[Glen]

Capitalists I know encourage privately-funded lifelong-education, such as completing an EMBA and various professional qualifications.
Socialists I know encourage publicly-funded lifelong-education, retraining and reskilling workers so that they can adapt to emerging economic situations.

I accept that education must not interfere with the democratic process, and that politicians will invariably be less educated than equivalently paid members of wider society, but it seems to me that lifelong-education is a universally accepted ideal so why is the issue so rarely promoted? How did our national models end up promoting a completed education before entering work, instead of adopting a staggered lifelong approach?

[Potemkin]

How did our national models end up promoting a completed education before entering work, instead of adopting a staggered lifelong approach?

Because those were the needs of industrial capitalism in the late 19th and early 20th centuries. Unfortunately, our education system has not really kept up with the changes in our economic system, despite such innovations as Workers' Educational Institutes and the Open University in the mid-20th century. We still have a long way to go before our education system catches up with the current needs of our economic mode of production.

[Glen]

Because those were the needs of industrial capitalism in the late 19th and early 20th centuries.

Is there evidence of other approaches being tried in non-industrial or non-capitalist societies?

[Potemkin]

Is there evidence of other approaches being tried in non-industrial or non-capitalist societies?

There was little need to educate the masses before industrial capitalism. The children of the elites were privately educated by tutors, before going up to Oxford or Cambridge, whose colleges were mostly funded by private donations and by fees.

Pre-industrial Scotland is an interesting case, since it had an egalitarian and highly developed education system even back in the 17th and 18th centuries. The Scots valued education in a way that the English just didn't (and still don't, to be honest). It's no accident that huge numbers of Scots became inventors, innovators and engineers during the Industrial Revolution, and indeed helped to kickstart it. The English supplied the money, and the Scots supplied the brains.

[noemon]

Is there evidence of other approaches being tried in non-industrial or non-capitalist societies

Greece fits this bill on some level.

Greece at some point in the 90's decided to experiment with encyclopedic education, so what it did was that she basically changed the A-level model and instead of 4 A-level during 2 years, you now had to do 13 A-Level's over 3 years.

I was the second batch to go to school under that system and instead of having the 4 basic A-level in 3 categories, you had 13 A-levels instead in a bid to give children a more rounded education focused on encyclopedic learning.

The problem with analysing the Greek model is that while high-schools adapted to the new system, universities didn't and while education in Greece at least in my time was of a very high calibre in high-school, education in universities since the 1980's has been abysmal due to the politicization of the schools, which is a subject on its own.

Essentially Greek law-makers following the junta went on a binge to prevent a junta from rising again and passed laws that made universities asylum centres, so police were banned from entry, this enabled the anarchists to make universities their permanent residences, another law they passed is that students can elect the Dean and that political parties have a right to operate in universities, so what that did was to create a system where the Dean is beholden to the strongest party at uni, completely destroying the Universities independence. These measures largely destroyed Greek universities and so most rational people, myself included went abroad to study at Uni, that is how eventually I ended up in the UK. But this is something to consider as well.

In the sense that there has been a disconnect both in philosophy and in quality between high-schools and universities and so the success of the encyclopaedic model has been mired by the under-performance of the university centres, and lastly this encyclopedic model did not eventually last and is no longer active anyway.

[Bosnjak]

I think Denmark pays the state any kind of education and curses, for adults.

[noemon]

Most countries in Europe are sort of socialistic when it comes to education and most countrie's education is free up to the Master's.

The British model is a good model to discuss because it has a balance between private-public which apparently works really well.

[ThirdTerm]

Cambridge University has an adult education department which runs summer schools in July and August.

Our programmes
Leading Cambridge academics deliver classroom sessions, themed plenary lectures and evening talks. Our programmes are academically rigorous and require you to prepare for your studies in advance. This will increase enjoyment and enhance your capacity for critical thinking.

Interdisciplinary Summer Programme
Our Interdisciplinary Programme which offers three two-week terms is the best choice for those who want to combine a variety of subjects including philosophy, economics, international politics and relations, literature, history, archaeology, art history and history of science.

Specialist Summer Programmes
For a more specialised study path we also offer programmes in: Ancient and Classical Worlds, Science, Literature, History, Shakespeare, Medieval Studies, Creative Writing and English Legal Methods. Most programmes run for two weeks, but one-week options are available for most. The English Legal Methods programme runs for four weeks.

Combining programmes
You can combine programmes/terms to build your own schedule of two, three or more weeks. For example, you can study two weeks of Literature followed by two weeks of Shakespeare, or Ancient and Classical Worlds followed by History.

https://www.ice.cam.ac.uk/international ... programmes

[noemon]

The great thing about Cambridge is that it charges the same as any other British uni, which is £9000 per year and you get an interest free loan, which you pay off only if you get a job and only 3,5% of your salary per month.

Cambridge Uni like all British Uni's are both public and private owned and regulated in terms of fees(but not anything else) by government. When I studied back in 2002 it used to be £3000, which is essentially nothing for education in Cambridge Uni or Oxford.

[Chetna3_sharma]

Indian education is not well are not as well planned as they are predictable. Private institutions have charge very high fees and have very strict controlled by their own. Central or state governments have registered that management. Administrations have opened their own school where they have low charges so that poor family students can also afford................Read More about

[MistyTiger]

I accept that education must not interfere with the democratic process, and that politicians will invariably be less educated than equivalently paid members of wider society, but it seems to me that lifelong-education is a universally accepted ideal so why is the issue so rarely promoted? How did our national models end up promoting a completed education before entering work, instead of adopting a staggered lifelong approach?

My guess is that if they bring it up, they will be expected to come up with a bill to cover the costs of lifelong education and they would rather not do that. The US already has a GI Bill to help cover education costs for military personnel and their families.

Having a completed education symbolizes that a person is stable because they have established what they want to do in life. I think that there is a tendency to think that if you are always in school that you could always change your mind about where you see yourself in the future. More employers in the US support continued studies these days but they want to be sure that their staff have at least an undergraduate degree. Having only a high school diploma is commonly associated with unskilled, nonprofessional jobs.

[Rancid]

All of this won't matter, because robots.

That said, I guess it depends on the field you're talking about. Although it is true I am not taking any sort of formal courses at a University. I am constantly learning on the job, as well as taking occasional training courses/seminars for my job. I'd much rather do this, then take a semester long course at University XXXXXX.

[One Degree]

Having only a high school diploma is commonly associated with unskilled, nonprofessional jobs.

A college degree as a solution to employment problems is simply another example of people deluding themselves that they have found a solution when they have not.
Only 1 in 4 people have an IQ above 110.
Only 1 in 10 have an IQ above 120.
You can give them a diploma, but does that mean they are suited for cerebral jobs?
Education will not solve the problems we are facing unless you are willing to eliminate all the people except the intellectually elite.
I don't put a lot of faith in IQ, but it is convenient for demonstrating points.

[MistyTiger]

I laughed at your last sentence, One Degree.

The geniuses have been known to score low in school. But that IQ does not necessarily translate to higher rate of real world employment.

People can go for associate degrees as in electrical technician or medical assistant, they do not have to have a bachelor's.

My point was that people have this misconception that you are not worth much if you do not have a college degree. But how many auto mechanics have gone to college? They make decent money working on cars.