What’s it all about?
Back in the 1960′s there was a film starring Michael Caine called “Alfie”, based on a book by Bill Naughton, in which he played a cockney “lad about town” who decides to change his way of life and settle down. It was quite a ground-breaking film in many ways approaching a moral theme in a new and lively way … and Caine frequently breaks “the fourth wall”, addressing the audience directly by talking to the camera. It was well received at the time, winning the Special Jury Prize at the 1966 Cannes Festival and Oscar nominations for Best Film, Best Leading Actor, Best Supporting Actress, Best Song and Best Screenplay Adaptation – and when remake , starring Jude Law and set mainly in Manhattan, was filmed in 2004 the 1966 film was rated by one Film magazine as the “48th greatest British Film of all time.”
Believe it or not, although I never actually saw the film, (I was thirteen when it was released … ), it is still sticks in my mind as one of the icons of the 1960′s … the “swinging sixties” … along with things like the Beatles and Woodstock, the Apollo Moonshots, the film “2001 – A space Odyssey”, President John F. Kennedy, The Six Day War and “The Prague Spring” …
The theme song became a “Top Ten” hit in the UK for Cilla Black, (although for the movie it was actually performed by Cher), with words from Joss Stone and music by Burt Bacharach. It had a haunting melody which stays with you – and deep, questioning lyrics:
What’s it all about, Alfie?
Is it just for the moment we live?
What’s it all about when you sort it out, Alfie?
Are we meant to take more than we give
Or are we meant to be kind?
And if only fools are kind, Alfie,
Then I guess it’s wise to be cruel.
And if life belongs only to the strong, Alfie,
What will you lend on an old golden rule?
As sure as I believe there’s a heaven above, Alfie,
I know there’s something much more,
Something even non-believers can believe in.
I believe in love, Alfie.
Without true love we just exist, Alfie.
Until you find the love you’ve missed you’re nothing, Alfie.
When you walk let your heart lead the way
And you’ll find love any day, Alfie, Alfie
would you tell me what’s it all about?
what’s it all about? Alfie, Alfie, Alfie.
What’s it all about? Whats this all about?
what’s it all about Alfie? tell me
what’s it all about Alfie? what’s it all about Alfie?
just tell me yeah. what’s it all about?
what’s it all about?
The title song begins with the question: “What’s it all about?”. Now, there’s a metaphysical question for you!
I am often tempted to break out singing this song … what stops me, (apart from the fact that I could only manage from memory the first two lines), is the dramatic effect it would create and the fact that no-one would understand.
I remember one such occasion in particular. It was a “Round Table”, (a sort of, high level, policy discussion), attended by government Ministers, representatives of Universities and other Higher Education Institutions, and of the business community and Trade Unions, and also a number of recently qualified graduates which had been called to discuss the current state of the educational system … was it providing the sort of graduates needed by Kyrgyz industry. The emphasis was mainly on Business Education. Normally such meetings are organized with a purpose in mind, and so the answer to the question was a forgone conclusion – in this case: no. The aim of the meeting was to explore what could be done to help address the issue and redress the problem.
How many such meetings have I attended in the past? … too many. I had been invited as a member of the Business Community, (an employer), but I had a wider interest in the subject because of my background as a teacher – and also as a former Trade Union representative.
There were lots of interesting comments made by the participants during the course of the meeting … although I, personally, found it a very unsatisfying meeting.
The educational institutions, in particular, made a moving and powerful plea for assistance in creating greater practical material, course materials based in the real world, and preferably drawing on examples from Kyrgyzstan. The result of this was a competition for teachers and lecturers to visit Kyrgyz businesses, research and write-up Case Studies based on real issues faced by those companies, (for example covering: the problem; the background; the issues; potential solutions and courses of action; what actions the company took and the result – possibly accompanied by references to academic theory), which would then be published and could be used in classes. This appealed to me greatly as a project. I remember how, as a teacher of IT, I was always hungry for case study material about how computer technology was used in the real world … not just to know that it was in use, but how it was being used to solve real problems so that I could incorporate it into lessons. Needless to say, we participated in the project and I am pleased to say that the Case Study based on our Human Resources management won first prize.
The government agreed that there was a problem … but, as is so often the case here, it mainly boiled down to “c-and-c”: “cash and control”.
Anyone offering education or training in Kyrgyzstan needs to be licensed, (by the Ministry of Education). There is nothing unusual about that – I have a “license” to teach in the UK … that was the original meaning of a University degree. In theory, this gives the government considerable control over the educational system – although not as much as when they maintained the system as a whole. However, since Independence a large number of establishments have been licensed both government run institutions and “private enterprises”. As a result they are independent and make their own management decisions. Whereas privately run institutions were free to choose what courses they would offer to students, in the case of state run institutions funding is only available for approved courses and any other course has to be self-sustainable, self financing and self justifying. Often, it was claimed, they chose to offer “popular” courses – where the demand was driven by student choices rather than the needs of the market. As a result there was a mismatch between the numbers of students graduating in a particular discipline and the needs of the market.
Now, as I understand it, under the communist system everything was subject to centralized planning. The government had the responsibility to find employment for everyone in the population. Centralized planning served to try and ensure that there was always a good supply of qualified people to meet the needs of society. If it was thought that more lawyers were going to be needed then plans were drawn up to try and meet this need: new courses planned; “orders” placed with educational institutions to deliver them; students enrolled, studied, were examined and graduated. The government was the “consumer” of the “product” of the educational system, (the graduates), and also responsible for the planning, supervision, regulation, and management of that system – and everything was funded from the central budget. In the new “free market” environment, the consumer is now private enterprise … but the educational system is still basically government controlled, and funded. Entrepreneurs want a freely available pool of qualified recruits to choose from when trying to fill a vacancy, and don’t want to pay for the either the initial course (which is paid out of taxes) or, for that matter, for any additional training that might be necessary.
To make matters worse, the educational system here is quite complicated … there are three different Ministries and a couple of State Committees involved in Vocational education, (not to mention other bodies, for example, the State Agency for Tourism which has an interest in education, training and qualifications in the tourism industry). Every syllabus for an approved course has to meet the requirements set by the government for that specific specialism. Every occupation has a code, a definition and job descriptors which specialist courses have to address. It takes ages to create or amend the various criteria – and, of course, cost money – in some cases, quite large sums of money.
When it came to comments from the business community, my feelings were divided. I had a lot of sympathy with those who complained about recent graduates applying for jobs with totally unrealistic ideas about the sort of work that they would end up doing and their expectations with regard to salary and position. A lot of them seem to consider that because they have a diploma, (a degree), then they should be taken on in a senior post, as Managers – with a team of underlings to do the actual work. (I am conscious of the fact that in my first teaching post I was the “Teacher in Charge” of Religious Education … but then, basically, I was the only one in the school!). In addition, they expect “astronomical” salaries which even the most experienced of staff would consider as “generous”. Apparently this is a tendency all over the world …
I had less sympathy, however, with those businessmen who complained about the content of courses, the bias towards theory as opposed to practical experience: … how many students did they take as interns so that they could receive practical work experience? – some firms are very active in this respect, but unfortunately most are not; how many were involved in course committees and on examination boards, contributing to the development of courses, materials and standards? – unfortunately, far too few … I remember all too well being castigated as a Maths teacher by one employer because our “graduates” could handle vulgar fractions … and I asked “why do they need to? … why is it important that they can add 11/16ths and 5/27ths?” … I understood that some branches of engineering still used eights, sixteenths, thirty-seconds and sixty-fourths … but this was clearly a minority and as metrication was being adopted as a norm, even they were becoming irrelevant. Perhaps we were still supposed to teach the unitary fractions of Ancient Egypt? As it happens, I could see reasons for teaching fractions … they are important for understanding a variety of techniques and concepts in higher mathematics, and they do help to teach and develop logical thought processes … but I could not see why they were considered so important for school leavers who going to work as shop assistants, policemen and the like. If the course doesn’t teach appropriate topics, or doesn’t have enough practical content to provide a contextual framework for handling real life problems, then surely it is sensible to try and help shape the course so that what is taught and examined is relevant.
To be fair, however, that seems to be a pretty universal issue … educational bodies all over the world face similar disinterest on the part of business in terms of course development, they are more interested in the “final product” of the educational system – the graduates. I am pleased to be able to say that, on the whole, most of the students and graduates that I have met have been talented, eager to both work and gain new experience.
The reason Cilla Black and Michael Caine sprung into consciousness during the meeting was a comment made by one of the recently qualified graduates.
The bitterness he felt was clearly evident as much as in the way that he spoke as in what he actually said … he complained that he had just graduated after five years of Higher Education and now found that he couldn’t find employment … he felt that he had wasted his time. Why spend five years studying if at the end of the course he couldn’t find employment in his specialty?
Although I felt some sympathy for him, this situation is not unique to him nor to this part of the world. In the West there are many graduates who cannot find employment in the field in which they studied. In some cases it is a question of choice, (and I suppose that, in a way, I am a classic example of this as someone with a degree in Theology but not working in the Church). In my father’s generation people often ended their working life in the same sort of occupation or business as when they started it – the situation is far from true these days. It has to be admitted, however, that for a large and growing number of graduates these days it is not a question of career choice but of necessity. The graduate of History may well end up working as a waiter, at least for a while, because they cannot find a career opportunity that requires their academic skills. It is not simply an issue facing newly qualified graduates.
Here in Kyrgyzstan there are also many older, qualified and experienced people who are working in jobs that have no connection to their formal qualifications. It’s true that for many of them it is a matter of necessity rather than choice, (for example: engineers and doctors who work as taxi drivers), but there are also many who have chosen to follow a different career path, (such as an engineer and a motorcycle racer who have opened their own tour businesses), because it suited their particular interests and circumstances.
I know one person who qualified as a teacher, (of Russian, language and literature), who refused to even consider working in a school after he graduated … because of the conditions and low salary … but that doesn’t mean that he wasted his time in Higher Education. It’s fair to ask, (and I have), why he chose that course in the first place? His explanation was that, at the time he applied for and was accepted on the course, he had intended to work as a teacher, but in the intervening years the employment situation for teachers had worsened so that it was no longer an attractive career option and he couldn’t imagine why any fit and intelligent young person with a university education and their whole life ahead of them would agree to subject themselves to such conditions. To be honest, however, I think there was another factor as well: Higher Education is held in extremely high regard here … and everyone wants there son or daughter to receive one if at all possible. Kyrgyzstan has one of the highest proportion of Higher Education graduates per population in the world. It seems to me perfectly possible that he chose this course simply because it was “available”.
If we assume that the student who made the remark in the meeting was prepared to accept a reasonable offer of a post, without the over inflated ideas of his self worth, I would still be surprised by his attitude. It seems to me that education is about far more than simply about “equipping” oneself for future employment. Although finding future employment is one of the obvious factors to take into account when choosing a course or University, after all it is the activity we spend most of our lives doing … Education is about far more than simply the content of the course, the lectures attended, … it’s a life experience. Not everyone who takes a degree in History finds work as an Historian, or a History teacher. Their degree is simply a sign of their capabilities and experience. It takes a certain amount of ability and application to obtain a degree. The subject matter can be important especially in terms of relevance – but, I think, it is not the “be all and end all” of the matter.
In fact, if employment was the sole purpose someone has in mind when they choose to go to university, then, in my opinion, they risk losing out on a lot of other important aspects of university life. Having to live away from home and cater for yourself, immersing yourself in a new environment, undertaking social and leisure interests and activities, learning to balance the demands of work (study) and leisure … and so on.
But then, perhaps that simply reflects the “privileged” life that I have led. The fact that I grew up and received my education in the West, and during the 1960′s when the concept of education was more concerned with the process and experience than with practical things like “getting a job”.
Bishkek