"The Knowledge Economy" - A Political Myth?

Eliot Rosewater · 04-04-2010 11:42PM #1

I'm beginning to suspect this widespread term "the knowledge economy" is nothing more than a political myth. I'm starting to think that it's just an excuse for economic policies that greatly increase the cost of doing business. During the boom years Fianna Fail could dramatically hike up social welfare, public sector pay and other services, and they could pursue other policies which substantially raised the cost of living, because we're a "knowledge economy" and we can afford to be expensive.

But I'm not sure if that's true. As we saw with Dell moving to Poland, relatively low skilled jobs are still very important for this country. There's simply not enough knowledge employment here for an island full of University graduates.

Thoughts?

Eliot Rosewater · 04-04-2010 11:42PM

Optional substantiation: There's also the issue of free University fees, supposedly the basis of the "knowledge economy". The only problem being that they nearly achieve the opposite of what they're supposed to. It takes a lot of the motivation out of third level education, in my opinion.

As an example: I've just finished first year maths. Last week a guy I have never seen in my life came up to me, told me that he's in my course but that he's never been in, and can he please have some notes! He's not the only one either. Clearly the lack of monetary cost in his education causes him to bear no respect for it, so he dozes off for the year. Where's the knowledge in that?

Seth Brundle · 04-04-2010 11:49PM

We do have a knowledge economy - we all have the knowledge that our economy is fecked!

Byron85 · 04-04-2010 11:50PM

Eliot Rosewater wrote: »

Optional substantiation: There's also the issue of free University fees, supposedly the basis of the "knowledge economy". The only problem being that they nearly achieve the opposite of what they're supposed to. It takes a lot of the motivation out of third level education, in my opinion.

As an example: I've just finished first year maths. Last week a guy I have never seen in my life came up to me, told me that he's in my course but that he's never been in, and can he please have some notes! He's not the only one either. Clearly the lack of monetary cost in his education causes him to bear no respect for it, so he dozes off for the year. Where's the knowledge in that?

I was in private College when I was 18 and I saw the exact same carry on there that goes on in regular Government funded Colleges/Universities i.e, people not showing up at all until the last week or so of the semester. The only reason I was there was because I won a scholarship as I wouldn't have been able to pay the fees otherwise.

ntlbell · 04-04-2010 11:52PM

Eliot Rosewater wrote: »

Optional substantiation: There's also the issue of free University fees, supposedly the basis of the "knowledge economy". The only problem being that they nearly achieve the opposite of what they're supposed to. It takes a lot of the motivation out of third level education, in my opinion.

As an example: I've just finished first year maths. Last week a guy I have never seen in my life came up to me, told me that he's in my course but that he's never been in, and can he please have some notes! He's not the only one either. Clearly the lack of monetary cost in his education causes him to bear no respect for it, so he dozes off for the year. Where's the knowledge in that?

The problem is not just the studenets.

I went back to do a course at night recently and the standard of lecturing was a disgrace.

no real knoweldge of the topic, couldn't answer questions on the subject.

Used assignments of a previous lecturer.

Out of 8, 1 was decent.

These civil servants are earning huge amounts of money, have no teaching skills and a poor level of knowedlge of the subjects.

If this is common across Irish uni's then the whole thing has to be a myth

RichardAnd · 05-04-2010 12:52AM

The knowledge economy, or smart economy is, in my opinion, something fabricated to give people hope, or at least the illusion of it.

The idea that Ireland can be a nation of scientists and engineers is, frankly, laughable. Putting aside the sub standard education children receive in maths and linguistics and our graduates being sub par with the US and europe, the Irish lack the dedication as a whole to excell at something like this.

Don't get me wrong, there are some seriously clever people in this country but they are the minority. Most people can just no commit to something seriously enough to become good at it unless it involves drink.

So yeah, we can have our smart economy, and it will happen the week after we all stop drinking.

p1akuw47h5r3it · 05-04-2010 12:55AM

ntlbell wrote: »

The problem is not just the studenets.

I went back to do a course at night recently and the standard of lecturing was a disgrace.

no real knoweldge of the topic, couldn't answer questions on the subject.

Used assignments of a previous lecturer.

Out of 8, 1 was decent.

These civil servants are earning huge amounts of money, have no teaching skills and a poor level of knowedlge of the subjects.

If this is common across Irish uni's then the whole thing has to be a myth

In my course I have a few poor lecturers who do have a good knowledge of there field, they are just poor at getting their point across. Maybe sometimes the lecturer is just poor at lecturing. AFAIK, they are not highered based on their lecturing skills but more on the amount of research papers published etc.

However I am open to correction on this.

RichardAnd · 05-04-2010 01:04AM

DanDan6592 wrote: »

In my course I have a few poor lecturers who do have a good knowledge of there field, they are just poor at getting their point across. Maybe sometimes the lecturer is just poor at lecturing. AFAIK, they are not highered based on their lecturing skills but more on the amount of research papers published etc.

However I am open to correction on this.

No I'd actually agree with you. I had a math lecturer who is, believe me, a genius. The guy could take maths and apply is to anything and make it work but he could just not, at all, teach.

Then there are the other class of professors. The guys with all the papers, masters and phds but whe were absent when god handed out common sense. These guys are probably worse than the above.

Permabear · 05-04-2010 01:12AM

This post has been deleted.

Nitochris · 05-04-2010 01:28AM

It looks like there is a conflation here between the education sector and the knowledge economy (o.p. your post clearly shows that you are aware of the difference), the knowledge economy is a floating concept and can refer to anything that policy makers want it to. My former supervisor found that there was a lot of interpretative flexibility in how it was defined, even within those industries that are part of it.

In general the discussion of the knowledge economy is tied to the idea of the "creative class" and similar concepts. Richard Florida who came up with the term linked it to a very wide grouping comprised of academia, arts and the media.

Manach · 05-04-2010 01:44AM

Firstly may I agree that if you pay for your education you value it, missed lectures are a loss (I found out from personal experience.)
Secondly, creating and maintaining the technical skills level to compete in the Knowledge Economy is difficult. Irish IT workers have to compete against skilled Indian/Chinese science/engineering graduates who have a lower headcount run-rate than us.

maninasia · 05-04-2010 07:14AM

Knowledge Economy consists of two parts, 'Knowledge' and 'Economy'. What use is knowledge without the economy characteristics. The Soviet Union had millions of technical graduates but an economy that couldn't even produce enough bread to feed it's citizens in the end.

Risk culture, hard working and willing to put in long hours, sales and marketing skills and experience, established sales channels, established worldwide brands, deep pool of integrated businesses, reasonable costs in labour and economy, world class in 2-3 industries....these are equally if more important than the knowledge bit.

There's no point complaining about the Indians and Chinese. I don't see the Swiss do that. I don't see Silicon valley do that.

In fact Ireland does pretty well in terms of IT with a lot of investment from US companies. What Ireland doesn't do well is globalised sales and marketing of products made in Ireland and produced by Irish companies.

SkepticOne · 05-04-2010 08:16AM

Following on from the last post.

When people talk about the knowledge economy, the "knowledge" part tends to mean knowledge of science and technology subjects the assumption being that this is they type of knowledge the country most needs.

However were this the case you would expect that the remuneration for graduates in these areas (and pursuing those areas) to be higher than, say, law, banking, finance etc. However is this the case? I think the answer is generally no and that after a few years, they fall behind these other professions.

Something doesn't add up in the rhetoric put out by politicians about the need for more people to do science and technology subjects.

I think the marketplace is telling us we're making the same mistake that the Soviets made. If we want to build up indigenous industry then no one cares if some minister says we produces x number of physics graduates or y number of engineers. This sort of language may have been relevant when we were trying to attract multinational but we need to move beyond that now.

cavedave · 05-04-2010 08:33AM

There is a poll running now about the greatest Irish person. There is not one scientist or engineer on the list.

It seems odd to have an economy based on science and technology when most people cannot name one current Irish scientist (with the exception of economics).

silverharp · 05-04-2010 10:22AM

its hard to have a true knowledge economy when more then half the economy is exempt for starters. I would have thought that from 2000 or so we wew going for the Saudi economic model of bringing in increasing numbers of people from developing countries while a new breed of Irish entrepeneur could set up such innovative companies as bouncy castle hire and window clearners with €50K 4x4's

ei.sdraob · 05-04-2010 10:30AM

maninasia wrote: »

The Soviet Union had millions of technical graduates but an economy that couldn't even produce enough bread to feed it's citizens in the end.

yes thank you very much. i was about to mention this

modern Cuba would be another example of this, here we have bright and highly educated people (in some cases incredibly gaining knowledge without access to modern equipment and tools) who end-up being puppets of an authoritarian regime, a regime which is interested in selling a vision of a socialist paradise while lining its own pockets

theg81der · 05-04-2010 10:47AM

To make something you need the ingredience and the tools!

Change the system completely! For one stop letting teenager opt out of things. Test them first to find their personal strenghts and advise them and educate them in a suitable way. We probably have a lot of amazing minds not achieving because of choices they made at 14/15 years old which is nuts! The door for people to discover their talents should be wide open.

I said this already but computers should feature heavily in schools from Primary and it should be like a dual degree with anything. Computers play a pivital role in all our jobs and futures.

AlekSmart · 05-04-2010 01:32PM

Change the system completely! For one stop letting teenager opt out of things. Test them first to find their personal strenghts and advise them and educate them in a suitable way. We probably have a lot of amazing minds not achieving because of choices they made at 14/15 years old which is nuts!

Theg81der has a very good point here and one which does`nt sit too well with the modern concept of "Freedom".

It also,yet again,focuses a rather withering gaze on that hoary old chesnut of Parental Responsibility,something which is a required precursor to greater general responsibility (ie: The ability to come upon an item of public ownership such as a Bus Shelter without immediately feeling the urge to destroy it)

For far too long now both the UK and Ourselves have followed a somewhat dipsy line of thinking centred on a "Light-Touch" principle which has been as unsuccessful in Social regulatory terms as it has been in Financial Regulation !

Put at it`s simplest,large numbers of our highest graded young graduates present themselves as having serious difficulty adapting to the realities of ordinary living.

Perhaps Silverharp2 is better at expressing the issue than I....

its hard to have a true knowledge economy when more then half the economy is exempt for starters. I would have thought that from 2000 or so we were going for the Saudi economic model of bringing in increasing numbers of people from developing countries while a new breed of Irish entrepeneur could set up such innovative companies as bouncy castle hire and window clearners with €50K 4x4's

p1akuw47h5r3it · 05-04-2010 01:53PM

donegalfella wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

The reason for this is that these subjects are harder than say Geography or Economics etc. Secondary school is about getting points for a course, not necessarily an education. I have just started reading this forum and a lot of the problems discussed seem to be as a result of secondary education being so poor. I have just finished school (I'm a first year in Uni) and I remember my teachers telling me how poor secondary education was. It is only now in Uni that I realise how right they were.

the reason points have fallen so low is due to more places being available for engineering degrees etc.

ntlbell · 05-04-2010 02:10PM

DanDan6592 wrote: »

In my course I have a few poor lecturers who do have a good knowledge of there field, they are just poor at getting their point across. Maybe sometimes the lecturer is just poor at lecturing. AFAIK, they are not highered based on their lecturing skills but more on the amount of research papers published etc.

However I am open to correction on this.

I think your right, they don't have to have _any_ teaching skills.

Considering this their main function IMHO it seems pretty bizzare.

Having endless amounts of knoweldge is useless if your not capable of passing it on.

I paid a lot of money to the course and I ended up having to watch video's etc from US uni's in order to learn the material.

MysticalRain · 05-04-2010 02:47PM

I think the term "Knowledge Economy" was nothing more than a way for the government to make us feel better about losing our manufacturing base to lower cost countries. Of course many of the same countries are now gobbling up our Knowledge Economy economy jobs, and the government itself has done a miserable job of providing infrastructure necessary for a thriving high tech economy - just witness the terrible state of our broadband infrastructure.

I also understand perfectly why Irish school leavers are shying away from high tech jobs. The subjects required are difficult to study, job prospects are very precarious in a heavily globalized economy, there is a lot more money to be made elsewhere.

baalthor · 05-04-2010 03:02PM

After the last Leaving Cert results some of the students who had scored 600 points were interviewed and asked what courses they planned to do in college. The most common replies I heard were: Medicine, Pharmacy, Occupational Therapy!.

Now, maybe these weren't representative of all the high scoring candidates but you do wonder about a system that channels students with perfect scores into careers like Pharmacy and Occupational Therapy. These are excellent careers but should you really need to have over 500 points in the Leaving to become an Occupational Therapist for example?
In the same universities where OT is offered, courses like physics, engineering and genetics have lower points requirements.

Of course the reason for this is that if you do Pharmacy, Medicine, Dentistry, OT etc, you stand a good chance of gaining a high status, permanent, pensionable job. The supply of places on these type of courses is also very limited.
If you opt for physics, engineering or genetics it's not clear what your eventual employment prospects will be.

The discussion of the knowledge economy isn't that new. I remember my geography text book from school (1980s) explaining that Ireland would have to move beyond attracting basic manufacturing jobs if it was to avoid having to compete with third world countries.
Of course, what happened in the 90s was that we actually had to compete with third world countries like India for knowledge economy jobs like software development.

RichardAnd · 05-04-2010 03:07PM

baalthor wrote: »

After the last Leaving Cert results some of the students who had scored 600 points were interviewed and asked what courses they planned to do in college. The most common replies I heard were: Medicine, Pharmacy, Occupational Therapy!.

Now, maybe these weren't representative of all the high scoring candidates but you do wonder about a system that channels students with perfect scores into careers like Pharmacy and Occupational Therapy. These are excellent careers but should you really need to have over 500 points in the Leaving to become an Occupational Therapist for example?
In the same universities where OT is offered, courses like physics, engineering and genetics have lower points requirements.

Of course the reason for this is that if you do Pharmacy, Medicine, Dentistry, OT etc, you stand a good chance of gaining a high status, permanent, pensionable job. The supply of places on these type of courses is also very limited.
If you opt for physics, engineering or genetics it's not clear what your eventual employment prospects will be.

The discussion of the knowledge economy isn't that new. I remember my geography text book from school (1980s) explaining that Ireland would have to move beyond attracting basic manufacturing jobs if it was to avoid having to compete with third world countries.
Of course, what happened in the 90s was that we actually had to compete with third world countries like India for knowledge economy jobs like software development.

The points system doesn't give a good representation of how good or bad a course is, just how popular it is. When I started in DCU with software engineering, it took me 300 points to get my place. At the same time, DCU were offering a 4 year course in Communications (perhaps the supreme waste of time course) for about 450 point if I remember right.

Why? Because a course like SE takes alot of time and it pretty hard, a course like communications is p!ss easy and will allow for plenty of partying without heavy course work demands.

baalthor · 05-04-2010 03:38PM

SkepticOne wrote: »

Following on from the last post.

When people talk about the knowledge economy, the "knowledge" part tends to mean knowledge of science and technology subjects the assumption being that this is they type of knowledge the country most needs.

This is a good point. I get the idea that the government sees the knowledge economy as:
"Let's fund lots of scientists and people in labs with white coats who will eventually invent some do-hickey that everyone in the world will want to buy!" (to paraphrase Dilbert's boss)

As you have said, there is more to the "knowledge economy" and "innovation" than the science and technology sector. The IDA probably understands this; not sure about our masters in government though.

I also suspect Ireland may have more of an advantage in the non-science based knowledge economy than in the men-in-white-coats area.

baalthor · 05-04-2010 03:43PM

Popularity does play a part; I remember when journalism was first offered on the CAO, it was over 500 points!

However, the medical based courses I mentioned would have pretty heavy workloads.

ei.sdraob · 05-04-2010 03:56PM

baalthor wrote: »

Popularity does play a part; I remember when journalism was first offered on the CAO, it was over 500 points!

is that why Irish journalists and media are so dire?

dan_d · 06-04-2010 09:09AM

Points are mainly based on the popularity of the course.
You also have to fulfill the minimum subject requirements though.
Witness engineering. It was 475 in my LC year (2001), but you needed a min B3 in hons LC maths, along with high grades in at least one science subject. The coursework in engineering is not for the faint-hearted, yet the points are a good 100+ lower than medicine etc. Less demand.
And science in UCD went way down to the very low 300's at one point, because there was simply less demand for it - the drop out rate was huge, as people got in who were simply unable to manage the coursework.
If points were wholly, or even mostly based on the difficulty of the coursework involved, then they would never change beyond going approx 5 points up or down.In fact, they would never go down, as that would be perceived that they course was becoming "easier", which would lead to questions about what the college was doing (which is a whole other can of worms!!).

The_Honeybadger · 06-04-2010 10:45AM

baalthor wrote: »

After the last Leaving Cert results some of the students who had scored 600 points were interviewed and asked what courses they planned to do in college. The most common replies I heard were: Medicine, Pharmacy, Occupational Therapy!.

Now, maybe these weren't representative of all the high scoring candidates but you do wonder about a system that channels students with perfect scores into careers like Pharmacy and Occupational Therapy. These are excellent careers but should you really need to have over 500 points in the Leaving to become an Occupational Therapist for example?
In the same universities where OT is offered, courses like physics, engineering and genetics have lower points requirements.

Of course the reason for this is that if you do Pharmacy, Medicine, Dentistry, OT etc, you stand a good chance of gaining a high status, permanent, pensionable job.

I have been saying this for quite some time, these type of jobs are just too damn attractive to our brightest young people. Medicine / pharmacy / dentistry are probably bad examples, I am talking about teaching / nursing and other jobs that are well remunerated and pensionalble. They are the jobs every mammy wants for their son / daughter, and they will be encouraged to follow these type of careers rather than taking a chance in a science / engineering or I.T. course, as these careers are probably undervalued in many ways. We simply have no hope of building a knowledge economy when this type of culture exists. The way to change this is a matter for another thread of course.

RichardAnd · 06-04-2010 10:57AM

mickeyk wrote: »

I have been saying this for quite some time, these type of jobs are just too damn attractive to our brightest young people.

Just because someone gets 600 points does not mean they are bright. I used to go out with a girl that got 550 points in her LC and she had about as much cop on as a 5 year old. Another guy I was friends with got 560 points and he's the kind of person who talks about Harry Potter and Dan Brown books like they are War and Peace.

Permabear · 06-04-2010 11:07AM

This post has been deleted.

The_Honeybadger · 06-04-2010 11:29AM

RichardAnd wrote: »

Just because someone gets 600 points does not mean they are bright. I used to go out with a girl that got 550 points in her LC and she had about as much cop on as a 5 year old. Another guy I was friends with got 560 points and he's the kind of person who talks about Harry Potter and Dan Brown books like they are War and Peace.

Agreed, cop on is a quality you are born with. It is possible through rigid discipline and an ability to memorize large amounts of info to get 500+ in the leaving. However that will not prepare you for third level and a career in an industry that requires excellent communication and people skills for example.

donegalfella wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

Also agree but I didn't want to go that far as we have loads of these threads already.

"The Knowledge Economy" - A Political Myth?

Comments