Search

International education can be seen as a kind of litmus test in interrogating the place of education, power, and ideology in a globalized economy. In this paper, the authors detail the development of international education both with respect to character and credentials, and identify its putative links with elite higher education. How then might this educational path feed into global class recruitment? If one accepts that significant aspects of class structuration develop out of economic relations, then clearly the plausibility of concepts like that of a transnational ruling class will depend upon global economic developments. Here there are two theoretically competing accounts of economic globalization which have a bearing on the issue of social class; the first relates to the ideology and practice of neoliberalism, which gives some plausibility to the emergence of a transnational ruling class, while the second sees economic globalization as fundamentally about imperialism--that is, a competition between nations for fundamental economic advantage across the globe. In this case the focus remains, as it has traditionally, on the construction of national class systems. (Contains 7 notes.)

The dominant view today is of a global knowledge-based economy, driven by the application of new technologies, accelerating the shift to high-skilled, high-waged European economies. This view is reflected in the expansion of higher education and the key role of higher education in national and European economic policy. The Lisbon agenda seeks to make the European Union "the most competitive and dynamic knowledge-based economy in the world, capable of sustainable economic growth with more and better jobs and greater social cohesion". Not only is education believed to hold the key to international competitiveness but to the foundations of social justice and social cohesion. This article outlines the underlying assumptions of this mantra, which in many respects has changed little since the 1960s when human capital theory gained increasing prominence in education and economic policy (Halsey, 1961). It examines the prospects for the creation of high-skills economies throughout Europe in light of new realities of the global economy. This analysis is based on interviews with senior managers and executives in leading transnational companies and government policy makers in seven countries including China and India. In conclusion, the authors outline a series of issues as a contribution toward a new agenda for education and the knowledge economy within the European Research Area. Following this essay are two responses: (1) "Expanding the Higher Education System and Building World-Class Universities: China's Response to Globalization and the Knowledge Economy." (Wang Yingje); and (2) "Education, Globalisation and the Future of the Knowledge Economy: Three Comments" (Stephan Vincent-Lancrin). (Contains 1 figure, 1 table, and 25 notes.)

• HE Reforms to create employable talent will not increase Social Mobility; • Corporate 'War for Talent' is contributing to educational inequalities; • Inequity and social mobility need wider reforms beyond education. • Digital Innovation unlikely to lead to a major increase in 'knowledge' work • Positional theory shows why more access to HE may not increase social inclusion. This article examines China's response to issues of social inequity, talent management and social mobility through an analysis of HE policies aimed at transforming China into an innovation nation, alongside the views of corporate managers and executives. Our analysis identifies a positional convergence between China's elite universities and corporate hiring strategies, which renders the 'vocational turn' in HE as part of its digtial innovation strategy, unlikely to narrow educational and labor market inequalities in relative life-chances. What is identified in China is widely applicable, highlighting that social equity and social mobility cannot be delivered through neo-liberal models of technological change. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]