An article on the online version of the Wall Street Journal ‘Why MBAs are reading Plato’ (April 30, 2014) highlighted an important problem with modern-day teaching: “graduates are trained to solve single problems but often miss the big picture”. To address this lacunae, some institutions abroad are now rebalancing the curriculum to teach students how to think.
This is an important observation which should shape any curriculum design in Malta; the Maltese education system appears to place excessive emphasis on teaching how to do something and does not encourage sufficiently the questioning of why something is done that way. The latter is based on a misconceived idea that education is simply a way to equip students with the current skills necessary for business. In the long run this strategy will backfire, as the country will always trail other countries which encourage more innovation.
Innovation can only take place if supported by research, which in turn requires people who are trained to ask even the most challenging questions. Innovation, by definition means something new, either a new product or a new way of doing something. This necessarily requires students who are able to think outside the box. Creative thinking should be given more importance in the education system. Likewise one should not shy away from subjects such as philosophy, sociology, anthropology and literature because of their lack of ‘business-appeal’. We need students who can challenge the status quo, not out of pure rebellion, but out of in-depth analysis, a skill which can be learnt from such subjects. These studies should then be supplemented with courses on entrepreneurial skills, to enable young graduates to monetise on their knowledge.
A further eye-opener on the lack of importance given to research comes from the results of a recent EU-financed report which ranked 850 universities worldwide on their performance in a number of areas. As Times of Malta reported (May 14, 2014), the University of Malta’s performance in terms of research was lower when compared to teaching, reaffirming the teaching versus research bias. In this respect, it is useful to reflect on the words of the former Governor of the Central Bank of Malta (speech delivered at the annual dinner of the Institute of Financial Services in 2010) who stated: “…higher education drives innovation and economic transformation…The University of Malta, however, is short of funds. One way of tackling this deficiency would be to limit stipend support to students who are truly in need. This would ensure that access to a university education remains open to everyone with the potential to benefit from it, while releasing funds for improving its quality”.
Although debating the stipends issue is considered as taboo, at some future date, Maltese society needs to reappraise the way in which it is supporting the education sector, in particular tertiary education.
In another article published in Times of Malta earlier this year, University Education: ‘No longer elixir of life’ (February 13), it was stated that “now some social analysts are questioning the wisdom of pursuing a university education in the context of changing dynamics of the world economy”. In a way, the author is right. It is sad to find people who have spent a number of years, financed through taxes, to study academic subjects at university, who end up doing jobs which hardly require more than a SEC level of education. However, the solution, rather than diminishing the importance of further higher education, should be to understand why the economy is not creating jobs which require a graduate level of education. If the country aspires to move up the quality ladder in terms of value- added jobs, it is important to start focusing on the quality of jobs being created rather than just looking at the headcount. Malta should aspire to become a centre of excellence in terms of high value-added jobs.