At A2, as you know, evaluation is everything (well, half of everything); therefore, you have to know how to question its value. It is important to understand that questioning the value (efficacy) of something does NOT mean it is not worthwhile; it merely says YOU understand there may be limits, which is what the examiners want to know. For education and training policies one way of achieving evaluation marks is by pointing out that even PhD students (let alone school leavers) are "raw material" where firms are concerned, and will need to be trained in specific skills by their employers. Their education (hopefully) means they will be quicker learners, and with better outcomes (i.e. profits) for their employers. This article points out that countries that just increase education do not see the big uplifts in growth achieved by the developed nations, and so therefore there must be more to growth than just education:
"And there is more bad news for the “education, education, education” crowd: Most of the skills that a labor force possesses were acquired on the job. What a society knows how to do is known mainly in its firms, not in its schools. At most modern firms, fewer than 15% of the positions are open for entry-level workers, meaning that employers demand something that the education system cannot – and is not expected – to provide."
You do not have to read the whole article; you can encapsulate this evaluation point in one sentence. If you use supply-side policies, I hope human capital/education & training will feature prominently; you now have your evaluation in a nutshell.
Exam Guru
No comments:
Post a Comment