Political Compass #30: School's prime function is equipping kids to find jobs.

Great Debates
1

Many political debates here have included references to The Political Compass, which uses a set of 61 questions to assess one’s political orientation in terms of economic left/right and social libertarianism/authoritarianism (rather like the “Libertarian diamond” popular in the US).

And so, every so often I will begin a thread in which the premise for debate is one of the 61 questions. I will give which answer I chose and provide my justification and reasoning. Others are, of course, invited to do the same including those who wish to “question the question”, as it were.

It would also be useful when posting in these threads to give your own “compass reading” in your first post, by convention giving the Economic value first. My own is
SentientMeat: Economic: -5.12, Social: -7.28, and so by the above convention my co-ordinates are (-5.12, -7.28). Please also indicate which option you ticked. I might suggest what I think is the “weighting” given to the various answers in terms of calculating the final orientation, but seeing for yourself what kind of answers are given by those with a certain score might be more useful than second-guessing the test’s scoring system.

Now, I appreciate that there is often dissent regarding whether the assessment the test provides is valid, notably by US conservative posters, either because it is “left-biased” (??) or because some propositions are clearly slanted, ambiguous or self-contradictory. The site itself provides answers to these and other Frequently Asked Questions, and there is also a separate thread: Does The Political Compass give an accurate reading? Read these first and then, if you have an objection to the test in general, please post it there. If your objection is solely to the proposition in hand, post here. If your objection is to other propositions, please wait until I open a thread on them.

The above will be pasted in every new thread in order to introduce it properly, and I’ll try to let each one exhaust itself of useful input before starting the next. Without wanting to “hog the idea”, I would be grateful if others could refrain from starting similar threads. To date, the threads are:
Does The Political Compass give an accurate reading?
Political Compass #1: Globalisation, Humanity and OmniCorp.
#2: My country, right or wrong
#3: Pride in one’s country is foolish.
#4: Superior racial qualities.
#5: My enemy’s enemy is my friend.
#6: Justifying illegal military action.
#7: “Info-tainment” is a worrying trend.
#8: Class division vs. international division. (+ SentientMeat’s economic worldview)
#9: Inflation vs. unemployment.
#10: Corporate respect of the environment.
#11: From each according to his ability, to each according to need.
#12: Sad reflections in branded drinking water.
#13: Land should not be bought and sold.
#14: Many personal fortunes contribute nothing to society.
#15: Protectionism is sometimes necessary in trade.
#16: Shareholder profit is a company’s only responsibility.
#17: The rich are too highly taxed.
#18: Better healthcare for those who can pay for it.
#19: Penalising businesses which mislead the public.
#20: The freer the market, the freer the people.
#21: Abortion should be illegal.
#22: All authority must be questioned.
#23: An eye for an eye.
#24: Taxpayers should not prop up theatres or museums.
#25: Schools shouldn’t make attendance compulsory.
#26: Different kinds of people should keep to their own.
#27: Good parents sometimes have to spank their children.
#28: It’s natural for children to keep secrets.
#29: Marijuana should be legalised.

*Proposition #30: * The prime function of schooling is to equip the future generation to find jobs.

SentientMeat (-5.12, -7.28) ticks Disagree.

The cart seems to have been placed before he horse here: looking at the job market and tailoring the education system in order to fill those vacancies is surely a way of ending up with a workforce having obsolete skills. The prime function of schooling is to provide an education: we learn algebra, history, literature and the like in order to learn how to think critically, analyse, communicate and perform all manner of other feats which we are unlikely ever to require in the real world, even though strict “job-finding” might be better served by learning, say, basic plumbing. We must first understand our place in the world, and its place in the universe, before we can determine how to make it better in some capacity (professional or otherwise.) At the very least, schooling should first teach us how not to make it worse.

In this way I would also put the social function of schooling, ie. providing a stable environment in which children interact each other, in front of the purely vocational aspect. I would far rather that a kid could functionally relate to another one than he or she could perform some economically useful task: Young adults can usually learn from scratch how to fulfill a given job’s requirements with relative ease in a short timescale, but learning how to be a citizen must begin from an early age.

These jobs are not “out there waiting for us” in anything but an extremely broad sense. I venture that the society which provides a rounded education in arts, sciences, maths and humanities ultimately ends up with a more flexible workforce, and perhaps even more jobs, than the society who takes Proposition #30 to heart. Of course, one might argue that focussing on academic and social development rather than on practical skills is equipping youth to find jobs, thus retaining the primacy of job-finding in schooling’s function. But I feel that, again, such rather strained interpretation focusses too exclusively and simplistically on the “job market”, which is only a single (but admittedly vital) piece of the jigsaw.
P.S. This halfway point will be the last of the present series since I have a nuptially momentous month ahead of me. The Political Compass will return with Proposition #31 hopefully sometime in August after nice long honeymoon in Mauritius. Au revoir, mon amies!

2

Up to university I believe the primary function of education (for children) is to civilise and democratise children. Make them aware of their historical and cultural heritage and teach them the critical skills needed to be able to function in a modern democracy. You make whole humans, self confident, unafraid and curious and with a broad knowledge base all the rest will come by itself. Also what the job market needs most these days are not specific job-skills but more something like critical thinking, an open mind and the ability to learn.

You’re off to Mauritius for a month?! God-damn bastard you! What about you send the wifey to Brigham and invite me instead. We could spend the long nights in platonic(!) discussion of the merits of the different Political Compass proposition. Come on. I know you love me!

3

I came out close to the Dalai Lama, someone I would never have suspected. On another note, this idea was first developed by Jerry Pournelle, the science fiction writer, in 1986 or thereabouts.

Regards

Testy

4

I also disagree (I was somewhere in the libertarian left, can’t recall my exact coordinates).

Giving kids the tools they need for jobs in the future is important, but we’re only talking about the most basictools such as math, critical thinking and English skills. Apprenticeships, later vocational schools, and on-the-job training are more efficient means of giving specific job skills. The job market itself will ensure that it can create skilled workers.

These foundation skills are important, but I really think the point of primary and secondary education is not to create people capable of finding jobs per se, but people capable of learning whatever skills they need to be able to move on to more specialized training. More than taht, however, in any democracy or republic, an educated populace ios essential. We need a voting base that understands, at a basic level, the law, history and values of the land. Folks who can see through at least the most obvious laws and faulty arguments of a would-be demagogue or tyrant. That’s what education is for, to preserve a smart voting base and thus greater freedom.

5

CurtC (+5.25, -4.10) picks disagree.

The primary purpose of undergraduate school is to make better people. Vocational training can be done at the same time, especially in university, but it’s not the primary purpose.

Best wishes to you, SentientMeat.

6

Disagree. The primary function of schooling is to teach children how to think rationally and independently.

When you get a common concensus on our place in the world, in the universe, and how not to make it worse please let us know.

Marc

7

(-5, 0.75)

Disagree, although I also disagree with the notion that school’s primary purpose is to teach people to think.

The primary purpose of school is to impart fundamental skills and knowledge. How to read and write, how to do math, and basic understanding of science, geography, history, etc.

It’s those skills and knowledge that arms a person to think for themselves AND to hold down jobs.

8

Agree.

Interestingly, I also agree with this:

“The primary purpose of school is to impart fundamental skills and knowledge.”

My thinking goes like this…

The primary purpose of school is to educate. Obviously. But, this begs the question: why? Why are we educating people? I would argue that the primary purpose is to equip them to find jobs. There are other bennefits to having an education, but a good job is the main purpose IMO.

9

~(-4.5, -4.5)

I agree, but with some reservations. I do think the primary purpose of education is to prepare people to find jobs, but I do not believe education should be designed around that goal. The workforce is always shifting, so any attempt to engineer an education is going to be an exercize in central planning, and I think history has shown that there aren’t a lot of things open to that measure of control. Surely in a relatively free market, a centralized educational system designed to train kids for jobs will fail spectacularly.

But this only shows how I think we should run the schools (more hands off than not), not what their essential purpose is. I agree with Debaser here easily. Living today means finding work (even if the work you find is your own business or new invention), and that work takes education to various degrees. This is why we educate.

10

+7/-3 Strongly Agree.

Humans, more so than any other mammals, have to teach their young how to survive. In an industrialized society, that teaching has been largely formalized in the school system.

This is almost a trick question, set up so that people’s first reaction will be “of course our education system is designed to do more than the crass task of teaching job skills”. But, the question said “prime function”, not “only function”. Who would not consider a school a failure if no student could find a job after attending it?

“Getting a job” is really another way of saying “surviving in the world we live in”. Parents do teach some of these skills at home, but we have largely contracted out that function to the school system.

11

Enjoy the honeymoon!

If you need some beachside reading for the trip, I’d recommend “Free to Choose”, by Milton Friedman. :slight_smile:

12

I didn’t find high school to be all that helpful in finding gainful and satisfying employment post graduation. High school prepared me for college it didn’t prepare me to enter the workforce at all.

So what kind of schools are we talking about here? Grade school, high school, trade schools, and universities all have different missions.

Marc

13

I think it’s reasonable to assume that we’re talking about K-12. But you’re right, that the answer might depend on which types of schools you were talking about.

14

What is your basis for comparison?

15

7, -1.5. Agree

What John Mace said.

16

I’ve graduated from college, I’ve graduated from a trade school, and I’m about to enter another trade school (same general field different specialization). I don’t want to minimize the lessons I did learn through grade school but it didn’t do much to prepare me for meaningful employment.

Marc

17

Economic Left/Right: 0.50
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: 0.87

Strongly agree. All the esoteric knowledge in the world won’t help you one bit when it comes down to it. I could be a Jeopardy! champion with all the BS I know, I can kibbitz on virtually every topic, and yet I find myself in the position where despite my knowledge I can barely pay the bills.

The current system of schools should be done away with in favor of a Vo-Tech sort of education. If people want to go further than that, then that falls upon them to do so. I think it should be much the same as it was a long time ago where people were apprenticed at an early age, learned a trade, and did the rest on their own time.

God knows that I wish every day that I had gone to Vo-Tech. Life would be easier with a real skill, which is something that is not currently taught in your average high school anymore.

18

(Scored on Ghandi… er, somewhere in the middle of the bottom left)

Frankly, I’m flat floored by this question. I literally don’t know which way to lean. I see the point of schools preparing for life- that is their goal. And employment is concern #1, so it makes sense that preparation for employment would be a priority at schools.

But at the same time, I’m unwilling to do away with the “arts” training that some people find so useless. History/social studies, especially, is a very important topic. Literature is also helpful. Art in general is a nice thing to train in people, lest you produce mindless dullwits who do what they are told. Er, wait, I see the appeal for some people. :rolleyes:

At the same same time, I’m hesitant to give the Federal government authority over teaching the arts, given their inherent power over people. You can literally train culture, society, and history however you want into young little minds.

And we especially don’t want any religion dripping into the mix.

So I would hate to see Doors’s “Vo-Tech” schools only. A generation without culture or knowledge is a dangerous thing, even if they are all exceptionally well trained auto mechanics and computer technicians.

19

It says “**prime ** function” not “**only ** function”. One can agree with the statement and also expect schools to teach a broad range of subjects that might not be considered relavent to any given job.

20

Granted. Though my reply was directed at some posters who were in favor of making it the only function.

Frankly, I think the K-12 should prepare for college, and college should be chosen between university, vocational schools, or other colleges.

Frankly frankly, I would favor a system that let high schoolers choose their own courses in preparation and exploration for their college choices.