Failures in University Education

In the UK today, Education has failed. As it is currently practised, education fails more people than it helps. Annually, many graduates are deceived into believing a dream job awaits upon graduation. Many are deluded into thinking they posses the highly sought attributes of the ideal graduate. Many are ignorant of the fact that they are doomed simply because they attended a non Ivy-league university. The fact that there exist some sub-standard universities and that those sub-standard universities are allowed to produce sub-standard graduates is tantamount to a crime. That is the failure of education of which I am referring to. However, education in itself is not a complete failure. It still serves its limited purpose. It provides top businesses, top government and private institutions with suitable fresh graduate recruits. It provides the economy with fresh graduate workers. Understandably, as long as the best universities produce the best graduates for the best jobs, it is taken as a given that education is serving its rightful purpose. But that is only half of what a proper and effective education should do. The main aim of education is to enlighten, to inspire, to educate – to a set standard, regardless of institution. And employment should be a by-product of education, not the main product.

Today, the aim of education is simply to lead one to employment. This is not just wrong but wasteful. It is wasteful because there will never be 100% graduate employment or 0% graduate unemployment. As it is prescribed, education turns the average student into nothing more than a professional job seeker. At any given time, there are far too many graduates for the economy to absorb. As a consequence, the business of education is reduced to a heartless, wasteful, competitive, win-loose, sum-zero, elitist business. Those with the means to get the best education get the best jobs and opportunities. The rest – which are a majority - loose out. Not only do they loose out on the jobs but they also loose their education. A graduate has no validation without suitable employment. This is another failure of education.

This failure comes from the format in which education is delivered today. Education should be a two-way traffic. First, education has to enlighten, inspire, educate – to a set standard regardless of institution. Second, education should only be provided to those who want to be enlightened, those who want to be educated. In other words, only those who deserve it should be educated. This is very controversial but education cannot be delivered in any other format if it is to be proper and effective. Education cannot be delivered in any other format if the independence of the standard is to be maintained. To be worthy of education, one has to be able to demonstrate education-worthiness beyond all doubt. Anything less than an ample and appropriate demonstration of ones desire, eligibility to be educated to the highest standards should be rejected. Anything less than a comfortable demonstration of one’s academic abilities prior to entrance into a university and through out the duration of ones course should be rejected. Sub-standard graduates end up devaluing the institutions that produces them. As a consequence, education can never be for all. A medical doctor without the minimum grades and right disease-diagnosing instincts of a medical doctor is more of a menace rather than a messiah to society. An engineer without the right objective and analytical mind ends up a danger to his profession and mankind. In order to ensure those with the right attributes and capabilities go on to qualify as graduates, proper periodical testing should be the norm. This view that education should be for all is the greatest threat to proper and effective education. All intentions to open education, especially University education up to all, has always been political. What is the benefit to society of a graduate who cannot speak, write or think like a graduate? Such egalitarian practices inevitably lead to wastage and devaluation in standards of education. It also leads to the emergence of elitist universities where standards are maintained and selection processes a nightmare. If standards were maintained everywhere, there will be no room for elitism. The sub-standard students end up paying a higher price in the end.

Education is about attaining a certain academic standard. That standard has to been defended, protected, maintained and monitored for education to justify its worth. Education has to be difficult. Education has to be demanding. That is the first part. The second part is that the students themselves have to submit to this standard. Students must want to attain this high standard themselves. No institution, teacher, library or lecturer can bring a student to this standard without the will of the students themselves. The defining difference should come from the individual student. That is why there always has to be some sort of vigorous standards testing in the form of regular examinations to monitor standards.

In the final analysis, a university education should be able to guarantee a certain standard in a graduate regardless of university attended. The fact that some universities are obviously head and shoulders better than others defeats the object of setting up a university as an institution of higher learning in the first place. Why should a PhD from say South Bank University be viewed any differently from a PhD from Oxford? A levels in this country are far better in this respect as an “A” grade say in mathematics from any College is still an “A” grade regardless of the College from which it is obtained.