If only we
filled our minds up with even more knowledge, even more skills, GDP will
dog-leg upwards, productivity will soar and all will be well. The conceit of
education is that the answer to bad schooling is always more schooling. The
glass is always half empty, even when the data suggests it is close to the
brim. We always seem to have deep 'deficits' and 'divides'; digital divide, digital
skills, maths, 21st C skills, qualifications, bias in algorithms, even happiness!
It is easy
to see why the ‘deficit’ model of education has taken root - it’s a means to an end – always a demand
for more money and more research. The problem with the deficit model, is that
it has an unexpected consequence. Your enemies pounce upon the same arguments
to promote fiercer regulation and control on education, as you have already
defined yourself as having created those deficits, you find yourself being
branded as the blob, where standards have slipped and some stern discipline is
needed to reduce the deficit which you admit is a massive problem. In the
current climate, if you promote the deficit what you get is, not increased
investment, but austerity. The exaggerated deficit model becomes the rod for
education’s own back.
1. Digital divide
The most
obvious exaggerated deficit is the digital divide, where, no matter how
positive the data on mobile penetration, broadband take-up, massive use of
Wikipedia, YouTube and social media is presented – there’s always someone in
the audience whining on about the relatively small number of people who are ‘disadvantaged’.
Yet when I speak to these people, the elderly, the disinterested and the
downright skeptical, they don’t feel disadvantaged at all. They choose to live
without this stuff and that’s fine by them and fine by me. Even those who want,
but can’t afford, to get online invariably have a library, community centre or
other way to access if they make the effort. I’m not saying that there is no
digital divide, only that it is alluringly alliterative and not so much a
divide as a vanishing problem.
2. Digital skills deficit
Again, the
deficit model suggests that even the young lack the digital skills they really
need. Digital literacy, the phantom that launched a thousand grant
applications, is bandied about, as if it were a chronic disease. In fact, it is
a phantom limb, a largely imaginary appendage that allows armies of adults to
sell their services in reducing the so-called deficit. In truth, schools are ill-equipped to deal with digital skills, as the deficit, if it exists, is more
prevalent among the teachers than the learners. Sure there’s some work to be
done on digital safety but let’s not brand it as some huge deficit.
3. Maths deficits
Wherever we
turn the maths Taliban are there, demanding more maths. The graduate baristas
in Brighton don’t even have to work out the change as the till does it for
them. Yet we need more algebra, quadratic equations and surds. You will be
forced to take and retake GCSE Maths, even though most of it will be of
absolutely no use to you in your later life. Maths teachers are the last people
I’d turn to for help and advice in the real world. The illusory maths deficit
is the leaning tower of PISAs awful legacy, branding education as a failure and
wiping out huge swathes of useful knowledge and skills in favour of illusory
benefits.
4. 21st C skills deficits
It’s become
a weary PowerPoint cliché – 21st C skills. We need to teach
collaboration, communication, creativity, critical skills. Yet, the learners
already communicate, collaborate and create using tech, every five minutes or
so. We come along and claim they have a skills deficit (21st C skills) and want
to teach this stuff, usually in a classroom, where all of the tech is banned.
I’m hugely amused at this conceit; that we adults, especially in education, think
we always have the skills we want to teach. In my experience, it’s schools,
colleges and Universities that need to be dragged into the 21st century, not
their users.
5. Qualifications deficits
If only
more people had more certificates, more degrees, more paper qualifications,
we’d live in a utopian paradise of massive productivity and wealth. Sorry, it
doesn’t work that way. As more and more people get bits of paper, those bits of
paper become commoditized and worth less. In fact, the massification of Higher
Education may have led to even more inequality, acting as a sorting mechanism
in the job market, rather than being related in any meaningful way to the
economic growth.
6. Therapeutic deficits
The weird
assumption that all learners and employees are mentally deficient and in need
of therapeutic help from educators and HR types has taken hold, resulting in
mindfulness, wellness and happiness jargon being bandied about like
ant-depression tablets. Well meaning but naive types crow on about the assumed
emotional deficit in us all (the glass is not half empty but completely empty) and
demand that it be reduced through half-baked, new age fads.
7. Algorithmic deficits
The inevitable, first reaction by eductaors to the use of AI in learning is to attack it on the basis of bias, even though that attack is, typically, biased - conformation and negativity biases. Sure there can be bias in data and execution but all humans and all teachers are biased. These biases have been well studies in education, in particular on bias in assessment and in the way teachers cue girsls towards certain subject choices. The mantra that 'All algorithms are biased" is as sure a sign of weak, deficit thinking that I can think of.
7. Algorithmic deficits
The inevitable, first reaction by eductaors to the use of AI in learning is to attack it on the basis of bias, even though that attack is, typically, biased - conformation and negativity biases. Sure there can be bias in data and execution but all humans and all teachers are biased. These biases have been well studies in education, in particular on bias in assessment and in the way teachers cue girsls towards certain subject choices. The mantra that 'All algorithms are biased" is as sure a sign of weak, deficit thinking that I can think of.
Meanwhile - real deficits ignored
Every year
there’s recognition of vocational skills’ deficits. Every year there’s
educational and political intent to reduce those deficits. Yet, every year we
demote, diminish and destroy whatever vocational skills delivery we have left
in our system. This is a deficit of education’s making. Our political class
largely comes from two Universities, the reports are written by abstract
academics, with no real understanding of the mess they’ve created – endless
bodies, changes, fiddling and procrastination. Apprenticeships is but one of a
long list of messy failures. Massive amounts of financial resources, especially from public sources, are being spent on the wrong things, peripheral, exaggerated deficits, as opposed to real and valuable education.
Conclusion
Deficit models
demand calls for reducing the deficit. But where the deficit is exaggerated it
creates a climate of distrust, where politicians dismiss the deficit mongers or
worse, turn their own arguments back on them, to ridicule and diminish
them even further. What has worried me recently is education’s tendency to turn
the deficit definition of education into something far worse – the pathological
definition of education, where our emotional well-being and health is a target
for schooling. When education is seen as a cure and cognitive deficiency a
disease, we need to worry.
1 comment:
Is the main reason most people will need to learn a specific set of maths skills that, n years down the line, they'll need to be able to help their own children complete their maths homework?
Post a Comment