As I understand it, part of BIUST’s mandate is to help transform the
economy of Botswana from a resource based one to a knowledge based economy. The
sense I’m currently getting is that BIUST wants to achieve this by establishing
a technology/innovation park (part of the university’s founding mandate).
However, this venture is still in the planning phase. On the academic side the
general consensus seem to be that this transformation would be driven by
increasing the number of postgraduate degrees. I believe that will definitively
contribute to making this transition, but to achieve this it has to inform all
the activities at BIUST. In particular the undergraduate teaching has to be
transformed to deliver students who will be equipped to facilitate this
transformation through to postgraduate level and beyond.
In addition to what is being taught, I think the environment in which
recent graduates will be seeking employment needs to be considered since this
will inform how the what is being taught. I propose classifying the environment
in which graduates might find themselves in into two (sub)types of knowledge economies:
(More) structured knowledge
economy: a knowledge economy where job descriptions, entry requirements, and
promotion trajectories are (mostly) defined and known.
This is typical in a more traditional, well-established, industrialized
economies where universities deliver, amongst other things, industry-specific trained
graduates.
(More) unstructured knowledge
economy: typically smaller knowledge economy where graduate absorption is limited
and employment outside of traditional occupations are highly dependent on
innovation and entrepreneurial skills. In other words this type of economy is
more prevalent amongst developing nations which lack well-established and
diverse industries. Furthermore in these knowledge economies the specific
demand for highly skilled graduates is difficult to quantify.
I don’t think the above are mutually exclusive, both could be prevalent
in sectors of most countries’ economies. In most resource-based economies the
mining industry could probably be considered structured: problems that
skilled labour are tasked to solve are within their knowledge parameters or
confined to the tools available to solve it. Thus out of the box thinking is
not necessarily required or encouraged on a large scale. On the other
hand sectors which are technology based or innovation driven (even within the
most developed countries/economies) could be considered an unstructured skills
economy: large scale, almost continuous, evaluation and improvement of
solutions are needed to drive the economy forward.
From what I have read about Silicone Valley it is clear that at least
some tech companies are more interested in hiring employees based on their
interests and skills set than their formal education. An extreme example of
this trend is probably the Thiel Fellowship which pays high schoolers to not go
to college but to rather pursue their ideas. In the same way
PhD graduates are attractive to potential employers due to their demonstrated
independence, determination and higher order thinking skills: outside of the
formal research environment the graduate’s highly specialized PhD research
project is only attractive to a very narrow interest group. Therefore any
investment or inceptive aimed to increase the number of PhD graduates have to
consider the probable absorption of these graduates into the economy. South
Africa is currently a prime example of how highly skilled individuals are
trapped in limbo (see here for more detail): for a country
the oversupply of highly skilled individuals is considered a “good” problem to
have, but it sucks for the individual who has invested so much and is consequently
being treated as an unwanted stepchild with limited prospects.
To avoid a similar bottle neck in graduate employment, Botswana (or any developing
nation that is expanding its tertiary education sector) has to consider the
challenges faced by graduates: Either in terms of employment in sectors where
the graduates’ skill set do not directly match that which is required by the
position which will necessitates some reinvention; or as change
agents/transformation drivers (predominantly manifested as, but not limited to,
entrepreneurs). This should be address as part and parcel of the drive towards
a knowledge economy and on the appropriate level: tertiary education. Due
consideration need to be given to these challenges when planning undergraduate curriculum
as well as postgraduate research projects.
I do believe that the incentives are lacking in the tertiary education
environment to achieve the transfer of the skills set needed to deal adequately
with the realities of an unstructured knowledge economy. In particular with
regards to postgraduate students who are probably most expected to drive the
transformation from a resource to a knowledge economy. I think one of the main
reasons for this is an unhealthy fixation on research publications as measure
of academic quality, especially at institutions who lack other formal
infrastructure to evaluate all the aspects of academic life (research,
teaching, and, service/community interaction activities). To my mind, if
the number of publications and years spent in academia are the only measures of
an academic’s quality it could lead to severe complacency, in particular
amongst senior academics. Furthermore, the situation is compounded in environments
where the number of researchers in a specific field is limited. In these cases researchers may well become a
law unto themselves and have low tolerance for critical engagement since they
see themselves as the only recognizable expert.
Even when high impact and high quality papers are produced in developing
economies this must still be done with due consideration for students’
education as a primary concern. Highly specialized research implies highly
specialized skills. If there is no local absorption of highly skilled
graduates, we are essentially producing graduates for a structured skills
economy elsewhere (in this sense I think an argument around decolonizing higher
education in Africa can be made).
However, I don’t think any philosophical arguing would do much to change
the situation since, as with any human behaviour, the situation will only
change if the incentives, rewards, and in effect what is truly valued, changes.
Check back later for my suggestions.
