What is the purpose of education?

[robertsona]

So in my English class we finished reading a play called The History Boys a little while ago (very good play, even if some of it strikes me as outlandish). The play essentially dedicates itself to analyzing the typical dichotomy of pedagogy in today's schools, and how it affects the kids in the play who are trying to get into Oxford and Cambridge.

There are two teachers featured in the play, Hector and Irwin (I know this seems more like an advertisement for the play than a Critical Thinking thread thus far, but don't worry!). Hector teaches "learning for learning's sake". He has the kids study quotes and poems and engages in class discussions that sometimes run off into intellectual tangents--you've probably had a Hector before. He's that English teacher you loved in 11th grade or so. He's the one that really boosted your interest in whatever field of study you ended up pursuing. This is the type of teacher who turns students into full-fledged scholars; scholars into professors, etc.

Then there's Irwin. Irwin is the poster boy for pedagogical pragmatism; he's introduced into the fictional school of the play for one reason and one only: to get these kids into "Oxbridge", as it's referred. He teaches the kids simply how to take tests well, how to write essays that admissions officers will like, etc. Arguably, students who have Irwins for teachers are more likely to become Fortune 500 CEOs and the like. But at what cost? Is it worth the potential sacrifice of priceless intellectual stimulation?

What do y'all think? Hector, Irwin, both? What pedagogical model do you think best fits our world today? Is living a typically "successful" life or an intellectually fulfilling one better? Tell me what you think.

Edit: Wow, this post is a lot shorter than I thought it would be.