Why send so many to third level?

We have the highest rate of third-level attendance in the EU, but there may be a downside, writes WILLIAM REVILLE

We have the highest rate of third-level attendance in the EU, but there may be a downside, writes WILLIAM REVILLE

OF THE IRISH students who complete second level, 65 per cent (the highest proportion in the EU) go on to third level, and the Government plans to increase this to 72 per cent. Although generally considered a laudable policy, there is evidence, for example summarised by the political scientist Charles Murray in three pieces in the Wall Street Journal (July 16th, 17th, 18th, 2007), that we are directing too many young people into academic channels to which they are unsuited. I am persuaded to give this controversial proposal an airing as, despite its importance, it is seldom discussed.

In the 1970s the US psychologist Howard Gardner divided human intelligence into seven categories: kinesthetic (broadly, athletic ability), music, visual-spatial, interpersonal (for example, social skills), intrapersonal (personal insight), linguistic (facility with words/syntax) and logical-mathematical. The traditional intelligence test (IQ test) specifically measures linguistic, logical-mathematical and visual-spatial intelligences, the intelligences that broadly equate with academic ability.

IQ is spread in a “normal distribution”: that is, about 2 per cent have extremely low intelligence (IQ of less than 70), 6.5 per cent have borderline intelligence (70-79), 15.6 per cent are low average (80-89), the majority (50 per cent) are in the average range (90-109), 16.6 per cent have high average intelligence (110–119), 7.2 per cent have superior intelligence (120-129) and 2.5 per cent have very superior intelligence (130+).

READ MORE

Training and practice improve innate levels of intelligence only a little. No matter how hard I train, for example, I will never make a good gymnast: my natural flexibility and co-ordination (kinaesthetic intelligence) are not good enough. Extensive efforts were made in the US to improve IQ scores by pumping resources into early-childhood education. Such interventions do improve IQ scores, but the scores fall back again during adolescence and the net improvement is negligible.

But what about the impact of top-quality schools and teachers? Again, Murray quotes extensive evidence from the US and the UK: reports compiled between 1966 and 1981 by the US sociologist James Coleman showed that academic ability is poorly related to the quality of the school but strongly related to the student’s family background.

According to Murray and many others, you will struggle with genuine university-level coursework if your IQ is less than 110, and in order to excel you need an IQ of at least 115. Motivation and hard work are also essential, but all the hard work in the world will not achieve an honours degree in physics if you don’t have a high IQ. These seem to be facts that cannot be altered by any educational or social re-engineering. But sending 65 per cent of Irish secondary-leavers to third level absorbs everyone down to an IQ of 104 into four-year honours degree courses. If we send 72 per cent of school-leavers to third level, the lower end of IQ intake will dip below 100 (based on Murray’s calculations).

Our universities struggle to cope with huge intakes of students, many of mediocre academic ability and coming from a second-level system that does not prioritise independent thinking. The temptation to dumb down university courses to help the weaker students is irresistible and unfair on the brightest students, who are not being stretched as they should be. Employers often complain about the quality of our graduates.

People are loath to acknowledge a modest IQ but can readily acknowledge personal limitations in any of the other five intelligences because IQ is still mistakenly taken to mean intelligence per se, while the other intelligences are seen merely as talents. This unfortunate interpretation has beaten innumerable square pegs into round holes.

Academic excellence is critically important to society, but so is excellence in areas where the other intelligences are required: trades and crafts, music, painting and sculpture, dance, sport and so on. Everyone is better at some things than others, and we naturally revel in doing those things for which we have high intelligence. It is unfair to encourage students who are unsuited to higher academic pursuit into university, where they struggle unhappily and unsuccessfully.

Every student should be helped to identify the particular intelligence(s) with which they are best endowed and encouraged to pursue a career in that area, where they would find the joy of fulfilment and achievement. A related issue is the redistribution of monetary reward and social status to recognise the invaluable contribution to society made by those working in the creative arts, the crafts and the trades. All this should be calmly considered when we debate the future of higher education.

Finally, an interesting statistic. Germany has the strongest economy in Europe and Ireland is broke. Twenty-six per cent of 25- to 34-year-olds in Germany have third-level qualifications. The corresponding figure for Ireland is 48 per cent.

William Reville is an emeritus professor of biochemistry and public awareness of science officer at UCC. understandingscience.ucc.ie