More thoughts on free education

A question for the floor:

Many people (individuals and organisations) are strongly pro free education. Is this because people are desperate to be educated? They want to read Foucault and Marx and discuss philosophy into the wee hours of the mornings? They want to maser today's science, the present knowledge of the human body, the nature of the cosmos? To debate economic theory and the impact of enocomic schools of thought on various areas of the world today? To interrogate the way we govern our nations and our cities? To master the skills required to understand our natural world - to conserve our coastlines, maintain safe water supplies, to uncover the fascinating worlds of animals.

If the answer to this question was yes, I would say that a three year university or college qualification is a truly terrible way to do this. Real education of this sort is a life long endeavor that everyone can, and should participate in. It is a matter of reading and observing and listening and seeking out knowledge throughout our entire lives. Part of that may be times spent in a formal learning context, in a classroom or a lab or in the field. But much of it (most of it, even) won't be. Much of it will be reading books, alone, or learning from people. Going to open lectures, reading the newspapers, participating in events where people learn and discuss. Going to museums and science centres and joining clubs and societies of people with similar interests.

I think that is an exciting thing. I wish we lived in a society that encouraged this more. I go to the Dispatch Dialogues in East London sometimes, and they are such a good example of this. School kids and professionals and pensioners and academics and civil servants and the unemployed. All listening, engaging with a speaker, engaging with one another. I once sat next to a girl at one of these talks who must have been around 17 or 18, and afterwards she asked me for a lift to the town library. She told me that she had never been a library member before, but she was so excited after the talk that she went straight there to join. Her eyes had just been opened to this world of knowledge out there, and she wanted to participate in it.

Another wonderful recent example of this is the VC's Forum held at Rhodes University about two weeks ago. Grahamstown has chronic water problems so the VC hosted a forum to discuss the water. Various academics and water experts spoke, the municipality spoke, there was discussion around it. It wasn't simply a public lecture: many of the speakers, even the scientists, had different takes on the issue. And there was engagement with the floor and the speakers. what a good example of positive interaction between an educational institution and a community. Out of the limited context of a degree or diploma or certificate programme.

But to return to my original question: The desire for free education, is this because people are desperate to be educated? I strongly suspect you answered no. I would certainly have answered no.

No doubt there are students who do have this motivation, to one degree or another. The desire for knowledge and understanding.

But for most students, lets be honest, the primary desire is not for an education is the broad sense. The desire is for a job. Which is a very reasonable desire - we all want to work, we all want a salary.

And education is seen to be the golden key that will open the door of employment.

So when people cry for open education and free education, the main thing they are wanting is to get the skills they (and others) need to be employed, and to have opportunities to be employed in good jobs when their studies are finished. And for these opportunities to be available to everyone.

Now is that something best done through a three year degree programme? And through giving more people access to such programmes?

That is a topic for another post!