Prevention in school: Upbringing or/and educating?

Interesting Contibutions

One of the definitions of prevention education is about ”learning for being”. Some authores in the field of education belive that so called traditional school emphasizes the cognitive sides of education and informational goals more than moral education and social functions of school and formative goals. So the traditional school offers only education and not upbringing and gives too little empfasis on development of personality, attitudes, abilities, etc… That way the meaning of school isn’t anymore establishing values and rules of social cognition. School is cionsidered as something alienated, repressive and unusuble. The meaning of school should be to enable the student, according to social needs, the recognition, guidance and development of his/her creative potentials, to make the student able to create his/her environment or free expression of personality and become able to controle himself/herself (see Žižek 1985). The structure of school should be changed so that the emphasis is given to ”leraning for cognition” and greater to ”learning for being”.

We thing that the part of (Slovenian) pedagogical theory is trying to connect the disunion between ”learning for being” and ”learning for cognition”, in the other words disunion between upbringing and education, because the separation of those isnt’t all that simple. To say that the education (and preventive education) doesn’t have the formative power can lead us the wrong path. It is simply impossible to give only upbringing or only education because one of the properties of education is education through contents, methods of work and personality of the teacher. 
Key words: prevention, preventive education, education, upbringing, learning for being. 
Ph.D. Andreja Hočevar