The Education Myth

[Sachin=GOD]

The Education Myth

Education’s importance is incontrovertible – teaching is my day job, so I certainly hope it is of some value. But whether it constitutes a strategy for economic growth is another matter. What most people mean by better education is more schooling; and, by higher-quality education, they mean the effective acquisition of skills (as revealed, say, by the test scores in the OECD’s standardized PISA exam). But does that really drive economic growth? In fact, the push for better education is an experiment that has already been carried out globally. And, as my Harvard colleague*Lant Pritchett has pointed out, the long-term payoff has been surprisingly disappointing. In the 50 years from 1960 to 2010, the global labor force’s average time in school essentially tripled, from 2.8 years to 8.3 years. This means that the average worker in a median country went from less than half a primary education to more than half a high school education. How much richer should these countries have expected to become? In 1965, France had a labor force that averaged less than five years of schooling and a*per capita*income of $14,000 (at 2005 prices). In 2010, countries with a similar level of education had a*per capita*income of less than $1,000. In 1960, countries with an education level of 8.3 years of schooling were 5.5 times richer than those with 2.8 year of schooling. By contrast, countries that had increased their education from 2.8 years of schooling in 1960 to 8.3 years of schooling in 2010 were only 167% richer. Moreover, much of this increase cannot possibly be attributed to education, as workers in 2010 had the advantage of technologies that were 50 years more advanced than those in 1960. Clearly, something other than education is needed to generate prosperity. As is often the case, the experience of individual countries is more revealing than the averages. China started with less education than Tunisia, Mexico, Kenya, or Iran in 1960, and had made less progress than them by 2010. And yet, in terms of economic growth, China blew all of them out of the water. The same can be said of Thailand and Indonesia vis-à-vis the Philippines, Cameroon, Ghana, or Panama. Again, the fast growers must be doing something in addition to providing education. The experience within countries is also revealing. In Mexico, the average income of men aged 25-30 with a full primary education differs by more than a factor of three between poorer municipalities and richer ones. The difference cannot possibly be related to educational quality, because those who moved from poor municipalities to richer ones also earned more. And there is more bad news for the “education, education, education” crowd: Most of the skills that a labor force possesses were acquired on the job. What a society knows how to do is known mainly in its firms, not in its schools. At most modern firms, fewer than 15% of the positions are open for entry-level workers, meaning that employers demand something that the education system cannot – and is not expected – to provide. When presented with these facts, education enthusiasts often argue that education is a necessary but not a sufficient condition for growth. But in that case, investment in education is unlikely to deliver much if the other conditions are missing. After all, though the typical country with ten years of schooling had a*per capita*income of $30,000 in 2010,*per capita*income in Albania, Armenia, and Sri Lanka, which have achieved that level of schooling, was less than $5,000. Whatever is preventing these countries from becoming richer, it is not lack of education. A country’s income is the sum of the output produced by each worker. To increase income, we need to increase worker productivity. Evidently, “something in the water,” other than education, makes people much more productive in some places than in others. A successful growth strategy needs to figure out what this is. Make no mistake: education presumably does raise productivity. But to say that education is your growth strategy means that you are giving up on everyone who has already gone through the school system – most people over 18, and almost all over 25. It is a strategy that ignores the potential that is in 100% of today’s labor force, 98% of next year’s, and a huge number of people who will be around for the next half-century. An education-only strategy is bound to make all of them regret having been born too soon. This generation is too old for education to be its growth strategy. It needs a growth strategy that will make it more productive – and thus able to create the resources to invest more in the education of the next generation. Our generation owes it to theirs to have a growth strategy for ourselves. And that strategy will not be about us going back to school.

http://www.project-syndicate.org/commentary/education-economic-growth-by-ricardo-hausmann-2015-05 Interesting.

[zen]

I guess how useful education is depends upon the area/sector you work in. In some sectors, education may not be that useful vs. skills or experience acquired on job, while in some sectors it could be useful as advanced degrees are necessary to even get started Since China is mainly focused on manufacturing, it may not need most of its population with advanced degrees. On the other hand, countries focused on R&D or finance (Switzerland), may need a workforce with advanced degrees The problem starts when people start going for advanced degrees but don't find suitable work and have to work in sectors where advanced education is not required. Therefore in such cases productivity may not be directly proportional to getting advanced education Also it is unfair to use 1960s as an example as it is a part of the "baby boomers" era. They usually had the best of most generations born after WW2. After WW2 in Europe, there was a lot of rebuilding in Europe. There were more opportunities available to the workforce to rebuild the continent Similarly, in the other cases, it can be explained why education was not able to be the key driver alone. However, the crux of the article is valid For me education is more about learning to be accountable and responsible to your community, nation, environment, etc. Once such basics are reinforced, people can focus on job skills, advanced degrees, etc .... There is no point in not having a system where you don't take any basic education and you turn to crime; or despite having an advanced degree, you still turn to crime. As at the end of the day, you are uneducated if you cannot differentiate b/w right and wrong In India, there is probably a need for a system where a student studies till she (and he) is 16 (probably till class 10), then she takes a year off to do internship (or gain insights on the career she is interested in or even world tour for those who can afford to get to know herself better) to gain some practical experience. Based on this experience, she can decide the direction she wants to take including pursuing apprenticeship or an advanced degree, or joining the army, or ....

[randomGuy]

For me, education in Indian context should mean knowing basic English language, ability to operate a computer or Smartphone, do banking transactions etc. If a person just knows how to read/write in Hindi (or his local language) besides knowing some basic math, he/she is an illiterate for me.

[Crookbond]

It all boils down to the primary goal of education - exposure to different areas and honing your skill set. Now, if you can learn in this school or while riding bullock carts in village is m00t.

[moniker]

For me, education in Indian context should mean knowing basic English language, ability to operate a computer or Smartphone, do banking transactions etc. If a person just knows how to read/write in Hindi (or his local language) besides knowing some basic math, he/she is an illiterate for me.

Literacy is not the same as education.

[randomGuy]

Literacy is not the same as education.

Yep. I was opining abt what is required to succeed or even sustain yourself in 21st century world w/o going into difference of definitions. If you know following, you are fully empowered to succeed in life in whichever field you are interested in - - Basic English - Basic Maths - Basic computer and smartphone usage - Online banking transaction You can learn (almost) everything you want from the internet that you can possibly learn in a school (rest is on-job learning).

[coffee_rules]

I kindof agree that the only way out of poverty for a family is education. I am sure most of us bere born in middle class to lower midle class family, with only the father's income, with a proper focus on education are now living more comfortably than before. It might be the case for individuals, not for the GDP of a country as it depends on how the country's leadership behaves. We have by far one of worst political environment. Any growth is inspite of that.

[randomGuy]

My.point is that learning has become so very easy now. I made a career shift from s/w dev. to trading/investing last yr (may become professional investment advisor too in future). (Now I regret giving my first 2-3 yrs savings to my dad to be invested in real estate :mad:)All by just studying stuff on internet. When you cross a particular amount in turnover for a financial year, a formal audit from CA is mandatory for IT return. It was needed in my case. A friend of a friend is a CA. I met him for this purpose. After 15mins of listening to him, I found myself explaining to him how the turnover is to be calculated differently for intraday and f&o vs. delivery through a link that I had read (the CA understood after I presented the link to him) The point is that learning has become very easy. U just need basic english lang. knowhow and an internet connection.

[zen]

My.point is that learn has become so very easy now. I made a career shift from s/w dev. to trading/investing last yr (may become professional investment advisor too in future). (Now I regret giving my first 2-3 yrs savings to my dad to be invested in real estate :mad:)All by just studying stuff on internet. When you cross a particular amount in turnover for a financial year, a formal audit from CA is mandatory for IT return. It was needed in my case. A friend of a friend is a CA. I met him for this purpose. After 15mins of listening to him, I found myself explaining to him how the turnover is to be calculated differently for intraday and f&o vs. delivery through a link that I had read (the CA understood after I presented the link to him) The point is that learning has become very easy. U just need basic english lang. knowhow and an internet connection.

Would you have been able to learn the new concepts as easily as if you hadn't got your Bachelor's degree and purely based on the strengths of basis English / Math, etc.?

[randomGuy]

Would you have been able to learn the new concepts as easily as if you hadn't got your Bachelor's degree and purely based on the strengths of basis English / Math' date=' etc.?[/quote'] Yes. Bachelor's degree or my work experience has no relation with what I am doing now.

[zen]

Yes. Bachelor's degree or my work experience has no relation with what I am doing now.

Agree with that your degree may not have any relations to what you do now .... But you probably were able to learn new concept quickly because of the training you got by pursuing the bachelor's degree vs. say knowing just basic Eng, Math, etc. Now a Grade 1O student from a decent school would know basic Eng and Math, along with basic technology. But she may not be able to grasp new concept as quickly as someone who pursued a relatively advanced education .... Otherwise after grade 10, many would start doing what you are currently doing w/o any problems :dontknow:

[randomGuy]

Agree with that your degree may not have any relations to what you do now .... But you probably were able to learn new concept quickly because of the training you got by pursuing the bachelor's degree vs. say knowing just basic Eng, Math, etc. Now a Grade 1O student from a decent school would know basic Eng and Math, along with basic technology. But she may not be able to grasp new concept as quickly as someone who pursued a relatively advanced education .... Otherwise after grade 10, many would start doing what you are currently doing w/o any problems :dontknow:

I would say I learnt nothing in college aside from a bit of duniyadaari. Not saying one shouldn't go to college. one should. Those years of should be spent enjoying in the company of people of similar age-group that you get in college. But shouldn't think learning happens in class. It happens better on the internet. EDIT: and on-job of course.

[zen]

I would say I learnt nothing in college aside from a bit of duniyadaari. Not saying one shouldn't go to college. one should. Those years of should be spent enjoying in the company of people of similar age-group that you get in college. But shouldn't think learning happens in class. It happens better on the internet.

So you got your degree by learning a bit of duniyadaari? :P You are probably over simplifying things .... how successfully or quickly or comprehensively, you can learn on your own (through online, books, etc.) would depend upon many factors including what you are studying

[randomGuy]

So you got your degree by learning a bit of duniyadaari? :PYou are probably over simplifying things ....

Yes sir. I learnt ghanta in college.

how successfully or quickly or comprehensively, you can learn on your own (through online, books, etc.) would depend upon many factors including what you are studying

Which is why I inserted an 'almost' in post#6.

[zen]

Yes sir. I learnt ghanta in college. Which is why I inserted an 'almost' in post#6.

Therefore, knowing basic Eng, Math, etc. (Say Grade 10 stuff) may work in some cases, while it may not in others .... For e.g. a Master of Finance may have a more solid understanding of some of the financial concepts than you .... Or if you had pursued Master of Finance vs. Engineering, you could have a different opinion :dontknow: PS which is why I wrote the below as in Ind, many end of doing something totally different than what they first enrolled in to: "In India, there is probably a need for a system where a student studies till she (and he) is 16 (probably till class 10), then she takes a year off to do internship (or gain insights on the career she is interested in or even world tour for those who can afford to get to know herself better) to gain some practical experience. Based on this experience, she can decide the direction she wants to take including pursuing apprenticeship or an advanced degree, or joining the army, or ...."

[randomGuy]

Therefore' date=' knowing basic Eng, Math, etc. (Say Grade 10 stuff) may work in some cases, while it may not in others .... For e.g. a Master of Finance may have a more solid understanding of some of the financial concepts than you .... Or if you had pursued Master of Finance vs. Engineering :dontknow:[/quote'] I don't know. I would guess that for most practical purposes, concepts can be learnt online . these days, full course lectures too are uploaded on the internet for the whole world many subjects in college are useless for ur future job or otherwise and you know it. yet you have to study them.

[zen]

I don't know. I would guess that for most practical purposes, concepts can be learnt online . these days, full course lectures too are uploaded on the internet for the whole world many subjects in college are useless for ur future job or otherwise and you know it. yet you have to study them.

There is also another dimension to acquiring degrees - Say, if you want to work in banking, you would need proper degrees more often than not. "I learnt it online" may not work, esp. when you are tasked with managing (and growing) other people's money .... On the other hand, if you want to do something on your own, then different rules could apply

[randomGuy]

PS which is why I wrote the below as in Ind, many end of doing something totally different than what they first enrolled in to: "In India, there is probably a need for a system where a student studies till she (and he) is 16 (probably till class 10), then she takes a year off to do internship (or gain insights on the career she is interested in or even world tour for those who can afford to get to know herself better) to gain some practical experience. Based on this experience, she can decide the direction she wants to take including pursuing apprenticeship or an advanced degree, or joining the army, or ...."

Nice idea. (Though I realised I was semi decent in maths n stuff only after studying 11th class books) My suggestion would be to only have schools that teach English from first standard itself. maybe teach online transactions, open bank accounts and debit cards in 10th class itself. These things will prove useful for kids from poor households.

[randomGuy]

There is also another dimension to acquiring degrees - Say' date=' if you want to work in banking, you would need proper degrees more often than not. "I learnt it online" may not work, esp. when you are tasked with managing (and growing) other people's money .... On the other hand, if you want to do something on your own, then different rules could apply[/quote'] Right. Thoughjob related ques. In interviews and the recommendations etc will take care of it to a good extent I guess. Edit: If companies ask for degrees, its because it becomes easy for them to shortlist and because it has been a convention. Doesn't mean that u can't do the job w/o a degree. Edit : (to work as a professional investment advisor, there is a certification mandatory as per sebi. To work as an analyst for some brokerage, no cert. is required AFAIK. I don't wish to become either at this point in time.)

[zen]

Right. Thoughjob related ques. In interviews and the recommendations etc will take care of it to a good extent I guess. Edit: If companies ask for degrees, its because it becomes easy for them to shortlist and because it has been a convention. Doesn't mean that u can't do the job w/o a degree. Edit : (to work as a professional investment advisor, there is a certification mandatory as per sebi. To work as an analyst for some brokerage, no cert. is required AFAIK. I don't wish to become either at this point in time.)

Exactly, so those seeking a career in such industries have to get relevant degrees if they hope to work for premier organizations It may be possible to do the job w/o a degree, but the questions is how many organizations will give such people an opportunity? There is a gap b/w "Can" and "Will" as illustrated below: a) CAN Ind will the world cup? Yes b) WILL Ind will the world cup? :dontknow: Simply stated - A relevant degree increases the chances of getting the desired job, even though the person w/o the degree "could" be equally skillful. For those seeking a job, it is all about trying to maximize their chances of getting hired esp. when not everyone has the right connections and when you could be competing with a bunch of qualified candidates Since pursuing a degree is an investment and requires commitment, it is better to give correct guidance to school kids so they can understand their interests, the careers they would love to pursue, the directions they need to go, etc. .... As discussed, some careers may not require advanced degrees vs. on the job training, while to pursue some careers an advanced degree could be mandatory .... In either case, a basic set up / education is needed, for e.g. study till Grade 10 and then take some time to explore :nice: