There is no doubt that any positive development around the world is the fruit of a productive interaction between needs or problems and problem-solving creative ideas. But in the actualisation of this seemingly simple interaction, the process makes a huge difference.
This is because such interaction takes place within a complex, policy-driven system, with each side benefiting from the expertise, creativity, and capacity of the other.
In the world of ‘ideals’, education should achieve its goal of leading its recipients out of their former world and transforming their worldview. But in the real sense, especially in our end of the world, this seems highly unachievable. Maybe we can look at the problem from another angle by examining the framework as well as the process of interaction between our education and our local problems.
There's no doubt that any positive development around the world is the fruit of a productive interaction between needs/problems and problem-solving creative ideas. But in the actualisation of this seemingly simple interaction, the process makes a huge difference – the ‘how’! This is because such interaction is facilitated at the level of a complex policy-driven system, with each end benefiting from the expertise, creativity and capacity of the other.
For example, to build durable roads, the government needs qualified engineers and other experts, yet to actualise their expertise, these experts need funds and equipment to be provided by the government. There is a continuum of interdependence in making things work, as both parties are there primarily to solve problems and improve the quality of life, each at their capacity.
Now we come to the principal questions of this write-up. What should be the modality of this interaction between the education system and our many problems? Should experts keep quiet and just watch things go haphazardly, or should they raise questions? Should professors of law, for example, be silent when there are obvious public breaches of law and due process? Should the communities be involved more in highlighting the needs and ranking their levels of urgency, as in a bottom-up approach?
We cannot deny the fact that the available education in itself has already equipped us as a nation with enough knowledge and skills to be far ahead of where we are. But the growth of a state is a game of chess which takes skills, wisdom, commitment and discipline to win. It is a manifestation of us being learnt people when our educators add value by being concerned with educating our own systems and are respected and listened to as experts.
For example, if we have a whole department of experts teaching matters of sanitation in our universities and producing thousands of qualified graduates every year, having poor sanitation policies which are impossible to implement, leaving our cities dirty with poor sewage control, etc., and those graduates unemployed is an insult to those teachers who have worked so hard to produce both experts and systems. The disconnect between education and policies as applicable to local situations is a critical matter of concern. Our policies should tackle problems in the simplest and most practical ways possible.
However, we can change the direction of these questions to face the government. Is the government system open to having objective experts in it, and does it accept when they advise what should be done as per their standard practices? Here there are many things to say, as there are cases where crucial expertise is rendered useless. A typical example is when a professor of law is made a minister for sports, or a military person (active or retired) is made a civilian executive such as a regional commissioner, etc., contrary to the expertise demands of those responsibilities.
Now, this provokes the question of balance. Shouldn’t there be a balance between the influence of politics and education in the holistic process of national affairs? These two, politics and education, must be interdependent and in complementary harmony. Politics alone, without being guided by educated people who are truly loyal to their various areas of expertise and to the country, is bound to catastrophic failure. This is because productive engagement in any field needs expert know-how, not just influence, power, fame, or money.
Thinking of consequences, when education loses its currency (power) as an important problem-solving investment, it also loses value among its recipients. It is not uncommon to hear young people criticise pursuing higher education. The question they often ask is, “What problem will it help me solve?”
This position can be judged as valid given the example of many educated people purged from the system and abandoned in the streets. Their education is being proved as irrelevant, despite the obvious need for their expertise all over the country and even in their own communities. With our nation having more than 70 per cent of its citizens aged below 35 years, it is dangerous to have young people despising education or having their education rendered useless. The impact will be felt not far from now.
Moving forward it is important for the government to consider, for the common good, having mandatory and functioning government-academic partnerships to help explore better ways to solve problems. There are many problems that we should not have today, as we have all it takes to have them solved with merely more informed policies. Not all matters are to be politicised; there are issues that have to be handled objectively by experts.
Shimbo Pastory is an advocate for positive social transformation and a student of the Loyola School of Theology, Ateneo de Manila University, the Philippines. Website: www.shimbopastory.com
