I wrote Indian Education System is the Best … for India! in 2006.
I followed it up with Indian Education System for NYC? in 2009 and Indian Education System for UK? in 2011.
Seven years later, there seems to be a case for Germany to adopt the Indian education system!
At least that’s what Quora user Ralf Jenser, German national who has done his PhD in Germany, seems to suggest in his rebuttal to my answer for the following question:
How does Germany produce so many great engineers and scientists?
My answer is peripheral to this post. If you’re interested, you can read it here.
But Ralf Jenser’s answer and my comment on it are central to answering the question that forms the title of this post. So let me copy-paste both below for your ready reference (emphasis mine):
Ralf Jenser’s Answer:
I couldn’t read all answers so i hope i won’t tell something twice.
The question and the answere i’ve read are really nonsense.
Why?
I am a german, i’ve studied in germany and so on.
Before the ‘belognia’ agreement changed the education system in germany and europe there as different system not comparable to the uk/us system.
To find a job you have 3 possibilities after school.
- you start a vocational education in any kind of business, which takes three years
- you study at a ‘FH’, which takes aprox. 3 1/2 years
- you study at a ‘University’ or a ‘Technical University’, which takes apros 5 years
It as advised to start with 1. a vocational training and to proceed after this with your studies.
So the only way to become a nurse was the way 1. On way 3 you could get a medical doctor, on way 2 you could have study business to become the director of a hospital.
This is not comparable to the uk/us system.
2. is a full time education, orientated on the needs of a future employer. Something comparable to the Bachelor degree but with a more specialised training.
3. Is a scientific education. Science has nothing in common withbusines or industry. After 2 years you made a ‘Vordiplom’ a exam comparavle to the bachelor degree but a without a degree. It takes further 2 years plus 1 year of work in a science field to gain a degree. This degree is somewhat comparable to a master.
On line 2. you could never gain a PHD without starting on line 3. from the bottum up. This easily to understand if you keep in mind 2 is business orientated 3 is a scientific education.
Thrue the change in the education to the bachelor/master system is nearly impossible to understand the current university education.
Now you can gain a bachelor/master degree on line 2. and on line 3.
Line 2. offers the possibility to gain a PHD.
BUT!!! There are still the schools which educated the people before. The difference business/science education is still active.
On line 2. you can get faster in a job. The education is orientated on the needs of one job field. So you can e.g. become a electrical engineer on line 2. Advantage you are on a fast lane to a job.
Disadvantage: you are a educated electrical engineer , deeply specialized. But you know nothing besides your job. Even math training is targeted to the needs of this job.
On line 3. you get the same degree. This is a bachelor/master of electric engineering too.
Disadvantage: you learn in a much wider, scientific orientated, field. Math training is in company with students in math, computer science and businees, medical education and so on. In this way you have to learn much more stuff, even stuff you won’t need anymore. You aren’t so specialized as on route 2, this is expected to be learned on the job.
Advantage: you can easily change your career path. Keep in mind : for a electrical engineer math education (and much more) is exactly the same as for a future medical doctor. So, on the one hand you know in this field exactly the same as studied people in other jobs, on the other hand,because you have learned the same, you can switch rather easily on their career path.
In my case: i’ve studied applied physics on route 3.. In my live it gave me the chance to work as a teacher (without teacher training) , to work in different engineering fields, even in medical science. Now i am switching to computer science.
This would be impossible without a strong scientific background. With the education on route 3 i’ve learned the basics of all scientific fields so i am able to switch to a new field. My disadvantage is that I’ve learned only the basics so I’ve to train myself for the special needs in a job. This takes a lot of energy because I’ve to learn something, in a view month, on my own . This education was given for free for the students on lane 2..
So job route 2. gives you a direct way to a fast career in a specialized field. You are pretty well educated. But it is hard for you to switch to another job path. In the case you want a different job you’ll have to study this from the first step. What do have electrical engineering, psychology, dentist and nursery in common? I guess not very much.
On way 2 it is hard for an engineer to work e.g. as a psychologist. On way 3 i’ve got so much in common with this group, that i am able to apply to certain job postings for a med. doctor, priest , or even a bank job.
1999 the education system changed cause of the bologna agreement. The job titles on way 2. Fachhochschule and way 3. University do not exist anymore. Germany and europe switched to the bachelor/master system.
Currently the two ways still exist. You can still move to way 2. or way 3.. As time goes on the differences between both ways become smaller and it is intended that there should be no difference between both ways anymore.
In future you will find a lot of graduates on nearly the same levelas in the us. The specialised people you’ve met are certainly graduates from way 2. Even if they got a bachelor or master degree, the schools are slow in changing. The schools changed their programm step by step, a process which is currently not finished.
Ups , bologna 1999? we got 2018!
That is the next part. Germany has a two things you need to know about.
Germany is a bureaucratic society and – you can’t translated this to english- a proportional society. I guess the first point is easy to understand, the second revers to the following fact:
Because of the composition of the constitution in germany many groups can influence life and politics. To win the next election you have to respect all groups relating to their influence. This is called ‘proporz’ for a proportianal behaviour.
To understand this an example: women are a huge group in every society. But there a only a view of them in certain jobs. So there are laws which promote women for certain jobs. In the case that two aplicants have the same qualification the women gets the job -only because she is female.
There a a lot of rules in this way. These rules influence the way of work directly.
As a result of both ‘proporz’ and bureaucracy it takes a long time to change anything in germany. Even a quarter for twelve it is impossible to change anything.
E.g. Data science. It was a hype outside germany, the hype is all over. In germany the hype is starting.
Or e.g. education. You are unable to change any topic which has to be taught, even if you are a teacher. So have to teach stuff in the way they did 1960–1970.
The world changed, germany not. Things are going the same way as 1960 or 1970 or 1980. There are small changes but germany has already lost the connection to world wide and modern developments. Germany runs a system which started 1950. This system was successful, so why change it? A change would shake around all rule we got by the fact of ‘proporz’. Any company has to employ a certain amount of severely disabled people, another proporz rule.
This system was founded in the 50’s and 60’s but it is hardly possible to change this. I am glad that it is hard to change because i am disabled too, on the other hand this way of thinking and reacting detracts flexibility.
Even if they promote something else, society and economics in germany change slowly, too slow to react to the changing world. As a result germany is going to perish.
No one admits this, who would admit that he is a looser? No, they’ve tried a lot of tricts to hide this fact.
You don’t belive this?:
Just take a look on the distribution of generations. In a view years ( 10 or so) many employees move to their pension. Dispite that this pension is to low (nearly social aid), germany is looking for a funny situation. One employed has in future to pay for 3 or 4 people in pension. Funny, how shall this work?
This fact is well known. No one cares. Only a few changes have been tried, all of them useless. (Besides the recent immigration trouble has its background in the generation distribution and the urgently need of people who pay taxes. The idea was great, if we need worker so open the door- everyone is welcome. [to finance the pensions] This was a great idea, it failed because of the proporz.)
So in future germany is the society of the old. Unflexible, not prepared for new challenges and in a financial disaster.
I can’t find no ‘genie’ in this country.
“These are all traits that are extremely valuable in Engineering. Ergo Germany produces great Engineers.”[Ketharaman Swaminathan, Founder CEO]
Funny, but nonsense. This is a outdated impression. Not the future or the presence.
Countries like india or china have overtaken germany. And in the fields these countries have’t reached this yer, they are on the best way to do it. In germany there is no idea how to face this problem. This can be found in any strain of live in germany, school, university and anything else.
Sorry for the simplifying explanation. A scientific explanation would fill books.
—–
My Comment:
TY for your mention of my answer. The way I see it, my answer focused mostly on past factors leading to favorable results in the past and present (although, at the end, I did touch upon potential challenges to future performance occurring due to changes in the way modern engineering disciplines seem to function). Your answer seems to focus mostly on past and present factors that might lead to unfavorable results in the future. Personally, I don’t see any conflict between our answers. On a side note, I’m extremely thrilled to read your concluding remarks. Having lived in India and several countries outside India for several years, I’ve had the opportunity to observe the respective education systems in many countries up close. Based on that exposure, I’ve always maintained that the Indian education system is the best for India. Indian Education System is the Best … for India! But, alas, my compatriots have never agreed with me. Dissing the Indian education system is one of our favorite national pastimes in India. Now, I’ll point to your answer. Hopefully, when they see that a German says India has overtaken Germany, they’d start accepting my oft-held opinion.
So, you have it there. I’m not the only one saying that the Indian education system is the best … for India!
