No short term gain in education
Monday, May 28, 2007
EDUCATION is for work. It is for many other things too, but there is little doubt that our children will still need to earn their keep in 2025. We have to try to guess which skills they will need, when they join the job market in fifteen or twenty years' time. Our children must be productive, otherwise they will become a burden on others. Schools should prepare them to compete in an increasingly globalised economy.
We are educating young people for a world that does not yet exist, but the investment has to be made now in teachers, facilities and resources. It isn't a matter of writing a computer game that will be obsolete in a year or so or producing mobile phones with the latest gimmickry. We are not talking about investing to make a quick buck. There are no short term gains in education. Investment is for the future and returns will never be easily quantified in a conventional balance sheet.
Work forces are increasingly mobile and people compete globally for jobs. Ten per cent of British nationals already work overseas. Many governments favour free trade in goods, services and people. There are not many economists these days who argue for any sort of protectionism. In the 19th century, tariffs protected certain interest groups, but they did nothing for economies as a whole. When America forced Japan to open its ports to shipping in the 1860s, the local economy boomed.
The same thing goes for skills today. In the EU, nationals are not favoured if foreigners can do the job better and of course more cheaply. In London now, catering and hotels are in the hands of Czechs and Poles, newly arrived from the former Soviet states. They work harder than Brits and they have good language skills. When I recently visited my parents in Gloucester in the UK, I didn't recognise the place. There were Czech travel agents, supermarkets selling borshch and the banks displayed exchange rates for the zloty.
The education we offer our pupils must take into account that we are living in a world where national boundaries matter less and less and travel is cheap. I heard a rumour recently that AirAsia might soon be offering a flight to London for $600. It won't be such a big deal to get home for the holidays. Peter Mandelson, the EU Commissioner for External Trade, was here a few weeks ago discussing free trade agreements between Asean and the EU; Asian pupils, who might have thought of going no further afield than KL or Perth, now need to think about working in Europe. The job adverts in any international newspaper demonstrate that people with specialist knowledge and skills are in short supply and are recruited internationally.
I am not advocating for a moment that schools should teach lots of vocational subjects, which belong in institutes of further education or in polytechnics. The reason is pragmatic. Vocational training tends to become obsolete very quickly. If I teach you how to fix a computer, the knowledge will be out of date in two years, let alone fifteen. But if I teach you about basic logic and digital circuits, you will understand the principles of computing and be able to apply them to new technology.
I loathe the sausage machine approach to mathematics teaching: teachers who inculcate a method for differentiating quadratics rather than getting back to first principles are cheating their pupils of the beauty of mathematical reasoning. They are also robbing them of a vital skill. At school pupils must learn to think for themselves, not carry out a mechanical process with little understanding. The ability to reason is a transferable skill that will serve them well in the world of work.
Again and again, employers say that they are looking for young people with the ability to communicate. This means being able to express oneself clearly and grammatically and marshal points into a coherent argument. In many countries, like Brunei, it is necessary to do that in more than one language. This skill should be taught not just in English or Bahasa lessons, but also in history, geography, psychology and general studies. I remember having drummed into me at university the words of Boileau on the essence of good style: "la clarte{aac}, la clarte{aac} et toujours la clarte{aac}" ("just be clear"). Pontificating about this subject in newspaper articles is, of course, asking for trouble.
Companies want employees who are at ease with numbers. They tie this skill of numeracy to a good knowledge of IT. This begs the question whether we should teach IT through other subjects or whether it deserves curriculum time of its own. Some say that IT is one of those skills that should be learnt on the job, once the basics have been covered. If children have been well taught, they will have acquired the basic skills in primary school. After that, subject teachers should take over.
Employers want people who can lead and take initiative and work with other people. Our extra-curricular programmes must foster these skills. Team games are important too. A rugby match is a symphony of cooperation.
Employers need workers with a broad personal culture who are interesting people. One of the best way we can produce people like that at school is to get our pupils to read. If they end up liking books, we have achieved a great victory in an age when they are bombarded with superficial, unimaginative, visual trash by the bucket load. There is nothing more satisfying that seeing a pupil reading a novel during their lunchtime break, completely oblivious to the rest of the world, certainly to headmasters. The body language trumpets "Do not disturb".
The Minister of Education's speech is timely. In schools we must focus on giving pupils relevant skills and knowledge, so that they can find employment in due course and contribute to the country's development. Employers need literate, numerate young leaders who understand the world in which they live. We must constantly review what we teach inside and outside the classroom to ensure we are achieving these aims.
John Price is the principal of Jerudong International School (JIS). His email is John.Price@jis.edu.bn.The Brunei Times
We are educating young people for a world that does not yet exist, but the investment has to be made now in teachers, facilities and resources. It isn't a matter of writing a computer game that will be obsolete in a year or so or producing mobile phones with the latest gimmickry. We are not talking about investing to make a quick buck. There are no short term gains in education. Investment is for the future and returns will never be easily quantified in a conventional balance sheet.
Work forces are increasingly mobile and people compete globally for jobs. Ten per cent of British nationals already work overseas. Many governments favour free trade in goods, services and people. There are not many economists these days who argue for any sort of protectionism. In the 19th century, tariffs protected certain interest groups, but they did nothing for economies as a whole. When America forced Japan to open its ports to shipping in the 1860s, the local economy boomed.
The same thing goes for skills today. In the EU, nationals are not favoured if foreigners can do the job better and of course more cheaply. In London now, catering and hotels are in the hands of Czechs and Poles, newly arrived from the former Soviet states. They work harder than Brits and they have good language skills. When I recently visited my parents in Gloucester in the UK, I didn't recognise the place. There were Czech travel agents, supermarkets selling borshch and the banks displayed exchange rates for the zloty.
The education we offer our pupils must take into account that we are living in a world where national boundaries matter less and less and travel is cheap. I heard a rumour recently that AirAsia might soon be offering a flight to London for $600. It won't be such a big deal to get home for the holidays. Peter Mandelson, the EU Commissioner for External Trade, was here a few weeks ago discussing free trade agreements between Asean and the EU; Asian pupils, who might have thought of going no further afield than KL or Perth, now need to think about working in Europe. The job adverts in any international newspaper demonstrate that people with specialist knowledge and skills are in short supply and are recruited internationally.
I am not advocating for a moment that schools should teach lots of vocational subjects, which belong in institutes of further education or in polytechnics. The reason is pragmatic. Vocational training tends to become obsolete very quickly. If I teach you how to fix a computer, the knowledge will be out of date in two years, let alone fifteen. But if I teach you about basic logic and digital circuits, you will understand the principles of computing and be able to apply them to new technology.
I loathe the sausage machine approach to mathematics teaching: teachers who inculcate a method for differentiating quadratics rather than getting back to first principles are cheating their pupils of the beauty of mathematical reasoning. They are also robbing them of a vital skill. At school pupils must learn to think for themselves, not carry out a mechanical process with little understanding. The ability to reason is a transferable skill that will serve them well in the world of work.
Again and again, employers say that they are looking for young people with the ability to communicate. This means being able to express oneself clearly and grammatically and marshal points into a coherent argument. In many countries, like Brunei, it is necessary to do that in more than one language. This skill should be taught not just in English or Bahasa lessons, but also in history, geography, psychology and general studies. I remember having drummed into me at university the words of Boileau on the essence of good style: "la clarte{aac}, la clarte{aac} et toujours la clarte{aac}" ("just be clear"). Pontificating about this subject in newspaper articles is, of course, asking for trouble.
Companies want employees who are at ease with numbers. They tie this skill of numeracy to a good knowledge of IT. This begs the question whether we should teach IT through other subjects or whether it deserves curriculum time of its own. Some say that IT is one of those skills that should be learnt on the job, once the basics have been covered. If children have been well taught, they will have acquired the basic skills in primary school. After that, subject teachers should take over.
Employers want people who can lead and take initiative and work with other people. Our extra-curricular programmes must foster these skills. Team games are important too. A rugby match is a symphony of cooperation.
Employers need workers with a broad personal culture who are interesting people. One of the best way we can produce people like that at school is to get our pupils to read. If they end up liking books, we have achieved a great victory in an age when they are bombarded with superficial, unimaginative, visual trash by the bucket load. There is nothing more satisfying that seeing a pupil reading a novel during their lunchtime break, completely oblivious to the rest of the world, certainly to headmasters. The body language trumpets "Do not disturb".
The Minister of Education's speech is timely. In schools we must focus on giving pupils relevant skills and knowledge, so that they can find employment in due course and contribute to the country's development. Employers need literate, numerate young leaders who understand the world in which they live. We must constantly review what we teach inside and outside the classroom to ensure we are achieving these aims.
John Price is the principal of Jerudong International School (JIS). His email is John.Price@jis.edu.bn.The Brunei Times
Business Besides Oil
