Marx argued that class [was] the most fundamental inequality in society. This is now generally thought to be an outdated view because class has become far too complex to strictly define in modern society; and is now no longer the primary tool of racial, patriarchal and discriminatory divisions.
Social mobility has become the buzz-word for the destruction of class boundaries and one of the predominant tools of social mobility, advocated by most Western governments, is education. Education, along with the [seriously flawed] merit system ideal, is what someone needs to position themselves freely in society. Your history and social context is objectively irrelevant if you have obtained what you need through the education system. You can become a doctor or lawyer, previously purely the professions of the middle classes, if you work hard enough at school; and everyone is [supposed to be] given an equal opportunity to it.
So the labour government in the turn of the milennium advocated university education - to provide all of the aspiring educated with a means to succeed in the world. However, presumably in an attempt to implement blind equality, it has become quite clear that they have forgotten a few simple rules of economics. If everyone has a degree there will be a glut of graduates who cannot get "graduate-type" jobs. So in order to get head-and-shoulders above their fellow graduates many must seek further ways to educate themselves - with post graduate qualifications or more experience.
The government does not fund post-grad qualifications. And those "lower classes" saddled with crippling debt from university cannot afford to volunteer for experience and must simply enter the job market whereever they can. Many are forced to start at the bottom of the ladder again: 3-4 years behind everyone else and in serious debt.
This is the result of encouraging too many students to go to university to gain arbitrary degrees in "mickey mouse?" subjects - without then allowing appropriate equality of opportunity at recruitment level. Equality of opportunity must cover everything or it will fail.
The answer is there - it is just not used as it should be. The merit system for recruitment would help to select the right candidate for a job rather than the one who has had the benefit of nepotism or financial backing which have provided hollow experience or opportunities to "shadow" professionals (as if this could possibly demonstrate a higher level of experience).
The merit system is failing and needs to be fixed.
Social mobility has become the buzz-word for the destruction of class boundaries and one of the predominant tools of social mobility, advocated by most Western governments, is education. Education, along with the [seriously flawed] merit system ideal, is what someone needs to position themselves freely in society. Your history and social context is objectively irrelevant if you have obtained what you need through the education system. You can become a doctor or lawyer, previously purely the professions of the middle classes, if you work hard enough at school; and everyone is [supposed to be] given an equal opportunity to it.
So the labour government in the turn of the milennium advocated university education - to provide all of the aspiring educated with a means to succeed in the world. However, presumably in an attempt to implement blind equality, it has become quite clear that they have forgotten a few simple rules of economics. If everyone has a degree there will be a glut of graduates who cannot get "graduate-type" jobs. So in order to get head-and-shoulders above their fellow graduates many must seek further ways to educate themselves - with post graduate qualifications or more experience.
The government does not fund post-grad qualifications. And those "lower classes" saddled with crippling debt from university cannot afford to volunteer for experience and must simply enter the job market whereever they can. Many are forced to start at the bottom of the ladder again: 3-4 years behind everyone else and in serious debt.
This is the result of encouraging too many students to go to university to gain arbitrary degrees in "mickey mouse?" subjects - without then allowing appropriate equality of opportunity at recruitment level. Equality of opportunity must cover everything or it will fail.
The answer is there - it is just not used as it should be. The merit system for recruitment would help to select the right candidate for a job rather than the one who has had the benefit of nepotism or financial backing which have provided hollow experience or opportunities to "shadow" professionals (as if this could possibly demonstrate a higher level of experience).
The merit system is failing and needs to be fixed.
No comments:
Post a Comment