part 1: what idaho can learn from germany

Interesting to see how they integrate education over the lifecourse with workforce development. It’s not as smooth as they claim, nor do the well-publicized details match reality.. but it definitely has things we can learn from. And it REALLY helps rural Germany.

One key is that this is largely driven by “demand side” considerations - what do employers want? What do FUTURE employers need??

The selling points for the system are pretty strong.

First: It works. Good-paying jobs DO get created. In high-demand vocations.

Second: Educational options are broadened. College is far from the only post-high school option.

Third: They balance the system by aiming for absolute best-in-the-world in most of their university programs. Entrance standards for students are very high but if you get in, costs are low. They insist on A++ students and A++ faculty.

The lessons for Idaho are pretty simple:

Lesson 1) Do more to identify what current employers want(software developers & programmers? nonprofit managers? etc.) Do a LOT more to identify what Idaho’s future employers will need.

Think Ireland, not Wales. (Wales created low-skill, low-wage jobs to help recently displaced low-skill workers… with awful consequences. Ireland took the opposite approach of training up their low-skill workers as best they could - mostly, they focused on their higher-potential workers..)

Policy Idea: Let’s figure out what Idaho COULD be, then plan accordingly. Why not commission an “Idaho 2020″ group?

Lesson 2) The College of Western Idaho vote is a great sign to accompany the workforce/economic development innovativeness of College of Southern Idaho. (I also recommend www.stcc.edu, especially http://ebd.stcc.edu for how a community college renovated western Massachusetts… entrepreneurially.)

Policy Idea: Use CWI as the region’s key engine for economic development, including but not limited to workforce development.

Lesson 3) Academic excellence at the university level is critical. The downside is that means hiring A++ faculty and giving them the reins. This will be a culture change of tectonic proportions. [Too often, we try to build programs from within; that will NOT happen. Universities must find the best expertise globally & put them in charge. But can you imagine the howls if we do this??] Nonetheless, it will pay equally massive dividends (just not for everyone).

Lesson 3a) BUT… here’s an interesting other angle. This is NOT a call for more money for basic research. To compete on a global level for faculty would be insanely costly unless… we do a LOT better on applied research. Why do Stanford, MIT and Caltech compete so effectively? They engage industry. That’s how Idaho can compete for A++ faculty.

Policy Idea: Identify ways for Idaho universities to recruit successfully against Stanford, MIT, Oxford… It will cost more money, but it will also require overhauling systems and…. university culture. Find out exactly how we CAN compete for the best talent in the world… and implement it ruthlessly.

Policy Idea: The state must fund ONLY applied research. In particular, we need to follow the advice of NSF’s EPSCoR program* and focus heavily on applied research & commercializing. Connect to local industries, yes, but to paraphrase Mr. Ritter… be cognizant that “flat world” can work IN our favor!

Anyway, I’ll have more later… but nobody had posted at TechBoise in a while…

Happy Holidays, everyone!

N

* Experimental Program for Stimulating COmpetitive Research - NSF’s program for “have-not” states to build capacity and learn how to compete with the big boys for the big-bucks funding. EPSCoR wants states to focus on applied research & commercialization; it also wants to see widespread collaboration. This is a HUGE untapped resource for Idaho.

Share This