(ACADEMIC ESSAY) CREDENTIALISM AS ALIENATION: TOWARDS AN INCLUSIVE SKILLS AGENDA

This is the first of the many academic writing posts I will feature in my blog. 

I prepared and submitted this particular essay as my first assignment for the International Issues of Adult Education module of my IMAESC Programme. This is actually my first attempt to do an academic writing piece after my college years. The assignment required me to submit a 500-word essay comparing 2 academic articles. For a limited word count, I have to present 3 important information to substantiate my arguments. I learned therefore, that an academic writer must be skillful and patient to edit and re-edit the paper until a final version is reached....and edit again so these pieces of work can be useful for any future writing work.   

I usually forget the grades given to me. Instead, I keep the feedback and cherish the lessons on how I developed and applied my thoughts into writing this essay and how I can improve next time. 

Happy reading and please share me your comments too!

Are there still clamours for prestigious academic degrees? Somehow, I think that one's degree is only as good as the first job. Skills, attitudes and attributes will matter in the subsequent career journeys of an individual. 

===================================

CREDENTIALISM AS ALIENATION: TOWARDS AN INCLUSIVE  SKILLS AGENDA

This essay will compare two articles which investigate the value of credentials and skills. The first paper elaborated Weber’s argument that credentials have paved for the development of a ‘privileged’ class through implementing demand-side restrictions such as ‘signalling’ and ‘screening’ of workers (Brown, 2001). The second paper featured how the skills growth model is reflected on Singapore’s SkillsFuture, a national lifelong learning movement to articulate the country’s economic ambitions (Tan, 2017). Both papers acknowledged that credentials still allude to utilitarian and economic motives for occupational participation of individuals. They also concluded that the credential crises stem mainly from prevalent socio-cultural and economic value preferences for degrees. However, Tan (2017) offered a fresher perspective that state support for employment-driven training also led to the alienation of one’s personal and social growth objectives as trade-offs. 

A critical argument I present in this paper is that the endemic preference for credentials and degrees has transcended in skills development programmes of developmental, neoliberal societies such as Singapore and remains an alienating agenda for both institutions and individuals. The observations below elucidate the argument.

Meritocratic culture still prevails. Singapore’s remarkable history of economic development was supported mainly by adding degree-based consciousness in their formula for success. SkillsFuture attempted to dissipate the alienation experienced by those with vocational qualifications by equalizing access to every citizen’s learning and employment. However, a strong cultural affinity to Confucian learning culture dominated by theories and texts, as well as the success-directed orientation alienates citizens’ personal passions and non-material aspirations such as developing empathy, emotional intelligence, and creativity. (Tan, 2017).

‘McDonaldizing’ of skills training intensified competition. Opening the training and skills development market for universities, institutes of higher learning and private educational players validated the economic-driven intentions of the programme. The hefty government training subsidies brought ‘meso-level’ providers (Boeren, 2017) to a competition by offering wide range of scaled up massive programmes. This ‘McDonaldizing’ of education (Brown 2001, p.26) tells something about credential sequencing. Such neoliberal approaches also encouraged these players to combine different schemes of programme delivery – from introducing local and overseas placements to stacking of modular courses leading to degree-based qualifications. Therefore, the vocational skills learned today will potentially become the new paper credentials of tomorrow.

Developmental state models regulate participation. Tan’s (2017) recommendation for individual and community collaboration in supporting the government’s SkillsFuture implementation represents a visible observation that the government regulates citizens’ participation in the process. Though this may have changed by now, it does not discount the impression that policymaking still rests among the political and bureaucratic elites.

These observations affirm how important it is to look at the motivation and intent behind skills development programmes beyond their proposed glossy outcomes. We also need to fortify our questioning on how policymakers and educators include the learners and civil society’s voices in the policymaking agenda. Should they be given the space too? Despite the pessimistic conclusions, I challenge us to respond by rethinking and reimagining a skills development platform that is inclusive, participative, and representative. 

(500 words)

REFERENCES:

PAPERS REVIEWED:

Brown, D. (2001). The Social Sources of Educational Credentialism: Status Cultures, Labor Markets, and Organizations. Sociology of Education, 74, 19-34. DOI:10.2307/2673251

Tan, C. (2017). Lifelong learning through the SkillsFuture movement in Singapore: challenges and prospects, International Journal of Lifelong Education, 36:3, 278-291, DOI: 10.1080/02601370.2016.1241833 

SUPPLEMENTARY ARTICLES:

Boeren, E. (2017) Understanding adult lifelong learning participation as a layered problem, Studies in Continuing Education, 39:2, 161-175, DOI: 10.1080/0158037X.2017.1310096