As the demon
of Austerity stalks the land wherever he or she does their worst, if not then
at least some light trimming, those who might or will be affected are moved to
plead their cases.
Almost
invariably they will claim that that the money they want to sustain or expand their
activity will be good for economic growth, honest, look at the figures.
This bleeding heart is at the LSE where it is claimed that increasing
the number of universities will do the trick.
It begs the obvious question that if the money was deployed elsewhere
whether the growth increase might be greater or more sustained or benefit more
people.
There is the
other obvious point is if you corral more bodies into a sphere of activity that
requires major outlays, public or private or both, high levels of staff ratio's
and extensive buildings, takes people out of the job market or unemployment it
is bound to have some financial and economic effect.
Whether this
might be useful or not is another matter.
How far it can be called "investment" is another, for many it
might well be a form of consumption if what they do is unrelated to what the
broader economy requires.
When spending money on teachers is a question the Welsh are often to be found
leading the way. The nub of this is the
proposed four years for the first degree and two years of teacher
training. That is six years in all. Add on the gap year and it means that you only
start real work at 25 or so. There is a question
here that if the time were more fully spent on study and concentrated is this
needed?
Fifty years
and more ago those in teacher training colleges and some specialised institutions
might do only two or three years. But
they were intensive and with disciplines alien to modern students. At their best they were of high standards and
the teachers emerging were capable of doing the job with larger classes and
fewer facilities.
Graduates had
a year's course and some did not take them. The picture above is of the
teachers who taught David Attenborough and Richard. Almost all had just a first degree, most
honours They seemed to manage very well
on just that in a demanding job where their pupils were expected to reach the
highest standards.
As for other
means of training and educating, those will military experience with its added
disciplines and demands will recall just how much could be done in short
periods to require people to meet high standards of performance in spheres that
were demanding.
There is also
the matter that in the digital world with all the new technology at our
disposal why should it take almost twice as long to prepare adults to function
in a classroom? Is this more a comment
on the way our society is now and the limited experience of life that most of
our youngsters have?
The answer may
not be to allow longer and longer for someone to become a teacher in forms of
education that now spend less and less time on the central learning
needed.
It may be that
shorter, more demanding, intensive and practical work but with longer hours of
study and greater disciplines might be better and cheaper.
"There is also the matter that in the digital world with all the new technology at our disposal why should it take almost twice as long to prepare adults to function in a classroom?"
ReplyDeleteThe elephant in the classroom.
"why should it take almost twice as long to prepare adults to function in a classroom?" - because teachers have to understand that everybody outside knows the teacher's job better than the teacher. You know the story about the man, the boy and the donkey? If you want to throw the fat into the fire, insist that the knowalls get together and write the schoolroom textbooks.
ReplyDeleteWe forget that jobs are a cost not a benefit so increasing them does not help the economy. It is productivity that does that. Proof is as we have become wealthier we are able to work less hours. The aim should be for there to be fewer in work but there be more and cheaper goods and services produced.
ReplyDeleteFor instance two or more income households should gradually be reduced to one then none. The last is possible when AI and technology arrives at the point it can do everything for us. Nothing to be afraid of. Well AI perhaps it may decide it does not need us "Terminator" fashion.