Investment in education may need revision
Any investment has pros and cons but the debate is still going about the new education reform.
11:05 13 July 2013
The latest in education news is supposedly that five year olds will be attempting fractions and computer algorithms in the hopes of being able to compete with some the best education worldwide. Critics say that knowledgeable experts about the capacity of children to learn should be consulted to develop curriculums.
This could be two different ways of approaching the same idea: that reform may be necessary in order for students to compete academically. Many times, we think of investments in terms of statistics and numbers, but it is easy to forget the intangible aspects of an investment.
Here are just a few that could result from these changes, both pros and cons.
- Better retention—if a curriculum is developed with an eye towards student capabilities, it is possible that students could benefit from the investment by achieving better retention of subjects like the sciences and math, in which many students typically struggle.
- University—equalising education at such a young age may give students from all walks of life a better chance at qualifying to enter a university of their choice, or one, which offers the programmes they seek. This could be a direct investment in providing a qualified workforce to fill needs.
- Contingency plan—as with all plans, it might be prudent to have an additional plan at the ready. There is no telling if the plan will be properly implemented or adequately taught, simply because of the fact that it is new and different. This could potentially set back a number of students. The payoff for this investment may not come until later when flaws have been discovered and corrected.
- Unemployed—in a worst-case scenario it is possible that this particular investment could result in frustrated students who become overly stressed by expectations they may not be able to meet perhaps resulting in higher dropouts, lower university enrollment, and higher unemployment.