Balmain Working Mens’ Institute
photo: J Bar

In the debate about what makes a country or a society competitive in the world, it would be interesting to know how much a decline in educational standards counts for. We tend to assume that children are usually better educated than their parents, since standards are rising constantly. What if this is not so in a country — say in the US?

Clive Crook, writing in the Financial Times reports this fact and is clearly of the opinion that it should be more widely reported and discussed than it has been so far:

A startling and profoundly important fact about the US economy has received surprisingly little attention. The educational quality of the country’s workers is starting to decline – not just relatively (because other countries are catching up and moving ahead) but also, for the first time, in absolute terms. Over the coming years, baby-boomers departing from the labour force will have better educational qualifications than the younger workers replacing them. If the ultimate source of an economy’s ability to grow and prosper is its human capital, the US is in trouble . . .

Between 1940 and 2000, the educational standard of people entering the US labor market rose markedly. While fewer than 5 per cent of the population had at least a four-year college education at the start of this period, more than 30 per cent did so by the end.

When the educated Baby Boomers retire

However, the children of the post-war Baby Boomers now have fewer post-graduate degrees than their parents’ generation. What happened? Have they lost interest? Does a good degree count for less in getting a job?

Whatever the immediate reason, there has been no such decline, it appears, in countries like South Korea, Japan, Canada and Russia. In fact, in many other countries, the proportion of people aged 25-34 with at least a college education is now as high as, or higher than, in the US — and still climbing. When the US Baby Boomers leave the labor force, as they are already starting to do, a good proportion of the educational attainments of the country will leave with them.

Life-long learning

Learning isn’t for life. It is life. You don’t do it once, as a young person, then live off the results for fifty years. What you learned last year may already be in need of revision. Mental faculties quickly run down if not kept constantly in use. In a world of “knowledge work,” your mind is your best — maybe your only — truly long-term asset.

But if you don’t begin the habit of learning early on, the chances are high that you never will.

In the early years of the 20th century, working people in the mines and factories of post-Victorian Britain flooded the new public libraries and set up their own ‘universities’ in the Working Mens’ Institutes. Denied access to a good education before, they were overcome with enthusiasm for books and what they could provide.

Today’s children — at least in theory — have learning opportunities that would have made their great-great-grandparents dizzy with envy. Yet a recent study by Nobel laureate James Heckman and Paul LaFontaine found that the high school graduation rate in the US “has been falling for 40 years” and that this “explains part of the recent slowdown in college attendance”.

A matter of priorities

There are few areas for public expenditure that produce greater long-term rewards than education. Maybe only health care comes close in creating a prosperous and civilized society.

So why is it that these are perennially the worst funded and most overlooked areas?

Maybe the answer lies in the long-term nature of the investment. Few politicians are much interested in something that will bring big dividends only long after the next election, or even the three or four after that. Nor will spending in these areas generate flashy overseas trips and glamorous photo opportunities with the troops or foreign leaders.

Countries usually get the politicians and policies they deserve, based on the interest and activism of the electorate. Maybe they also get the longer-term economic prospects they deserve as well. A century ago, members of the ruling class feared that educating the common people would lead to revolution. Could attitudes like that still be around today as well?

Technorati Tags: education, educational standards, educated workforce, value of education to an economy, global competition, human capital, educational attainments, better educated workers, meeting the need for skills in the future

Related articles by Zemanta

• Youth entering workforce earn less than parents did
• Many feel unappreciated at work: survey
• Academics denounce courses tailored for businesses

Here’s how the writer expresses it:

As so-called hyperparenting continues to dominate modern childrearing with its flash cards, over-programming, hovering and handholding, a number of conscientious objectors are taking a big step back.

They are not slacker parents – they don’t celebrate 3 p.m. martinis and serve Happy Meals for dinner.

But they are returning to a parenting style in which kids’ time is filled with free play, unsupervised activities and plenty of downtime. Some call it free-range parenting.

The reason for this reflection is a new book by Canadian philosopher and writer Carl Honoré entitled Under Pressure: Rescuing Our Children from the Culture of Hyper-Parenting. “Hyperparenting is a kind of bizarre cultural perfect storm,” Honoré told the paper. “All these remarkable and in themselves not evil trends have come together to produce the moment of collective hysteria about children and collective panic that touches everything we do with childhood.”

When I think of my own childhood in England — albeit many years ago now — I experienced a degree of freedom to spend time how I wanted that would probably amaze many children today and horrify most parents. Did my parents always know where I was? No. Did I spend most of my ‘free’ time in organized and supervised activities? No, very little. Did I get into trouble as a consequence? Not at all.

My wife has exactly the same experience of childhood: a time of freedom to roam and play without constant involvement of parents or other adults. A time to grow up naturally, at your own pace.

I don’t think either of us are any worse for the experience. Sure, we took a few knocks and did a few things we regretted later, but that’s what learning is all about. By trying to protect their children from any kind of hurt or danger, I suspect parents are actually protecting them from living as they should — or perhaps at all.

Technorati Tags: childhood, hyperparenting, parenting, children, learning, growing up,

An article in Management Issues (“High school leavers can’t think, can’t communicate”) suggests that our schools are more focused on cramming their pupils for standardized tests than helping them develop critical skills they will need for employment.

The article summarizes the research like this:

According to a study by The Conference Board, an overwhelming majority of secondary school head-teachers and employers believe the ability to think creatively and communicate effectively is becoming increasing important within American workplaces. Yet the research, which was also carried out by Americans for the Arts and the American Association of School Administrators, found that most high schools and employers only provided such training only on an elective or “as needed” basis.

It’s fashionable to decry modern education, but there does seem to be some cause for concern, if this is a true picture.

Do we blame the government? Maybe, but I think parents need to take some of the blame as well. It’s natural to want your children to do well, but it seems some parents are intent on micro-managing every aspect of their children’s lives (“I Know What You Did Last Math Class” from the New York Times). No good will come of this tendency.

Maybe we need to re-instate a debate about the nature and purpose of “education” — which is not the same as “teaching children specific facts.”