As a first year student working towards a degree in business and law at LCA Business School in London, it could be argued that I am a professional of tomorrow.
However, in reality, following a severe decline in graduate jobs, obtaining a quality degree in the current social and economic climate no longer guarantees a job within what can only be described as a fierce and competitive professional job market.
There is a general assumption of students: we are lazy, narrow-minded and somewhat orthodox. I think this is a generalised opinion that, although in many cases arguably true, is through no fault of students - especially not current students.
In my opinion the education system, in general, doesn't stimulate students: it provides education but makes no attempt to encourage students to apply their knowledge. This has resulted in many students being left unable to formulate an opinion or arguments of their own. I for one would hate to live in a world of generalised opinions but ultimately this is what the education system is providing for students.
Many academics have, quite rightly, argued that Scandinavian countries operate a voucher system whereby many of the schools are not directly run by the state or local government. This provides a wealth of different teaching styles and a more diverse set of skills and knowledge. In an attempt to drive up educational standards within the United Kingdom, the Blairite Labour Government sought to replace failing schools in struggling education authorities with new innovative academies.
Academies were - and still are - essentially publicly funded schools which operate outside of a local authority's control. However, after falling out of favour with many Labour ministers, it wasn't until the current tenure of the Conservative Government that the plans to incorporate academies into the education system started to become a reality.
In my opinion these independently state-funded schools still do not offer a viable alternative to what the education system has to offer. The solution isn't to 'privatise' schools in the way that Michael Gove and the Tory party think: instead my argument is that we should make the provision independent from the government, subsequently forcing the teachers' nemesis - the national curriculum - into retirement.
Abolishing the national curriculum would remove the shackles currently placed on teachers and academics throughout the country. It would not only give the teachers a much needed degree of freedom to provide students with a practical knowledge of the subject but also would enable students to formulate their own opinions and conclusions.
So why is the Conservative Government so reluctant to eradicate the national curriculum? One far left argument suggests that it is in the Tories' best interest to nurture a generation of traditionalists and conformists, as essentially this is what conservatism is founded upon.
However, in reality the Conservative Government appreciates that the national curriculum - although not stimulating high achievers - does create a level of standardised learning.
This bitterly disappoints me as I believe that education should not only involve learning but questioning, evaluating and, in some cases, disagreeing with opinions and theories. But the disappointing reality is that students in classes across the country are having bright, naturally inquisitive minds imprisoned effectively by the national curriculum and educational guidelines.
So in a nutshell I think that current pedagogy on both a structural and practical level is failing. In my opinion it is far too standardised and not diverse enough to cater for all students' needs, ultimately lending itself to what can only be described as a bland and lacklustre form of education. I'd be interested to hear other people's thoughts on this!Suggest a correction