Does our Educational System Fail our Children?

AI generated

I once gave a talk on the Future of Education at Kellogg College, Rewley House, which is a constituent college of the University of Oxford. In the talk, I criticised the UK educational system, particularly at the secondary school level, because it so often failed to enable the individual to reach their potential, and at the same time denied students the ability to think democratically. I had the audacity to propose a different model to the existing educational system: my thesis was that not only did we not serve the individual student appropriately, but we also failed to promote the importance of the freedoms of a democratic society.

While often educational institutions fail to understand the individual student's needs and learning requirements, they also tend to promote the opposite of a democratic culture. They can be hierarchical, rules-driven, and often punitive. They reward the correct answer over the argued case, and compliance over dissent. Where democracy requires citizens who can question authority, weigh competing evidence, and tolerate ambiguity, the typical classroom trains students to wait for instructions and avoid risk. The habits instilled by twelve or more years of formal schooling are not the habits of democratic participation.

Should we be surprised that secondary schools are a nightmare of disciplinary infractions and of dysfunctional, too-often, ignorant teenagers, who are unfit to participate meaningfully in democracy?

Even where civics appears on the curriculum, it tends to be taught as constitutional furniture. That is, the three branches of government, how a bill becomes law, rather than as a living practice. The skills democracy actually demands, such as identifying misinformation, building coalitions, speaking in public, or understanding structural inequality, rarely feature. Without opportunities to practise deliberation through student councils, community projects, or genuine debate, civic knowledge remains abstract and inert.

Compounding this is the crude industrial and cheap model of students sitting in rows. I know that many educational institutions now try to move away from this system, but because of cost, it still endures. There is also a deep inequality baked into most education systems. Wealthier students receive better resources, richer intellectual environments, and the social confidence that comes with them. Poorer students are more likely to receive drill-based instruction oriented towards compliance. The result is that schools, because of the environment and sheer numbers, do not level the democratic playing field; they mirror and entrench the hierarchies that already exist in society, producing unequal political voices rather than equal ones. Ignorance and feelings trump argument and data!

Much of this flows from a narrowing of education's purpose. When schooling is framed primarily as preparation for employment, that is, productive members of society, its educational principle, in the sense of expanding the mind and the civic mission, quietly disappears. Students learn to think of themselves as economic competitors rather than creative individuals and political participants. Life and democracy, however, require people capable of reasoning beyond their private and narrow personal interests, and capable of engaging in public life, but a purely instrumental education neglects that dimension entirely.

Sadly, all too often, the expectation is that schools should stand alone against the wider forces eroding individual development and democratic culture. Polarised and sensationalist media, economic precarity, political corruption, and social segregation all undermine the person, as well as civic engagement, in ways no curriculum can fully counteract. Schools are not insulated from these pressures; they all too often reflect them.

None of this is to say that education is irrelevant to the growth of our society or democracy, or that improvement is impossible. In countries where schools are well-funded, teachers are trusted with genuine autonomy, and civic education is taken seriously as a practice rather than a subject. It is disappointing that we often have to look abroad for more successful models, like parts of Scandinavia, Canada, and Germany, where I would argue the relationship between education and democratic health is considerably more positive. Research consistently shows that more education correlates with greater political interest and tolerance. The problem, I must emphasise, is not education as such, but the form most education actually takes.

In my talk, I offered a couple of solutions to overcome the industrial model and lack of understanding of a democratic society: the first was radical: scrap secondary schools and create clubs where teenagers could voluntarily go to pursue their interests and hobbies, whatever, from fashion to sport. It was based on the child's choice, and there are some expensive private schools that pursue this approach. My belief and argument were that the students themselves would, in the end, understand and pursue their educational goals. I always remember one of the first questions from the audience was: "If my children are allowed to choose whether they go to these clubs or not, who would look after them while I go to work?" Yes, all too often, schools are just seen as 'babysitters'. The second proposal was to abandon the industrial model and focus on the needs and understanding of the individual, in the way that the Oxbridge tutorial system does - an expensive one-to-one approach, but the results are worth the investment for the individual and society's greater good.

The other truth is that education has failed democracy, not because learning does not matter, but because most education systems were never genuinely designed with democratic ends in mind. They were designed to sort, to credential, and to produce people for employment. To change the relationship between schooling and self-governance, it would not be enough to add a civics lesson or update a textbook. It would require reimagining schools themselves as places where individuals find their talent and where they can practice a democratic voice.