Roy Bowdler:
The main policy response to equipping young people with skills was the expansion of Higher Education and there is a strong case that this has proved to be a success, albeit not an unqualified one.  Higher Education has itself become one of our most important “industries” which now underpins the economies of many Towns and Cities. The generation to benefit are better educated and equipped to compete where such attributes can be productively deployed.  However, the culture of academia generally and the incentives offered have tended to relatively undervalue, those parts of the further and higher education system that were more vocational in nature, such as Technical Colleges and Polytechnics who often worked closely with employers.

I don't necessarily think that the expansion of higher education has been a sensible strategy. With the possible exception of computer science and related courses, there hasn't been a significant increase in the number of home graduates in hard science and engineering since 1980. Much of the increase in graduates has been in arts, humanities, soft subjects, and subjects that weren't degrees in 1980s such as nursing. Universities are really just in the money game nowadays rather than seats of learning like they were in the past. Qualifications have trounced education. Nobody goes to university to learn any more but instead to get a degree.


It's a deeply philosophical question whether it's acceptable, or even desirable, to have half of all taxi drivers and waiters with a degree in one subject or another or whether it's a complete waste of everybody's time and money.


Not many people go to university in Switzerland yet it's a wealthy country with one of the highest standards of living in the world. Have we got anything to learn from the Swiss education system?

Roy Bowdler:
The main policy response to equipping young people with skills was the expansion of Higher Education and there is a strong case that this has proved to be a success, albeit not an unqualified one.  Higher Education has itself become one of our most important “industries” which now underpins the economies of many Towns and Cities. The generation to benefit are better educated and equipped to compete where such attributes can be productively deployed.  However, the culture of academia generally and the incentives offered have tended to relatively undervalue, those parts of the further and higher education system that were more vocational in nature, such as Technical Colleges and Polytechnics who often worked closely with employers.

I don't necessarily think that the expansion of higher education has been a sensible strategy. With the possible exception of computer science and related courses, there hasn't been a significant increase in the number of home graduates in hard science and engineering since 1980. Much of the increase in graduates has been in arts, humanities, soft subjects, and subjects that weren't degrees in 1980s such as nursing. Universities are really just in the money game nowadays rather than seats of learning like they were in the past. Qualifications have trounced education. Nobody goes to university to learn any more but instead to get a degree.


It's a deeply philosophical question whether it's acceptable, or even desirable, to have half of all taxi drivers and waiters with a degree in one subject or another or whether it's a complete waste of everybody's time and money.


Not many people go to university in Switzerland yet it's a wealthy country with one of the highest standards of living in the world. Have we got anything to learn from the Swiss education system?