-
We talk about the future qualified talent shortage and scratch our heads wondering where and how to find the hen's teeth. There's little talk of developing that talent today.
However, in yesterday's news (or at least a couple of days ago) it was announced that Mayor Villaraigosa is going to take over responsibility for education in Los Angeles from Roy Rohmer because our scholastic performance scores are so abysmally low. [I have a feeling this is really a blog, but I'll go on for now.]
How many other cities are facing similar educational challenges and similar talent vacuums? Should each city's mayor, then, become responsible for overseeing the dispensation of quality education? It seems to me that is too broad a reach for the mayor and a misallocation of responsibility. But where, then, will come the proper development of talent that is embued with an awareness of what the good work ethic is, good customer service, and following through on even the smallest details?
As members of the recruiting industry, should we not be invested in working in some way to *develop* the qualified talent that we seek? Or is that too much work for the overworked?
I really don't think education belongs in the mayor's lap.
Viva
31 replies
Log in or register to post a reply.
-
Yvonne -
LAUSD hired the good Admiral as the Ship is indeed sinking.
-
I have great respect for anyone that throws out ideas on the difficult issue of education. Voicing differing ideas and opinions, in the public square, can be the catalyst to resolving some of the conflict as to where blame might rest.
That said, I have to disagree with Deborah that a free market model in education has any redeeming value in educating the masses. The Blueberry analogy only goes so far. It underscores the formidable challenges in the public education system.
The analogy to the Titanic made in an earlier comment is more on target than 99.9% of the American populace realizes. The public education system is an easy target. Its some how held accountable for resolving the myriad of systemic challenges in society. Let me offer some examples:
How and who solves the problems created in English speaking communities where poor and uneducated girl are born into a culture of high out-of-wedlock birthrates? Families or their children making choices presumes one has the knowledge that there is a choice, the resources to pursue the choice [transportation to a different institution], and the support [of family]. Few in this environment have that. Some will make it out, sadly, most won?t. It?s absurd to believe that a teacher with no teacher?s aid or parent involvement in a classroom of thirty kids who come from the same environment has the resources to solve that? No matter how good they are, teachers working in that environment can barly tread water. What is a private school going to do differently? I can tell you with absolute certainty that private schools generally require parent classroom involvement?parents must volunteer or their kids can?t enroll. Now, if a parent won?t volunteer time to a public classroom, are they likely to volunteer in a private classroom? Not likely? Parents that value education will show up no matter what the situation.
Unchecked immigration brings with it major challenges. Since I don?t have time to write a book, consider how and who solves the myriad of education challenges in schools where Spanish is the primary or only language. In California, anyone that believes a private school can or will address this any better than a public school, can petition to convert an existing public school to a charter school?but again that requires serious parent involvement.
What does a teacher do in a classroom where neither the parent nor the students will assimilate the host culture? The condition of Balkanizing communities, and the exponential growth of gang culture is a major challenge.
Balkanization is a precursor sign of declining civilization. The inability of a nation state to protect its boarders from infiltration [incursion / invasion] is another precursor to a failing nation state. For those who have the stomach to investigate the wake of the economic and political chaos our politicians [we voters] have set in motion for our children?s futures, just read books like Non-State Threats and Future Wars, written by Robert Bunker one of the preeminent historian of the past hundred years. Also read, Immigrations Unarmed Invasion, by Frosty Wolodridge and Collapse. Let me know if you want other titles. But be forewarned; get ready for some sleepless nights.
If the educational systems of these third world countries are so superior and pumping out such large numbers of geniuses, why is it that an education at US universities is so highly sought after by the peoples of other countries? How is it that the intellectual property produced in US enterprises and institutions is being copied, hijacked and pirated at alarming rates? Who sends the highest percentages of military, police, emergency responders, medical personnel, food produced by US farmers and a host of other resources to clean up after the messes that these highly educated third world ?leaders? create?
One of the biggest problems is in the way states fund schools. Who ever thought up Average Daily Attendance should be wipped.
It seems to me, with all the obvious problems in our education system, it still compares well to what the public will find in India, and most other places in the world.
The problem lies at the feet of voters, politicians and business. Politicians aren?t leaders. When ?earmark? legislations is eliminated, money in our republic might be spent in a better way. When business enterprises stop moving their corporate entities to some small island, the government might have more revenue to put toward education. I could go on-and-on?
I agree that ?a broad collaboration between parents, schools, businesses and Governments' is what is needed. Solve for that nut and you?ve got a solution.
-
I love the way this conversation has veered into so many different directions....but everything seems to come back to 'values.' What we, as a country, a town, a family, believe is important enough to be significantly instilled into the hearts and minds of our kids.
Karen proposes an interesting concept of sending teachers on sabbaticals into different countries. With all due respect, I believe this path could lead to success if we also send the school administrators, the school boards, the parent organization officers, the college level administrators and deans, business leaders, hiring managers....I think the drift is understandable here. As I think we're all saying in this post, a successful solution is one that is built on numerous variables, one that includes the school system, families, government, and business. So some people can attend a sabbatical while others attend Parental Support training courses, and students secure work-oriented internships, and businesses provide career planning sessions and/or dollars for securing college degrees (before the layoff notice rather than after), and the possiblilities could go on and on and on.
The key is to influence what it is that we value - - not within a vacuum or within isolated segments of society - - but within a wider spectrum. As defined, values refer to 'something (as a principle or quality) intrinsically valuable or desirable.' Cultural values take decades to change - - but we have to begin somewhere.
-
When I read the ?blueberry? story I confess that I remain boldly UN-chagrined in my thoughts that our education system is in need of reform. Why am I sticking to my story? Because it is a multi-part story that maintains that the education system, in collaboration with parental and Governmental, Commercial and Societal engagement, is required to turn out better-educated students. These better-educated students will feed into the future labor/talent pool at various levels of accomplishment, aptitude and future altitude within their respective vocation.
Just as schools do not have the luxury of turning away any student they deem of inferior quality, neither does a parent get to send back a child that might appear to have lesser traits. Now before your knickers become irretrievably twisted, wait for the point.
It is not, at the educational or parental level, about choosing the quality of what comes in. It is about SHAPING the quality that goes forth. Simple.
A parent?s role is to help shape, to the best of their and their child?s ability, things like respect, commitment, dedication, tenacity, curiosity, willingness to try, discipline, etc.
An educator?s role is to help each student, to the best of that student?s ability (offering the given that the teacher has good educating ability), to learn and to think critically across an array of subjects. At the minimum, the child should learn to read, to write, to speak with a semblance of grammatical correctness, and to perform at least simple mathematics to function. I have covered some of this in my earlier posts so I will try not to be repetitive.
Not all students are equipped for college/higher education. Gasp! Did I just say the world is not fair or equal? Yup. Never has been, never will be. Some people simply perform at higher levels ? either through innate/genetic skill or through willpower and application. Yes, some folks perform better because they work harder, not because they are genetically predisposed.
I remain convinced that if schools could choose not to accept all comers, then we would end up in very dire straights indeed. Private schools have that choice which is fine. Public schools exist for the benefit of?wait for it?.the PUBLIC. Again I will refer to you Thomas Jefferson - a man far more eloquent then I in expressing the value of public education and an educated public at large.
This is not about assigning fault or blame. Heck, that is part of the problem. The fault is irrelevant. The solution is where we need to focus our time and minds.
It is a broad collaboration between parents, schools, businesses and Governments that will put us back on the right course.
Damn - how did that soapbox get under my feet again?
-
My previous posts on this subject matter may seem naive and uninformed to most. And I humbly realize that I don't have all the answers to such a complicated question. But the 'blueberry story' tends to illustrate some of the points I was making. I said that schools are not free to set standards and dismiss anyone who won't play ball in the current system. And that is what the teacher was saying in the blueberry story. In my free market model (which is not perfect either), the blueberries would be forced to present themselves knowing they need help and willing to participate fully. While the blueberries may not be able to be utilized in the most premium product made by the school, they could be utilized to their highest and best use, if the school made that decision. If not, the blueberries would have other choices as well.
-
Karen,
You don?t really define to whom you?re referring as ?we? or ?they?. Whether you?re referring to parents or a ?poor? education system is extremely relevant in you question. Parent competence can certainly have a negative impact on a child?s performance. But I?ve personally met a lot of bright kids from dysfunctional homes that have done really well in our public schools.
Maybe ?Janie? didn?t fall far from the gene pool. When it comes to stupid, incompetent or simply uninvolved parents; the school system or one good teacher may be all that a student from those circumstances has going for them. Painting the education system with a broad brush as ?poor? when every school is tasked with educating all comers, especially in schools challenged with the myriad of problems associated with a heterogeneous, non-native (culture, language, etc.) student population, would be simplistic at best. The responsibility is better placed on parents and students, one-by-each, which is what I presume was your point.
For a better perspective than I?ll ever be able to duplicate, read ?The Blueberry Story?, which I?ve attached to the end of this brief missive. It offers an excellent perspective on the reality of the situation faced by the teachers and administrators of our schools.
THE BLUEBERRY STORY: The teacher gives the businessman a lesson.
'If I ran my business the way you people operate your schools, I wouldn't be in business very long!'
I stood before an auditorium filled with outraged teachers who were becoming angrier by the minute. My speech had entirely consumed their precious 90 minutes of inservice. Their initial icy glares had turned to restless agitation. You could cut the hostility with a knife.
I represented a group of business people dedicated to improving public schools. I was an executive at an ice cream company that became famous in the middle1980s when People Magazine chose our blueberry as the 'Best Ice Cream in America.'
I was convinced of two things. First, public schools needed to change; they were archaic selecting and sorting mechanisms designed for the industrial age and out of step with the needs of our emerging 'knowledge society'. Second, educators were a major part of the problem: they resisted change, hunkered down in their feathered nests, protected by tenure and shielded by a bureaucratic monopoly. They needed to look to business. We knew how to produce quality. Zero defects! TQM! Continuous improvement!
In retrospect, the speech was perfectly balanced -equal parts ignorance and arrogance. As soon as I finished, a woman's hand shot up. She appeared polite, pleasant. She was, in fact, a razor-edged, veteran, high school English teacher who had been waiting to unload.
She began quietly. 'We are told, sir, that you manage a company that makes good ice cream.' I smugly replied, 'Best ice cream in America, Ma'am.'
'How nice,' she said. 'Is it rich and smooth?'
'Sixteen percent butterfat,' I crowed.
'Premium ingredients?' she inquired.
'Super-premium! Nothing but Triple A.' I was on a roll. I never saw the next line coming.
'Mr. Vollmer,' she said, leaning forward with a wicked eyebrow raised to the sky, 'when you are standing on your receiving dock and you see an inferior shipment of blueberries arrive, what do you do?'
In the silence of that room, I could hear the trap snap. I knew I was dead meat, but I wasn't going to lie.
'I send them back.'
'That's right!' she barked, 'and we can never send back our blueberries. We take them big, small, rich, poor, gifted, exceptional, abused, frightened, confident, homeless, rude, and brilliant. We take them with ADHD, junior rheumatoid arthritis, and English as their second language. We take them all! Every one! And that, Mr. Vollmer, is why it's not a business. It's school!'
In an explosion, all 290 teachers, principals, bus drivers, aides, custodians and secretaries jumped to their feet and yelled, 'Yeah! Blueberries! Blueberries!'
And so began my long transformation.
Since then, I have visited hundreds of schools. I have learned that a school is not a business. Schools are unable to control the quality of their raw material, they are dependent upon the vagaries of politics for a reliable revenue stream, and they are constantly mauled by a howling horde of disparate, competing customer groups that would send the best CEO screaming into the night.
None of this negates the need for change. We must change what, when, and how we teach to give all children maximum opportunity to thrive in a post-industrial society. But educators cannot do this alone; these changes can occur only with the understanding, trust, permission and active support of the surrounding community. I know this because the most important thing I have learned is that schools reflect the attitudes, beliefs and health of the communities they serve, and, therefore, to improve public education means more than changing our schools, it means changing America.
Copyright 2002, by Jamie Robert Vollmer [Jamie Robert Vollmer, a former business executive and attorney, now works as a motivational speaker and consultant to increase community support for public schools. He can be reached at jamie@jamievollmer.com]
-
Societies express the importance of education through the institutions they establish. An education presumes that students who pass through it come out the other end socialized to that societies cultural norms, along with the ability to think, problem solve, and communicate as go on to higher education and ultimately they enter the workforce to become productive citizens. The U.S places a high premium on educating not only its citizens, but the citizens of every other country that come here too [legally or not]. That education is paid for with tax dollars.
The incentive for ?the Government? to improve school standards and achievement is an oxymoron. Voters who are parents that do nothing [in schools or at the balot box] get what they put in. I feel for their children. I can tell you with absolute certainty that the administrators at all of the public school, and in the district where my children have been educated all know me by sight and on a first name basis. Thanks largely to my wife, our two eldest children both graduated near the top of their classes and the third is on track to do the same thing. They score at the highest levels in both state and federal standardized achievement tests. Believing that ?parents can only do so much? is an abdication of personal responsibility?nothing more. You exercise control by getting and staying engaged. It?s that simple! Once they?re out of school its up to them and the market place. But for those who think the free market place, competition and choice is the answer to some of the serious education and market place training challenges should think again.
Does anyone really think that the illiterate in third world countries are included in the statistical analysis of comparing educational achievement to that of the U.S.?
Lets see?
An average Indian spends just about two years in school, while a Chinese spends five and a South Korean nine; and in the US where education is compulsory, roughly 85% attend school through 12 grade.
The State of California spends 40% of its $111.7 BILLION budget on educating all comers [feeding a large number of them as well] providing preschool opportunities through the 12th grade. According to Felipe Aguirre, a city councilman in Maywood, CA, citing U.S. Census data recently said 96 percent of the city's 28,000 residents are Hispanic, and 55 percent of residents in this city, located about five miles south of downtown Los Angeles, were born in a foreign country. Tax dollars at work. The reasons for the problems faced by educators in the U.S. aren?t too difficult to figure out. When children entering the U.S. don?t speak the native language, the majority of their parents refuse to learn or speak English, and kids enter gangs at an increasing and alarming rate, is it any wonder that the drop out rate between the 9th and 12th grades in some school systems approach [and in some cases exceeds] 50%? Compare that with India and Bangladesh.
In India, 40% of the population is illiterate and adult literacy is under 65%, and spending 1.9 per cent GDP on primary education [two-thirds of what is needed to educate all its children], making quality public education for the children of farmers, artisans and laborers is hardly a priority.
Bangladesh for example, with its homogenous population nearing 30,000,000 [83%Muslim, 16%Hindu], has a illiteracy rate of around 62%, spending about 1.5% of GNP on education in a system where access is unequal, is not compulsory, and only 16,000,000 children, one-third, ever attend school. The school structure, characteristic of Britain?s, consists of five years of elementary education, three years of lower or junior secondary, two years of secondary, and two years of higher secondary education. In addition, vocational and technical education is offered at the secondary level. There are three types of universities in Bangladesh: General, Special, and Open. Approximately 20% of all elementary schools are privately operated. All junior secondary schools, and 97% of all secondary schools and all but three higher secondary schools are in the private sector.
Our son was a foreign exchange student for a year in Germany, so I know a little bit about the German system. It has three basic levels of schooling that children get ?tracked? into at an early age, depending student capabilities, and to some extent economic/social status. In the U.S. ?tracking? is a politically incorrect concept that officially abandoned decades ago, although in practice we still do it under clever devices that we call Advanced Placement courses, and SAT exams used to identify college bound performers. Just look at the freshman class entering any high school at any U.S. campus and follow that class through the next four years; and you?ll see the same high performing kids ?tracking? through with one another. Moreover, students from these ?tracks? will by in large be the same ones who go on to college. It?s the same in Germany, they?re just more up front about it.
German children will attend one of three school systems. In the ?Haupt? school a student attends to age 14/15 and then goes directly into a trade where they learn on the job. The second tier is the ?Real? school attended to age 16/17, having two tracks, one leading to a higher level trade; or, for those students that show initiative and promise, an opportunity to move onto the third tier of secondary education, the ?Gymnasium?, attended to the age of 19/20 by those who are earmarked for higher education. There are private schools, but they cost a fortune. Unlike American public schools, German schools have few classroom discipline problems. Administrators take responsibility for student that present behavior problems.
Look what?s happening in France?s immigrant [guest worker] population?they?re beginning to burn the place down, because the country has Balkanized. Immigrants of the ghettos have no education and therefore no future?period.
The analogy to the Titanic is more on target than 99.9% of the American populace realizes. Immigrants bring their own culture and refusing to assimilate into the host culture is multi-culturalism; or by another term it is Balkanizing, and balkanization is a precursor sign of all past declining civilizations. The inability of a nation state to protect its boarders from infiltration [incursion / invasion], physical or otherwise, is another precursor to a failing civilization or nation-state. For those who have the stomach to investigate the wake of the economic and political chaos our politicians [we voters] have set in motion for our children?s futures, just read books like Non-State Threats and Future Wars, written by Robert Bunker one of the preeminent historian of the past hundred years. Also read, Immigrations Unarmed Invasion, by Frosty Wolodridge, and Collapse by [?]. Let me know if you want other titles. But be forewarned; get ready for some sleepless nights.
As long as Americans accept and allow big business to define America in terms of capital, above all else [one dollar/one vote], then the democracy is based on economics where currency is the vote. Money will rule in such an environment; and it won?t matter who does a job, or where a job is done. The logical net result will be the continued and escalating sucking sound of jobs going to those who are qualified at the best price [any place where the same job can be done with labor for ten cents on the dollar]. Those who get the contracts hire those who get the jobs, and they are the ones who get the post school [on-the-job] training and work experience that, in tern, make them even more competitive in the next iteration. Now all of this is ok, as long as your family is on the right side of the declining American middle class [make no mistake?the American middle class is shrinking].
Should we close our boarders? Yes! Should we stop immigration? No, but we should define it and only invite, and by extension, invest in the education of those who are both able to contribute and are willing to assimilate; rather than our current default position of investing in the education of largely illiterate immigrants whose children are propagating the exponential growth of gangs in neighborhoods that are balkanizing and where we tax payers subsidize loans [loans a citizen can?t get] so those who are here illegally can by a home at below market rates [rates that a citizen can?t get] with less paper work than would be required of someone having a valid social security number. If you don?t believe me, just read ?Undocumented residents being recruited for loans? in today?s edition of the San Diego Union-Tribune: http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/metro/20060206-9999-1n6loans.html. China and India have policies that clearly manipulate monitory and trade policy, restrict immigration [even birth rates], discriminate in education, engage in government-sanctioned espionage. So what does the U.S. government do? It turns a blind eye to all of things that would never be tolerated in the American legal system, or by American standards of ethics, business practices or professional conduct. Stupid U.S. [many Americans have become lazy, politicians aren?t leaders, combine lack of real leadership with bad policy and inept enforcement, and well?]
Now, where is the responsibility?
I?m done now?
-
Deborah,
Precisely my point. We already have privatized trade schools. And I see no value in turning our entire education system into the same thing. And because we also have private elementary and middle, and high schools there is already an element of choice and free market at play in the system. The difference is that if I elect to send my child to private schooling I then have to pay a premium to do so.
I am curious, if education were privatized, how could you make it mandatory to patronize those business/school hybrids (my estimation of what they would be)? How would you mandate and manage the funding?
Some existing school districts/systems already have school choice. I have yet to be convinced that this approach is the solution. Typically the logic presented is that a poor performing school will improve its performance to retain the students, and thus the funding. The flaw is that when the students and dollars (Sate & Federal) leave, the school no longer has the resources required to make the improvements needed.
How did ?fitting the mold? create mediocrity? It strikes me as more of an emotional crutch to justify the lowering of standards. Mediocrity has been brought about by trying to make the MOLD fit EVERYONE. I dare say mediocrity in education is a relatively recent phenomenon that has come about in large part because we have altered the standards to accommodate those who ?don?t fit the mold?.
People are different. That is an absolute that no amount of mold changing, mediocrity tolerance, or privatization will fix. Heck, I would even argue that it is those very differences among people that facilitate the free market to be free.
Absolutely, some people approach life differently and quite thankfully so. But why does that necessitate lowering of standards? Should they not be taught mathematics, reading, grammar, sciences and arts (as much about thought process as product), etc? The reality is that they may not receive A?s or even B?s. So what? Plenty of ?C? level students have gone on to be remarkably successful. Not everyone deserves an A, or a B or a C. I would rather see the school educate a student to the best of the student?s ability (even when that is C level) rather then force all students to learn at the pace/ability of the lower performers.
If the problem is that our schools and their administrators are not empowered to hold higher standards, then why not fix that? We can do so with the system already in place. How can I say that? Quite simply - because our education system used to function that way. Simply restore those powers.
Once we begin to expect more, and tolerate less mediocrity, we will begin, anew, to get more. In the workplace, if you don?t fit the mold of your job you get fired. Then you are free to find the mold you do fit.
-
There would be nothing wrong with having privatized 'trade' schools...we have them now as post-high school options. And some modicum of basic functioning is necessary for one to succeed in those schools. Education, privatized, would need to be mandatory, but parents and individuals would then have the freedom to choose among their options. Part of the mediocrity in the system now is that not everyone fits the mold, so to speak, and everyone gets dragged down. In the past, some of the worst schools were reformed by administrators who either demanded that everyone meet a standard, or release them to other venues. Our public schools and thus adminstrators, in the current situation, are not free to do either of these things.
-
Deborah,
I am an absolute believer in market driven/based economies ? when considering commerce. I am not in favor of completely privatizing the educational system. Look at the overall performance of charter schools for example.
Ironically, it is the very bureaucracy of State and Federal governments that can, when better directed, help us improve where we are. After all, at one time, our educational system was the ?best practice? upon which others were modeled.
So how do we get back there? Why not revisit what DID work and then re-institute and reinvigorate those policies and practices? Yes, times have changed. That does not mean that core, critical fundamentals have. Success in any endeavor requires discipline, practice, and focus. I don?t see that privatizing all schools will bring us back to what works.
In fact, my concern in privatizing schools completely is that we might move back too far; to an era of apprenticeships along the lines of the pre-industrial methods. Sound ridiculous? If the ?free market? drives schools, would you not expect to see automotive schools, computer schools, etc., set up to focus predominantly on those skills? If that were the case, where would people get the primary education tools needed to succeed in ANY endeavor?
I am not willing to throw the baby out with the bathwater. If you are navigating a ship, do you alter your course when you have gone astray or do you scuttle the ship and start over?
-
Todd, I absolutely agree that we should seek a firm stance on the service delivery of quality education. And even in my free market stance, I realize that government will likely never let go of the role we have asked them to play for too long, until the system is so bogged down and miserable that they will have no choice. So, in the meantime, yes we do need to be involved with every resource. And, we need to be determined to seek our own development and that of our children in the way that best suits ourselves and our finances, the same way that we seek out other services and products. We only spend our money where we get results. This is the only viable route to the best services/results for the best value.
-
I absolutely love this topic ? both for what it is, and also for the passionate positions people are willing to take. In reading through these posts it strikes me that we are all in violent agreement with one another.
I wholeheartedly agree that, as a society at large, we are holding up the wrong people as examples of success. Though when you look at how success is being defined by our media, then it is easy to understand why they are held up for all to gaze upon in awe. The biggest paycheck seems to be the definition of success ? to some.
The good news is that I sense a bit of a grassroots backlash against such hubristic and hedonistic icons - a slow gravitation towards more of what does matter. People of character, people of true substance are beginning to emerge as those who are worthy of emulation by our children (young adults included). Those who are willing to give of their time, and of themselves, not just of their bank accounts to fend off negative media stories.
Part of the cause for that shift is because we parents have figured out that money, in and of itself, is not the best benchmark for success. We have discovered that money is a tool that can enable us to do good things. Yes, money can be used for ill, though there is no point in citing examples, as it would seem superfluous.
But I digress.
?No child left behind? is not living up to its potential, and most importantly, its intent. And frankly, that does not surprise me. Though my assessment is not tied to politics or political leaders. If I knew all of you better and we were sitting on someone?s deck enjoying a glass of wine I might be willing to engage in that dialogue. The concept is not living up to its intent because it is being implemented as a unidimensional pyramid and that one dimension (dementia?) is the bureaucracy of the Federal government. Two missing dimensions are often parental involvement and local school authority. The kids, God love ?em, are doing their best to not be left behind. Rather then restate my previous posts, I?ll reserve further comments on schools unless asked.
The gist of all of is that there is no SINGLE point of accountability for preparing our future talent. And maybe we are better served by defining talent. Do we mean the sheer numbers of the workforce or do we mean the leaders of and within that workforce. And then, do we need to define or perhaps parse out leadership?
The state of industrial, intellectual, and academic talent is a bit like the mirror at the tailor?s shop, we need to view it from all angles to make sure we have the proper cut of cloth, the proper stitching together of that cloth, and that it not only looks well made, but that it IS well made. OK, so (sew?) I need to work on the analogy though I think you take my meaning.
We have to encourage our children to pursue academic excellence and then give them the proper tools to do so. Layered on top of that, we must then challenge them to pursue excellence in their crafts and passions. We must then work as, as a society at large, to provide work environments that encourage and foster the development of workers as genuine contributors ? to their company and to society.
So as to the question of how do we raise the standards? We start with you. We start with me. If I am unwilling to compromise on the standard, and you are unwilling to compromise, then each of us has taken the first step in stopping the atrophy of talent. In school, at home, at work - Do not yield. Do not capitulate. I rather like the old adage, ?waste not, want not?. It seems simple, perhaps even trite, but it is spot on.
We need talent (either intrinsically so or laboriously honed - and often both) in every field I can think of.
-
I'll take the soapbox for a sec.
Regarding the shortage of IT talent, which we would expect to be streaming out of high schools and colleges, I'm somewhat surprised at our surprise. As we all know the dot.com bust knocked the kneecaps off the IT industry. During that point in time, I was managing an affiliate for a national organization which provided early identification of talent for major clients. We recruited high-achieving college level students At least one-half of our business involved placing talent into MIS, IT, computer engineering internships, and eventual full-time placements. During the dot.com bust and many years thereafter, students who would have pursued a degree in computer science began telling us that they were now getting a degree in finance, business, you name it. It was a matter of self-preservation. In this regard, the economy was cast as a major role player; however, we should never underestimate the advice received from various deans hanging out in ivory towers, and parents who have experienced years of corporate reorgs, downsizing, right sizing, and layoffs. We all know the drill at this point - - the corporate career and the 25 year retirement pen is a myth.
The question of who is to blame for our country's mediocre education will never rest neatly at anyone's doorstep. In response to what I've read in earlier posts: yes, we do send our children to schools where we can never truly account for what they may encounter (profanity, improperly dressed friends, poor education). But I would counter this statement by saying, 'Yes, but it's the values, my friend.' If you - - as a parent, a guardian, aunt, uncle, grandparent, etc. - are continually working towards saying 'this is how we do things here. This is what we believe in our family,' then, it's amazing what you're able to reap when your precious darlings meet face to face with bad-mouth Johnnie. Trust me, I have three of 'em: 14, 10, 7, and each one questioning the very values in which I speak.
One last note: all of our schools need the resources to be able to churn out the requisite technical talent. The state of New Jersey (where I proudly reside) unfortunately has one of the highest property tax rates in the nation, and a large proportion of these dollars are tied to public education. Our town's school board recently issued a report detailing the increased need for additional computers and related technology. They are seeking additional state-based dollars to fill in the gap.....and the beat goes on.
I shall now step off of the soapbox.
-
Dianna, Bravo and my hat is off to you for raising sons who seem very talented. Also, for helping them to see how to put their skills to their highest and best use. Industries change according to market dynamics and computer science is no exception. Hence, your sons are exploring their options, as they should. Everyone, at whatever level they function, needs to take their skills and knowledge into account, and apply it to the market to achieve a fit as close as possible for them. And they must go further to 'predict' the future for their current industry and skill sets as much as possible. Any less effort than this results at some point in a mis-alignment of the two.
-
I believe as Eric Karlan points out that shortages of kids going into computer science is from the fact that their well educated parents in IT have been downsized and told that they are too old to learn new tricks, too old to be of value or just too expensive. The corporation doesn't want to invest in training.
I have teenage sons. My oldest son scored a 32 on the ACT, will have 8 AP classes completed upon graduation and an GPA of 3.89. He is staying away from computer science because he sees it as a job that is unstable. He fears that what he will learn in college will be obsolete before he graduates and that employers will hire someone from India before him.
Where are the brightest students studying? Between him and his 'geek' friends - biochemistry, medical services, pre-med, teaching, aerospace engineering, environmental engineering, to name a few. Not one of his 'geek' friends is majoring in computer science although all of them are computer geeks already. (Who set up my network for my business? My son Who helps me with new software/hardware? My son)
Today's kids are not stupid but they are disillusioned about their futures. So many of them had seen their fathers and mothers lose jobs and take lower paying one to replace it - (not my kids - I lost my job and went into recruiting and make more). They hear from their parents that work is not everything. Quality of life is important.
-
Todd,
Encore, Bravo, etc.
My colleagues and I are most often observers here and getting educated-thank you all!
Rather than look for blame, look for solutions, in any neighborhood, city, state, etc, the families with successful children are pro-education, pro school, and their children are most motivated and reach their goals. The blame is only partially on wasteful Teachers unions protecting jobs as opposed to fighting for kids (disclaimer-half my family are NYC teachers some for 30 years, so no bias, they agree). The parents are the #1 reason kids succeed or fail. Another is Fear stories in the press about out-sourcing and greedy executives who seek the REAL (end results of 10-15%) slim difference in costs by going overseas lead students to see IT as a dead-end Todd's lists are on the nose. A culture of mediocrity gets mediocre talent. Also, If the idols in the media, are athletes who say 'uh, uh, uh, y'know,' in all the interviews or musicians who promote bad language, behavior etc young people will continue to seek the easiest path. Except for Bill Gates, most young people could not name an IT 'hero' (his wallet is the 'hero') or a scholastic idol.
Todd said the rest much better than we could.
Soapbox now free
-
Todd, Points taken... and I think you've confirmed one of my major points - that the problem is not having the know-how or knowledge regarding what needs to be taught. But there is a major disconnect between this knowledge and those in charge. And from my own experience I can attest to a lack of many of the skills/talents you mention among current management.
I guess I only have a problem with the question... who's responsibility? As always in a democracy - Ours. We the people... and we still get the government, services, etc. that we are willing to work for and vote for. The bad news for most however is that our free market capitalism is also allowing business to turn to the lowest bidder in the now global talent market, which puts Americans into a spiraling devaluation of their skills and talents, while trying to maintain a standard of living that is escalating in cost. In America, mediocrity in education is costing more to maintain, while quality is rising beyond the reach of more and more people. Or to state the obvious, if this were a simple problem we would have seen more progress towards a solution in the past 10 years.
IMHO 'no child left behind' is really not much more than a catch phrase for equal opportunity for a mediocre education. Perhaps we gave up our vision of being the best at things a while back. On a more positive note, I was impressed when my 16 year old daughter came to me the other day and said she was starting a club at her high school that would promote more realistic academic goals and career planning among students... (go figure)... maybe all is not lost... yet.
-
Sondra, Without any intent to malign, I would suggest that when enough of us start thinking in more than 'In off moments...' then things will start to change. The analogy of the Titanic is becoming increasingly more appropriate... the captain rushing at full speed across a mine field for commercial reasons, while the populace sits by comfortably secure that we sail in an unsinkable ship.
Deborah, I'm sure you are in good company defending the free market mentality. Most of us agree that competition in business is the best overall solution. But in some areas, where there is little commercial interest or a need for consistency, or where the public interest is at stake in terms of safety or quality of life, experience has shown, and continues to show that business cannot be trusted to be self-regulating, or to always be honest or fair. The issue of our failing education system is obviously not one of money. Our values have changed so much in the past 50 years as to be almost unrecognizable by those born in the first half of the 20th century.
I have found it difficult to save my own children, much less those of the public in general. Everywhere they turn, they are told they don't have to work too hard... that an education is not really necessary... that they are entitled to a lifestyle of ease and luxury. The media tells them this, adults tell them this, and their peers tell them this. And of course their hearing is very selective.
Do I think it is a student problem? Only to the extent we allow it to be.
Do I think the government can solve this problem? Only by providing the leadership needed to focus attention on the circumstances and ills of our society that have resulted in this deterioration in education. This problem cannot be solved by a top down, mandated solution.
Our best hope, as always, is to support the leadership who will inspire us to be better people. Kennedy had it... Kerry might have had it...
-
George,
First ? this is a long post.
I am not suggesting that poor education, in and of itself, is the issue driving the looming talent shortage. I do however, firmly believe that the continuation of poor educational standards and practices, and thereby output, will only serve to exacerbate the problem and, in effect, render a viable solution impractical to most businesses. Quite simply, most businesses cannot afford (in true capital investment, or in business opportunity cost, work hours, etc.) to re-educate and then fully train the entire workforce.
I agree that some management trends of late are not helping companies retain, manage, groom and grow talent (across all ages and ethnic backgrounds). There is a delicate balance that needs to be struck between improving the bottom line now (think pressure from Wallstreet), and improving the bottom-line AND longevity of that bottom line. Forgive my bias, but I work for a publicly traded entity. That said, I think the same holds true for private firms both large and small. Talent management guided and driven solely by cost is unsustainable. On that I think we all agree.
Yes, business does have an obligation to interact with the educational system and offer resources and tools. The barrier that I see with this is the perception of undue influence. Look at the hue and cry when a Pharmaceutical company sponsors research at a University - even when the sponsorship is managed through grants and/or other methods of controlling and monitoring impartiality. Admittedly, there are people who break the rules. There will always be people who break the rules. I go back to my comment on my fatigue around tyranny of the lowest common denominator. Or, for the sake of an analogy ? Most people agree that electricity is a good thing. Unfortunately, it can harm or even kill. Should we stop using electricity because some may be harmed? Automobiles, while useful, can be used to harm. Should we stop using automobiles?
There is a viable level of cooperation that should be established. MOST of the underlying work still belongs in the realm of our educational system.
When we refer to business talent, more often then not, we are assessing the ability of a worker to contribute in a positive manner rather then their inherent ability. While running fast, or jumping high, or playing the piano by ear are all wonderful talents, they typically have little business application. And yes, for those of you looking to pick a nit or two, there are exceptions and examples that no doubt would take advantage of these talents in a professional setting. Let?s stay focused on the topic, not on tearing down my examples with fringe "yeah, but" 's.
Here is a short list of primary skills we need to get through life (at work and in general): �intelligence, ability to learn quickly �ability to make good decisions quickly �analytical, inquiring, logical �ability to work well under pressure and willingness to work hard �competitiveness, enjoyment of challenge �ability to apply oneself to a variety of tasks simultaneously �thorough, organized, and efficient �good time-management skills �resourceful, determined, and persistent �imaginative, creative �cooperative and helpful �objective and flexible �good listening skills �sensitive to different perspectives �ability to make other people 'feel interesting'
This is not intended to be an exhaustive list. Now, what is apparent to me about the list above is that they are those skills that simply must be learned PRIOR to joining the workforce. Yes, companies can enhance those skills. More accurately, the individual must seek to enhance those skills through their work environment.
Stanford University's Career Planning and Placement Center developed a list of skills and personal qualities to describe the variety of 'soft' skills one learns while in college and even in graduate school: �ability to function in a variety of environments and roles �teaching skills: conceptualizing, explaining �counseling, interviewing skills �public speaking experience �computer and information-management skills �ability to support a position or viewpoint with argumentation and logic �ability to conceive and design complex studies and projects �ability to implement and manage all phases of complex research projects and to follow them through to completion �knowledge of the scientific method to organize and test ideas �ability to organize and analyze data, to understand statistics, and to generalize from data �ability to combine, integrate information from disparate sources �ability to evaluate critically �ability to investigate, using many different research methodologies �ability to solve problems �ability to work with the committee process �ability to do advocacy work �ability to acknowledge many differing views of reality �ability to suspend judgment, to work with ambiguity �ability to make the best use of 'informed hunches'
If you consider the foundation created not only from the list of primary skills, but also the additional layering of the above ?soft? skills, then you have a platform on which most businesses can add the particular skills required to offer the goods and services of their respective market.
So - back to the question at hand. Where does the responsibility derive? With each and every one of us. As parents, educators, workers, managers, mentors, citizens, politicians, etc. With all of us do-gooders and naysayers alike.
-
Todd:
' I find it astounding and deeply troubling that many cashiers cannot make proper change without reviewing the register instructions '
Since I have an engineering background and used to be a siamese twin to an HP programmable calc, I can understand that a sudden mental arithmetic might be a surpise to someone without an aid... but in all reality, even so, what's an even bigger shock to me-- and shock is the right word-- is the utter inability to say 'hello', and/or 'thanks' or 'thanks for shopping at xxx'... ANYTHING. You just barely get a glance, and this barnyard animal gaze, devoid any any inkling to say thanks to the person (people) who are keeping the store alive and your job alive. EVen if you can't add, this is unforgivable.
and
'It may seem harsh to some but the simple fact is that it is NOT enough to just show up'
Isn't it said that you need to preface the latter with 'may seem harsh'. You've correctly read the social norms, and you knew you needed to insert a disclaimer or sorts. That's how far common sense has drifted. I won't even get into moral relitavism. Simply that it's now apparently harsh to hold someone to a standard. It's harsh to tell someone, 'you failed'. I remember when I was in university, I got an F in one of my loopy advanced chemistry classes. I loved my F. It was the best motivator for me, and a reality check. To deny someone reality is the greatest slight of all. It's harsh to treat a student with kid gloves when society and business will chew and spit them out-- if they're as unprepared as many are today. THAT would be harsh.
Sondra:
'the parents announced that they 'could not be bothered - it was not their job' to make sure that the short applications and esays were completed and turned in.'
This almost requires no additional comment, it is so emblematic of the problem. But I needed to quote this part just for my own happiness.... Could not be bothered... My frustration here is- the parents are the fuel of the school. And if the parents are devoid of any sense of responsiblity, there is no recourse. You figure 'who would be a bigger benefactor of a child than the parent that brought them into existence'!?... but this is, apparently, somehow, faulty logic. You can't punish parents for letting go of the steering wheel of their children's future, you can't remove them, many times you can't even reason with them because... well... they don't show up. Sure, you can motivate them, but this degree of separation-- the administration-- the child-- the 'once-removed' parent-- how to you truly motivate a parent? really motivate a parent? how do you keep the school from morphing into some wasteland ( with like Mel Gibson riding around in a rusty three-wheeler ) of detached meaning, union-mentality entrepreneurialism ( I tried to think of the biggest oxymoron I could find ), un-lead minds, bandied about by the immediate, then the budgeted, and lastly and certainly least, the strategic.
-
Todd, I don't for a moment think that the disconnect between real world business needs and today's education/training is due to a lack of understanding or ideas to improve the situation. There is, however, a shortage of communication between the two, and a lack of genuine interest on the part of educators (strategist) in working with business leaders and politicians to solve this problem... at least from my personal experience.
Moving past the obvious solutions that no one seems very interested in, I think it's important to remember that corporate America has relegated a significant number of the male/white/40+ population to the dustbin during the past 20 years with downsizings and layoffs. I find it difficult to sympathize too deeply with a business culture that tries to replace the seasoned veterans with students, and complains about the need for training.
In short, is the problem inadequately prepared recruits, or poor management of their existing labor assets? On either count, Corporate America is passing the buck to either the state or the individual to supply the right human resources. I suggest there should be some shared responsibility here somewhere, particularly in areas where the skills lifecycle is shortening. Best regards, George
-
Cheers to Todd!! A dozen years ago (almost to the day.. 2/6/96) I headed a non-profit educational training firm in Hartford, CT, which developed a special program called NEXT - an alternative school for at-risk (of dropping out) 9th grade students for the Hartford public schools. After much cross-examination on their part and expenditures, research,effort on ours, the School Board adopted it unconditionally and asked us to set up this school, saying that if it was successful, we should replicate it around the city. And soon, the entire system was taken over by the State of CT because it was deplorable, underachieving, etc and NEXT died stillborn. We had learned that expectations in the school were very low, teachers disheartened and thus sometimes underperforming. Many parents were enraged because their kids ultimately faced dead-end lives and the students were bored, restless and then truants. We did teach several experimental courses in entrepreneurship which developed excited participants who showed up early and some who 'over-performed'.. a concept which we did not then and still do not understand. This past year, 'Pure' gave a scholarship to a high school senior from an economically challenged school district to study a life science program at a university or college. Of the 3 high schools included in the program, 1 never submitted an entrant because the parents announced that they 'could not be bothered - it was not their job' to make sure that the short applications and esays were completed and turned in. In off moments I really do worry where we as a nation are headed. Our education delivery system is horrific, our rate of really employable citizens has declined.
-
I agree with most aspects of everyone's comments on this discussion. And I watched the 20/20 show also. In my defense of the free market, which I've somehow been assigned ownership by Abel ('your free market'), my premise is simple and exactly what the TV program pointed out...competition produces greater productivity and efficiency at the best possible price and results for consumers. Nothing is perfect. There must be accountability and responsibililty by parents, students, teachers, government regulation, business owners...everyone. If a student sits in his chair with a blindfold on and cotton in his ears and refuses to learn or participate, no educational system can save him. If parents do not parent, then everything else in the child's life will be difficult. But the government's role needs to be limited to protection. The market, regardless of how 'free' it is, could stand to be made more free by reducing regulation. But we won't solve that issue completely in our lifetime. Suffice it to say that people need to stop relying upon one government solution for all their problems...just the same as no one should rely upon one employer for the guarantee of their retirement fund, Abel.
-
Warning: Soapbox Alert! OK, this thread is one that could easily spin off into political extremism and 'look what that party/administration did wrong' blame gaming. And if it did, to my mind, it would miss the point. The pending dearth of talent is not, per se, the fault of the political parties in and of themselves, though they clearly play a role. We have societal and physical trends acting as pressurepoints.
I want to chat about 2 of the core, critical issues at play. 1) Our education system is no longer genuinely focused on education for the sake of the end game ? a productive citizen. Read some of Thomas Jefferson?s views on public education. It is fascinating to say the least, assuredly thought provoking, and enough to make you want to stand up and be involved (hint, hint).
2) The demographics are shifting. We have a significant portion of the workforce nearing retirement without an equal replacement pool to fill the gaps (physical or intellectual).
No doubt there are other issues but these two are the focus of this particular post.
As I push my bifocals back on my nose (at least they're no line), and the light glints off the gray in my hair, I offer these thoughts:
EDUCATION - I recall that when I was in school there was an unwavering expectation and focus on academic performance above all else. Meaning - EVERY child was expected to learn and to think to a higher standard.
We were in school to learn. Teachers were there to help educate. Receiving an 'A' was a significant achievement because your schoolwork was above the expected. There were consequences to not doing homework - you know, a failing grade with the real prospect of NOT being advanced to the next level simply to avoid 'social stigma' or damaging our precious little psyches.
To me, the irony of a social grade level advancement is that it does, in fact, damage one?s psyche because it misrepresents what is genuinely required to advance or succeed, much less excel. It may seem harsh to some but the simple fact is that it is NOT enough to just show up; it is not enough (in business especially) just to try. Yes, it is critically important that children learn the value of both - being present, and being involved. But to be rewarded above and beyond one has to perform above and beyond. We DO get graded at work - it is called a performance review.
Back to education. Some things must be learned by rote ? simple mathematics for example. I find it astounding and deeply troubling that many cashiers cannot make proper change without reviewing the register instructions (watch next time you make a purchase). This isn?t high math; I am talking about giving proper change, not the sophisticated calculations (let alone thought patterns and processes) required to design engines for vehicles using renewable energy sources! Or the mental acuity and agility required of a scientist to work out the causes of, and cures for, mankind?s physical ailments.
All of this to say ? our education system is not keeping up because it is no longer being tasked with the primary mission of education and learning. Parents need to instill and reinforce basic life skills such as discipline, comportment (an old fashioned word and concept it seems), responsibility and personal accountability to name but a few. The parent is responsible for teaching children how to behave.
The teachers can reinforce these skills but it is NOT their role to lay down these basics. The teacher is there to see to it that a child learns and understands the fundamentals, concepts and applications of things like math, grammar, reading, sciences, arts, language, and even philosophy (perhaps not in kindergarten mind you). And this is what elementary (or primary) school is about. Think about why we call it ELEMENTARY. I?ll give this topic a rest for now.
DEMOGRAPHICS ? Do the math (see above) and you can deduce (maybe even induce) at least in part, why we will have a talent shortage. Numerically, we have a shrinking workforce. That indicates a loss of knowledge as well since it seems we are not doing very well with knowledge transfer (hmmm, another topic to be sure).
So we have an obligation on various levels to make changes.
Let?s get schools refocused on their original mission - education. Let?s get businesses refocused on developing work related talent ? it is every bit as much an investment in the business as R&D, systems, etc.
I think corporations would do well to provide tools to schools. I am not an advocate of corporations setting the curriculum overall. Perhaps some sort of adjunct teaching arrangement? Almost a reverse internship ? part of your job duties include teaching project management at the local schools, etc.
Developing specific job skill talent lies with the company. Developing primary education and broad job skills belongs to our education system.
I better stop here to take a breath and corral my thoughts.
-
Eamonn,
I just came back from vacation where I was eating gourmet food every day, and boy was I hot and heavy for a plain pizza pie when I got back. :-)
Since it seems that tough love works and is needed in many instances where incentives don't add-up, how can we get tough love back in schools where teachers, and even police are not allowed to practically do anything? What's the equivalent of today's ruler? Dunce cap? Corner chair? I'n not talking about punishment, nor it being anywhere near the main motivator of performance. But there has to be a counterweight to what's out there that hasnt worked.
If we can't force parents to be parents ( talking about just the worse pockets here ) then we have to give the schools some muscle. In Europe, they have an entire parallel track for schooing- tradeschools, where if someone has a big mouth and cant sit still, gets thrown out of school too many times, they can still become that plumber that charges you that $120 an hour. I think there has to be a powerful second track to college, a parallel path that is really not just a place to hold misfits and emotionally disturbed ( but initially innocent) children.
I had a guardian when I was young. I'd like my kid not to ever have a guardian, and always have a parent.
-
Didnt we already have this conversation somewhat.
Viva, I'm not suprised by the situation in LA, if there where ever a place in the US ( I wont go on about such places as Rio de Janiero or Montevideo, or Durban or Capetown or New Delhi) that urban blight has run rampant and the difference between the haves and have nots has reached almost South American and Indian proportions it's the greater US cities (LA, NYC,etc). It seems to be that every kid is infused with talent, the issue is how do we identify the talent? I do know that privatisation of education is not an option... since business is in the business of corporate profit....not social responsibility and not for profits just dont get big enough for this.
No matter what type of organisation owns the responsibility to run the system to educate and train young people, the first thing that needs to be done is that we educate the parents... as long as we have deadbeat parents that dont care: the kids largely dont get educated.. the source of all of this positive education MUST start at home, or as we see (and as Dianna Rudd lamented) not every opportunity to learn is equal.
If theres a way to incentivise every parent to learn with the promise of a better life then many will take advantage. This will in turn lead to children having a better foundation with parents / guardians who are motivated and in turn inspire.
I dont believe that teachers in 'inner city' (sic: public) schools are any better or worse than the suburbian / charter school compatriots... they just have a little tougher material to mold and more day to day issues that detract from their ability (and ultimately desire) to teach.
So when you ask where does the responsibility derive, the answer must be the parents / guardians of our future talent: This will allow those who look up to them to have the truly equal opportunities we all talk about, without a life of potential abuse, violence and discrimination.
Now how do we work to do this, thats the real question::::
TTalis, Im not sure though that every kid wouldnt mind the option of McDs, Wendies, BK or Subway for lunch every day :).
-
Since we're off on a political solution bent, I will throw in my 2 cents worth...
First, as a minor aside, let me suggest that 'Talent' is not the ideal word... as talent is traditionally inherent, and developed not created. I know, picky, picky, picky.
And while I wish I had time to write the appropriate book on the subject, I will limit my comments to a few key points regarding whose fault/responsibility it is, and how the 'free market' could fix everything.
We complain about education, because it rarely approaches the promise it had when we valued the ability to think, as opposed to how much we know. Currently, we get exactly what we ask and pay for... a system that furnishes skilled labor for a mass society that is manageable. Thinking is left more or less to the elite who attend well segregated institutions and are accorded access to information and insights that lift them above the masses... now evidenced by the increasing need for the government to operate in secrecy and its ability to create consensus from manufactured information or disinformation.
The 'holy grail' of a free market economy seems to be getting a lot of play these days, like 'intelligent design' here in the South. And both want to replace reality with a solution that caters to the interest of some at the expense of others.
There has never been a free market economy, just as there has never been a free society. It is ironic the party that constantly reminds us 'there is no free lunch', also claims that only an unrestricted, free market system will deliver a fair economic system and progress. So if we can agree that everything has a price...
Life, and by derivation, our social constructs are always a complex system of checks and balances. The better they work, the more successful any life form is... including ours. Western Man has evolved to a new level of productivity and general welfare using our republican version of democracy, and a controlled version of capitalism. Against the various foreign systems of politics and economics we now find ourselves questioning our values in order to remain competitive. And maybe our values are no longer functional. Or maybe the problem is that values are not an economic strategy, and what we get from them cannot be measured in dollars and cents, and featured on a balance sheet.
So... will the free market fix things? Yes... like war has always fixed things. We are a society of laws... a society of rights and responsibilities... not a free society. Our economics reflect our values and our belief in the need for laws and responsibilities for business as well as people.
And about whose responsibility it is to produce a qualified work force... I would let the market place take care of that.
A healthy and prosperous New Year to everyone... Respectfully, George Watson
-
Thank you, T. Tallis for getting on that soapbox for me. I hinted at the free market solution with perhaps a bit of lame humor. I absolutely agree with you.
-
I think that this is a very broad issue and really need to be split into general education and talent development.
Solving the problems of public education, most of which could be solved with more money but who will pay. Move to the suburbs where parents are willing to pay higher taxes and surprise, the schools are better. You also have more involved parents and often, parents with better education. Wow, sometimes even one parent stays home and volunteers at school.
City schools - often old, poorly maintained building, old textbooks, parents who may or may not have a high school diploma, may or may not be literate or even speak English. Parents working 2 jobs to make ends meet or a single parent. Surprise, these schools don't do as well overall.
Talent development - This is also explained with money. Companies who invest in training their workforces don't seem to have as much trouble recruiting AND retaining talent.
But many companies have a short term outlook - With no guarantee of anyone working for a company lony term (by company or employee choice), companies don't want to invest in employee development because people leave and bring those skills to new employers.
These issues are complex and I agree that just throwing money at things doesn't fix anything. Money has to be spent wisely. But after growing up inter-city and raising my kids in the suburbs, well, money spent wisely does make a difference.
-
Y, I'm not sure I want to get up on my soapbox on this one. And I am sure that most do not want to witness it, either. Let's just say (in the most simple terms imaginable) that if our educational systems would, or could, focus upon the skills that are needed in the workplace, and the discipline it takes to instill the motivation needed, and stop babysitting students, then there just might be a closer alignment between a qualified workforce and job opportunities. Picture this...Rod Serling on your black and white TV...He says, 'Imagine for a moment, that both state and federal governments completely stopped all educational support and get out of the business of education. What forces would take over? The FREE MARKET. In the Twighlight Zone!'
Music cues: 'Do-do-do-do...Do-do-do-do...DA!' I love that Twighlight Zone theme music.
-
Well, we can't be the obstetrician, teacher, and undertaker all at once. This is a life span we're talking about. So they say that you can't know where you're going unless you know where you came from. I gues here that means you can't teach someone talent unless they were trained to expect or procure talent growing up. So its bad parenting, bad schooling, and now industry is left to suffer the shortage.
Almost everything which is a government monopoly is wasteful and inefficient. This is, of course, including politicians and their (again) (current) (recurring) corruption. So healthcare, federalized? Schooling? No competition? Kiss it goodbye. No vouchers? Ni incentive? No alternatives? No accountability? No bonuses? No penalties? No social demotion? Well, you've got today's union-generated, parent approved (little choice) public school-produced, media-encouraged mass-culture mediocraty.
Suppliers are brought into major resellers' supply chains like a bear hug. Just in time. What used to be in-house is now done at the vendor, because the vendor is the client, by proxy. A marriage made in logistics heaven.
The whole idea of bringing in Intel, Microsoft, et al. to almost 'take over' high schools and hand-create their future engineers is a salivating concept for me. Bring up the supply chain to the school. Or vice versa. Bang in some reality, throw out a lot of the useless memorization. Shake the pasture and the ghetto out of the victim, and throw in a glaring dose of incentive.
Education is like some sterile petrie dish of illusion. It's disjoint from real industry, with some notable exeptions, but still, by and large, this is true. Instead of no child left behind ( no dig here ), why not have no child without a corporate sponsor? I'd rather have a corporation as my parent than the government. At least they have a motivation for me to succeed.
Uh oh. Coke machines are back in the hallways.
-
See who is already coming to #socialrecruiting summit in November!
