Education in the Knowledge Society

‘Knowledge society’ and ‘knowledge economy’ have become accepted terms that characterize our post-industrial world. The concept of knowledge society assumes that knowledge “should be dominant, just as agriculture and industry have dominated earlier societies” (Sörlin & Vessuri, 2007, p. 12). The rhetoric of knowledge economy suggests that knowledge is essentially the capital or a personal asset in the contemporary economy, just as land in agricultural societies and factories in industrial societies (Davies & Guppy, 2010c). Although these analogies seem descriptive and sensible, they are nevertheless not free of ambiguity: For one thing, we can say that agriculture and industry “dominated” earlier societies because farming and manual work were the fundamental modes of production in those societies; but how is it that knowledge has dominated today’s society? For another, land and factories were “capital” and “personal assets” in previous societies because they were the means of production that led to economic gain for people who possessed them; but can the same logic apply to knowledge and individuals who possess it? 

The problematic use of “knowledge” in the analogies between the features of our contemporary society and those of the previous ones prompts me to investigate the meaning of ‘knowledge society’ and ‘knowledge economy’. In this regard, two main questions guide my inquiry: What beliefs and values are constructed and promoted by the notion of knowledge society? What does the rhetoric of knowledge economy emphasize, and how do people conduct themselves accordingly? I ground my analyses of these questions in the sociology of education because the concepts of knowledge society and knowledge economy suggest a close tie between education, knowledge, and the economy: ‘knowledge’ is seen as the defining feature of our contemporary society and the economy; and education mediates the production and dissemination of knowledge.

In the first section of this paper, I trace the emergence of the idea of knowledge society and how the meaning of this concept has evolved since it was first proposed in the 1960s. In the second section, I examine education and employment in the new global economy by drawing on the work of Livingstone (1999), Jarvis (2001), and Harris (2004).  I conclude by pointing out the implications of the notions of knowledge society and knowledge economy for the education system.

 

Understanding ‘Knowledge Society’

The idea of knowledge society originated in the post-World War Ⅱ era when mass higher education began to emerge (Sèorlin & Vessuri, 2007). In the 1960s, Peter Drucker suggested that “knowledge has become the central factor of production in an advanced, developed society” (as cited in Beerkens, 2008, p. 17). He asserted, “The key to producing more work was to work smarter (instead of harder); the key to productivity was knowledge (instead of sweat)” (as cited in Beerkens, 2008, p. 17). In Drucker’s statement, knowledge was tied to the advancement of a society; and the nature of work would evolve as knowledge became a smarter and more efficient production factor substituting labour.

About a decade after Drucker’s illustration of a “smarter” way of work in an advanced society, in the early 1970s, Harvard sociologist Daniel Bell (1973) predicted shifts in the location and content of people’s work in an emerging new society (Beerkens, 2008; Davies & Guppy, 2010b). In his influential work The Coming of Post-Industrial Society, Bell (1973) argued that the most advanced countries were moving beyond industrialism and entering into a post-industrial society –– a society characterized by high rates of productivity and the workforce moving toward the nonindustrial sectors of the economy. Bell’s (1973) post-industrial society was a knowledge-driven society in which “the sources of innovation are increasingly derivative from research and development … and … the weight of the society–––measured by a larger proportion of the Gross National Product and a larger share of employment–––is increasingly in the knowledge field” (as cited in Beerkens, 2008, p. 18). In Bell’s (1973) vision of future societies, knowledge was associated with innovation. By highlighting the importance of research and development, Bell (1973) indicated that scientific knowledge would become the fundamental driver of the post-industrial society.

It is not possible to actualize an advanced society defined by science if a high proportion of the labour force is working on farms and in factories, which explains why the idea of knowledge society did not gain much prominence until the twentieth century. As Sèorlin and Vessuri (2007) put it, “In essence, the knowledge society could only be conceived of as a society where a large portion … of the population had some elementary academic education, and where quite a few also had advanced degrees” (p. 6). The role of education in the knowledge society formation is well laid out in Sèorlin and Vessuri’s (2007) statement: the very existence of the notion of knowledge society depends on the population’s participation in education.

As I have shown, knowledge started off in the 1960s and 1970s being seen as primarily a productivity factor of future societies. While still considered as the economic driver, knowledge is now “intellectual capital” (Stewart, 1997, p. 61) and a “primary personal asset” (Davies & Guppy, 2010c, p. 117). As knowledge has shifted from society’s means to achieve economic prosperity to individuals’ intellectual capital, it has been reconceptualized from a common public good to a private good (Jarvis, 2007) –– and consequently, greater emphasis has been placed on individuals’ academic attainments. Knowledge is now something that members of a ‘knowledge society’ must seek and possess to be able to participate in the labour market. In the following section, I will discuss to a fuller extent the widespread demand for individuals to engage in education.

Questioning the ‘Knowledge Economy’

While recognizing that ‘knowledge society’ is already a reality, Livingstone contends that “the ‘knowledge economy’ … is still illusory” (1999, p. 171). He suggests that the increasing adult participation in formal education, continuing education, and informal education shows that lifelong learning and the knowledge society are “alive and well”; however, there is massive underemployment of workers’ knowledge and learning capacity in the workplace. He documents the underemployment in the U.S. and Canada and finds that there is a wide gap in educational attainments between those from lower class and from the higher class; there is a structural unemployment gap between the number of job seekers and the actual number of jobs available; there is a notable credential attainment––credential requirement gap; there is also a performance gap between workers’ high educational attainments and the actual knowledge needed to perform their jobs; and ‘subjective underemployment’ is also identified when workers consider themselves overqualified for their jobs. These education––job gaps reveal the immense wastage of knowledge and human resources in the ‘knowledge economy’, and hence the irony of conceptualizing ‘knowledge’ in contemporary society as analogous to land and factories in previous societies – it is difficult to imagine land in agricultural societies and factories in industrial societies being wasted as knowledge is in today’s economy!

The reality is that a great number of workers are overqualified for their jobs, yet the most common response to underemployment is to seek further education as though “somehow they must continue to get more and still more education, training or knowledge in order to achieve any economic security” (Livingstone, 1999, p. 181)! Instead of contesting the structural malfunctions, individuals have come to assume responsibilities for their own learning and employment opportunities. It is exactly as Jarvis explained – the notion of lifelong learning is built on the idea that anyone can get education at any stage of their lives, and “the possibility of social advancement is held out to them” (2001, p. 197). In a neoliberal society where individualism and meritocracy are emphasized, the pervasive assumption is that anyone can transform their lives by pursuing education. This notion is confronted by Harris’ (2004) argument that the globalized and de-industrialized economy needs different types of workers to fill positions at opposite ends of the labour market, so not everyone is ‘meant to’ succeed in the new economy even if they have ‘certified knowledge’. Livingstone points out that “recommendations that stress a growing need for lifelong learning” among an overwhelmingly underemployed workforce “miss the point” (1999, p. 182); rather, the emphasis should be placed on restructuring the workplace and utilizing the knowledge and skills that the workers already have.

Concluding Remarks

The notion of knowledge society places considerable emphasis on the need to develop a highly educated workforce to compete in the global economy. Consequently, education is seen as crucial to national success; and lifelong learning is promoted in most advanced capitalist societies (Livingstone, 1999). However, “learning throughout the whole life does not appear to be as important as learning throughout the work life” (Jarvis, 2001, p. 201) in the discourse of capitalism. The problem of the discourse is that learning––the very idea of human emancipation and human fulfillment––is reduced to a survival tactic; education, is no more than a process that manufactures the type of workers that the capitalist workplaces demand; and most importantly, the ‘person’ is omitted from the discourse when economic competitiveness and national success are emphasized –– and individuals’ learning is undertaken for that end. Marx envisioned an education system that would “truly nurture the development of the whole person” (Davies & Guppy, 2010a, p. 27). Fostering the development of the whole person in today’s insecure economy and increasingly stratified society means engaging learners in critical thinking about social reality, and helping them develop critical consciousness of their social positions (Freire, 2000) and gain the power needed to challenge inequality and injustice.

Through providing a brief historical background, I have illustrated some of the positive connotations attached to the concept of knowledge society, and how the ideas and values that come with this concept contribute to the growing participation in education. It is not knowledge itself, but people’s seeking of knowledge that is dominant in the knowledge society. In examining education and employment in the contemporary economy, I have shown that there is tremendous wastage of knowledge and human capital in the so-called knowledge economy. Rather than emphasizing lifelong learning, reorganization of the workplace is needed to enable the workers to apply the knowledge and skills they already possess. Finally, I have suggested that placing learning for work before learning for life degrades education and learning from human emancipation to a survival tactic; and that a humanistic approach should be adopted in the education system to foster the development of the whole person. I end with bell hooks’ (1994) hopeful voice:

The academy is not paradise. But learning is a place where paradise can be created. The classroom with all its limitations remains a location of possibility. In that field of possibility we have the opportunity to labour for freedom, to demand of ourselves and our comrades, an openness of mind and heart that allows us to face reality even as we collectively imagine ways to move beyond boundaries, to transgress. This is education as the practice of freedom (p. 207). 

References

Beerkens, E. (2008). University policies for the knowledge society: Global standardization, local reinvention. Perspectives on Global Development and Technology, 7, 15-36.

Bell, D. (1973). The coming of post-industrial society: A venture in social forecasting. New York: Basic Books.

Davies, S., & Guppy, N. (2010a). Classical sociological approaches to schooling. In S. Davies & N. Guppy (Eds.). The schooled society: An introduction to the sociology of education (pp. 18-36). New York: Oxford University Press.

Davies, S., & Guppy, N. (2010b). Contemporary sociological approaches to schooling. In S. Davies & N. Guppy (Eds.). The schooled society: An introduction to the sociology of education (pp. 37-66). New York: Oxford University Press.

Davies, S., & Guppy, N. (2010c). Unequal student attainments: Class, gender, and race. In S. Davies & N. Guppy (Eds.). The schooled society: An introduction to the sociology of education (pp. 117-156). New York: Oxford University Press.

Freire, P. (2000). The Pedagogy of the Oppressed. New York: Continuuum.

hooks, b. (1994). Teaching to transgress: Education as the practice of freedom. New York: Routledge.

Harris, A. (2004). Jobs for the girls? Education and employment in the new economy. In A. Harris (Eds.), Future girl: Young women in the twenty-first century (pp. 37-62). New York: Routledge.

Jarvis, P. (2001). The age of learning: Education and the knowledge society. London: Kogan Page.

Jarvis, P. (2007). Globalisation, lifelong learning and the learning society: Sociological perspectives. London: Routledge.

Livingstone, D. W. (1999). Lifelong learning and underemployment in the knowledge society: A North American perspective. Comparative Education, 35(2), Special Number (21): Lifelong Learning and the Education of Mature Adults, 163-186.

Sèorlin, S., & Vessuri, H. M. C. (2007). Knowledge society vs. knowledge economy: Knowledge, power, and politics. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.

Stewart, T. (1997). Intellectual capital. New York: Doubleday.

 

Advertisement