We all know that more education is a Good Thing, especially for our economic futures. This is why many countries, particularly in Europe, have numerical targets driving their education policies: 50 percent participation in post-secondary
education in the Britain or Sweden, for example, or 80 percent to
ILLUSTRATION MOUNTAIN PEOPLE
baccalaureate level in France. Chancellor Schroeder's big idea for solving Germany's economic problems is, of course, education: including yet more undergraduates in a system struggling to cope with those it has.
Governments see their main job as delivering economic prosperity, and they view education as a necessary and reliable tool for achieving that end. But is it?
We are told that in a "knowledge economy," a country needs ever more graduates and formal qualifications to stay competitive. But education simply does not deliver economic growth the way our politicians -- and businessmen -- believe: more education in does not mean more growth out. Worse, the education policies that follow from current beliefs have serious negative consequences for opportunities for young people and the quality of education itself.
The argument that education matters for the economy is plausible because, at one level, it is obviously right. A modern society does need educated people: not just engineers, chemists and doctors, but millions of people who can write coherent letters, fill in complicated forms, explain insurance policies and interpret statistical data from machines on factory floors. Some of these skills can be learned only in universities; others can -- and should -- be mastered in primary and secondary schools.
Employers naturally tend to hire the most educated workers on offer, and so as the number of graduates increase, so does the number of "graduate" jobs. However, every study I know of -- whether British, Scandinavian or American -- agrees that large numbers of these "graduate" jobs require no more than they did when non-graduates performed them perfectly well. In this sense, many societies are already "overeducated."
But perhaps this is irrelevant. Maybe better-educated workers do their jobs more efficiently, in which case we will surely find a clear relationship between educational attainment and economic growth.
Alas, no. A few recently industrialized countries have pursued successful government-driven education strategies that seem to boost economic development. But for every such case -- South Korea is the favorite example -- there is another, like Hong Kong, where meteoric economic growth had nothing to do with centrally planned education policy. Instead, parents pushed their children towards the best schools to give them an individual head start -- something parents do the world over -- only after they got richer.
Moreover, for every South Korea and every Hong Kong, we can also find developing countries where expanding education merely fueled competition for white-collar jobs in a bloated, deadweight state bureaucracy. Countries like this explain why large international studies often find a negative relationship between education and growth rates.
Egypt is a classic example of this. Between 1970 and 1998, its primary school enrollment rates grew to over 90 percent, secondary schooling soared from 32 percent to 75 percent, and university education doubled. Egypt started the period as the world's 47th poorest country; it ended the period as the 48th poorest.
But it is not only among developing countries that links between education and growth prove elusive. Switzerland has been one of the richest countries in the world for a century -- and not because of its natural resources. Yet it has the lowest rate of university attendance in Western Europe.
If you look for a relationship between children's performance on international surveys of achievement and their countries' growth rates 20 years on, you will look in vain. No such relationship exists. So, while any developed country obviously needs an educated population, the idea that having the most education will get you the most prosperity is a chimera.
Does this matter, though? Surely, education has other virtues, over and above its economic role. Maybe we should stop criticizing and start celebrating governments' enthusiasm for spending on education.
But this would ignore the dark underside of our educational spiral. The creation of more
"graduate" jobs only proves that
as credentials become more
common, they become more important. Moreover, in the past, someone who left school without the "right" qualifications could still succeed, through an apprenticeship or by working his way up from the shop floor. Today, that
is becoming impossible: we are creating societies in which the sheep and the goats are marked for life in their teens.
As university attendance becomes more common, fewer capable young people enter vocational training. Yet our economies still need highly trained craftspeople far more than another batch of arts graduates.
Moreover, rapid expansion of university education all too often comes at the expense of quality. Education is expensive because it uses people: there are no vast economies of scale or leaps in productivity. Relative pay for teachers has been dropping as their total numbers increase, which affects teacher quality. University classes become larger, which means that students
are taught less effectively. It
becomes harder to maintain good university-based research because of the demands of other parts of the education budget.
Is this really the best route to a vibrant economy and a civilized, cultured and open society?
Alison Wolf is Professor of Management and Professional Development, King's College London.
Copyright: Project Syndicate
Saudi Arabian largesse is flooding Egypt’s cultural scene, but the reception is mixed. Some welcome new “cooperation” between two regional powerhouses, while others fear a hostile takeover by Riyadh. In Cairo, historically the cultural capital of the Arab world, Egyptian Minister of Culture Nevine al-Kilany recently hosted Saudi Arabian General Entertainment Authority chairman Turki al-Sheikh. The deep-pocketed al-Sheikh has emerged as a Medici-like patron for Egypt’s cultural elite, courted by Cairo’s top talent to produce a slew of forthcoming films. A new three-way agreement between al-Sheikh, Kilany and United Media Services — a multi-media conglomerate linked to state intelligence that owns much of
The US and other countries should take concrete steps to confront the threats from Beijing to avoid war, US Representative Mario Diaz-Balart said in an interview with Voice of America on March 13. The US should use “every diplomatic economic tool at our disposal to treat China as what it is... to avoid war,” Diaz-Balart said. Giving an example of what the US could do, he said that it has to be more aggressive in its military sales to Taiwan. Actions by cross-party US lawmakers in the past few years such as meeting with Taiwanese officials in Washington and Taipei, and
Denmark’s “one China” policy more and more resembles Beijing’s “one China” principle. At least, this is how things appear. In recent interactions with the Danish state, such as applying for residency permits, a Taiwanese’s nationality would be listed as “China.” That designation occurs for a Taiwanese student coming to Denmark or a Danish citizen arriving in Denmark with, for example, their Taiwanese partner. Details of this were published on Sunday in an article in the Danish daily Berlingske written by Alexander Sjoberg and Tobias Reinwald. The pretext for this new practice is that Denmark does not recognize Taiwan as a state under
The Republic of China (ROC) on Taiwan has no official diplomatic allies in the EU. With the exception of the Vatican, it has no official allies in Europe at all. This does not prevent the ROC — Taiwan — from having close relations with EU member states and other European countries. The exact nature of the relationship does bear revisiting, if only to clarify what is a very complicated and sensitive idea, the details of which leave considerable room for misunderstanding, misrepresentation and disagreement. Only this week, President Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) received members of the European Parliament’s Delegation for Relations