Learning in Chains

By Herman M. Lagon

We often view education as a panacea that answers society’s most profound problems. Education advocates are quick to assert that schooling and knowledge are keys to personal and national success, and they are not entirely wrong. Yet, this single-minded focus ignores a critical question: Could education itself be a part of the problem?

There is ample evidence suggesting that education, as currently structured, may entrench inequalities rather than alleviate them. Despite its altruistic goals, it often categorizes, limits, and constraints. Paulo Freire, the Brazilian educator and philosopher known for “Pedagogy of the Oppressed,” believed traditional education systems can oppress. Passivity in the classroom makes critical thinking less important than conformity. Freire saw this as an education that disciplines rather than liberates, creating a compliant workforce rather than thoughtful, empowered citizens.

Today, educators and policymakers strive to reform curricula and enhance teacher training, but they sometimes overlook how the structure itself limits potential. In our country, for example, despite years of reforms, students’ reading, math, and science competencies remain below global standards. Studies have shown that the root of this crisis is not always lack of effort but the system’s inherent design—one that is slow to adapt, often rigid, and focused on producing workers for an economy rather than nurturing human development. An endless focus on standardized testing has only exacerbated this problem, creating classrooms where memorization is prioritized over actual comprehension and creativity.

Furthermore, formal education can disregard the significance of local wisdom and practical knowledge. For instance, a farmer may have decades of experience in sustainable agriculture, adapting practices handed down through generations. But when agricultural experts arrive with “modern” methods, the farmer’s insights are frequently dismissed as outdated. This dynamic, seen in development projects worldwide, reflects a narrow vision of education that overlooks local wisdom (Tigabu, 2023). In contrast, a holistic approach would integrate these insights with academic knowledge, fostering respect for diverse ways of knowing. But when education is used to impose, rather than learn from, these realities, it becomes part of the problem.

Likewise, the rise of neoliberal educational frameworks has resulted in what can be described as “productivity at all costs.” Students are often treated as cogs in an economic machine, conditioned to prioritize productivity over personal well-being. This has led to a culture where rest, curiosity, and reflection are secondary to grades, deadlines, and measurable outcomes. The result? Students feel disconnected and, at times, dehumanized, as education becomes a relentless pursuit of achievement rather than a journey of growth. The late-night study sessions, sacrifices of mental health, and pressure to excel only reinforce this exhausting cycle (Hiñosa, 2021).

Education also holds the danger of perpetuating economic divides. In private and public schooling contexts, socio-economic disparities are stark. Access to better-resourced private schools is an advantage tied to family income, not individual potential. Similarly, tertiary education, once considered a direct path to economic stability, has now become a financial strain for many families. As a result, young people graduate saddled with debt, and the guarantee of a better life is anything but assured. In the U.S., for instance, student debt has ballooned to over $1 trillion—a crisis echoed by graduates worldwide. Consequently, instead of being the bridge to a better life, education becomes a barrier in itself, leading to stress, financial struggles, and a diluted sense of purpose.

During the COVID-19 pandemic, we saw education’s rigidity laid bare. As traditional schooling structures collapsed, learning took on new forms—remote classes, independent projects, even community-based learning. This period was a stark reminder that education should not be confined to classrooms. In fact, “learning to learn”—a 21st-century skill essential for adapting to change—has been the real lesson for many. However, the pandemic also highlighted the stark digital divide. Wealthier students continued their studies with relative ease, while those from marginalized backgrounds faced connectivity issues, device shortages, and inadequate learning environments (Luz, 2020). These inequities underscore how education can be exclusionary, leaving vulnerable students further behind.

The education system also neglects students’ socio-emotional needs. Social psychologists argue that self-worth and mental well-being are critical components of effective learning, yet these are often sidelined in favor of academic achievements. The intense pressure to perform and meet expectations is detrimental, especially for students who struggle academically. Even as the Department of Education acknowledges these issues, structural change needs to be more active, weighed down by bureaucracy and limited funding. Education reforms too often focus on results, failing to consider the holistic development of learners, leaving students mentally exhausted and emotionally disconnected from their education.

Critics argue that education’s tendency to label and categorize students is another facet of its complicity in social inequality. The reality is that students learn differently; some thrive in traditional settings, while others excel in hands-on environments. Yet, our system rewards conformity, sidelining unique strengths in favor of predefined metrics. In the Philippines, students must meet “Most Essential Learning Competencies,” which often translates to rigid, test-based criteria. This standardization misses the vast array of human potential that lies outside these boundaries, limiting how students perceive their own capacities and stifling individuality.

Additionally, education that teaches only to replicate existing systems overlooks its responsibility to empower students to imagine alternatives. Holistic education usually emphasizes self-reflection and service, urging students to connect personal goals with a broader social mission. Education should ideally equip students to discern their path with a purpose that benefits not only themselves but their communities. When this reflective, purposeful approach is missing, education becomes a hollow pursuit, detached from students’ lived realities and future aspirations.

To turn education into a solution rather than a part of the problem, it must be reimagined as a dynamic and inclusive experience that values both intellect and character. Schools and universities should consider co-learning spaces where students engage actively with communities and contribute beyond the classroom. They should seek out opportunities for dialogue, bringing the wisdom of different generations to the table. Instead of dictating a curriculum, teachers could help students explore with critical thinking and self-awareness tools.

Education’s strength is its ability to grow—not just in content but in how it fosters a community that values curiosity, collaboration, and compassion. For education to be transformative, we must question norms, challenge assumptions, and be more inclusive and flexible. It is not enough to adjust the school calendar, cut the competencies, or tweak the curriculum; we need a profound shift that centers learning as a shared, meaningful endeavor. Education should be less about feeding young minds with facts and more about helping them cultivate a critical awareness that leads to genuine understanding and action.

 

At its best, education can be the bedrock of a more just society, an invitation to explore and transform. But when it clings to outdated hierarchies and rigid structures, it loses this potential, risking its role as a positive force. It is high time we rethink how we approach education if we want to truly tackle the issues it sometimes upholds without meaning to. Instead of treating education as a rigid structure, let us see it as a way to liberate, spark curiosity, and inspire change. Doing this can create a generation of skilled, deeply aware, compassionate, and world-changing learners.

***

Doc H fondly describes himself as a “student of and for life” who, like many others, aspires to a life-giving and why-driven world grounded in social justice and the pursuit of happiness. His views do not necessarily reflect those of the institutions he is employed or connected with.