This is part 5 of a 13 part series.
Once the requirements for a software product are finalized, the design process is initiated. The design is meant to create a structured approach that needs to be followed by everyone involved in building process. This is the step at which the mapping of ideas to real world takes places. The constraints are isolated and possible solutions are designed. The purpose of each and every component to be used is outlined and documented as Functional Specification. The Functional specification now becomes the guide for the building team to start developing each component from scratch. The vision of designers is the key to success of translation. A design failure cannot be recovered in any latter stage. The only way is to redesign and redo the building.
Similar to designing, the education phase of student’s life should help the system map the talent in relevant fields. The initial years dedicated to explore variety of topics enabling parents or guardians in designing future course work. But the alarming rate of failure of the system to appreciate and nurture the exceptional talent is something that could lead to downfall of our civilization even before global warming could do so.
The failure in this case has to be shared by both system and parents equally. The system is unable to create a specialized curriculum that can help students showcase their potential at early ages. The curriculum is just not providing enough depth to cater to curiosity of the young minds. Instead their innovation is discouraged as an unnecessary distraction. The course work needs to focus more on the human qualities that define character instead of just basic definition oriented texts.
Parents on the other hand are more than happy to join in with the curriculum to destroy curiosity. By neglecting their shortcomings to connect with curious minds, they just increase the burden on schools to nurture the talent. A probable cause for this ignorance could be a broken communication with school authorities.
Communication between the parents and teachers is vital for a child’s career. An evidence of this failure is parents forcing their children into a candidature of careers which they feel were the best when they first thought about this topic (often as an afterthought). And often that best career is most financially rewarding career at that point of time. This idea is somehow never addressed by teachers in school. Often students assume the silence of education system as approval of being mediocre in an incompatible field. This silence forces the students into losing faith in a system that could help them define their professional lives. The experts are part of the system and have better insight about these decisions compared to the parents.
The disheartening part of this design process is its goal, money. Education was not designed to monetize curiosity. The part of benefiting financially should be left to an individual as a decision to be made in adult life. Parents and teachers predefine the goal of a career leaving very narrow path for the children to follow. By the time we realize this flaw in the process, it is already too late to fix it at individual level. Since an individual cannot fix it to benefit himself, then why should he care to fix it at all, isn’t that what the design was always planned to be?, short sighted and self serving.
SDLC Series iterator : I : Preface , II : Introduction , III: Normal Perspective , IV: Requirements Gathering , V: Functional Specifications , VI : Development , VII : Testing , VIII : Alpha Release , IX : Beta Release , X : UAT , XI : Migration , XII : Release Notes , XIII : EOF , Book Shelf: Bibliography