Maybe education is not the answer to economic growth

[Winston001]

This book is pretty counter-intuitive for me but I'm having to revise my opinions. I'm a firm believer in education because an informed society becomes a better society. New ideas spring up and the standard of living improves.

Weeell.......maybe the cart comes before the horse. Alison Wolfe a professor of education at London University has done a study and come to the conclusion that economic development comes first. Better education is made possible by the strong economy.........but that comes afterwards.

So sending our children to poly-techs and universities at all costs could be a mistake. This is completely contrary to most OECD planning and a bit flabbergasting.

http://www.la-articles.org.uk/eoe.htm

[Woodman]

Actually I am all for dumbing down the population to reduce economic gowth.

Economic growth = population growth = pollution = used up resources = the end.

[phill-k]

Life was much simpler when education was for the privileged, lets face it it hasn't helped anyone the masses finding out just how much our gentry like to screw us and all we have created - just thinking about sir fkn r Douglas and his $44grand trips last year on the tax payer even though he has already screwed NZ to the point that he couldn't spend all his ill gotten gains.

Fuck the economy educate the masses so that we don't just believe all we are told - Pike River Mine disaster comes to mind.

[Motu]

So the wealthy breed more? Sounds like we need more poor people then.

[twinbruva]

So the wealthy breed more? Sounds like we need more poor people then.

Like Haiti?

[bogan]

Actually I am all for dumbing down the population to reduce economic gowth.

Economic growth = population growth = pollution = used up resources = the end.

shoot the unemployed, then you just get economic growth, and smart/hardworking people, we will colonize mars and divert asteroids into our orbit for mineral wealth in a matter of years

[steve_t]

Less people seeking higher education may aid a country's economic development but with any given generation, do you really want to discourage your child from gaining qualifications which, on average, would lead them to a higher income and standard of living for themselves, to benefit the country as a whole? Sorry for the long sentence.
How about keeping education and keeping advanced research going, but telling everyone that no matter what profession they are in, no matter what qualifications they have, that the maximum income they can receive is eg. $70,000 and any more that they would have earned would be diverted to benefit the country's economy. Oops, would that be labelled as communism?

[Dave Lobster]

Oops, would that be labelled as communism?

Obviously.. because the smart people would all leave.

Wouldn't it be a better idea if people that don't go down the degree route don't get stigmatised for it??

[Winston001]

Less people seeking higher education may aid a country's economic development but with any given generation, do you really want to discourage your child from gaining qualifications which, on average, would lead them to a higher income and standard of living for themselves, to benefit the country as a whole?

I don't think she is saying we shouldn't have higher education. Instead she is challenging the widespread assumption that high education automatically leads to high economic growth. For example Switzerland has lowish university participation but the strongest economy in the world.

Egypt increased education from 1980.....and became slightly worse off on the poverty index.

How about keeping education and keeping advanced research going, but telling everyone that no matter what profession they are in, no matter what qualifications they have, that the maximum income they can receive is eg. $70,000 and any more that they would have earned would be diverted to benefit the country's economy. Oops, would that be labelled as communism?

Because as Dave says, they'd leave.

But I do agree with you. Already we are seeing university graduates working at low-end jobs because there aren't any openings for them. What is likely to happen is salaries will diminish for the better educated because everyone else will be better educated too.

[Pascal]

Less people seeking higher education may aid a country's economic development but with any given generation, do you really want to discourage your child from gaining qualifications which, on average, would lead them to a higher income and standard of living for themselves, to benefit the country as a whole?

Yes, because education for "higher income and standard of living" is meaningless and putting the cart before the horse. It essentially creates a group of people with shiny pieces of paper and no real skill.

It would be better to encourage children to follow their aptitudes and interests first; to see what type of future they can build from that and to seek education when they wish to further their knowledge. See if they can build something - create something new - follow their interests.

And not just blindly follow the "study - work - die" pattern.

[mashman]

shoot the unemployed, then you just get economic growth, and smart/hardworking people, we will colonize mars and divert asteroids into our orbit for mineral wealth in a matter of years

Shoot those that are incarcerated and you may get the unemployed into work under threat of death... I dunno, such a waste to shoot the unemployed who are we gonna test our fricken lazers on

Yes, because education for "higher income and standard of living" is meaningless and putting the cart before the horse. It essentially creates a group of people with shiny pieces of paper and no real skill.

It would be better to encourage children to follow their aptitudes and interests first; to see what type of future they can build from that and to seek education when they wish to further their knowledge. See if they can build something - create something new - follow their interests.

And not just blindly follow the "study - work - die" pattern.

What he said.

[Banditbandit]

Yes, because education for "higher income and standard of living" is meaningless and putting the cart before the horse. It essentially creates a group of people with shiny pieces of paper and no real skill.

It would be better to encourage children to follow their aptitudes and interests first; to see what type of future they can build from that and to seek education when they wish to further their knowledge. See if they can build something - create something new - follow their interests.

And not just blindly follow the "study - work - die" pattern.

I agree .. we have created a society which has fetishized qualifications.

A job you would have once got off the street (and done really well) now requires a certificate .. a job that required a certificate now requires a diploma and what was once a diploma job now requires a degree ...

People are struggling to sit in classrooms and pass courses when they would actually be very good at the job ... (I've even seen a unit standard for "Mucking Out a Stable" .. this is a course for shovelling shit Fa Gawd's Sake !!!!)

And consequently, with higher qualifications they want to be paid more money - but they haven't done anything to earn employer more money - just got a bit of paper that says they might be able to do a particlular job (I don't believe bits of paper - only what I see people actually do ... some of the PhDs I've worked with are a complete waste of space ...)

And many of them at Uni are taught by people who left school, went to Uni .. wound up as lecturers and have never left - taught by people stuck in the Ivory Tower with no real knowledge of much outside the academic bullshit environment.

So the cost of labour goes up, but not the real economic earnings of employers.

Now, I believe that education is the way out of the poverty trap and the drugs/alcohol/crime cycle - but I don't believe that education, as such, will improve the economy overall - education trains people to fit in - it stifles creativity. The best entrepreneurial minds have probably not been to university where they were told their ideas wouldn't work (Bob Jones disagreed with his lecturers, who told him that if he thought his ideas would work, why didn't he try them - so he did ...with the obvious results ...)

And the "Information Society" is bullshit ... it doesn't create the jobs where the ideas are ... for instance, the people in Silicon Valley may well have earned lots of money designing computer chips ... but the peope making them are all employed in Asia - especially India ... so Americans miss out on these jobs and their economy suffers ...

I could go on .. but you get the idea ...

(PS, I work in a tertiary institute ... bit ironic - but it pays for my bikes, my house and my boats ... and I was 38-years-old before I got into the business)

[steve_t]

I don't think she is saying we shouldn't have higher education. Instead she is challenging the widespread assumption that high education automatically leads to high economic growth. For example Switzerland has lowish university participation but the strongest economy in the world.

Sorry, the point of my post wasn't clear enough. What I was saying is people, in general, don't give a crap about their country's economic growth. What they currently want for themselves and their children is the best quality of life and on average the best way to achieve this is through gaining qualifications. I don't dispute that a higher percentage of people seeking higher education would remove a significant proportion from the productive workforce and thus the economy would suffer.

Yes, because education for "higher income and standard of living" is meaningless and putting the cart before the horse. It essentially creates a group of people with shiny pieces of paper and no real skill.

It would be better to encourage children to follow their aptitudes and interests first; to see what type of future they can build from that and to seek education when they wish to further their knowledge. See if they can build something - create something new - follow their interests.

And not just blindly follow the "study - work - die" pattern.

I wholeheartedly agree. I know so many people who have graduated in the last 10 years who are now in jobs that have nothing to do with their degrees/diplomas. What a waste of time and money that was for them! And the reason they couldn't get jobs in their fields was because there are so many other people that did the same qualification. The workforce definitely needs to have a wide range of people in it with different skills to occupy different roles. I also agree that it's crazy for people to go to university just for the sake of it, but speaking to a lot of school leavers, it's amazing how many of them have no idea what they want to do with their lives. Don't they have career advisors in schools anymore?

[Banditbandit]

I also agree that it's crazy for people to go to university just for the sake of it, but speaking to a lot of school leavers, it's amazing how many of them have no idea what they want to do with their lives. Don't they have career advisors in schools anymore?

I've never known what I wanted to do with my life - still don't - and I'm 55 ...

I wouldn't worry about an 18 or 19 year old not knowing ... hell they still have raging hormones to worry about ...

[MisterD]

I agree .. we have created a society which has fetishized qualifications.

A job you would have once got off the street (and done really well) now requires a certificate .. a job that required a certificate now requires a diploma and what was once a diploma job now requires a degree ...

Exactly. The recent (ie last 15-20 year) drive to put as many people as possible through tertiary education has achieved the following:

1) The devaluation of the degree
2) A wind-fall for MBA providers
3) Huge debt for graduates who now have to pay their own way rather than the brightest x% being subsidised.
4) A shortage of electricians, plumbers....

The underlying message I received through my schooling was "trades are for thick people". I'd be a sparky if I had my time again.