1.1 Introduction
Education is an integral part of societies across the globe. Although there may be differences with respect to how it is provided, the fact remains that pupils and students around the world are often required to attend compulsory education and are then able, required even in some countries, to study for qualifications at increasingly higher levels. In the English-speaking world, it is common to find references to compulsory education comprising primary and secondary education, followed by Tertiary Education, which may be referred to as Continuing or Further Education, and then Higher Education. What is also evident is that education does not just exist within society in a neutral sense; it is always the product of a range of social and political forces. Education may appear to be axiomatic but it is always subject to a range of ways of understanding it. Because of this it is subject to a number of forces which act upon it. Some of these forces may be said to be internal in that they appear to be rooted within education itself, but very often they are external to it. In this way education can be seen within formalised institutions as well as within a much broader and more informal context. Education, at whatever level, however, is not apart from society, it is a part of society and social forces are rarely simple.
There may be lots of commentators and educationalists who would propose that education is a right but this has not always been the case (Wrigley 2009). As such, contrasting debates about the value and purposes of education can be identified (Pring 2004). Biestaās (2009) argument that education meets three functions, qualification, socialisation and subjectification, is an illustration of this. One way of considering education is to consider the intrinsic and extrinsic value that it has. This can be seen in ideas about education which reflect a humanist tradition espousing education as having its own value, and being a key component with respect to personal development, but this approach can be juxtaposed with a utilitarian approach towards education. From the utilitarian perspective, education exists to serve a purpose that is extrinsic to the individual. There are links to a neoliberal perspective within the utilitarian approach. From a neoliberal perspective, the purpose of education is seen as being the way in which it contributes to the economy or, at least, to the way in which it facilitates an individualās contribution to the economy which in turn is argued to be reflected in the rewards that individuals receive. This reflects the idea of human capital in which investment in education on an individualās part will increase the rewards that they can expect in terms of income (Hartog and Oosterbeek 2007). However, a consideration of income differentials with respect to varying occupations illustrates that this is not a strong argument.
This human capital argument may have had more relevance in the past when, in industrialised countries in particular, education could provide advantages within the labour market, but to echo the argument that Blacker (2013) presents, the rate of return on education can be seen to have been falling over the past 50 years. Blacker presents a rather pessimistic view of the role of education within contemporary society in which he argues that technological and economic developments suggest that for many of the population, there is little to be educated for. Although his argument has some merit with respect to economic developments and the experience of work, I would argue that it maybe makes the mistake of accepting the neoliberal argument regarding education existing to provide for the economy as a given, something which I am certain Blacker would not have intended. Instead it could be argued that the falling demand for education that arises because of automation within the economy actually reiterates the importance of education having value in its own right with respect to self-development.
Within this book I adopt a critical perspective on the way in which education is organised and experienced, and although the focus is on England, the arguments that will be made have resonance across the globe. I start from the position that education must be fit for purpose, whatever that purpose may be. However, I will suggest that the forces which are acting upon education may be seen as creating educational provision which is not fit for purpose. I propose that this position applies whether or not one adheres to either a utilitarian or a self-developmental view of education. I do this by arguing that education is being increasingly tamed when what is required for each position is education that is wicked. Chapter 2 will illustrate and explain what is meant by wicked and tame in this context.
1.2 Education as a Process
A key factor that contributes to the taming of education is that it is increasingly being seen as a process. This concept may be seen as underpinning much that applies to education and, in some ways, there are aspects of education which give the impression that this is the case. For example, it would be hard to argue that education does not change individuals. Not only does education change individuals, one of the main reasons for education is precisely that. We want to change people. Education exists for that very reason. Indeed, it is when education does not appear to have changed an individual that we consider it to have failed. For that reason, we can see that it is unsurprising that we view education as a process. However, we can always be certain that individuals will change over time and so being able to attribute any change to education is maybe not as simple as it first seems.
So, in that respect we have a situation wherein we can establish both an original state, that is, before education, and an end state, that is, after education, but the extent to which it is education that has caused the change is not as simple as it first appears. Irrespective of this concern, considerations of education tend to assume a causal relationship with change and with assessing the extent of change. The question then turns to the nature of the process itself and how we might establish an understanding of what the process has produced. It is at this point that it is important to recognise that how we provide education is social. There is no inevitable structure to education, nor is there any intrinsic characteristic of it which means that education can only be structured and provided for in any one way. However, what will be argued is that not only has education come to be seen as a process, there are forces that act upon education which operate in ways which mean that ever-increasing aspects of control have been brought to bear upon it. Importantly though the consequences of increasing control are not in our long-term interests.
It is also pertinent to note that I am concerned with formal systems of education. It is irrelevant, in one sense, if education is being provided for publicly, organised by the State, or privately, such as a private school or college. The important thing here is that a system has been set up to provide education. As such, we can draw an immediate distinction between learning and education because one thing that we can always be certain of is that individuals will always learn. So, the key thing to consider here is that this book is focused upon structures and systems that are established with a view towards particular aspects of learning which can generally be characterised by the idea of a curriculum. In that sense the curriculum provides some degree of formality towards what should be or is expected to be learnt. In turn, this then provides the possibility of the measurement of such learning.
So, following from this we can see how educational systems include providers of education, in terms of organisations such as schools, colleges and universities, and in respect of individuals who teach and where this means that the work of such organisations and teachers may be measured. This is not to presume that such measurement is either accurate or useful, only to point out that it is used with increasing importance in terms of consequences. As well as organisations and teachers being measured, pupils and students are being measured also.
1.3 Structure of the Book
In presenting arguments that relate to the concept of wicked and tame, Chap. 2 draws significantly from the original concept of wicked problems as put forward by Rittel and Webber (1973). As will be argued in Chap. 2, the value of this conceptual framework is that Rittel and Webber articulate the problems faced by individuals who work with complex issues. This resonates with education. However, the original idea can be seen as a dichotomy wherein any particular issue is either seen as wicked or tame. I see this as a useful starting point but one which does not really go far enough; indeed it could be argued that the initial concept as proposed by Rittel and Webber is itself tame. For this reason the concept is developed further so that it is wickedity and tameness which are brought to the fore in a manner whereby education can be seen as more wicked or more tame.
The concept of wicked and tame is useful when considering education because issues relating to teaching and learning are always complex. In addition to this, a key part of education, especially within the Higher Education sector, is that it seeks to develop new knowledge rather than just mastering what is already known. It seeks creativity and originality (Hussey and Smith 2010). The argument that is presented here adopts the position that if creativity and originality are valued as part of the remit of education, then we need to est...