by Crawford Kilian
Prof. Kilian's article was reproduced in the Internet newsgroup
"misc.education" in 1993, and that version of the article is reproduced
here without editing. He gave me permission to post it many years ago,
and I hope his permission is still good. His website is at
http://crofsblogs.typepad.com
Copyright 1993 by Crawford Kilian.
I published the following article in the fall 1993 issue of Vancouver
Review. In the light of the discussion on "Schools and the Anti-Culture,"
some people may find it helpful.
We educators enjoy entirely too much power over students and society, and
we should give up a great deal of it. We wield our power because we set
the terms for everyone's entry into the working world: we can give or
withhold a piece of paper called a diploma or degree--a credential.
Lewis Perelman raises the issue of credentialism in a recent book called
School's Out: Hyperlearning, the New Technology and the End of Education.
Perelman argues that as long as you must have an academic degree or
diploma to get a decent job, the education system has you over a barrel.
To the extent that we educators think about it at all, it's only to
rejoice that God has so wisely given us the barrel. The rest of the
population is less delighted with this divine ordinance, but they accept
it without question. Belief in the value of a piece of paper is so
ingrained that most people consider credentialism a solution instead of a
problem.
The problem with dropouts, after all, is not that they're incompetent; the
problem is that they don't have their grade 12 diploma. The problem with
post-secondary education is that too many people can't get in to obtain a
degree. Too many others fail to complete their BA, MA or PhD; despite
their expensive schooling they don't qualify for challenging jobs.
(However, their incomplete education may "overqualify" them for joe jobs.)
So millions of North Americans scramble for some kind of certification, at
immense personal and financial cost.Ironically, the increase in numbers of
high school and college graduates has devalued their achievement. High
school graduation once qualified young people for all kinds of work; by
1965 or so, it was just a ticket for further training. A bachelor's
degree, in the last decade or so, has suffered similar devaluation; many
new BA's go right back to school to acquire either an advanced degree or
certifiable job training. As each piece of paper becomes less helpful,
another piece of paper becomes essential.
Like nations caught up in an arms race they can't afford, young people
must now compete furiously with one another to qualify for the next stage
of their education. Many must commit the entire first third of their lives
to the schooling they need for high-income employment; they need the high
income so they can pay back their enormous schooling-induced debts. They
and their families must sacrifice to afford the cost of study, and the
whole society must tax itself heavily to subsidize the hundreds of
thousands who--without a credential--would be unemployable. They are often
unemployable in any case.
Nevertheless, governments foster ever more belief in credentialism.
Official reports predict that for the foreseeable future, new jobs will
require 17 years' formal schooling--the equivalent of a master's degree.
Politicians warn of the dire consequences of high-school dropouts, of
uncompleted college educations. Everyone wants to reduce dropouts and
increase high school graduation rates, which would of course lead to still
more people entering post-secondary.
Surprisingly, the politicians never mention the staggering cost increases
that would follow such success. When 9,496 students dropped out of BC
schools in 1991-92, they saved taxpayers $60 million in per-pupil grants
for 1992-93. Had those dropouts all stayed in and graduated, about 2,000
of them would have joined the throngs already fighting for seats in BC's
overcrowded colleges and universities.
The supposed reason for all this schooling is to equip people for jobs, as
if employers were desperately seeking credentialled workers to feed a
booming economy. Yet though we seemingly need advanced education to stay
competitive, our credentialled workers are manifestly incapable of
sustaining prosperity. In 1988 alone, Canadian universities awarded almost
3,000 master's and doctor's degrees in commerce; those graduates have
spent most of their careers under recession conditions. Another 3,000
received advanced degrees in education that year, and never has the public
been less happy with the schools than in the last five years.
Credentialism is not an innate flaw in education, but a result of the
misuse we have made of it. Post-secondary education in particular should
be dedicated to the pursuit of scholarship for its own sake--whether in
high-energy physics, biology or Chaucer. But we have made scholarship
(better said, the certified pretence of it) into a prerequisite for
utterly unrelated kinds of work outside the academy, and credentialism is
the result.
The scholars themselves have cooperated in this abuse of their calling.
Floods of state-subsidized students bring in money for research, for
teaching assistants, for secretaries, for offices and labs and travel. In
return, scholars must teach large numbers of young people who could not
care less about their subjects. A few students may be potentially good
apprentice scholars, but finding them is a tedious business. Teaching well
enough to attract such apprentices is even more tedious.
To ease the apprentice-spotting process, the scholars pressure the public
schools to improve academic standards--regardless of the impact on
ordinary, non-scholarly young people who just want to make a footnote-free
living. Perelman observes that today's education is really just vocational
training for the job of college professor; yet we make everyone train for
it.
Consider an analogy. We have decided to give the best jobs and highest
prestige to accomplished 100-meter sprinters. Track coaches find
themselves awash in money, but only if they accept countless students who
can barely stagger. The coaches have to work with swarms of young
stumblers in Remedial Walking, all the while proclaiming "Excellence in
Sprinting." (The junior coaches, that is; the senior coaches are away at
conferences on track surfacing, locker-room design, and sprinter
self-esteem.)
With their enhanced incomes at stake, coaches soon find ways to pass even
their hopeless students. Special educational stopwatches run slow, giving
plodders a chance to sprint to glory. Educators debate the exact
definition of "100 meters": before long, 90 meters looks close enough.
Maybe 85. Steroids become mandatory. After all, if they flunk too many
student sprinters, it will look bad and the kids won't get jobs.
Absurd, of course--but no more absurd than to suppose a certified literary
critic or sociologist is more useful to business than someone who never
heard of Walter Pater or C. Wright Mills. Yet employers still prefer
applicants who are so certified.
This reflects badly on employers' trust in their own judgment. A degree,
as they themselves loudly and rightly complain, is no proof of
competency--least of all when they themselves hold one, or the Canadian
economy might be stronger. But demanding a degree cuts down on the number
of applicants to interview. In the old days, hiring on the basis of race,
sex or nationality served the same purpose. Lewis Perelman rightly calls
credentialism a civil-rights issue. Employers, he says, shouldn't be
allowed to discriminate in favor of people with degrees.
Suppose we grant Perelman's point, that employers should hire strictly on
the basis of demonstrated ability to do the job. A credential, by
definition, gives the employer grounds to believe the applicant is
capable. Reject credentials, and what can you believe in apart from the
applicant's own self-serving claims?
Perelman would replace the grade 12 diploma with a "Certificate of Basic
Competency" (CBC)--a guarantee that graduates have at least entry-level
work skills. Of course, you wouldn't need to wait until grade 12 to
acquire your CBC if you could pass the test sooner. And you'd be crazy to
leave school without it.
But who would design the CBC test? As long as the testing authority was
independent of educators, it could be an employers' group or a government
agency. The Motor Vehicle Branch, after all, doesn't care if you learned
to drive from your mother or from a driving school. You earn your licence
when you prove you can drive, not because your mother is rich or the
driving school has ivy-covered walls.
The CBC, like your driver's licence, would say nothing about your
understanding of Shakespeare's sonnets, your fluency in Spanish, or your
knowledge of geography. It would measure only the basic abilities that
employers would like to see in young workers. These would presumably
include rapid reading, clear and correct writing, listening, speaking, and
numeracy. Beyond the basics, job seekers could obtain specialized skills
from public or private schools, or as apprentices. They might obtain
certificates of completion, but the real "ticket" would again come from an
independent judging body. Employers could of course run their own tests,
perhaps after in-house training. And in many cases they might well decide
that a background in the liberal arts would indeed be a "basic
competency." If so, students would have to turn back to Shakespeare and
the Brontes, and to prepare for testing on the Impressionists or Lady
Murasaki.
Can we break the grip of credentialism? The idea seems daunting. Yet one
recent case suggests it can be done. China for centuries ran its affairs
with the help of a credentialled class of mandarins. An elaborate system
of schools and examinations worked to staff the empire's bureaucracy. The
system survived warlords, invasions, communist takeover and even the
Cultural Revolution.
The Chinese economic boom, however, has done what Mao's Red Guards could
not: make credentialled education almost worthless. Canadian educator
Robert Cosbey, who has taught all over China since the 1970s, reports that
the country's graduate programs are frantically lowering standards in an
effort to attract students. Even women are now allowed into hitherto
male-only disciplines.
The reason? A bachelor's or advanced degree leads only to a monthly salary
of perhaps $30 Canadian; a job in the booming private sector can pay ten
times as much regardless of certification. China's best and brightest are
therefore deserting the schools that were once their only hope of security
and prestige.
Similarly, but more consciously, Perelman's "civil rights" approach would
reduce the economic advantage of a credential, and deprive education of
its present captive market.
Far from destroying the schools, the end of credentialism would rescue
them from their present bureaucratic stagnation. The system would become
smaller, simpler and more productive. Many "dropouts" would now have
reason to rip through school in record time, grab their certificates, and
take off for work or further training. Education costs would fall sharply
for a good reason: the state would subsidize only the training demanded by
the workplace. If students wanted to take other courses out of personal
interest or for the good of their souls, they could do so at their own
expense.
Universities would therefore shrink into small groups of scholars; they
would teach only students who wanted to become scholars also.
Some might argue that such a system would aggravate our present problems
with "cultural literacy." Who would read Dostoevsky or Scott Fitzgerald
without a professor's gun at their head? Who would enroll in philosophy,
art history, or surveys of medieval French poetry, without the threat of
severe reduction in lifetime earnings?
The answer is obvious: Those who wish to, and those who must do so for
professional reasons.
The present education system seems so huge, complex and entrenched that we
forget it is largely a recent creation--a gigantic daycare for the baby
boomers. The economic and technological conditions that gave it life are
changing before our eyes. From a kind of "monoculture" of credentialist
education, we are moving rapidly into a rainforest model of diverse but
equally valid approaches to teaching and learning. The purpose of such
diversity is only partly to produce employees; its primary goal should be
to produce free men and women who choose their own lives, on their own
terms.
We can look forward, perhaps even within the lifetime of middle-aged
pedants like me, to a system in which education happens everywhere, all
the time, to everyone. In that happy time, those who look back at late
20th-century schools will say that we were, in more senses than one,
certifiable.
Crawford Kilian
Communications Department
Capilano College North
Vancouver
BC Canada V7J 3H5