Here we go again – Give the man a bigger shovel!

I found myself writing a response to a partial article in the THE about the difficulties in student recruitment for HE institutions in Australia (part of my past life, but something I loved). That sent my brain off to the singularly most mind-numbing period of my formal education… The History of Management Theory! All things seem to have a reason, and with a piece I wrote recently, I saw direct parallels between Taylorism (aka Scientific Management Theory), Industry 4.0, and AI. In an attempt to keep this light-hearted and of interest to you all, let's oversimplify the relationship between industry and education systems here.

• The Industrial Revolution necessitated educating large numbers of people to work in factories and maintain the machines that provided increased productivity and profits.
• Loosely, we can say that the concept of machine-paced work came into existence at this time. That is, humans servicing the needs of the machines rather than the other way around… You can see where I am going with this.
• "Education" moved from the realm of the privileged in private schools and churches to include the factories where new menial skills and knowledge were required. The Factory view of education persists to this day.

Subsequently, this got me thinking about what will be different, if anything, for education and educators as a result of today’s paradigmatic shift in technologies. Below is my twopence worth on this issue. Is there an opportunity now for the resource (students) or educators to influence the future of education? Its content and delivery? Or will the resource and means remain subservient to our economies and the unending romp of technological innovation? Will we choose to live in a machine paced “Metropolis” (Fritz Lang 1927) world for evermore?

What do you think?

THE BORING STUFF - The Factory Education System

The "Factory Education System" is a term used to describe the model of education that emerged alongside the Industrial Revolution in the 19th century. This system was primarily developed to meet the needs of the new industrial society, with a focus on producing a disciplined and skilled workforce for the burgeoning factory system.

Key characteristics included:

• Standardisation: Just as factories standardised production processes, the education system aimed to standardise learning. This was reflected in the uniformity of the curriculum, teaching methods, and school hours. (We have all been there, have we not? and the Gove’s still live there…lol!)
• Centralisation: Education became more centrally organised. A shift from the more localised, often church-controlled, education systems of the pre-industrial era.
• Focus on Basic Skills: The curriculum was heavily focused on basic reading, writing, and arithmetic, skills deemed essential for factory workers .
• Discipline and Order: It emphasised discipline and punctuality, mirroring the discipline required in factory work. The classrooms mirrored the organisation of factories with children in rows, timetabled activities, and strict behavioural codes.
• Vocational Training: As industrialisation progressed, the system increasingly included elements of vocational training, preparing students directly for work in factories and associated trades.
• Age-graded Classes: Students were grouped by age, much like workers in a factory were organised according to their skills and roles.
• Public Funding and Compulsory Education: saw the first examples of public funding and compulsory education laws, ensuring a consistent/standardised level of basic education across the population.
• Teacher-Centred Didactic Instruction: The teaching style was authoritarian, with the imparting of knowledge to passive students, analogous to a factory manager overseeing workers.

This system played a key role in the development of contemporary public education. Its focus on conformity, lack of creativity, and failure to address individual educational needs have been consistently seen as its failings. While there have been shifts towards student-centred approaches in recent decades, the legacy of the factory education system is still evident .

The Industrial Revolution with Industry 4.0, AI, and education

The advent and implementation of Industry 4.0 and AI have parallels to the rise of machines and the application of Scientific Management (akaTaylorism) during the Industrial Revolution. They are:

• Increased Efficiency and Productivity: Just as machinery in the Industrial Era increased production efficiency and output, AI and Industry 4.0 technologies are revolutionising efficiency in today's industries. AI algorithms and smart machines can optimise processes, predict maintenance needs, and make decisions much faster than humans, similar to how mechanical looms and assembly lines sped up textile production and automobile assembly .
• Workforce Displacement and Skill Shifts: significant displacement of workers resulted from the introduction of machines. Similarly, AI and Industry 4.0 will replace jobs that involve repetitive tasks or can be algorithmically defined. This is creating a shift in workforce demands, with a growing need for skills in data analysis, machine learning, and robotics, much like the earlier shift from artisanal to factory skills.
• Economic Growth and New Opportunities: The Industrial Revolution opened up new economic opportunities and spurred growth. AI and Industry 4.0 are creating new industries and transforming existing ones, leading to economic growth. They're enabling new business models, and creating new sectors (like AI-driven health diagnostics).
• Standardisation and Optimisation: Taylorism emphasised standardisation of work processes and tools to improve efficiency, a concept that finds a parallel in the standardisation of data, protocols, and interfaces in Industry 4.0. AI relies on standardised data for effective learning and operation, and Industry 4.0 benefits from standardised interfaces and protocols for seamless integration of various technologies.
• Human-Machine Interaction: The Industrial Revolutiuon relied on optimising human labour with machinery. Industry 4.0, focuses on the integration of AI and human intelligence, with AI taking over routine, predictive tasks, and humans handling more complex, creative problem-solving tasks. Another co-dependant interface by any definition.
• Societal and Ethical Considerations: the Industrial Revolution raised concerns about labour conditions, worker rights, and societal changes. The rise of AI and automation brings up issues of privacy, ethics in AI decision-making, job displacement, and the digital divide. A common theme for both eras is the need laws, policies and frameworks to address these issues.
• Need for Lifelong Learning and Adaptability: The Industrial Revolution highlighted the need for workers to adapt to new technologies and processes. Similarly, the rapid evolution of AI and digital technologies within Industry 4.0 emphasises the importance of continuous learning and adaptability in the workforce.

Frederick Taylor's salutary lesson for us all

Taylor conducted several supervised experiments, one of which was to gauge the difference in performance of hand-selected employees to shift coal. Guess what? Big men could shift more coal than small men. So, how else can you further increase that man's productivity? Simple, give him a bigger shovel . That is, until the man gets tired and cannot keep up with the pace required any longer… so we need to bring in another man. This cycle continues and the resourced is maxed out and breaksdown. Humans are not as easily upgraded as machines! This was subsequently replicated by studies such as the Western Electrics Hawthorne studies and E A Rice (?) studies where working environments and conditions were manipulated in search of more productivity and efficiency from the human resource.

The lesson to be taken from this is that efficiency and productivity improvements have limits, especially when they are solely focused on technological advancements and standardisation without considering the human element. The application to the AI and Industry 4.0 scenario implies that a balanced approach that respects and integrates human capabilities, needs (education), and limitations is necessary. It also suggests that blindly pursuing efficiency without considering sustainability and long-term implications can lead to counterproductive outcomes (especially for me, you and yours).

In the context of education, questions about the balance between technology-driven efficiency and the appropriate educational solutions (the need for human-centric, adaptive, and flexible educational approaches) are the concern. The prevailing model of education is still plainly influenced by the industrial era factory model. The need for evolutionary changes in education aligned to the needs of a rapidly changing, technology-driven society appear to be an essential issue to be resolved before we repeat the same errors.

So what will the ask be of education in the 21st Century

The potential of Industry 4.0 and AI in education is immense. My main point in this article is that the economic demands and expectastions remain the same, and our schools, colleges and universities are likely to respond in the way they always have, rather than realise the opportunities that lie within this technological advancement to enrich society. The parallels to the educational imperatives of the first industrial revolution are plainly apparent when you look at the educational imperatives that accompany Industry 4,0. Consider that educators around the world are now being expected to prioritise:

1. Digital Literacy: Understanding how to interact with, manage, and leverage digital tools, now as fundamental as reading, writing and mathematics.
2. Lifelong Learning/Continuous Education: Continuous upskilling and reskilling are becoming essential (ie still CPD not developement of the individual per se).
3. Global and Collaborative Learning and Training Environments:
4. Interdisciplinary Education: Encouraging learning in STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics)

Yet again Humanities, social sciences and the arts are paid lip service.

Along way second - but positive developments if they are realised are the opportunities for:

5.????Personalised and Adaptive Learning: student paced and prefered style of learning. A shift from the one-size-fits-all approach of the past.

6.????A Focus on Higher-Order Skills: OR the skills that AI cannot easily replicate, such as critical thinking, problem-solving, creativity, emotional intelligence, and adaptability.

7.??? Ethical and Societal Implications: incorporation of topics to prepare more socially and ethically aware citizens.

I hope I am wrong, and I hope you have reason to disagree with me. I hope our communities are as enriched by Industry 4.0 and AI as the world of commerce is. However, it does appear that the bigger shovel mentality is already well in place with the developers of the technologies and AI. There is a war already underway between Microsoft, Apple, Google and Amazon to gain the most commercial and economic advantage from their new shovels at the cost of quality of life. Despite projected efficiencies, productivity and profits that will result, none of the above will come for free to the average person in the street. Schools, colleges, and universities will be tied into ever increasingly costly technologies and service subscriptions, and this will be passed on to their end users through fees and government taxes.

The Industrial Revolution birthed education systems focused on standardisation, basic literacy, and vocational skills to meet the needs of industrialised societies. Industry 4.0 and AI are purported to be driving a shift towards continuous, adaptive, and interdisciplinary learning, emphasising higher-order cognitive skills, digital literacy, and ethical awareness. Supposedly, this reflects a transition from preparing students for routine, industrial jobs to equipping them for a dynamic, technology-driven world where lifelong learning is crucial…. to service industry, technologies and economies. Is this really any different?

How can we guarantee this new industrial era delivers enrichment to our lives and our humanity?

I would submit that it is still up to educators to ensure that the full benefits of these changes are realised for all. There must be more to life than birth, learning, earning and death.

What do you think?