Knowledge is never a burden

COMMENT

“Education is not the filling of a pail but the lighting of a fire.” – WB Yeats (1865-1939)

It is becoming increasingly obvious in the last decade that third-level education is not really a right to which people, young and old, are entitled. The costs involved are prohibitive to many, both in terms of the fees and the cost of living associated with student life in a college town.
More disturbing, I would argue, is the almost total inversion in the general consensus of the purpose of education. Gone are the days when a student might earn a general degree in the arts covering such topics as politics, sociology and other humanities in broad brush strokes but, importantly giving the student the ability to analyse and rationally assess information presented to them.
In today’s climate, to present such a set of qualifications at a job interview might lead the interviewee to be viewed with suspicion bordering on violence. Not only might the person possessing such qualifications be a repository of dangerous ideas that could undermine team spirit in an organisation, they will most certainly not be able to specialise immediately in the way an applicant with a specific training in a particular role will be.
Companies with this attitude have not created the situation entirely on their own; they have done it with the full support of governments all over the world, who are so keen to have full employment that they have shaped education systems into assembly lines for workers. Education for the sake of education and learning, are no longer legitimised by state and societal endorsement.
Science, technology, engineering and maths (STEM) are what students are now being encouraged to consider when choosing their third-level courses. They are urged to do this not because they have any aptitude or love for the subjects but because there are jobs in these areas. In late June of this year, just before the close of the CAO ‘Change of Mind’ period, students were offered some advice.
Dr Graham Love, director of DSE and Policy and Communications at Science Foundation Ireland (SFI) said, “Since the start of this year, 4,000 technology jobs have been announced for Ireland with companies such as Amazon… I congratulate students that have already made the decision to undertake a science, technology or engineering-related course at third level and I encourage those who may be filling out their change of mind form this week to consider such courses.”
The release goes on to detail that, according to CAO figures, there was an 18% increase in students applying for STEM courses this year owing to their increased awareness that it is a growing sector from an employment point of view.
Ireland is not alone in its encouragement of students to study subjects that will feed the needs of major corporations. In Florida recently, Governor Rick Scott said the state does not need “a lot more anthropologists”.
He was generous to concede that the study of humans, human culture and its attendant concepts was most likely a great degree “but we don’t need them here”. In conclusion, he stated, “I want to spend our money getting people science, technology, engineering and math degrees. That’s what our kids need to focus all of their time and attention on. Those type [sic] of degrees that when they get out of school, they can get a job.”
The American Anthropological Association was quick to respond, accusing the governor of being “short sighted” in his characterisation of their discipline.
They stated, “Perhaps you are unaware that anthropologists are leaders in our nation’s top science fields, making groundbreaking discoveries in areas as varied as public health, human genetics, legal history, bilingualism, the African American heritage and infant learning.”
The kind of education delivered all over the world under the broad banner of ‘arts and humanities’ may not be to the liking of many employers because of its broad scope and non-specialist nature but there needs to be other considerations in the debate.
Those who are lucky enough to take such courses will enjoy exposure to a range of ideas that are applicable in many different situations and generally enjoy an education almost for the sake of it. The intellectual stimulation they will experience as a result will do more than merely heap facts upon them, it will stimulate a thirst for knowledge, learning and inquiry which will serve them well in later life, whatever they choose to do to earn money after they have finished. 
The move towards viewing third-level education as a form of traineeship for a life of work is destructive. It charts a course for young people and breeds the impression that life is a path that must be followed as though it were a road map. From the age of four or five when they start school, the impression is created that a series of appointed markers must be reached along the road to a life of work for whichever sector of industry is the dominant one at that time. As most people will attest, there is more to life than this.
Some people might accuse me of whimsy and an overly romantic or unrealistic outlook in advocating a broad, non-specific education as opposed to a more specific one, especially in the current climate.
I would argue that it is the attendant skills of analysis and debate where the real value of a broad education lies. In studying the humanities, the student is essentially studying life and learning to how to balance debates between concepts and ideas. This is an invaluable life skill.
Of course, I do not wish to seem as though I am being critical of those who choose to specialise in third level and shape themselves specifically to a given career.
What I am criticising is the new consensus that a broad education is somehow a negative thing or a waste of people’s time.
As the old saying goes, knowledge is never a burden. The danger of overspecialising is also worth considering. A significant number of the most sought after jobs in the world today simply didn’t exist 10 years ago.