CONCEPTUALISING EDUCATION AND DEVELOPMENT

For decades education was believed to contribute extensively to development in general. This

understanding was mainly proposed by economists of the 1950s after the World War II and in

the 1960s and 1970s. Of late the link between education and development has been question.

It is no longer seen as just a cause and effect relationship. Theorists have especially criticised

the thinking and assumptions made by the human capital theory and the modernisation

theory.

Education has been perceived by many as contributing to development and it can thus act as

an instrument for social transformation. This relates to the intrinsic value of education as it

enables individuals to unlock their human potential. Education has over the years become an

important variable for development. However its contribution to development has also come

under scrutiny with some theorists arguing that it can have negative effects on development.

The role of education in development has been recognised since the days of Plato. Education,

Plato believed, is indispensable to the economic health of a good society, for education makes

citizens “reasonable men”.

Since education has a high economic value, Plato argued that a considerable part of

community wealth must be invested in education.

Adam Smith also contributed on the relationship between education and economic growth. In

The Weallth of Nations Smith formulated the basis of what was later to become the science of

human capital. The most valuable of all capital is that invested in human beings.
Education is not merely a consumption activity but for most part an investment. It leads to the

formation of human capital, comparable to physical capital, making a significant contribution

to economic growth.

During 1960s many newly independent development countries expanded their educational

systems and made huge investments in education. During the process of economic

modernisation the rate increase in human capital was higher than that of reproducible

physical capital. (Education explosion)

Building up a new socio-economic system after the end of the colonial rule required a large

manpower with varied skills and so the governments could not but expand the education

structure.

With industrialisation came education and it was believed that education would improve

people’s quality of life by modernising them based on Inkels’ thesis on the modern man.

According to Inkels for development to occur there has to be the modern individual with

modern institutions and these cannot exist concurrently with traditional institutions.

Although Inkels justifies this kind of development path most of its assumptions are flawed

e.g the school is seen as the only socialisation institution yet there are others like the family.

Education is key to development and eradication of poverty. It is recognised rimarily not as

an instrument or means of development but as development itself while lack of it constitutes

not the cause of poverty but poverty itself.

Education increases the chances of one’s getting employed/increasing one’s earnings and

empowering an individual to self-sufficiency and critical thinking.

economics &development in general. The link was first taken with enthusiasm, and optimism

then developed to questions which led to scepticism in the 1980s (Saha and Fagerlind 1994).

For education to have a meaning it should be a means of conscentising especially those who

are oppressed and dominated. Freire questions the notion of literacy as he argues that the

education system is normative and he calls it “banking education”. For him literacy is not

enough but it should be a means for conscentisation.-critical thinking.

Human Capital Theory sees investment by human beings in their education and health as

important. The human capital perspectives dominated social science discourse in the 1960s

and 1970s but have been attacked by the neo-marxist conceptualisations rooted in the

dependency and world systems perspectives.

Human capital is the stock of assets of individuals that invested for future benefits. Human

capital theory is concerned with human capital as it retains benefits to individuals.

Education enhances both the individual and social capacities for socio-economic

development. Education is treated as a form of investment, producing future benefits in the

form of higher income for individuals and the society as a whole. Education is central as a

means of solving societal problems especially poverty.

Investment in human capital is important and yields benefits in the long run.
The value of human capital is revealed in wages, salaries and in entrepreneurial rewards,

along with the additional personal satisfactions that people derive from heir acquired abilities.

For education, the costs of materials used and the time consumed are used to measure it- its

benefits after completion

In human capital theory, the worker is the seen as a “holder of capital” by virtue of the skills

acquired through education and also having the capacity to invest in him/her.

According to the theory, education increases the productivity and efficiency of workers

Education is not viewed as consumption but as a productive investment. Human capital

propagates that investment in humans has much rate of return as investing in physical capital

Although the human capital theory has pervaded much thinking on the link between

education and development, it has its flaws. The argument that education improves the

productivity of workers by imparting necessary knowledge and skills has been questioned.

Education just acts as a screening device which helps employers to identify individuals who

possess either superior ability or certain personal characteristics, such as attitudes towards

authority, punctuality or motivation which employers value and which are therefore rewarded

by means of higher earnings. The screening hypothesis propounded by Blueston has also

been rejected because there is no evidence to support that education has a direct link with

productivity.
Despite expansion in education, employment chances have actually dwindled. He argues that

various forms of unemployment and underemployment have been chronic among highly

skilled and knowledgeable workers most of the time since the major expansion of the

capitalist industrial production. There is an oversupply of educationally qualified people on

the job market and this has been disguised by the employers’ inflation of credential

requirements and the general dissatisfaction with the quality of job entrants. HCT has a

tendency to look at education with a deterministic manner and exaggerates its potential for

change.

There are dysfunctional relationships between educational institutions and the economy.

There are no guarantees that the products of an educational system can automatically find

employment with rapid educational expansion and slow-growing wage employment.

HCT treats education as a resource open equally to everyone. However education is not

accessible to everyone. For example women have fewer chances than men of going through

education to tertiary level.

The human capital theory is premised on functional thinking. Functionalists look at it in such

a way that people are individuals with individual merits who work according to the needs of

society so as to create equilibrium. The functionalists do not look at the factors that hinder

some groups that are ethnicity, social status and gender from investing in their education.

Functionalists promote competition and meritocracy. Individuals who are out of the system
are out because of their individual incapabilities and skills deficits. The theory is flawed in

that it presupposes that because of their individual skills deficits people cannot make it in life.