世界在危機中：一個勢在必行的模式轉變，以培養出21世紀的學習者(上)

 

作者/Yong Zhao

編譯/李明洋

[tabs]
[tab title=”中文”]

世界在危機中：一個勢在必行的模式轉變，以培養出21世紀的學習者(上)

“我們的國家正處於危機之中。我們曾經技超群倫的商業、工業、科學和技術創新正被世界上的競爭者給超越過去了(National Commission on Excellence in Education, 1983, p. 1)”。美國繁榮的基石、廣大的中產階級均已萎靡了。而曾經締造出美國中產階級的經濟也已經歷了空洞化的過程(Wohlsen，2012)。適合中產階級的傳統工作則外包到其他國家或被機器所取代，因而快速消失(Brynjolfsson & McAfee, 2012; Goldin & Katz, 2008; McAfee, 2012)。美國的經濟日益成長，企業所獲取的利潤和所做的投資均創下了歷史紀錄，而且每天都有新的生意誕生。然而，這種經濟的成長，只出現在非常頂層和非常底層的工作(Aspen Institute, 2012)，所以只對那些從事創意和創新產業，抑或從事低廉薪資的工作者具有激勵的功效(Auerswald, 2012; Florida, 2012)。

我們的(基礎)學校和大學均曾在歷史上締造了美國的繁榮，並促進了人民的福祉(Goldin & Katz, 2008)，如今卻一再地遭到打擊，而徹底地改變了(Berliner, 2006; Carter & Welner, 2013; Darling-Hammond, 2010; Ravitch, 2010, 2013; Tienken & Orlich, 2013; Zhao, 2009a, 2012)。我們社會的教育基礎曾經將美國形塑成(世界)創新的中心，並創造出美國的中產階級，如今卻被日益升高的錯誤改革浪潮所啃噬，使我們的國家及人民的前途受到了威脅。美國教育的固有美德正日益喪失，轉而變得愈來愈像她以前的敵人及崇拜者，而這”在前一個世代就已開始發生，實在令人無法想像(National Commission on Excellence in Education, 1983, p.1)。”

正當美國政府執行錯誤的政策致使民主遭到威脅，致使美國的孩童被塑造成考試機器，致使教育的內容被窄化及同化，致使標準化橫行，致使貧困孩童求助無門，致使創意未受重視，致使考試重於教學，致使教師淪為替罪羊的此時，如果某個不友好的國家企圖痛擊美國，我們恐怕早已視之為一種戰爭行為。之所以如此，是我們自己造成的。我們浪費了科技所帶來的機運，忽視了研究所提出的證據，也忽略了未來的需求為何。”我們根本想都沒想，就單方面地在教育上繳械(投降)了。”

美國並不是世界上唯一”想都沒想，就單方面地在教育上繳械投降”的國家。在過去的幾十年以來，許多西方的民主和已開發國家都在從事類似的自殺式教育改革，從而導致其”國家在危機中”。澳大利亞、英國、紐西蘭，以及其他已然如此作為，或刻正仿效此等教育改革的國家。這些改革，就好比美國曾經做過的，根本就是試圖把錯誤的事情做得更加錯誤。她們是把整個世界陷於危機當中。

“歷史不會對遊手好閒的人仁慈(National Commission on Excellence in Education, 1983, p.1)。”歷史甚至還會對搖擺不定的莽撞改革者異常殘忍。過去，大多數的人集中在生產線前進行著例行作業，而工作內容也只需要基礎和標準化的知識和技能，然而，那樣的時代早已消逝無蹤了。如今，有愈來愈多的工作已採取自動化作業，抑或外包到海外，給薪資要求不高的人們去做。我們已經步入了全新的經濟(模式)。新的經濟模式有利於具有高技能及高學歷的工作者，由其締造的榮景又創造出了大量薪資低廉的工作者，而不是擁有中等技能，在過去勞力市場上居於中堅地位的中產階級(Wohlson, 2012)。新的經濟模式需要的是具有創意和創新的企業家，能夠創造出新的工作和新的機會(Florida, 2012; Wagner, 2012; World Economic Forum, 2012; Zhao, 2012)。因此，新一代的中產階級必須學會技能，以因應國內外僅剩的不完美的替代品(Goldin & Katz, 2008, p.352)。以往，由於社會與社會之間處於隔離狀態，而且改變的步調相當緩慢，所以一個人若要在社會上成功，或許會有所謂的既定技能和知識。此外，大多數的工作是由極少數具有創意和創新的人所創造出來，而且所需要的技能也極為相似。但，”這樣的情況已不復見了(National Commission on Excellence in Education, 1983, p.1)。”

“世界確實是個地球村(National Commission on Excellence in Education, 1983, p.1)，”一個人不可能只依靠著利用他人或和他人競爭，就可以獲致成功。全球化並非”零和遊戲(zero-sum game)”。誠如”國家在危機中”報告書所說的，一個國家的興起，不必然就是另一國家的消亡。在這個世界，人們、想法、物品和資源都在國際間不斷且自由地流動，任何人或國家若想獲致成功，就必須靠著和他人或國家合作，善待他人如同對待客戶和搭檔，而非將之視為敵人或競爭者。而為了締造全球的榮景，我們的教育就必須協助孩子成為全球公民，發展出能夠和不同文化及國家的人一同相處與工作的知識和技能。

我們的國家處在哪些危機中呢?

在以往，美國和西方已開發國家的教育具有以下諸項美德:包容特殊性，尊重個別差異，並且容許非常規行為，這些都是創意及創新所具備的精神(Zhao, 2009a, 2012)，然而，這些美德如今都遭到了摧毀。其次，由於現在的美國和西方已開發國家盲目地追求考試成績，將考試分數視為衡量教育成就的唯一指標，結果付出的代價就是喪失了創意，以及其他對一生的重要性更甚於學業成就的非認知技能(Brunello & Schlotter, 2010; Levin, 2012)。再者，由於針對每間教室裡的每個孩子強制施行統一的課程標準，致使孩子的教育經驗被窄化，也限縮了教師的專業自主性(Alexander, 2009; McMurrer, 2007, 2008; Tienken & Zhao, 2013)。此外，由於採用學生的考試成績來做為評鑑教師的績效，導致(教師的)士氣喪失，作弊之風大起(Nichols & Berliner, 2007)。

除了上述各項危機外，我們的國家也過度地以國際評量成績做為教育品質的指標，深怕被其他國家超越，也因此才會有”國家在危機中”報告的誕生；而在該報告中，有鑑於東亞各國教育體系在諸如PISA和TIMSS等國際評量的表現卓著，因此被美國當成了崇拜、仿效、看齊的對象(Tucker, 2011)。然而，那些東亞國家為了培育出具創意和創新的公民，已掙扎了數十年。諷刺的是，她們正效仿美國和西方諸國(以往的)教育策略，擺脫過去因致力於培育考場高手而使創意遭致犧牲的傳統()(Zhao, 2009a, 2012)。

創意、創業和全球競爭力是(新時代所應具備的)新技能，將能促成世界榮景的到來(Auerswald, 2012)。如果我們想要保有及增加機會，以培育出以前美國和西方已開發國家所擁有的具創意和創新能力的人才，那麼我們就必須停止已然造成巨大危害和資源浪費的錯誤改革(政策)。要讓我們的孩子為新的經濟模式做準備，那麼我們就必須將目前的教育轉換成另一種截然不同的模式。

然而，我們關心的不只是個人或少數幾個國家的經濟成功與否，也應該要關注人類的生存和文明的延續。全球化和科技的進步既可能幫助人們擺脫貧困，卻也可能導致更大的不公平(Friedman, 2007; Stiglitz, 2006)；人們也將因為全球化和進步的科技而擁有更強大的破壞力，並將災難傳播到世界各地。環境的惡化與受創已不再侷限於某個地方。在這個擁有70億人口的世界，人們居住在經濟、社會和文化各不相同的地方，人們的價值觀和興趣也各異其趣，所以我們必須關注的是如何和他人融洽相處，以及我們應該如何養育我們的孩子，讓他們促進其未來世界的和平和永續發展。我們必須教育他們成為世界的公民，而不只是某個國家的公民。在全球化的年代，個體必須具備國際視野，並且真切關懷他人的福祉(Asia Society, 2008; Zhao, 2009b)。

總結來說，(美國乃至於西方諸國)所面臨的危機，就是由芬蘭教育家Pasi Sahlberg所提出的全球化教育改革運動(Global Education Reform Movement, GERM)。GERM包括了競爭、標準化考試、以考試為本位的績效責任制等幾個特徵，感染了世界各國的教育體系，使彼等國家非但不致力於創意、創業及全球競爭力的培育，反而使其課程、教師和評量陷入了混亂。由於目前的學校教育所培育出來的公民只能應付過去的年代，因此造成了全球性的人才不匹配現象(global phenomenon of talent mismatch)，大量的年輕人失業，以及廣泛的人才短缺。結果就是，目前的世界比起未改革之前處於更大的危機之中。

事實上，世界所面臨的危機是有以下幾個指標可循的:首先，全世界都爆發了年輕人失業潮，大量的年輕人失業既是短期也是長期的經濟及社會危機；其次，有許多高學歷的年輕人同樣也找不到工作、上非全日班(underemployed)，或從事著和其學歷不匹配的工作，但企業界卻面臨著人才短缺的窘境。而全世界的人才短缺則又是另一個經濟和社會危機。

以下提出幾項有關全球年輕人失業的數據:

1.經濟學人(The Economist)指出，全世界15歲到24歲的人口中，幾乎有3億人找不到工作。將近一半的年輕人從事著非正式的經濟活動，或其生產效率未符合應有的水準(The Economist, 2013)。

2.世界經濟論壇(World Economic Forum)呈現的資料顯示，每年全世界的就業市場湧進了4500萬的就業人口，其中，大部分是年輕人。而在2011年到2015年間，有3億個新工作必須趕上勞動力的增長速度(World Economic Forum, 2011a)。

3.世界銀行(World Bank)的數據顯示，在中東和北非低區，有54%的就業人口是處於失業及遊手好閒的狀態；而在15歲到25歲的人口中，每4個就有1個沒有工作(Gatti, et al., 2013)。

4.歐盟統計局(Eurostat)的資料發現，在2013年最後一季度，歐洲15歲至24歲人口的失業率超過了23%(Eurostat, 2013)。

5.英國國家廣播公司(British Broadcasting Corporation, BBC)在2013年的報導指出，南非35歲以下的人口中，有高達70%沒有工作(Mbele, 2013)。

6.在澳大利亞，2011年17歲至24歲的人口中，有超過27%的人從事兼職工作或沒有工作(McDonald, 2013)。

7.在南韓，2013年的年輕族群失業率高達22%(Guilford, 2013)。

8.根據國際勞工組織(International Labour Organization)2013年的資料指出，美國16歲至24歲人口的失業率為16%，相當於約600萬個年輕人輟學或找不到工作(Elliot, 2013)

接著提出幾項大學生找不到工作、上非全日班和薪資過低的數據:

1.根據美聯社(Associated Press)2012年所做的研究發現，近年來美國有一半的大學畢業生找不到工作或上非全日班(Associated Press, 2012)。

2.根據大學可負擔性及產出性中心(Center for College Affordability and Productivity)的資料顯示，在2012年有就業的美國大學(應屆)畢業生中，所從事的工作並不需要大學學歷的就將近半數(Vedder, Denhart, & Robe, 2013)。

3.根據”每日電訊報(The Telegraph)”2012年的報導”，英國有8.6%的大學生在畢業6個月後仍未找到工作，而有高達30%的大學(應屆)畢業生，所從事的工作不需要大學學歷(Paton, 2012)。

4.根據中國”財新網”2013年的報導指出，中國大學應屆畢業生人數將近700萬人，但截至4月份，北京地區的在校簽約比率不及三成(Li, 2013)。其次，大學畢業生的平均起薪已和農民工相近，因為許多工作?本就不需要大學學歷(Guo, 2010)。

5.在南韓，2011年大約有25%的大學畢業生找不到工作(Guilford, 2013)。

最後再提出幾項全球人才短缺的數據:

1.根據”2013年海斯全球技能指標(Hays Global Skills Index 2013)的數據顯示，在全世界30個主要經濟體中，有18個面臨人才短缺的現象(Hays, 2013)。

2.根據麥肯錫研究所(McKinsey Global Institute)的預估，到2020年，全球將會短缺8500萬名高階技術及中階技術工作者(Mourshed, Farrell, & Barton, 2012)。

3.根據一項針對全球3萬8000名雇主所做的調查發現，有35%的雇主面臨職務找不到人才的困境，而有54%的雇主則表示，人才短缺對其公司在應對客戶的能力上造成中等或高等程度的(負面)影響(Manpower Group, 2013)。

4.在美國，目前至少有300萬個職務找不到人(Krell, 2011)；若要維持美國的經濟成長，就必須(額外)增加2500萬個具有基礎能力的工作者(World Economic Forum, 2011a)。

5.在日本，2010年有76%的雇主表示，很難找到適當的人才填補公司職務(Krell, 2011)。

6.根據歐盟(European Commission)的資料顯示，歐盟有超過200萬個職缺找不到人(European Commission, 2013)；而根據世界經濟論壇(World Economic Forum)的資料則顯示，在西歐，若想在2030年繼續維持住該區的經濟成長，就必須額外增加4500萬個工作者(World Economic Forum, 2011a)。

7.根據美中商務理事會(The U.S.-China Business Council)的資料指出，人才短缺是中國面臨的10大國際商業問題中的其中一項(The U.S.-China Business Council, 2013)。大約只有10%左右的中國大學(應屆)畢業生有能力在跨國企業公司工作(D. Farrell & A. J. Grant, 2005)。

因此，世界正面臨兩個矛盾的危機，其一是大量的年輕人找不到工作，其二則是大量的人才短缺。如果這兩種狀況持續下去，將會非常危險。大量年輕人失業所導致的不只是個人貧窮及心理創傷，而且也將造成社會的動盪及不公。人才短缺將減緩經濟成長，進而造成更少的工作機會。人才短缺也會趨使高階技術工作者的薪資往上提升，從而導致高低階技術工作者的薪資差距更為擴大。

(*原作發表於Society 52(2), pp 129-135, April 2015。國家在危機中30週年紀念特輯(http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s12115-015-9872-8)。原作者有感於”國家在危機中”對美國所造成的巨大影響，以及本文的重要性，乃仿效該報告的文筆寫成此文。)

【作者介紹：Yong Zhao】

本文作者Yong Zhao為國際知名教育學者、作家及演講者，專精於全球教育方法及應用，目前任職於美國奧瑞岡大學(University of Oregon)，擔任教育測量、政策和領導學系教授，發表學術文章百餘篇，以及出版20餘本書，包括2014年出版的”誰害怕大惡龍:為何中國擁有世界上最好(最差)的教育體系(Who’s Afraid of the Big Bad Dragon: Why China Has the Best (and Worst) Education System in the World)“、2012年出版的”世界級的學習者:教育創新與學生創業(World Class Learners:Educating Creative and Entrepreneurial Students)“，以及2009年出版的”迎頭趕上或引領世界:在全球化時代的美國教育(Catching Up or Leading the Way: American Education in the Age of Globalization)“。此外，他尚有經營部落格: http://zhaolearning.com.。

[/tab]
[tab title=”English”]

A World at Risk: An Imperative for a Paradigm Shift to Cultivate 21st Century Learners[1]

“Our Nation is at risk. Our once unchallenged preeminence in commerce, industry, science, and technological innovation is being overtaken by competitors throughout the world” (National Commission on Excellence in Education, 1983, p. 1). The bedrock of American prosperity, the massive middle class, has been shrinking. The economy that once created the American middle class has been going through a hollowing-out process (Wohlsen, 2012). Traditional middle-class jobs have been disappearing quickly, offshored to other countries or replaced by machines (Brynjolfsson & McAfee, 2012) (Goldin & Katz, 2008; McAfee, 2012). The U.S. economy is growing–companies are making record profits and investing, and new businesses are created every day. That growth, however, is creating jobs at the very top and the very bottom (Aspen Institute, 2012), hence the fast growth of rewarding opportunities for the creative and entrepreneurial and the low-paying jobs in the service sector (Auerswald, 2012; Florida, 2012).

Our schools and colleges that have historically contributed to the prosperity of the United States and the well-being of its people (Goldin & Katz, 2008) have been under assault and profoundly changed (Berliner, 2006; Carter & Welner, 2013; Darling-Hammond, 2010; Ravitch, 2010, 2013; Tienken & Orlich, 2013; Zhao, 2009a, 2012). The educational foundations of our society that once made America the center of innovation and created the American middle class are presently being eroded by a rising tide of misguided reforms that threatens our very future as a Nation and a people. “What was unimaginable a generation ago has begun to occur” (National Commission on Excellence in Education, 1983, p.1)—American education, once the envy of the world, is losing its traditional virtues and becoming more like its admirers’.

If an unfriendly foreign power had attempted to impose on America the misguided policies that threaten democracy, turn American children into robotic test takers, narrow and homogenize our children’s education, encourage standardization instead of helping the needy children and stimulating innovation, value testing over teaching, and scapegoat teachers that exists today, we might well have viewed it as an act of war. As it stands, we have allowed this to happen to ourselves. We have squandered the opportunities brought about by technology, ignored research evidence, and paid no attention to what the future needs. “We have, in effect, been committing an act of unthinking, unilateral educational disarmament” (National Commission on Excellence in Education, 1983, p.1).

America is not the only nation that has “been committing an act of unthinking, unilateral educational disarmament” in the world. Over the past few decades, many Western democratic and developed nations have engaged in such suicidal educational reforms. Led by the same mistaken assumptions that gave birth to A Nation at Risk, Australia, the United Kingdom, New Zealand and others have made or are about to make similar changes in their education systems. These changes, just like the changes the U.S. has made, are simply trying to do the wrong thing more right. They are putting the world at risk.

The Risk

“History is not kind to idlers” (National Commission on Excellence in Education, 1983, p.1). It is even crueler to reckless reformers who keep fiddling with the past to meet the needs of the future. The time is long past when most people worked on assembly lines and other routine jobs, which required only basic and standardized knowledge and skills. A growing portion of these jobs has been automated or offshored to places with abundant people who are unable to demand higher wages. We have entered a new economy. The new economy favors highly skilled, highly educated workers, and their prosperity creates greater demands for low-paying service workers–but not for the kind of medium-skilled, middle-class jobs that formed the backbone of the workforce in the past (Wohlson, 2012). The new economy needs creative and innovative entrepreneurs to create jobs and new opportunities (Florida, 2012; Wagner, 2012; World Economic Forum, 2012; Zhao, 2012). Thus the new middle class will have to be equipped with “skills for which there are only imperfect (domestic or international) substitutes” (Goldin & Katz, 2008, p. 352). It was once possible to predicate and prescribe the skills and knowledge one might need for success in a given society because societies were isolated from each other and the pace of change was slow. Moreover, the majority of the jobs were created by a few exceptionally creative and entrepreneurial individuals and required similar skills. “It is no longer” (National Commission on Excellence in Education, 1983, p.1).

“The world is indeed one global village” (National Commission on Excellence in Education, 1983, p.1). In this interconnected and interdependent village, one cannot achieve prosperity alone by simply exploiting and competing with others. Globalization is not a zero-sum game. One nation’s rise does not have to be another’s demise, as suggested by A Nation at Risk. In a world where people, ideas, goods, and resources move across national borders constantly and freely, the prosperity of any individual or nation depends on working with others, treating others as potential customers and partners instead of enemies or competitors. To achieve global prosperity, our education has to help children develop the knowledge and skills to live and work across cultural and national borders as global citizens.

The risk is not only the destruction of the traditional virtues of education in America and other Western developed countries, which tend to tolerate exceptionality, respect individual differences, and condone unconventional behaviors—the beginning of creativity and entrepreneurial spirit (Zhao, 2009a, 2012). It is not just the rigorous but blind pursuit of test scores as the only outcome of education at expense of creativity and other non-cognitive skills that have been proven to be equally, if not more, valuable than academic test scores for life’s success (Brunello & Schlotter, 2010; Levin, 2012); or the imposition of uniform curriculum standards on all children in all classrooms that narrows children educational experiences and reduces the professional autonomy of educators (Alexander, 2009; McMurrer, 2007, 2008; Tienken & Zhao, 2013); or holding educators accountable for raising student test scores beyond reason that results in the loss of morale and widespread cheating (Nichols & Berliner, 2007).

The risk is also the choice of educational systems to idolize, to emulate, to benchmark to. The fixation on international test scores as indicators of educational quality and the fear of being surpassed by others that give birth to A Nation at Risk has made educational systems in East Asia the model because of their superb performances on international tests such as the PISA and TIMSS (Tucker, 2011). But these educational systems have been struggling to produce creative and entrepreneurial citizens for decades. They have ironically looked up to America and other Western nations for strategies to move away from their traditional practices, which produce great test-takers at the cost of creativity (Zhao, 2009a, 2012).

Creativity, entrepreneurship, and global competence are the new basic skills that will bring the “coming prosperity” to the world (Auerswald, 2012). If only to keep and improve on the accidental opportunities for cultivating creative and entrepreneurial talents that once existed in America and other Western developed education systems, we must stop the misguided reforms that have already brought tremendous damages and wasted resources. To prepare our children for the new economy, we must begin the shift to a different educational paradigm.

The concern, however, goes well beyond economical success of individuals or a few nations. It includes the very survival of humanity and the continuation of civilization. Globalization and technological advancement have the potential to both lift people out of poverty and engender greater inequality (Friedman, 2007; Stiglitz, 2006). They have also given individuals the destructive power that once could only be held by a state and thus could send disasters to anyone anywhere. Environmental degradation and destruction are no longer confined to one place. With over seven billion people living different economic, social, and cultural settings, some of which do not necessarily share the same values or interests, we must be concerned about how to get along and what we can equip our children with to make the world they will occupy peaceful and sustainable. They have to be educated as citizens of the world beyond citizens of a nation. A global perspective and genuine concern about the well being of others are essential for citizens in the age of globalization (Asia Society, 2008; Zhao, 2009b).

The risk, to summarize, is that educational reforms around the globe, aptly shortened by the Finnish education author Pasi Sahlberg as the GERM, which stands for Global Education Reform Movement, have focused on fixing an educational paradigm that has little chance of preparing the talents and citizens we need in the 21^st globalized century (Sahlberg, 2012). The GERM, characterized by competition, standardized testing, and test-based accountability, have infected educational systems around the world and sent them to fiddle with curriculum, teachers, and assessment instead of inventing a new paradigm that cultivates creativity, entrepreneurship, and global competence. The old paradigm aims at strengthening schools to prepare citizens for a by-gone era, resulting in the global phenomenon of talent mismatch: the co-existence of massive youth unemployment and widespread talent shortage. As a consequence, the world is more at risk than before the reforms.

Indicators of the Risk

Indicators of the risk the world faces are well documented. First, there is massive youth unemployment around the world. Large youth unemployment is both a long-term and short-term economic and social risk. Second, while a large number of youth are unemployed and individuals who are highly educated in the traditional sense are unemployed, underemployed, or working on jobs that do not require the level of education, companies are facing a talent shortage. The shortage of talent around the globe is another economic and social risk.

Massive Youth Unemployment

• World wide, almost 300m 15- to 24-year-olds are not working around the world. Nearly half of the world’s young people are either outside the formal economy or contributing less productively than they could, according to The Economist (The Economist, 2013).
• With 45 million new entrants in the global job market annually – most of them young – 300 million new jobs will be needed between now and 2015 to keep pace with the growth in the labour force (World Economic Forum, 2011a).
• In the Middle East and North Africa, 54% of working age population is unemployed or inactive; 1 out every 4 youth aged 15-25 are jobless, according the World Bank (Gatti, et al., 2013).
• In Europe, the youth (ages 15-24) unemployment rate was over 23% in the last quarter of 2013 (Eurostat, 2013).
• “In South Africa, 70% of under 35 year olds are out of work,” according to a 2013 BBC report (Mbele, 2013).
• In Australia, more than 27 per cent of Australians aged 17-24 were not in full-time study or work in 2011 (McDonald, 2013).
• In South Korea, the youth unemployment rate was 22% in 2013 (Guilford, 2013).
• In the United States, the unemployment rate of youth aged 16 to 24 was 16% (International Labour Organization, 2013), with almost six million youth out of school and work (Elliot, 2013).

Unemployed, Underemployed, and Underpaid College Graduates

• In 2012, an Associated Press study found that half of recent college graduates were unemployed or underemployed in the United States (Associated Press, 2012). At the same time, nearly half of the college graduates were in jobs that did not require a college degree, according to a study by the Center for College Affordability and Productivity (Vedder, Denhart, & Robe, 2013).
• In the U.K., while some 8.6% of graduates were unemployed after six month in 2012, about 30% of college graduates were in jobs that did not require a college degree, according to a 2012 report by theTelegraph (Paton, 2012).
• In China, nearly seven million college students graduated in 2013 but less than 30% of the college graduates in Beijing area had an employment contract in April, just two months before they head out of school (Li, 2013). The average starting salary for college graduates are similar to that of migrant workers because many of the jobs do not require a college education (Guo, 2010).
• In South Korea, around 25% of college graduates were unemployed in 2011(Guilford, 2013).

The Global Talent Shortage

• Out of the 30 world’s major economies, 18 are experiencing talent shortages, according to the Hays Global Skills Index 2013 (Hays, 2013).
• The McKinsey Global Institute estimates that by 2020 there will be a global shortfall of 85 million high- and middle-skilled workers (Mourshed, Farrell, & Barton, 2012).
• Worldwide, 35% of over 38,000 employers surveyed report they are experiencing difficulty filling jobs due to lack of available talent. 54% of employers surveyed reported that talent shortages impact their client-facing abilities to a high or medium degree (Manpower Group, 2013).
• In the U.S., at least 3 million U.S. positions currently remain unfilled (Krell, 2011). 25 million workers will be needed to add to the U.S. talent base to sustain its economic growth (World Economic Forum, 2011a).
• In 2010, 76 percent of Japan’s employers said they had difficulty finding the right people to fill jobs (Krell, 2011).
• There are over 2 million unfilled vacancies in the European Union (European Commission, 2013). 45 million workers will need to be added in Western Europe by 2030 to maintain its economic growth (World Economic Forum, 2011a).
• In China, one the top 10 concerns of international businesses in China has been the shortage of talent (The U.S.-China Business Council, 2013). Only about 10% of Chinese college graduates are reported to have the skills to work in multinational businesses (D. Farrell & A. J. Grant, 2005).

The world thus is faced with two paradoxical crises: massive youth unemployment and equally massive talent shortage. Both are dangerous if allowed to continue. Massive youth unemployment leads to not only personal poverty and psychological trauma, but also social unrest and inequality. Talent shortage slows down economic growth and in turn generates fewer employment opportunities. Talent shortage can also drive up the incomes of highly talented workers, which in turn result in even bigger income gaps between the high-skill and low-skill workers.

Hope and Frustration

In the crisis of massive youth unemployment lies tremendous hope for the future. The millions of unemployed youth around the world can become the qualified talents to meet the rising demand of businesses or the creative entrepreneurs the world needs to harness the opportunities technology and globalization present (Salkowitz, 2010). In theory, any individual (except in extremely politically isolated places) has access to the global market of seven billion as well as global collaborators and financing (Zhao, 2012). The question is whether they are equipped with the right skills and knowledge. Education has thus been considered the most important action to address the youth unemployment crisis (Gatti, et al., 2013; World Economic Forum, 2011a, 2011b).

Likewise, the crisis of talent shortage is another opportunity. The severity of the problem has already made businesses, governments, and international organizations willing to take action. There is general consensus around the world that we must collectively invest in better equipping our children with the skills and knowledge for the new economy (Krell, 2011; World Economic Forum, 2011a). Expanding educational opportunities and improving educational quality have become a top priority for many nations, developed and developing. The resolution and determination to better education are clearly visible in the active, almost irrational, participation in and response to international tests results such as the PISA and TIMSS.

Education presents hope. It also presents frustration.

The frustration comes from the persistence and dominance of the old educational paradigm. Ample evidence suggests that the talent mismatch is not the result of insufficient education, but the result of the wrong education. For example, in South Korea, a nation that has been globally recognized for its high education quality indicated by test scores, “Korea’s best aren’t suited to the jobs on offer” (Guilford, 2013). China has also been recognized as one of the best education systems in the world, especially after it’s Shanghai took the number one position on the PISA in all three subjects twice in a row but only 10 percent of its college graduates are qualified (D. Farrell & A. Grant, 2005). About 45% of U.S. employers said the main reason for entry-level job vacancies is the “lack of skills” in a study by McKinsey (Mourshed, et al., 2012). The same study found that only 42% of employers worldwide believe new graduates are adequately prepared for work.

Clearly the traditional model of education is no longer adequate. Worse, it is harmful for preparing citizens for the 21^st century. The new economy needs entrepreneurially spirited individuals, but traditional education prepares employment-minded job seekers. Research shows that the more successful an educational system is in the traditional sense as indicated by test scores the less likely it is to cultivate entrepreneurs. PISA scores, for example, have been found to be negatively correlated with nations’ entrepreneurial confidence and activities (Zhao, 2012).

Excellence in Education

There is no disagreement that the world needs excellence in education but what defines excellence matters. There are two educational paradigms: employee-oriented vs. entrepreneur-oriented (Zhao, 2012). While both aim to prepare children to live successfully, the former focuses on transmitting a body of knowledge and skills predetermined to be valuable and the latter emphasizes on the developing the potential of each individual child. The former presumes that a body of knowledge and skills can be decided based on predications of needs of the society and economy, while the latter assumes if a child’s potential is developed she will become valuable in her own way. Employee-oriented education values what childrenshould learn, while entrepreneur-oriented education values what children would learn. Employee-oriented education prepares children to fit existing jobs, while entrepreneur-oriented education prepares children to take the responsibility to create jobs.

Excellence in one paradigm does not mean excellence in the other. When a school or system becomes extremely good at preparing employees, they are not necessarily good at preparing entrepreneurs because different paradigms lead to different arrangement of educational institutions and systems. Given its primary goal to efficiently and effectively transmit predetermined knowledge, the employee-oriented education paradigm requires an apparatus with clearly defined learning outcomes for all students, well-trained teachers knowledgeable of the content to be transmitted and skilled at doing so, engaged students willing and able to learn the content, standardized measures to monitor the progress of each student as well as institutions frequently, and other resources well-aligned with the prescribed content. Uniformity, consistency, standardization, competition, data-driven practices, and an emphasis on outcomes are the features of the employee-oriented education paradigm.

In contrast, the entrepreneur-oriented paradigm requires an apparatus that maximizes individual differences. School following this paradigm have no standardized and common curriculum for all students, each child pursues his or her interest and passion, teachers respond to and support individual student’s pursuit, and students’ progress is assessed only in accordance with their own pursuit. Variation, diversity, tolerance (or indulgence), autonomy, and student-driven are some of the features of the entrepreneur-oriented education.

Today, the measure of excellence in education follows the old paradigm. Excellence is defined as effectiveness and efficiency in transmitting the prescribed content and homogenizing children, indicated by standardized test scores in a few subjects. Schools and nations that produce higher test scores are considered having better education. Following the same logic, schools, teachers, and educational systems are working hard to raise test scores, believing that they are pursuing excellence. Guided by this definition of excellence, educational reforms worldwide have focused on strengthening components and arrangements of the old educational paradigm as suggested by A Nation at Risk: fixing the curriculum, raising standards, lengthening school time, improving the teaching force, and holding teachers and school leaders accountable.

To prepare the talents we need for the 21^st century, we need to redefine excellence in education. Instead of effectiveness in homogenizing students, an excellent education should support the development of diverse talents. Instead of suppressing creativity and individual differences, an excellent education should deliberately cultivate them. Instead of preparing compliant employees, an excellent education should intentionally encourage children to be entrepreneurial. Instead of overemphasizing global competitiveness, an excellent education should foster global perspectives and competence. Excellence in education should thus be measured by its effectiveness in providing personalized education that promotes diversity and creativity, on a globalized campus that engages children in global interactions, through product-oriented learning that inspires entrepreneurship and innovation (Zhao, 2012).

The Tools at Hand

We have the essential raw materials to realize the true education reforms we need. We have the right tools to complete the paradigm shift.

• Modern research supports the existence of the universal diversity of human talents, interests, passion, and culture (Ehrlich, 2000; Ridley, 2003) (Pinker, 2003) (Gardner, 2006) (Rose & Fischer, 2011), but that diversity had to be suppressed in mass-production economies that required a more homogenous workforce. Globalization and technology advances have drastically expanded the spectrum of skills that are valuable. Traditionally undervalued skills have become increasingly more valuable (Florida, 2012) (Pink, 2006). In the age of hyperspecialization (Malone, Laubacher, & Johns, 2011), unique, small niche skills can be of great value.
• Technology has advanced so much that it is a reality that one can learn anything, at anytime, with anyone, from anywhere (Bonk, 2011) (Christensen, Horn, & Johnson., 2010). Thus human learning does not have to be confined to the physically present teacher in geographically isolated places, making it possible to support the development a diversity of interests and talents, as well as different learning styles and patterns (Fischer & Silvern, 1985) (Fischer & Bidell, 2006) (Bransford, Brown, & Cocking, 2000) (Tomlinson, 2001).
• Globalization has significantly increased human interactions and movement across cultural and political borders, making it more possible for children to engage in learning activities on a global scale (Zhao, 2009a, 2012).
• Theories and practices that support the new educational paradigm have existed for centuries and advanced even more in recent years. Pioneers have developed successful strategies and tactics to make it a reality all over the world, albeit on a very small scale (Zhao, 2012).

These raw materials, combined with the commitment of the public, determination of government agencies and businesses, and the strong motivation of today’s youth, offers us the possibility of creating the next generation of excellent education. All we need to is the courage and wisdom to abandon the outdated model and begin working on the new one.

Recommendations

In light of the urgent need for improvement, both immediate and long term, I propose a set of recommendations that policy makers and educators can begin to act on now, that can be implemented over the next several years, and that promise educational excellence for the new age.

• Stop prescribing and imposing on children a narrow set of content through common curriculum standards and testing.
• Start personalizing education to support the development of unique, creative, and entrepreneurial talents.
• Stop fixing solely the teaching force by selecting, training, and retaining better teacher candidates. It takes too long and we cannot wait.
• Start empowering the children by liberating their potentials, capitalizing on their passion, and supporting their pursuits. Start giving the ownership of learning to the children.
• Stop constraining children to learning opportunities present in their immediate physical environments by assigning them to classes and teachers.
• Start engaging them in learning opportunities that exist in the global community, beyond their class and school walls.
• Stop forcing children to learn what adults think they may need and testing them to what degree they have mastered the required content.
• Start allowing children the opportunity to engage in creating authentic products and learn what they are interested in, just in time, not just in case.
• Stop benchmarking to measures of excellence in the past, such as international test scores.
• Start inventing the excellence of the future. You cannot fix the horse wagon to get the moon. We have to work on rocket science.

A Final Word

To implement these recommendations, the first thing we need is to abandon the mindset deeply entrenched in the obsolete employment-oriented educational paradigm, they very mindset that both gave birth to and has been perpetuated by A Nation at Risk. After thirty years of experiments that have brought revolutionary, destructive changes to American education, without any measureable improvement, it is time to be freed from its spirit.

 

【Author：Yong Zhao】

Yong Zhao speaks around the world on educational issues, particularly on issues related to globalization and education, creativity, global competitiveness, educational reforms, and educational technology.

[/tab]
[/tabs]

 

閱讀此文後，歡迎繼續閱讀：

世界在危機中：一個勢在必行的模式轉變，以培養出21世紀的學習者(下)

 

圖片來源：昇典 葉@flickr

本文轉載自小李的特教資訊站，未經許可不得轉載