It might have been that long long time ago, education must have been a ‘want’. I can’t say the same for today, the collective social subconscious seems to consider education as a ‘means’.
For instance the statements we say defines it: “Learn math so you get to be an engineer”; “Practice solving problems because you need to score well”; “Score well so you get a college of your choice”; “Pursue quality education if your child wants to earn well”.
The above statements are very realistic and true in most cases - and that also sets the definition for today’s education as a currency. A widely accepted means to an actual want - do you want to learn math? No but I want to become an engineer, hence I need to.
A (somewhat) fungible asset, must have in today’s world. But, what about tomorrow’s world?
When currencies fall, it falls for everyone equally. That makes them change-o-phobic. They are fragile to change. But on a pro side, currencies are great growth engines. If we manage to resist change for vast durations - currencies are the best mechanisms to have.
Now the question is, do we anticipate change in the next 100 years? If not, great! But if yes, we need to educate tomorrow’s generation on a curriculum that is to some degree change-o-philic. Change loving.
We will have to solve the problem of making education a want in itself and not purely a means. It has to behave like a currency for the growth benefits, but it should also be a change loving affair.
A hybrid. An alloy. An anti-fragile education curriculum for tomorrow’s generation.