). Without a sense of
connectedness, it is nearly impossible to expect students to flourish either while in school or later
in life.
The connectedness element of flourishing is especially important for us to incorporate
into our schooling now, when Americans are becoming more isolated than they have ever been
in our countrys history. According to psychiatrists Olds and Schwartz, Our society is in the
midst of a dramatic and progressive slide towards disconnection (Olds & Schwartz, p. 49). They
support this statement by explaining that the number of people who have no one with whom they
can discuss important issues has tripled in the last 20 years, that a quarter of all households in the
U.S. are made up of only one person, and that perceptions have changed: Being neighborly
used to mean visiting people. Now being nice to your neighbors means not bothering them
(Olds & Schwartz, p. 49). They continue by explaining that, We treat socializing as if its a
frivolous diversion from the tasks at hand rather than an activity that is essential to our wellbeing as individuals and as a community (Olds & Schwartz, p. 49). We as a culture are clearly
leaving any focus on human relationships and community connectedness behind, when these are
things that, as humans, we inherently need.
Texting and social media are also driving us to be less connected to one another. Sherry
Turkle, author of the book Alone in the Crowd, explains that many would rather text or post than
talk because it provides the possibility of our hiding from each other. They say a phone call
reveals too much (Turkle, 2011). She points out that Facebook friends, can provide the
illusion of companionship without the demands of friendship, without the demands of intimacy
(Turkle, 2011). In essence, social media outlets often allow us to know about people rather than

allowing us to know people on any profound level. Turkle goes on to list instances where
children are trying desperately to connect with their parents and their parents, while physically
present, are emotionally absent:
Children say they try to make eye contact with their parents and are frustrated because their
parents are looking down at their smart phones when they come out of school or after school
activities. Young men talk about how only a few years ago, their dads used to watch Sunday sports
with them and during the station breaks or between plays, they used to chat. Now their fathers are
too often checking their email during gamesmothers are now breastfeeding and bottle-feeding
their babies as they textAnd that child is vulnerable to interpreting [its mothers tension from
texting] as coming from within the relationship with the mother (Turkle, 2011).

Unless there is some dramatic shift in culture, students will be coming to school less and less
able to connect to other human beings; they will become more and more isolated, depressed,
aggressive, and generally discontented. In order to create students who will flourish, it is
absolutely essential that we teach students how to connect with one another. While either
autonomy or connectedness taken to extremes will not lead to flourishing, an appropriate balance
between them does. Students need to know who they are as individuals, while still being
connected to their school, their family, and their community.
In reality students need to see themselves as an essential component of something greater
than themselves. Students need to feel a part of their school, they need to care about the other
students, the teachers, the staff, and the building. They need to have impactful and lasting
relationships with these people that they encounter on a daily basis. This is connectedness. On
the other hand, they cant simply feel like one drop of water in the ocean, with no distinction
from anyone or anything else. Instead, we must bring students to a place where they feel that
they are part of a beautiful machine: each part that composes it is different and unique and
fulfills a specific purpose that only that piece can and each part needs all of the other parts for the
machine to truly work at the highest levels. Students must be sufficiently autonomous in order to

find their place in the great machine based on their interests, abilities, and personality, but not
so autonomous as to forget that any harm to any other piece will hinder the collective work being
done. In the words of the poet John Donne, No man is an island, entire of itself; every man is a
piece of the continent, a part of the main. If a clod be washed away by the sea, Europe is the
less (Donne). We need to create schools in which every individual finds their specific place
in the collective work of making the whole better.
While in his book, Brighouse discussed his vision for the necessary changes to create a
school whose focus is on flourishing, I would like to examine how we could work to create a
school whose focus on flourishing included as a major component, the promotion of
connectedness. As part of the goal of connectedness, I believe that the school must focus on three
different components of connectedness: school connectedness, family connectedness, and
community connectedness.
When examining the issue of school connectedness, I was surprised to find that the CDC
actually had produced a pamphlet for school districts and administrators to use espousing school
connectedness as a means for Improving Students Health and Academic Achievement (U.S.
Department of Health and Human Services, p. 1). They begin by explaining that school
connectedness results in students who are:

More likely to attend school regularly, stay in school longer, and have higher grades and
test scores.
Less likely to smoke cigarettes, drink alcohol, or have sexual intercourse.
Less likely to carry weapons, become involved in violence, or be injured from dangerous
activities such as drinking and driving or not wearing seat belts.
Less likely to have emotional problems, suffer from eating disorders, or experience
suicidal thoughts or attempts. (U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, p. 1)

It is clearly evident that school connectedness will increase flourishing and generally enable
students to be more successful, healthier, safer, and happier while attending school.

Unfortunately, not all studies done examining student school connections have come back
positive. A study by Barber and Olsen found that while their study group was most socially
impacted by their families and peers, only about half of students reported very positive
connections with their teachers (Barber & Olsen, pp. 310-311). In order to improve school
connectedness, the CDC explains that students need: adult support, belonging to a positive peer
group, commitment to education, and a positive school environment (U.S. Department of
Health and Human Services, pp. 1-3). In order to accomplish these things, I think that we might
need to organize students into groups for projects, discussions, and problem-solving activities.
We might need to give them assignments requiring them to have face-to-face or over-the-phone
conversations with adults that they do not know very well. Creating school connectedness might
mean eliminating the use of student and teacher ranking systems that promote competition and
discourage collaboration. It might mean rearranging the load of teachers so that a portion of
their day can be focused on connecting with students. This might mean having smaller class sizes
so that teachers are better able to get to know each of their students. This might mean teachers
meeting with students before school, at lunch, and after school individually or in small groups in
order to get to know students better. It might involve having comment/concern boxes in rooms
for students to be able to anonymously, or not, explain an issue that they are seeing in the school
or classroom. It might mean doing surveys of teachers and students to see which students none of
the teachers feel that they know and which students feel like they have no one they could go to
with a problem. I would love to see each school, grade-level, and individual class take on a
project each year to either benefit the school or broader community in which each member of the
school, grade-level, or individual class has a specific task to perform as part of this larger whole-

group effort. This would allow student the opportunity to be united toward something greater
than themselves where each individual has a part to play.
In addition to students feeling connected to the school, the school needs to make an effort
to help students to feel more connected to their families and by brining families into the school
and making them feel welcome. This might look like family social events held after school or
parents being invited into the classroom to help. It might mean that parents get to help decorate
the school each year for different celebrations or that parent speakers are invited in to discuss
their area of expertise with the students. Schools should continually work to make sure that
parents are informed about school events, and as much as possible, informed about what their
students are learning on a regular basis. Through whatever means, it should demonstrate loudly
to students that the school respects and values their parents as contributors to the school and that
the parents respect and value the school.
Similar strategies could be used with community connectedness: bringing in community
members to explain their expertise in a certain area, to be reading buddies with elementary
students, to be mentors to middle and high school students. The study completed by Baber and
Olsen shows that very few members of their study spend any significant time with adult
members of their community (Barber & Olsen, p. 311). Since this is clearly a lack in our current
society, it would be fantastic to connect every student in school with a caring community
member who they could talk to and do activities with each week. Creating community
connectedness could also mean that the school would reach out to the community, sending
students to job shadow with community members, having school groups participate in
community activities, having students, staff or both serve at local charitable organizations. As
part of their school connectedness projects, students and staffs could create museum exhibits for

the local historical center, perform a play for the local retirement home, beautify the local park or
library. Again, the community should be informed about what is going on within the schools and
the schools need to be active participants in the activities of the community.
I think the words of John Adams capture it best when he says, There are two types of
education One should teach us how to make a living, and the other how to live. It is my hope
that by working toward an education system focused on flourishing, with connectedness playing
an essential role, that we will finally be able to accomplish the latter type of education in the
American public school system.

Works Cited
Barber, B., & Olsen, J. (1997, April). Socialization in Context: Connection, Regulation, and Autonomy in
the Family, School, and Neighboorhood, and With Peers. Journal of Adolesent Research, 12(2),
pp. 287-315. Retrieved from jar.sagepub.com.proxy1.cl.msu.edu/content/12/2/287
Brighouse, H. (2006). On Education . New York: Routledge.
Donne, J. (n.d.). Mediation 17. The Literature Network. Retrieved from http://www.onlineliterature.com/donne/409/
Olds, J., & Schwartz, R. (2009, Mar/Apr). The Lonely American. Utne, pp. 48-51.
Turkle, S. (2011, June). Questionaire: Alone in the Crowd: Sherry Turkle says social networking is eroding
our ability to live comfortably offline. (M. Price, Interviewer) American Psychological
Association. Retrieved from http://www.apa.org/monitor/2011/06/social-networking.aspx
U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. (2009). Fostering School Connectedness: Improving
Student Health and Academic Achievement. Retrieved from Centers for Disease Control and
Prevention:
http://www.cdc.gov/healthyyouth/protective/pdf/connectedness_administrators.pdf