Editorial-26 January 2001
As Scott Adams points out in The Dilbert Principle, Johannes
Gutenberg has a great deal to answer for. Prior to the invention of the printing
press around 1450 the dissemination of information was slow and easily
controlled. The information explosion that followed was in fact more devastating
then any weapons' development either before or since. Printing widely
dispersed knowledge, reduced the intellectual monopoly of an ecclesiastical
elite, and is one of the foundation stones of modern science and technology.
Although rather deflating, compared to it, 20th century high speed
communications runs a fairly distant second.
That
said the virtually instantaneous electronic dissemination of information puts
the means of changing the fate of a nation in its own hands. Whether or not our
nation takes advantage of it – well, that depends on our priorities and that
of our leaders.
It's
an axiom that youngsters have an inherent curiosity, and it follows that if
appropriately fostered, that curiosity can be fashioned into a thirst for
learning. That in turn, if correctly managed, can lead to a prosperous society.
So far
that sequence hasn't taken place. The fact is that up until the early 1990s
there seemed to be little need. But at that point the Australian dollar was
around $0.60, hasn't risen much above that since, and has come close to
dropping below $0.50. In the meantime unemployment at 7% was heading toward
double digits, and peaked at over 11%. By the end of 2000 the unemployment
figure had been sharply reduced while still above 7%; full-time employment has
decreased; the unemployment statistics for the young remain depressingly high
and show little sign of decreasing to acceptable levels. We've witnessed
considerable hand wringing at most levels of society, finger pointing by the
oppositions at the governments of the day, reciprocal opprobrium of states and
the federal government, and a marked amount of tinkering with the educational
systems at all levels by states and Federal governments.
Looking
back over the past decade there are several certainties that emerge:
Really
the first question is, is there a will to start. The opinion is abroad that our
population is more interested in instant gratification than in long term
solutions. That cynicism is evident in the concern by both major political
parties in immediately raising the issue of tax cuts prior to impending
elections. So long as the pursuit of the siren of immediate cuts to taxes
prevails, this country, sooner or later, will be lured to the dissipation of its
common wealth.
Interestingly, what is the most important issue, is never discussed, for the apparent reason that it is seen as impossible to achieve -
Unless
there is bipartisan support together with the building of a partnership
between the state and Federal Governments for a unified and long-term policy to
adequately support education at all levels, science, engineering and technology will continue to wallow in
the present quagmire. In a phrase, we seem to be
swimming through glue. Were our
appreciation of academic and scientific skills seen to be the same as that of
sporting prowess, we'd be home free.
But what
do we see. Here is an excerpt from Michelle
Grattan's SMH column:
"Kim Beazley... had something new to announce - plans for an online
university. He was afire in his favourite policy area, education, wanting this
to be the year it is 'recognised as the number one political issue in
Australia'. If only it were, Beazley would find campaigning a lot easier."
It's the jangle of cynicism in that last sentence that's so disturbing. As
though the chief political correspondent for the Sydney Morning Herald
mentally added, fat chance. So why the hell should the Libs, the
Nationals, the Democrats, go past hand wringing, and tinkering. The well being
of the Nation? - Well, it is a thought.
The
submissions to the Federal Government of the
Chance
to Change by the Chief Scientist and Innovation:
Unlocking the Future by the Innovation Summit are a beginning, but
really just that. The unified approach for the teaching of science and
mathematics emphasised by the "Glenn
Report" (Before it's too Late) would seem a good starting point
for us. But the development of a consensus for an extended unified education,
science engineering and technology policy is vital. It will be neither simple
nor cheap but it'll be a damn site preferable to having Australia slowly
descend into the funneled web.
Alex
Reisner
areisner@bigpond.com