In this first-of-its-kind episode, Edtech Insiders hosts a debate about the value of Practical vs. Classical Education.
What is the true goal of education? In an age when the talk of the "ROI" of education is everywhere, what is the role of the classical liberal arts ideal of an enlightened and informed citizenry?
In this first-of-its-kind episode, Edtech Insiders hosts a debate about the value of Practical vs. Classical Education.
What is the true goal of education? In an age when the talk of the "ROI" of education is everywhere, what is the role of the classical liberal arts ideal of an enlightened and informed citizenry?
Welcome to Season Two of edtech insiders, where we talk to the most interesting thought leaders, founders, entrepreneurs, educators and investors driving the future of education technology. I'm your host, Alex Sarlin, an edtech veteran with over 10 years of experience at top tech companies. This special episode of Ed Tech insiders, we're actually going to host a little bit of a debate. So we have three guests really amazing guests from different parts of the tech world. We're going to talk about practical versus classical education. Let me introduce each of our guests. Christian Marty studied history, philosophy and Media Studies at the University of Zurich and received his doctorate there in 2019. With a thesis on max vapor parallel to his doctorate he built and led a very successful tutoring school that still exists today. In 2020, he founded evolve aupo, a learning platform with helpful learning material aligned to academic curricula for students throughout Europe and eventually the world. Bailey Parnell is the founder and CEO of skills camp and was named one of Canada's most 100 powerful women in 2016. Her TEDx talk about social media and mental health has over 3 million views. Skills camp is a soft skills training company that works with businesses and educational institutions to help their staff and students develop the essential skills needed for personal and professional success that skills like personal branding, emotional intelligence, stress management, and public speaking. Molly Blankenship is an associate director at jobs for the future. She was a Forbes 30 under 30 recipient in education for her role as the director of Chattanooga 2.0. In Tennessee, Her focus is helping students succeed and enter the workforce. She has helped the county's highest need high schools and advanced placement courses and classes on preparing for the AC T college entrance exam. She also backed an intensive four week full day summer program for students entering kindergarten who had not attended preschool or who needed additional pre K instruction. Molly Bailey Christian, Welcome to EdTech insiders. Thank you, glad to be here. This is really exciting. For me, this is a new type of episode for us. Rather than a deep dive interview with a single founder or CEO or thought leader or a new segment, we have all three of you three amazing guests super qualified to talk about our proposition today. And we're going to have a little bit of a debate, not a friendly debate, but about a very important topic. So I'm going to launch the proposition, you know what the topic is, and then we'll talk a little bit about some of the aspects of it. And I'd love to hear what each of you have to think. So our proposition today is, in the year 2022, classical liberal arts education is less valuable for students than practical skills based education, or more time in 2022, classical liberal arts education is less valuable for students than practical skill based education. So to kick us off, I want to give each of you about a minute to describe what you do in edtech, and what stance you'll be taking on this proposition. I want to start with you, Molly, please.
Molly Blankenship:Sure. Thank you, Alice. Great to be here. My name is Molly Blankenship. I'm an associate director at jobs for the future. We are a nonprofit that works all over the country on issues of workforce development and economic advancement with a goal of making sure that all workers have access to the economy and the opportunity to advance in their careers and grow wealth and income as they go. And I spent the majority of my career working in education and workforce development. And so I'm really pumped to be here and to have this conversation and I will be taking the position that it is actually yes, that is less valuable today than a practical skills based education. And there's a couple reasons for that. One is that I think if you take the word valuable, and really unpack what that word means it's more than just the applicability of curriculum. It's also about how accessible Training and Curriculum is about how attainable how relevant and how it's viewed in the marketplace. And for those reasons, I think today that a skills based education and credentialing background actually has the potential to be more accessible, more affordable, and thus more applicable in the workplace and as workers go forward. And then second, as we're seeing an increasingly tight economy and labor market is performing in ways that some of us have not been able to predict necessarily, opening up as many doors and on ramps to the economy as we can is not only important but also beneficial to business. And the last thing I'll add Alex is that so many have jobs today that are being developed and the jobs of the future tomorrow that are being developed require skills that are transferable and require people to be ready to learn and transfer between them. And so focused on ever changing, growing and stackable credentials can be one way to help achieve that. So that's where I stand. Thank you for having me.
Alexander Sarlin:Terrific. Let's pass it to you, Christian.
Christian Marty:Thanks a lot, that you invited me. I'm Christian, I'm from Switzerland, I hope you understand my English very well. And I hope I don't forget all my words I learned once in school, in the English classes. I'm Christian, what we're doing at Tech, so together with my two co founders and the team of around 250 people, and building a huge learning platform with helpful school material for all the students throughout Europe. And yes, regarding the debate topic, I have a really clear opinion. And it's quite the opposite of what has been said that before. Today, and I would say as well as at all the times, classical liberal arts education is more valuable for students than practical skills based education. Only classical liberal arts education lead, I think, to what we can call a three mind. So I'm really looking forward to our debate. And I think it will be a nice exchange between all of us.
Alexander Sarlin:Wonderful. And last but not least, Bailey.
Bailey Parnell:Thank you for having me. So my name is still Bailey Parnell, and I lead a company called Skills camp, which is a soft skills development company. And for many years now, we partner with both corporate and higher ed side of things to teach people the soft skills they need for personal and professional success. So that could be anything from emotional intelligence to communication skills, to critical thinking and beyond. We do this primarily online these days, but also offline. And so it's kind of funny hearing both of you go first, I think this was on purpose. I grew up in Canada started my career there and recently moved to New York. So I have some insight from a number of countries that I've lived in. But when Alex first reached out, I actually said, I don't know if I'm the right person for you, because I don't, I'm not too into binaries. So I do. I'm very strongly for liberal arts education, I think it's just as valuable as skills based education. And I think that actually, it should be taught more similarly to how skills based education is taught. And they also think that skills based education and trade should be treated with the same respect as as the humanities. So I find that we maybe I'll be going back and forth between them today, having being someone who teaches liberal arts kind of skills in a skills based education kind of way. And also looking forward to learning from my colleagues here as well. Alex, I feel like oh, we could choose both, technically. And it can't walk
Alexander Sarlin:the tightrope, but we'll allow it because this is a friendly debate. And I think that, you know, we all probably agree that there's value in both types of education. But for the sake of this debate, I think you could play the middle card.
Bailey Parnell:I think so too. I know, we all find value in both, for sure.
Christian Marty:That's true. That's exactly what I learned in my school in Switzerland. We always talked about the American debate. And then the teacher always said, A in the American big debate, you know, you have two sides. And usually there's a third person, and this third person has like, a little bit from both sides. So it says really, really this, it happens the first time what I learned so many years ago, so critical.
Bailey Parnell:Do you know what Christian, I think this very well might be part of the problem on most issues is that we're taught that there's two sides only. That's true.
Alexander Sarlin:That's true. Hopefully, our conversation will expose the you know, both sides and some of the spectrum of ideology in the middle, because there's definitely a lot here. Let's jump in. I want to start by asking about the classical liberal arts education. When you sort of look and read about the history of this type of education. They says things like, you know, it's designed to bring literature, sciences history, and create well rounded, informed and independent thinkers, people capable of continuing learning in a wide variety of fields. And I just want to quickly read the definition from Princeton University, which I think has a really neat definition of liberal arts education. And I want to give each of you to sort of respond. A liberal arts education challenges you to consider not only how to solve problems, but also trains you to ask which problems to solve and why preparing you for positions of leadership and a life of service to the nation and all of humanity by exploring issues, ideas and methods across the humanities and the arts and the natural and social sciences. You'll learn to read critically write cogently and think broadly, these skills will elevate you Your conversations in the classroom, strengthen your social and cultural analysis, they'll cultivate the tools necessary to allow you to navigate the world's most complex issues. So here's our question. Do you believe that in 2022, that liberal arts promise so articulately phrased by at Princeton still holds for most students? Or is it becoming a privilege of wealthy students of an institution like Princeton? Molly, can I start with you? We'll keep the order for now.
Molly Blankenship:Absolutely. I love that definition. First of all, and I'm I have a prediction, as I think this whole thing is going to, I doubt our debate ability, I feel like you're going to find a lot of agreement here. Bailey, I'm going back to your initial comments, as I'm thinking about this question is that it is, of course, that traditional education, our public education system serves as the backbone of this country. And of course, it is intended to deliver on this promise of our liberal arts education, and the thing that's unspoken, but implied here, but I call out all the time as an Informed Electorate and how critical it is that our education systems serve that purpose. And so for us at JF F, when we think about questions of workforce development, about skills based education, just like you were talking about Bailey, we're talking about things like character development, like digital literacy, civics education, that sort of thing that have to be I think that for me Alex's question where I'm going is, I think that the answer is that yes, education holds this promise, we have to start thinking about how we do it differently. Our delivery model, I think, as we can see, in a lot of different avenues and corners of our country is not serving the purpose that we want it to whether you're talking about from a civic standpoint, or an economic standpoint. And so I think thinking about delivery is definitely a question and thinking about the things I mentioned earlier, accessibility, affordability, etc, big questions. But in general, this promise still holds true. And I think we have to keep coming back to it as a country.
Alexander Sarlin:Any responses from the other panelists?
Bailey Parnell:Yeah, I always have something to say you'll learn that very quickly. I think any education is a privilege, for sure. But I don't think that it should be I also fundamentally agree that it's a human right. And that includes liberal arts education, as well. So we're talking very big, important subjects, like how people's brain works, and how society works, and history and all these sorts of things. And so for those that take it, yes, of course, I still believe it holds the promise of making you a more creative and independent thinker, and maybe even more importantly, better able to continue learning in life, which seems even more important now with the rapid rate of change and the evolving labor market. And so I think, if you are versed in liberal arts, your mind will serve you better over a lifetime, which is kind of the goal of early education. And so if it has become a privilege, I would actually, you know, look more broadly and consider why because maybe the question should actually be why should you not learn liberal arts? And if it's because I'm poor, that's not a debate, that's a necessity and a decision made for survival?
Christian Marty:I totally agree, guys, before our interview here, before our debate, I was thinking a little bit, why exactly are the liberal arts so important, and then I thought about it. And then I had two arguments in my mind. First, it was more of a theoretical argument coming from we can say traditional educational theory. And then I thought, I mean, without a clear focus on general knowledge, on mathematics, on grammar, on religion, on philosophy, and so on, and so on. And other things that shape the world. Without a clear focus on these things, we do not really see or know or understand the world. So we can say, if we don't look at these things, never not in school, not at the college, not at the university, and so on, we really have no idea about the world. And we can also say that the ability to be objective, to be critical to be distanced, and so on, and so on. That's simply not possible if we don't have a good liberal arts education. And then the other idea I had before our debate, it was more than empirical idea. And this argument is coming from we can say, cultural history, probably. And many of the ideas that we think altogether considered to be very important and very significant and very great, have been shaped by people who had less to do with concrete practice and more to do with abstract general knowledge. For example, the idea of democracy or fairness or tolerance. I mean, also in the USA, these are really important ideas. The ideas came from people who hardly ever dealt with everyday problems, but very much with religious questions with philosophy, philosophy, local dilemmas, or with historical developments. So I think then I thought about it, and I asked my girlfriend Hey, what do you think is the true answer? And then we came to the conclusion. Yeah, it's true. I mean, on one hand, in theory, it's really important because you can be critical without these background. And also historically, if we, if we look back, it's true, that enlightenment, for example, is not possible without people who have a great liberal arts education. So I think these two points really led me to their to their conclusion. Yeah, it's true. Liberal arts are really important, we can say. So it sounds
Alexander Sarlin:like we're all agreeing that there is definitely power in a liberal arts education, it can expand your mind and help you understand sort of what's what's important. And that, you know, people historically have really gotten a lot out of it. That said, I think, you know, when it comes down to spending, budgeting, curriculum development, sometimes liberal arts and skills based education get in conflict with one another. So I want to ask a couple of questions to sort of really pry into this, should students or their parents be empowered to remove classical education subjects in the curriculum if they would like to? In other words, should a parent for example, be able to replace their child's history class or foreign language classes with computer science or data science? Or, you know, skills based career outcome oriented classes? But this time, let's start with you, Bailey,
Bailey Parnell:when I hear this question, I think I'm totally tell you like a story first, my parents grew up really poor on the east coast of Canada, and neither of them finished high school. And they worked really hard, so that we could, and my husband, he's kind of got a classic immigrant story, parents grew up in India with nothing, and came to New York, and then Toronto with no education so that he could have it. And if you had asked our parents, when we were growing up, if we should have been out doing computer science, or instead of history, they honestly probably would have just chosen whatever someone told them would make us more money, because they were acting from a place of fear and poverty at that time of their life. And so, you know, he jokes that the career trifecta for his family was you had to be a doctor, lawyer engineer, because it was both respectable and made money. But if you fast forward to today, of course, doctors, lawyers and paralegals and engineers are all suffering from automation. So what would that mean today? And I think that if they were making that decision from a place of abundance, as I've seen in the private schools that I've worked with, I think that they would actually probably choose history. And so you get, I think, a little bit further into, what is the role of government in our life? What is the role of education? How do you see education and for me, I actually see my taxes, kind of like a subscription service. And like, as part of that subscription, I get different features in the government. And I don't always use all of the features. But as one of the biggest features is an education system not designed from a place of fear, but a place of abundance for all kids regardless of where they come from. And so I know firsthand, that, if parents were given the choice to make this, they may not always be able to make the choice. That's not from a place of survival. So I think we should maybe focus on improving the whole overall education system so that that parents don't have to make that choice. But right now, I would actually probably be just like in today's literal life, particularly, I'd say in the US, I would say, I don't want parents to have that choice, because I know how many of them are operating from a place of fear.
Alexander Sarlin:Fascinating responses from the other panelists.
Molly Blankenship:Yeah, I can jump in. Alex, I think Bailey is really cool. To hear that perspective. First of all, and very much agree. I think with most of your comments, a couple things that I would add are I think I'm what I may do is I may straddle the middle here is and carrying this question, I was here a little bit I think instead of presenting parents with an either or the questions that we could be asking are, how can schools how can the education system deliver on the promise of value and relevance to parents and children so they don't feel like they're having to make this choice. And I think that there's lots of opportunities to do that. One is through integrating career and learning together so that parents and families can see the connection of how skills like critical thinking and civics education, that sort of thing are connecting into a longer term pathway and plan towards success for their child. And then also, I think there's an opportunity just to go back again to thinking differently about delivery overall, not only not only integration of traditional learning and career but also thinking about community partnerships, integrating work experiences, things like that, again, so that computer science data science are represented in our history and foreign language classes and in our field trips and experiences not being true, either or which also, I would say run the risk it opens up the room of sending students down tracks that don't work for them if you do keep them separated. And I think that potentially an overlaid and integrated approach can serve all students, while it is still being open to tailoring and customization in partnership with students and families. That's my magic wand, if that's what it would look like,
Alexander Sarlin:value and relevance. Very interesting. Christian, anything to add to that,
Christian Marty:I thought we can ask back, I think Nobody of us wants an education, which only focuses on liberal arts. And nobody of us wants an education, which only focuses to train the people to be ready for the job market. I think both options you would say, okay, that's not possible, I think we should connect these two fields. And I think so I agree with with my two colleagues here that it's clear that there has to be a connection. And I think the big debate then is how exactly does this connection look like? And I think here, it's a more difficult question. But I think, what is also really great, especially if I go to the US that there are so many models, so many possibilities to connect these two fields, it's really great that we can say there are some colleges, which are focusing on more on one side, and other colleges are focusing on the other side, and so on. And this is, I think, one real cool thing that brings the country a little bit forward. Oh, you know,
Bailey Parnell:what's interesting, I asked a couple of my team members who are recent grads today, just because I actually always pose questions like this to the team, and kind of have conversation about it. And one of them said, when I was in school, just recently, I found the liberal arts so annoying, but I did it anyways. And it was only once I left school that I realized the value of it. And so yeah, when I'm in the moment in school in an engineering degree, and I've certainly worked with these students, they're like, Why do I have to do English, I'm never going to use this. But then when they get into that leadership role, or, you know, a great example, is a medical student, you know, a doctor who isn't really understanding the value of the liberal arts yet. But then once they get into their field, they realize that the psychology they learned is helping them with bedside manner, and their patience and the writing skills. They learned this helping them publish research, and the economics minor they took is helping them grow a private practice and the leadership skills they learned are actually making them okay to be a people leader. And so it's really the should parents be able to decide, maybe not every parent can decide certainly in mind wouldn't have had the experience even in this liberal arts education to make an informed decision for me. So as part of my subscription, I vote for officials who I believe have the knowledge to make that decision for everybody.
Alexander Sarlin:That's fascinating. So last question on this topic, let's cut right to the chase. If education were to pivot over time, entirely away from liberal arts, to vocational would our society writ large as you can define that by any country or our human society be better or worse off? And why Christian? I want to start with you for a couple of reasons. You I know you're gonna have strong opinions on this. Also, I think you have a very close understanding of the European apprenticeship and vocational model, which is, you know, very different than what we do in the US. What do you think about this question?
Christian Marty:I did my PhD about the German sociologist, Max Weber, I wrote a book about him, and Max Weber. And he's really in his really, really famous series of essays on the capitalist spirit. He traces what kinds of people populate the world when it's only about the work, jobs, and so on, and so on. So at the end, he shows us how a world would look like if we only focus on on producing people who are really great workers, but not really educated people in the old sense of the word. And then he says, And I, of course, I know it by heart, because I read it so many times. It's so far off the last stage of this cultural development, it might well be truly said specialists without spirit centralist. Without art. This nullity imagines that it has obtained a level of civilization never before achieved. So of course, he has a really pessimistic view on this stuff. But I think it's it's too pessimistic, in my opinion, but it shows a little bit in which direction it could go. If you only focus on vocational stuff. Then at the end, you have 3d specialists, yes. But the specialist results spirit, you have sensually a lot of consumers but consumers without art. And so he wrote his essays. It's a really big debate here in Europe about it. After he visited the USA in 19. A little bit after the 100 years ago, we can say and it was a debate, the the thought that America goes in this direction and so on and so on. But I think it's a little bit right. You shouldn't focus only on this side. As you know Alexis is my opinion. But I would also say that we shouldn't focus on the other side only that we say, okay, we, we only want to have educated people in the old sense, I think this would be also wrong because then we have probably a specialists view with a lot of spirit, but economics are going down. And I think this is also another solution. So this is how I see it.
Alexander Sarlin:You end up with spiritualists without skills, specialized skills. Really interesting onto this from the panelists, please.
Bailey Parnell:I think I might be closer to mark. Sorry, Max Weber, then because I think it sounds absolutely terrifying. Alex, I think it sounds like the Middle Ages. I think we're wealthy kids can learn liberal arts. But poor kids have to learn vocational skills. And the nth degree of this, the cheapest version of this is you learning the skills and trades of your parents. And we have seen this before we've seen this story, it was not good for anyone that didn't come with wealth that came through birth, right. So like, I think if we had down this path, we're living in a new monarchy. But today's monarchs are those that have won the game of capitalism and made the most money, which you could also argue is passed down through birth. Right. So I know that we've seen this story before. Why, because of my liberal arts, education, and history. And so I actually am terrified of a place you know, with a spirit as Christian says, and without heart. And so I feel like I am more cynically fighting to keep liberal arts education these days at all. But like I said earlier in the podcast taught more in the way of skills education, like when I think back to my best religion class, because I went to Catholic school, but my favorite religion class was world religions in grade 11. And the thing I remember most about that whole entire class was the one field trip we took to a Sikh boudoir, a Muslim mosque and a Hindu temple. And I remember everything from that day, I remember sitting with the Sikhs in the boudoir, eating with the poor on the floor understanding now that that was even a thing that they did. And I never would have made such an impact if it wasn't done in that kind of more experiential skills kind of way. So I think we'd be worse off about liberal arts, and maybe I am getting a bit cynical.
Alexander Sarlin:Molly, any response?
Molly Blankenship:I don't know that I can say it any better than my panelists and Bailey, your your passion? I don't want to follow
Bailey Parnell:my cynicism. Sorry.
Molly Blankenship:No, it's good. I totally agree. I mean, I think that they're really easy, straightforward answer to this question is that this society would be worse off. If we were to pivot totally away from liberal arts education. I think that there's an implication, Alex, that we're doing liberal arts education, well are fully in that question now. And I call that question, I think that we have, we have an opportunity not only to think differently, and do the blending that I talked about earlier, but to really look at the promise that the education system has made, as you know, in return for their subscription fee, Bailey, and ask ourselves, you know, if it's delivering and then and I think it's important to not to, even in our own mind, separate liberal arts, from skills, I really keep coming back to Bailey's initial point that about delivery of the liberal arts and the skills based way, when we talk about soft skills, the skills that employers ask for time and time again, what we're hearing all the time is that they can train on technical, they need folks who can collaborate, who can think critically, who can learn who can adapt. And so it's not just about exposure and history, and that's where they were talking about liberal arts it is, but it's also those core skills that we absolutely need in and outside of the workforce.
Alexander Sarlin:Gotcha. So, coming out of this section, feels like liberal arts has getting some very good responses. Let's talk a little bit about the skills gap. So, according to a 2019, Brookings Report, I'm gonna quote do a couple of quotes here one, the nature of work is rapidly changing due to emerging technologies and disruptive forces such as artificial intelligence, automation and the gig economy. The exact effect of these and other changes remain unknown, but one thing seems certain the skills that employers value and rely upon are changing. In turn, a skills gap has developed in which employers struggle to hire appropriately trained workers. Let's now zoom up to 2022. The most recent manpower worker shortage survey came out basically found that global talent shortages are reaching a 16 year high, with 75% of employers reporting that they can't find the talent they need, especially in top areas like it data sales and marketing operations and logistics. As you just mentioned, Molly it also identified key soft skills sought by employers, resilience, adaptability, creativity, reliability, problem solving, critical thinking, collaboration and others. So the question I have for all of you is if a society knows that new fields are emerging due to changing technology, who is responsible for helping the population prepare? Who would be responsible for closing the skills gap? Is it schools, colleges, employers, governments, private sector? Who does that fall on? For this one? Let's start with you, Molly. Sure,
Molly Blankenship:I think that it takes everyone and that it may be an unsatisfactory answer. But I really do, I think it takes all the folks that you listed, and more, a key stakeholder that I would say is is missing from that list, for instance, would be families and community. And making sure that really strong community engagement and input exists around this work so that it can be successful and sustainable, so that people know about the opportunities that exist for them, etc. So I think that for better or worse, this work really realized bridging the skill gap really relies on cross sector collaboration, schools being open to the input of employers, letting them drive where appropriate employers recognizing the value of a well rounded, holistic liberal arts based education, colleges who are willing to innovate and build up non degreed training facilities, and that sort of thing, workforce development departments, etc. Those folks coming together with willing intermediaries helping to coordinate I think, is really the magic that will help us get out ahead and innovate out ahead of a growing skills gap. And I will say that in some of the research that je FF and our partners at the SHRM Foundation and others have done, we've seen that there's growing popularity and uptake around more skills based education and credentials as a way to sort of get ahead of these things, both inside the workforce, and as people are trying to enter. And so I think thinking about how we prepare and think differently about where we find talent, what personas they hold, what educational backgrounds do they hold that sort of thing, is another key tactic that we need to use along the way just to get tangible,
Alexander Sarlin:perfect responses from the other panelists,
Christian Marty:I think it's through the only candidate that I think it depends a little bit on the stakeholder. I mean, the state, for example, the government, of course, has other ideas, then a private company. And then some individuals who do something together a small group, again, the small group has other ideas, then the state and the government and the private company, and so on, and so on. So I think it should be all together. I totally agree. But I think if we look at this topic, then of course, it's not so easy. I think all together, we say this, and then everybody knows what is meant by it. But I think it's quite complicated to really improve all together in that field. So it's a really hard task, I guess, especially if the country is so big, like the USA, for example, in Switzerland, Switzerland, it's a little bit more easy here. Nearly every school is public, and not private, nearly every school. So he receives the state can change something, and then it's done. More or less. In a country, which has 300 million people, it's a little bit different than a lot of private institutions, a lot of public institution, a lot of institution between private and public. It's a totally different story.
Bailey Parnell:I think that's incredibly interesting and important part of the debate or the, you know, very reasonable discussion we're having about skills based education and humanities. And really, I think now that I've lived in the US and a couple of states, I've actually been able to bring insights from other countries like Canada, and I know that Switzerland is much further along in terms of publicly funded education. But sometimes when I'm dealing with my American friends, there's this sense that it couldn't work here. And it's very strong sense that it's so built up on private education. But then I think like, who does it actually benefit to believe that it doesn't benefit the people to think that this can't happen here? And so I think, you know, going back to my ideal of what is the role of government in people's lives? is a big important first question before then also, how do you expect the government to regulate education? And so as part of my subscription fee, my taxes, as I've already noted, I think that a very, very publicly funded, very enriching experiential education system should be part of that all the way up to to a doctorate. And further if you'd like to go there. And with that, yes, everybody's totally right, that it's going to take all parties who are invested. Everyone who's currently benefiting from the proletariat has an investment in making sure that that proletariat is informed and exists 2050 years from now. So who can maybe do a little bit more governments in certain countries and other countries, maybe the schools can do more in other countries, maybe the private sector could do a little bit more too.
Alexander Sarlin:When I interviewed the Stanford sociologist of education, Mitchell Stevens, he said that the US is the country of you know, you're on your own when it comes to education and very little support from the government in sort of supporting people to get to the type of skills that they might need. But I really appreciate hearing everybody feel, you know, sort of make the case that the government could and it's totally collaborative.
Bailey Parnell:In a country or in a political system where the government is supposed to be made up of the people, the people first need to believe that this is the possibility that you can actually can expect this from government. And that's where I felt that I've lost a little bit of the spirit when talking to my American friends, or better yet, that they've lost the spirit that this is something you can actually demand from the government. And that's what kind of makes me really heartbroken. Because I would say the education debt along well with healthcare debt is absolutely crippling the middle class in this country, like I've seen nowhere else. And so that is not a criticism. But actually, it's like, Hey, I'm also here trying to help fix it. But I also can, maybe we can look to other countries, and where this part might be good, and kind of bring some of that to America.
Christian Marty:So with my friends here, we look at the USA, and then we think, how is this possible? They organize all the stuff privately, it's unbelievable. And we think, why not the government who says, Okay, everybody can go to school, for free, like it is everywhere in Europe, for free, of course, in the sense, you pay taxes and so on, it's not for free, that's totally clear, but in the sense that you don't have to pay taxes, and then some money for the school and so on. And we can't believe it. But of course, I mean, also there, I have to say from a sociological point of view, of course, there are really hard structures. And it's important that people think and believe that they change the structure is really, really important and crucial. But the thing Nevertheless, I think it's a really hard task to change the structures.
Alexander Sarlin:So one interesting trend that we've seen at the university level, is that students have been abandoning the liberal arts as majors for a number of years, instead, sort of heading towards majors that are sometimes perceived as more career oriented. So the social sciences in history have been on the decline engineering, health majors have risen. And I just want to name the top 10 fastest declining majors in the US over the last 10 years. Education, English Language and Literature, social science, liberal arts, theology was had been mentioned foreign languages, architecture, gender studies, philosophy, and meanwhile, the ones that are rising, it's health and biology, computer science, engineering, psychology, which is the one social science on there, but you know, very different. So my question for all of you is, do you see this sort of voting with their feet for by US college students, as a recognition that practical education is more important, or as a failure of US society to keep education costs in check, forcing university students to seek a higher return on investment? Or is it something else? Christian, I'd love to hear your take on this one.
Christian Marty:I mean, I think it's always structures that bring change, I mean, structure is a difficult word and so on. But I think here we can use it, we know more or less what is meant by it, usually, we can say that a certain type of behavior is rewarded in a society and in different societies, different types of behavior is rewarded. And for some time, now we can see and as you mentioned, and I think this information is, is really interesting. For some time now, this has been the type of behavior that is well compatible, we can say with the requirements of big business, I would say. So we can say probably the political economic structure of society tells us which things it needs. And then later on the individuals, the people, the university students, for example, deliver these type of things, which are needed. So it is, I think, quite simple. And also this we can learn. I think this is also really interesting point, as Bailey said, before, we can learn this from labor roles from sociology, for example, that the society gives us some ideas what we should do, and I mean, also this society is a really big word, but then the people think, okay, theology is not such a great thing. I think later, I will be unemployed. I don't earn money. So I don't study it, or philosophy. It's not so useful. So I don't study it. Okay. I go for engineering. I don't know. So I think this is a little bit the connection, but also here. It's quite complicated. If we look at it really precisely, why exactly this happens. I mean, these are my first thoughts. I don't have a clear answer to it. Probably. Mollier Bailey, you know more about it. Yeah.
Molly Blankenship:Yeah. Thank you for giving me a moment. I'm happy to jump in. One thing that I would mention just as a sort of data point for reference, again, in some research that the SHRM foundation lead, we found in surveys of US workers is 77. percent of US workers agree that having a job relevant credential, not a four year or two year degree increases or would increase their chance of being hired for a job. And so I do think that the conversation that we're having now is happening at all levels, certainly there's national conversation, there are local conversations and conversations happening around dinner tables about what the right pathway forward is. And I think to go back to your original question around whether this is a failure or recognition of value, I think that there's no way to deny that it's both the conversation around student debt is certainly relevant. The, you know, outcomes across the country around career mobility and comparisons in terms of cost versus income these days, all of these indicators, we can look at and see that there is a growing sense, I think that the economy looks different for workers today to navigate than it did before. And education has a huge role to play in that. And I think absolutely, the workers and employers will continue to vote with their feet and the education system is going to have to continue to be responsive and partner with that, for in that with them. Excuse
Bailey Parnell:me. Yeah, very well rounded answers. And then the initial question now of Is it a failure of society, my initial gut is that it is a failure of society, if students have to choose between learning and eating, because honestly, most students, even when I was working in higher education, which I didn't mention is that before my business I worked in higher ed and I worked particularly in Student Affairs, which is everything outside the classroom responsible for students access, including career centers, which was responsible for student employability and how that works into the programs. And most students at the bachelor level in Toronto at our particular city, Bagel City University, didn't think they were there to get a job. That was absolutely the number one reason when we asked people why they were coming in first year, why are you here to get a job? So the students themselves thought it was for employability? And how could they not they think I probably told I have to go to school to get a job and pay for my life afterwards. And so that's why I cannot possibly hold a 17 year old or 18 year old to understand the importance of why they need a liberal arts education. Instead, I think it's people like us that know that. And so what I found really valuable was forced liberal arts as part of whatever degree you're taking, and then you'll thank us later. So I don't know I don't like the idea that that a students have to choose that as a way to survive. Basically,
Alexander Sarlin:the quote from Princeton at the beginning of this hour was actually part of their explanation for why every student at Princeton has to take liberal arts classes, even engineering students, it's interesting to hear the people you talk about forced liberal arts education, because we do see that in certain institutions. This time has flown by, I wish we had more time to talk this through, there's so much more to say. And you all have been amazing. Let's wrap up, I want to ask each of you to make a short closing statement, explaining your theory of the case. And some of the points that have sort of really stood out to you today in this really interesting discussion. Bailey, let me start with you. Oh, sure.
Bailey Parnell:This has been very enriching for me as well. So thank you, everyone who's speaking here today. I really love what was said about community and improving the community. And is there ways that the community can actually contribute to the general populations, liberal arts education, maybe outside of the formal education system or traditional education system? Because I'm the first to say as well between get into that traditional education, I also have issues with because it's designed pretty much for one learning style, an auditory learner. And so of course, if that's not your style, you're going to be more drawn to the things where you can use your hands, but I think like, maybe Is there public arts or public history? Or are we funding this stuff so that people can get the benefit of this without having to pay for 40 $100,000? However, free degree and give up their time, I'm thinking about that because of this conversation. But I guess all summed up, I still believe that I am very strongly for liberal arts education taught more in the way of a skills based education, and that we should still offer the same respect and same sort of funding for vocational training that we do for any kind of education. Christian,
Christian Marty:I totally agree with daily is more or less always today. So it's, I agree, it's, I think the mix is the mix is crucial. On one side, I think we agree that the liberal arts are really important. But on the other side, we shouldn't forget the practical skills based education. So I think the mix is crucial. And I think it's a good conclusion, if we all can say, the mix is crucial. We don't know exactly how this mix should look like. And probably in every country, in every state in every school, it's a little bit different than that's fine, but I think it would be a nice second debate about how exactly this mix should look. Like think this would be interesting for all of us.
Alexander Sarlin:And review, Molly. Thank you,
Molly Blankenship:Alex, thank you so much for having me, this has been really fun, really great and great to meet you, Christian and Bailey, my big takeaway is I think the three of us are total Rule Breakers, we want our cake and eat it too. And we reject your promise. I come out of this conversation. And I think just more well rounded because of the conversation with my colleagues. But coming to a similar place really is where I started, which is, you know, the future looks different for education and work today already looks more different probably in ways that we're not even really seeing or seizing. And so thinking about education in the ways that we have before no longer is serving us as a country or our workers or our families. And so transitioning to a new way of thinking that blends skills and traditional education methods that blends career and learning in the ways that we traditionally conceive it, I think is really critical. As we move forward and will have a role there will be a role for each of us to play, as I mentioned earlier, and my colleagues have reiterated, as well. So I'm excited to see where we go. And I think we're at a pivotal moment to really seize an opportunity to innovate and think differently, and deliver on the promises that we've been talking about throughout the conversation.
Alexander Sarlin:Wonderful. I think that's a really great note to end on. Those are terrific summaries. And yes, I do feel like we stayed as a group a little bit in the gray area in between the two polls here. But that's probably the best place to be when it comes to such an extreme proposition. I really appreciate you all being here today. And I think this has been fantastic. It's our first debate ever. It was certainly very cordial. And I hope we can follow it up maybe next time, we can talk about how tech can serve as one of the pioneering bridges to put these two types of education together. And I know you all work in edtech and we'd love to hear more about that. Thank you all so much for being here. Thanks. Hello. Thank you. Thanks for listening to this episode of edtech insiders. If you liked the podcast, remember to rate it and share it with others in the tech community. For those who want even more Ed Tech Insider subscribe to the free ed tech insiders newsletter on substack.