Andreas Schleicher's article asserts that, owing to deficiencies in the UK's school system, the generation born this year is likely to lose #163;4.5 trillion in economic output over their lifetime. It then reports that higher performing education systems, such as those in Canada, Finland and Japan, have convinced their citizens to make choices "that value education more than consumption". Assuming a relationship between consumerist behaviours and economic output, how is such a #163;4.5 trillion loss explained? Moreover, given the article's further observation that schools are preparing students for "jobs that have not yet been created, using technologies that have not yet been invented", the figure is nothing short of fanciful.
Tony Fort, FEHE lecturer, Lancashire.