|
in 774 Keith Hudson said (in part)
"The reason why such a large part of the education system in the larger
countries has become dumbed down is that the majority of the skills required in
the job market have also become dumbed down as a result of industrialisation,
mass production, automation, computerisation and rationalisation generally by
the larger manufacturers (and many services) which increasingly supply the bulk
of the staple consumer goods of today's society.
For example, the
manufacture of a car, which used to take 70 or 80 person-hours within living
memory now takes only 25. "
Sorry, Keith, but you have got the facts right, but
the interpretation wrong. I used to work at Ford Australia in the 1980's
when Ford basically took anyone straight off a boat into the plant. Sure,
there are now many fewer workers, but they are hugely more skilled, and better
paid, than their forebears.
Charles Brass Chairman futures foundation phone:1300
727328 (International 61 3 9459 0244) fax: 61 3 9459 0344 PO Box
122 Fairfield 3078 www.futuresfoundation.org.au
the mission of the futures foundation is:
"...to engage all Australians
in creating a better future..."
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Sunday, June 19, 2005 6:17 PM
Subject: [Futurework] The future of
education
747. The future of education
In the last
few weeks I've been changing my mind about the need for education vouchers.
Or, rather, I've been changing my interpretation of what has been the reason
why the standard of education in state schools in the larger developed
countries has become increasingly dumbed down.
I still think that
education vouchers will be inevitable in several countries such as England and
America, and the short item below from today's Independent on Sunday
concerning the growing amount of extra private tuition being paid for by
parents of state schoolchildren is further grist for the mill.
I am now
beginning to think that the basic reason is that a country's total education
system -- state plus private -- really reflects the structure of the job
market. The reason why such a large part of the education system in the larger
countries has become dumbed down is that the majority of the skills required
in the job market have also become dumbed down as a result of
industrialisation, mass production, automation, computerisation and
rationalisation generally by the larger manufacturers (and many services)
which increasingly supply the bulk of the staple consumer goods of today's
society.
For example, the manufacture of a car, which used to take 70
or 80 person-hours within living memory now takes only 25. Even within the
last five years, the largest American manufacturer of domestic washing
machines reports that the number of person-hours required to assemble each one
has declined from about 3.5 hours to 1.5 hours.
Forty years ago, few
(highly-paid) car factory workers in my home town of Coventry -- and I knew
many because I supervised them -- thought that secondary education or any form
of examination qualifications were unimportant, particularly for their sons.
Why? Because, after a quiet word with someone in the personnel office, they
could always get a job for their sons in their own workplace. Even if it meant
their sons being "on the brush" at a lowish wage to start with, their sons
could almost automatically advance to higher-paid machining jobs within a few
years -- even into the most sacrosanct (and highly-paid) of all of them, the
toolroom -- according to the informal "apprenticeship" system then
operating.
All the time, however, automation was being incorporated
step by step and this, together with the post-war baby-boom effect of the late
1970s, produced a dramatic increase in youth unemployment. Since then the
prospects for the young have only been partly alleviated by an increasing
number of (generally poorly-paid) service-type jobs which have blossomed in
developed countries because of the prosperity given to us by the ever-cheaper
cost of energy from decade to decade.
At the same time as the skills of
most jobs have become dumbed down since, say, about the 1870s, a growing
minority of very high-skill jobs -- in administration, financial services and
in science and technology -- has been necessary. Whereas, in the 1870s, the
number of these jobs would probably have amounted to no more than 5% of the
population, the proportion today probably amounts to about 20-25% of the
total. And the necessity for these sorts of jobs is growing. In England, this
number of highly-paid, highly-skilled (or at least highly-protected) jobs is
almost completely supplied by the 7% of those who were educated in private
schools and who were, until fairly recently, catered for by a small group of
highly favoured universities which formed, and then supplied, the networks of
administrators, media and financial people, politicians and scientists who
actually run the country even though they have to look over their shoulders
occasionally at the whims of the public when it votes in general
elections.
But even this "establishment" of 25% of the population is
insufficient and the big divide in general quality between the state education
system and the private fee-paying schools has somehow got to be bridged unless
countries such as China and India -- where education is much more highly
valued (and often paid for) by even poor parents -- will not overtake us and
consign us to the trash bin. This is why there is now so much controversy over
the standard of state education in the larger developed countries and why, in
England and America, quite a number of alternatives are now being
(hesitatingly) explored by officialdom -- charter schools, home schooling,
special schools and (in England anyway) a new breed of low-fee private
schools, less pretentious than our traditional ones for the rich and
better-off middle class.
It is very interesting -- and probably
significant -- that state education has only appreciably declined in quality
during the last century in the larger countries. The standard of state
education in the Nordic countries, Switzerland and Singapore is much higher.
This is probably due to the fact that small developed countries -- if they are
to survive and prosper in the modern world -- need a proportionately larger
basic overhead of high-skill jobs than larger countries even though their
"ordinary" jobs are also dumbing down. Accordingly, their social and income
divisions are nowhere near as evident as in countries such as England and
America.
Where does this interpretation leave us? It leaves me in the
position of no longer wanting to be repeatedly calling for more private
education and free choice. It will happen anyway by parental pressure at the
margin -- such as shown in the item below. Unfortunately, this process will
take at least a couple of generations and a large number of children with
potentially bright minds at birth will continue to be blunted by both poor
state education and lack of motivation by parents who have themselves received
only a rudimentary state education.
In the meantime, the growing
social, educational and income divide that is now characteristic of the larger
developed countries will continue to grow -- also, probably, for at least a
couple of generations. And there'll be some developed societies in which, for
a variety of other reasons, the building of the bridge between the standards
of state schools and private schools will not occur. I wouldn't dream to
speculate on which countries will succeed and which won't.
Keith
Hudson
<<<<
ONE IN FOUR PARENTS PAY FOR EXTRA TUITION
Nicholas Pyke
A quarter of parents are forced to raid their
household budgets to pay for extra tuition in basic GCSE subjects, despite
fees of up to £25 an hour.
Research from Mori, published today, shows
that 24 per cent of pupils in England and Wales are taking after-school
classes by the time they reach the age of 16, proof, according to critics,
that the secondary school system is failing.
The figures do not even
include piano lessons or other leisure activities. Instead, parents are paying
out for help in the essentials English, maths and science.
The
research, covering more than 2,700 pupils, was sponsored by Sir Peter Lampl,
the millionaire businessman and government adviser.
It concludes that
families from minority ethnic groups are more likely to have paid for extra
lessons than their white counterparts, and that the most popular subject is
maths.
How much advantage is gained, however, is open to question. Boys
seem to benefit the most, according to an earlier survey by London
University's Institute of Education.
This showed that, on average, the
grades of those boys receiving extra help went up by 0.4 per cent, enough to
turn a GCSE D-grade into a C. But girls who had received out-of-school lessons
showed little if any improvement.
The use of private tuition to bolster
schooling has become a burgeoning industry. Famously, it was revealed nearly
three years ago that Tony Blair and his wife Cherie had hired private tutors
from the elite Westminster School to coach their two older sons, even though
they attend the London Oratory School, a high-performing state
school.
Sir Peter, chairman of the Sutton Trust educational charity,
said "The proportion of secondary school children receiving private tuition,
particularly in their last year of compulsory schooling, is incredibly high.
It shows that many parents who can't afford independent school fees are
nevertheless prepared to pay something towards their children's
education."
Sir Peter is pressing ministers to pay for bright children
to attend private sector schools with strong academic traditions. His charity
pays for an "Open Access" scheme at the private Belvedere Girls' School in
Liverpool.
David Cameron, the Conservative education spokesman tipped
by many as a contender to lead the party, said "There's a lack of rigour in
many parts of the education system and parents find themselves increasingly
frustrated. These figures reflect that.
"Schools are not doing enough
to stretch bright children or those in danger of falling behind."
A
spokesman for the Department for Education and Skills said there is a new
focus on providing lessons "tailored" to the needs of individual
pupils.
"The Government has a clear commitment to stretching the most
able and giving additional help to those at risk of falling behind," he said.
Independent on Sunday -- 19 June 2005
>>>>
Keith Hudson, Bath, England, <www.evolutionary-economics.org>
_______________________________________________
Futurework mailing
list
[email protected]
http://fes.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework
|
