But education excellence is not just more schooling, more money spent.
The level of cognitive skills of a nation’s students has a large effect on its subsequent economic growth rate. Increasing the average number of years of schooling attained by the labor force boosts the economy only when increased levels of school attainment also boost cognitive skills. In other words, it is not enough simply to spend more time in school; something has to be learned there.
More schooling helps – each additional year adds 0.37% to economic growth rate.
First, we looked just at the impact of average school attainment on the economic growth rate. (An adjustment was made for the initial level of GDP because it is “easier” to grow if you are starting out at a lower level; that is, it is easier to copy more productive technologies than to initiate progress on your own.) When we performed this analysis, we found, as other economists before us, that when the average number of years of schooling in a country was higher, the economy grew at a higher annual rate over subsequent decades. Specifically, we found that, across the 50 countries, each additional year of average schooling in a country increased the average 40-year growth rate in GDP by about 0.37 percentage points.
Improvement in cognitive skills helps even more, about 1% increase for each half standard deviation in test scores (less than the difference between top-performing countries and the less-performing United States)
But the impact of improved cognitive skills, as measured by the performance of students on math and science tests, is considerably larger. When we performed the analysis again, this time also including the average test-score performance of a country in our model, we found that countries with higher test scores experienced far higher growth rates. If one country’s test-score performance was 0.5 standard deviations higher than another country during the 1960s-a little less than the current difference in the scores between such top-performing countries as Finland and Hong Kong and the United States-the first country’s growth rate was, on average, one full percentage point higher annually over the following 40-year period than the second country’s growth rate.
Although other factors must be considered.
Other economic research has identified two additional factors that affect a country’s economic growth rate: the security of its property rights and its openness to international trade. When those two factors are taken into account, the positive effect of cognitive skills on annual economic growth becomes somewhat smaller, but is still 0.63 percentage points per half of a standard deviation of test scores. This is the best available estimate of the size of the impact of cognitive skills on economic growth
Although the most highly skilled may dominate the innovation needed to grow, universal skills are needed to effectively carry them out.
The reasons that a substantial cadre of highly skilled citizens and near-universal basic skills matter are not difficult to imagine. Even if a country is simply making use of new technologies developed elsewhere, as is often the case in developing parts of the world, the more workers that have at least basic skills, the easier it will be for them to make use of those new technologies. Some workers need a high level of skill so they can help adapt the new technologies to their countries’ particular situation. In countries on the technological frontier, substantial numbers of scientists, engineers, and other innovators are obviously needed. But so is a labor force that has the basic skills needed to survive in a technologically driven economy.
So our education system is correctly a key component of the ARRA objectives, with some benefit short term, but the more important benefit long term. Don’t let the tax cut advocates derail one of the better investments in our economy, our human capital.
http://www.hoover.org/publicat…
It might sound counterintuitive to say this, but I’d like a long-term goal to be to cut a year from undergraduate studies. It seems like a typical bachelor’s degree consisting of major(s) and minor(s) really only takes three years to complete. Undergraduate programs are pegged at four years because colleges and universities usually require the equivalent of one year’s worth of introductory classes across all subjects to insure a well-rounded education. In my opinion that should be the job of high schools. We need to get to the point where America’s public high schools universally achieve the standard of excellence that would make colleges and universities confident that they don’t need to require core courses. The ultimate benefit of this is the overall cost of a degree will go down because students will only have to pay for three years.
<
p>I have another ambitious idea regarding education that I would be curious for feedback on and have considered doing my own diary, but just never got to it. I would like to create a public University of the United States. We can stipulate for the moment that it would be an expensive undertaking and I don’t expect it to be acted upon in the current economy. There could be regional campuses throughout the country, possibly with each one specializing in a specific set of fields. In such a university system, students would be able to pay rates comparable to in-state while being able to study anywhere in the country. The UUS would be able to set the standard by example for what a high school diploma should mean via its admissions criteria.
<
p>For those who are concerned that this oversteps the proper role of the federal government, I would point out two things: George Washington, bequeathed money to Congress for the purpose of founding a national university. Congress never acted on it, but my alma mater, The George Washington University, is named in honor of our first President’s intentions. Thomas Jefferson, father of the University of Virginia, also expressed a desire that his model be replicated at the national level. The importance of an educated citizenry is one of very few issues our prominent founders agreed upon unanimously as far as I can tell. The most eloquent statement on this matter I think actually comes from the MA Constitution (Part II, Article v, Section 2) to wit:
<
p>”Wisdom, and knowledge, as well as virtue, diffused generally among the body of the people, being necessary for the preservation of their rights and liberties; and as these depend on spreading the opportunities and advantages of education in the various parts of the country, and among the different orders of the people, it shall be the duty of legislatures and magistrates, in all future periods of this commonwealth, to cherish the interests of literature and the sciences, and all seminaries of them; especially the university at Cambridge, public schools and grammar schools in the towns; to encourage private societies and public institutions, rewards and immunities, for the promotion of agriculture, arts, sciences, commerce, trades, manufactures, and a natural history of the country; to countenance and inculcate the principles of humanity and general benevolence, public and private charity, industry and frugality, honesty and punctuality in their dealings; sincerity, good humor, and all social affections, and generous sentiments among the people.”
<
p>One final thought – The European Union, that rather unique hybrid between an international organization and a federal republic, already has a College of Europe. The main campus in Bruges, Belgium and a secondary campus in Warsaw, Poland.
That the real recovery after the 1929 crash was not achieved until 1954 and if you look back at history beginning in 1950 is when we saw meaning full GDP growth that was not World War or Government spending driven. Yet if you look closely at the post war years 1946 to 1950 you will see enrollment in our colleges and Universities blossomed main as a result of the GI bill and ROTC. Now I am not advocating for a wide return of ROTC but instead my point is that all the government spending from 1932
1941 was mainly treading water. They kicked spending into High Gear on the war machine 19411946 and they then invested huge sums into education for returning veterans and as they graduated with Degrees from institutions like a Boston College et al we saw our economy flourish. It is time to return to Education as the key to recovery we need a trained capable work force in new technology if we are to restart an economy that has some basis for growth gone has to be the consumer spending/ service economy of the past it has proven unsustainable.<
p>As Usual just my opinion
Must have been triggered by my use of the hyphen interesting never bothered to figure out how to do that. Well learned something new today, isn’t education wonderful
Charts in Wikopedia, for example, show GDP per person reaching the 1929 levels by 1937.
<
p>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/F…
<
p>Full employment was reached in 1942. Depression is defined as constricting markets. As the economy hit bottom in 1933, that would signal the end of the depression and the recovery lasted till the late 30’s.
<
p>The GI Bill did make education and homeownership available to an entire generation and fueled a generation of achievement that had never been seen before.
<
p>A tax cut rebate does not last a generation…only a few weeks apparently.
This is an false truth based on WWII and the War machinery gearing up. With out the US government spending 108% of GDP on the war effort. Which did begin with the WPA in 1937 and continued into the Lend LEase of 1939 those numbers whould never have been achieved. Currently the investment in this current jobs stimulus is less then 2% of GDP while the banking and AIG bailouts when you take all the Treasury, Fed, and FDIC funds given and used as guarentees you exceed 15% of GDP which we as a government did not spend in the great depression.
Good point – our Education system must start early and progressively position students for the next level. Done well, then the current 4-year college could be accomplished by a significant number of students in 3 years. Of course, the best of these may progress to the next level of education in graduate programs.
<
p>As far as a National University, it is an interesting concept although one that I haven’t given much consideration so it is difficult to comment. In some respects the current State higher education programs include some aspects of this, such as out-of-state tuition waivers for curricula not offered in the state of residence. Maybe the best way to achieve the National University is to better integrate the existing State Universities, with the Federal role being to establish standards and provide funding to level the revenue playing field.
<
p>Go for it!
<
p>What should be shorter, for some students, is high school.
<
p>Students who wish to accelerate their learning–either to enter the workforce or college–should be supported in a much more substantial way than is current practice. One aspect of the Readiness Project that really hits home with anyone spending time in high schools is the notion that we need to get some kids out sooner. Our credit system and traditional freshman, sophomore, junior, and senior hierarchy and culture make this a difficult shift, but, in my view, but the goal is a worthy one. We should be spending more time focusing on individual student needs, mapped out early in the freshman year, that puts the student on a trajectory to get them where they need to be sooner. A student who has a tailored plan is a goal-oriented student. The senior year of high school, as currently configured, is largely time spent biding time. Not the best use of student or teacher time.