Educational
planning should aim at meeting the educational needs of the entire population
of all age groups. While the traditional structure of education as a three
layer hierarchy from the primary stage to the university represents the core,
we should not overlook the periphery which is equally important. Under modern
conditions, workers need to rewind, or renew their enthusiasm, or strike out in
a new direction, or improve their skills as much as any university professor.
The retired and the aged have their needs as well. Educational planning, in
their words, should take care of the needs of everyone.
Our
structures of education have been built up on the assumption that there is a
terminal point to education. This basic defect has become all the more harmful
today. A UNESCO report, titled "Learning to Be" prepared by Edgar
Faure and others in 1973 asserts that the education of children must prepare
the future adult for various forms of self-learning. A viable education system
of the future should consist of modules with different kinds of functions
serving a diversity of constituents. And performance, not the period of study,
should be the basis for credentials. The writing is already on the wall.
In
view of the fact that the significance of a commitment of lifelong learning and
lifetime education is being discussed only in recent years even in
educationally advanced countries, the possibility of the idea becoming an
integral part of educational thinking seems to be a far cry. For, to move in
that direction means much more than some simple rearrangement of the present
organization of education. But a good beginning can be made by developing Open
University programs for older learners of different categories and introducing
extension services in the conventional colleges and schools. Also, these
institutions should learn to cooperate with the numerous community
organizations such as libraries, museums, municipal recreational programs,
health services etc.
Q: According to the author, what should be the basis for awarding credentials?
Educational
planning should aim at meeting the educational needs of the entire population
of all age groups. While the traditional structure of education as a three
layer hierarchy from the primary stage to the university represents the core,
we should not overlook the periphery which is equally important. Under modern
conditions, workers need to rewind, or renew their enthusiasm, or strike out in
a new direction, or improve their skills as much as any university professor.
The retired and the aged have their needs as well. Educational planning, in
their words, should take care of the needs of everyone.
Our
structures of education have been built up on the assumption that there is a
terminal point to education. This basic defect has become all the more harmful
today. A UNESCO report, titled "Learning to Be" prepared by Edgar
Faure and others in 1973 asserts that the education of children must prepare
the future adult for various forms of self-learning. A viable education system
of the future should consist of modules with different kinds of functions
serving a diversity of constituents. And performance, not the period of study,
should be the basis for credentials. The writing is already on the wall.
In
view of the fact that the significance of a commitment of lifelong learning and
lifetime education is being discussed only in recent years even in
educationally advanced countries, the possibility of the idea becoming an
integral part of educational thinking seems to be a far cry. For, to move in
that direction means much more than some simple rearrangement of the present
organization of education. But a good beginning can be made by developing Open
University programs for older learners of different categories and introducing
extension services in the conventional colleges and schools. Also, these
institutions should learn to cooperate with the numerous community
organizations such as libraries, museums, municipal recreational programs,
health services etc.
Q: According to the author, what measures should Open University adopt to meet modern sequence means?
Educational
planning should aim at meeting the educational needs of the entire population
of all age groups. While the traditional structure of education as a three
layer hierarchy from the primary stage to the university represents the core,
we should not overlook the periphery which is equally important. Under modern
conditions, workers need to rewind, or renew their enthusiasm, or strike out in
a new direction, or improve their skills as much as any university professor.
The retired and the aged have their needs as well. Educational planning, in
their words, should take care of the needs of everyone.
Our
structures of education have been built up on the assumption that there is a
terminal point to education. This basic defect has become all the more harmful
today. A UNESCO report, titled "Learning to Be" prepared by Edgar
Faure and others in 1973 asserts that the education of children must prepare
the future adult for various forms of self-learning. A viable education system
of the future should consist of modules with different kinds of functions
serving a diversity of constituents. And performance, not the period of study,
should be the basis for credentials. The writing is already on the wall.
In
view of the fact that the significance of a commitment of lifelong learning and
lifetime education is being discussed only in recent years even in
educationally advanced countries, the possibility of the idea becoming an
integral part of educational thinking seems to be a far cry. For, to move in
that direction means much more than some simple rearrangement of the present
organization of education. But a good beginning can be made by developing Open
University programs for older learners of different categories and introducing
extension services in the conventional colleges and schools. Also, these
institutions should learn to cooperate with the numerous community
organizations such as libraries, museums, municipal recreational programs,
health services etc.
Q: Which of the following is most opposite in meaning to the word "integral" as used in the passage?
Educational
planning should aim at meeting the educational needs of the entire population
of all age groups. While the traditional structure of education as a three
layer hierarchy from the primary stage to the university represents the core,
we should not overlook the periphery which is equally important. Under modern
conditions, workers need to rewind, or renew their enthusiasm, or strike out in
a new direction, or improve their skills as much as any university professor.
The retired and the aged have their needs as well. Educational planning, in
their words, should take care of the needs of everyone.
Our
structures of education have been built up on the assumption that there is a
terminal point to education. This basic defect has become all the more harmful
today. A UNESCO report, titled "Learning to Be" prepared by Edgar
Faure and others in 1973 asserts that the education of children must prepare
the future adult for various forms of self-learning. A viable education system
of the future should consist of modules with different kinds of functions
serving a diversity of constituents. And performance, not the period of study,
should be the basis for credentials. The writing is already on the wall.
In
view of the fact that the significance of a commitment of lifelong learning and
lifetime education is being discussed only in recent years even in
educationally advanced countries, the possibility of the idea becoming an
integral part of educational thinking seems to be a far cry. For, to move in
that direction means much more than some simple rearrangement of the present
organization of education. But a good beginning can be made by developing Open
University programs for older learners of different categories and introducing
extension services in the conventional colleges and schools. Also, these
institutions should learn to cooperate with the numerous community
organizations such as libraries, museums, municipal recreational programs,
health services etc.
Q: What is the main thrust of the author?
