A panel of Michael Gove, Thangam Debbonaire, and Daniel Susskind examined whether education still confers social advantage, and what should replace the current model of education if it does not.

The Premise

Education has long been regarded as the most reliable route to individual flourishing and collective progress. The idea draws on Plato's philosopher kings and the Enlightenment's faith in reason. The moderator stated that this consensus is now fracturing for four reasons:

• Falling degree premiums: The financial return on a degree is declining.
• Rising graduate unemployment: Unemployment among graduates is increasing.
• Rising debt: Graduate debt is growing quickly. In the United States, it exceeds $1.8 trillion. For many courses, the salary gain is smaller than the debt.
• Artificial intelligence: AI threatens to automate the cognitive skills that education is meant to develop.

Nvidia chief executive Jensen Huang has called for skills-based learning. He stated that the economy will need hundreds of thousands of electricians, plumbers, and carpenters.

Critics also argue that, in an age of universally accessible information, judgment and wisdom to evaluate facts matter more than the facts themselves.

The panel framed three questions:

1. Should the educated be considered no longer advantaged, with the future favoring the skilled and self-taught?
2. Should the argument that compulsory schooling produces conformity, attributed to Elliot, be accepted?
3. Should education be rejected altogether, or only a conception of education that prioritizes facts over judgment?

Panelists

Michael Gove: Rejecting the Idea of an Elite

Gove argued that the concept of an educated elite should be abandoned. He stated that the idea of a division between a cognitive elite and the rest, described as "hewers of wood and drawers of water," has held back education in England and globally. He said politicians and others repeatedly divide people into "sheep and goats" and deny the capacity of humanity to learn and reason.

He traced the problem in England to the Education Act of 1944. The Act intended to create a division between grammar schools, technical schools, and secondary modern schools. In practice, Gove argued, it became a division between pupils entitled to an academic education, who would rule, and those who were not.

Gove stated that the most successful societies and schools reject this division. He cited Matthew Arnold's concept of "sweetness and light," meaning cultural elevation and illumination, as a birthright for everyone.

He set the following standard:

• Participation in high-quality education is currently accepted at 20%, 30%, 40%, or 50% of young people.
• Gove argued that high-quality education should be available to, and attainable by, 80% or more.

He challenged Jensen Huang's position. Huang received one of the best educations available in the United States, yet advises other children to become carpenters, electricians, or plumbers. Gove asked whether Huang's own children would follow that path, or whether other people's children would always serve in that role.

Gove also argued that the vocation of teachers and doctors reflects the purpose to which an education is put, not a desire to diminish others. He stated that technological change should be navigated through "classical liberal education," which he described as the means for all people to control their futures. He held that every previous technological revolution has reinforced this need.

Thangam Debbonaire: Mandatory Education and Creativity

Debbonaire agreed with much of Gove's argument. She stated that the most effective way to identify and develop each person's potential is a high-quality mandatory education system that does not sort children into "sheep and goats" at an early age. She argued that such a system would allow individuals to discover their strengths, contribute fully to themselves, their communities, their country, and humanity.

She argued that creative education is central to this system. She drew on her experience as a cellist of 56 years and as chief executive of a creative organization. She stated that creative education:

• Develops the next generation of artists and musicians.
• Builds future audiences.
• Strengthens creative problem solving in other occupations.
• Improves communication skills.

She stated that creative education should be open to all children and young people.

Debbonaire rejected the premise that the question is primarily about educated elites. She argued that society has been dominated by powerful elites for a long time, and that some of these elites have held power regardless of their level of education. She stated that mandatory, high-quality education is essential to disrupting this domination. She acknowledged that other panelists might disagree with this view.

Daniel Susskind: Uncertainty and Foundational Skills

Susskind identified uncertainty as the defining feature of the current debate. He argued that the future of work cannot be predicted in enough detail to determine which skills will be needed. He rejected the view, which he said dominated most of the twentieth century, that careful planning could define the required skills in advance.

He cited a policy example. In 2013, Prime Minister David Cameron announced that all children in primary and secondary schools in England would learn to code. Gove, then Education Secretary, supported the policy as essential technical training for the twenty-first century. Susskind stated that many countries followed. He claimed that Finland removed long division from its national curriculum to create time for coding.

Susskind argued that the policy failed because AI systems became highly capable at writing code within a decade. He stated that the skills the policy prioritized "barely lasted until the end of school." He described the error as a belief in future-proofing, the assumption that careful thinking could reveal the future of work.

He argued that the relevant question is how to prepare the next generation to flourish in a world that is poorly understood. He proposed foundational skills as the answer: literacy, numeracy, and critical thinking. He stated that these skills are likely to be valuable in almost any future.

He cited the OECD's Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA) data on literacy and numeracy. He reported that results have declined almost universally across countries. He stated that England, where Gove's reforms were implemented, enabled schools and teachers to focus on literacy and numeracy. He contrasted this with Wales and Scotland, which he said emphasized twenty-first-century skills and future-oriented approaches. He argued that England's focus on basics has better prepared young people for an uncertain future.

Open Question: Facts Versus Judgment

The moderator asked whether a new concept of education is needed, one that moves away from the current emphasis on facts over judgment. Gove rejected the premise to an extent. The discussion ended at that point.