In the wake of the changes to NCEA, you would have to ask whether the Knowledge Economy is the biggest political bust of recent times?  

Back in 2001, then Prime Minister Helen Clark launched the Knowledge Wave project. Like many ideas, it came from a good place. Helen Clark had a vision for a nation which was confident, progressive, more prosperous, tolerant and which cared for its people. She said New Zealanders would ride to the Knowledge Wave because they too sought a society capable of sustaining its first world status with well educated, innovative citizens who choose to stay in New Zealand because it's the best possible place to be.  

Do you remember back to those times? They were hopeful, and she was a great Prime Minister, and it sounded fantastic. Educated, prosperous, tolerant, reasonable people. It hasn't worked out so well. In a nutshell, the government believed that New Zealand's economy and its society would be driven far more by knowledge, skill, technology, and innovation. They looked across government to see how all policies could contribute to that end. Obviously, she said at the time, education was critical. She said by addressing the worst features of the student loan scheme and stabilising tertiary fees, we aim to improve access to education for all. We will have to invest more as fast as we have the capacity to do so.  

So, educate the people, they'll become more prosperous, they'll become more tolerant. We'll have a better place to be. We'll be living in Utopia. Twenty-four years on, how are we looking? Have we ridden that Knowledge Wave to the shores of prosperity and tolerance? Hardly. Young people were steered into degrees they weren't particularly interested in. They were saddled with student loans and some of them now feel they were sold a pup. Universities went from centres for critical thinking and academic excellence to factories that churned out degrees for people who were barely literate. And far from tolerance and critical thinking, they became bastions of intolerance and Orwellian thinkspeak.   

I think the Government's decision to reform NCEA is a step in the right direction. Instead of steering people into degrees they're not particularly interested in and they don't really want to do, there will be more options, more choices about what sort of future they can have. Not everybody wants to sit in a classroom, regurgitating a lecturer's opinion. Some people actually like to get out there and do stuff. The MTA, the Motor Trades Association, James McDowell, was talking to Mike Hosking this morning, and he reckons the changes to NCEA will be an overdue step towards a more relevant practical and future focused education system for young Kiwis.  

JM: What we would very much like to see now, and it's part of the consultation process, is saying look okay, we're going to do these big core subjects, let's say in our case, an automotive subject, and we all work with the polytechs and providers like MITO that do the on job training and start them early.  

MH: So I want to be an engineer in F1. Is that how it's going to work for me? I'll do my maths, I'll do my English, and I'll do something that channels me towards that?  

JM: Yes, it's a lot like the old days. It's a lot like the old system. Or perhaps more contemporarily, more like Cambridge at the moment, where you have your core subjects. There'll be much less choice for sure. I mean that's the problem with NCEA – there's just far too much flexibility. You've got something like over 11,000 unit standards you can choose from that make up these qualifications. That's just a complete mess. You know, you might get a few credits for learning how to put oil on a car – that does not make you an automotive engineer, unfortunately.  

Absolutely. Skills Group, New Zealand's largest private vocational training provider, concurs, saying the major overhaul of NCEA will hopefully create more robust and coherent vocational pathway options, ensuring that young people can pursue valued industry related learning and develop the real-world skills demanded by industry.   

I just wonder how many bright young things we have lost to the trades because they've been stared into doing a meaningless degree where they get a B- pass, which means absolutely nothing. There are some occupations, some professions, some vocations where you will need a degree and you will enjoy it. You'll love doing the research. You'll love doing the reading. You'll love the learning. It'll be great. But not everybody is meant for that, and I think we saw back in 2001 this utopian vision that Helen Clark had, that everybody would be able to sit around and having Socratic debates with one another and intellectual discourse about theories and ideologies, that's not for everybody.  

Now I think we're seeing a recognition that not every young person is cut from the same cloth. We need all sorts of minds, all sorts of abilities, all sorts of passions and all sorts of interests. And I think by giving the trades a greater focus, the idea of vocational education a greater focus, we will have a more tolerant society. I'm all for it.  

How many of you have degrees that you think is absolutely worth every cent you paid for it? How many of you think “if only I hadn't done that degree”? How many employers are thinking “yes, we're finally going to get the right people motivated, inspired, capable people coming into our trades and adding value”?