The Neoliberal ‘real’ in UK higher education
This blog post started as a comment on a LinkedIn thread responding to a post by TED IDEAS “Let’s stop calling them “soft skills” — and call them “real skills” instead“. It was an interesting discussion that spawned after someone ran a poll asking what the best term for soft skills would be: Real, Power, Human or Soft skills. I pitched in with the notion we should call them CORE SKILLS and got so involved I thought I would share my comments in the form of a blog post here.
One particular concern that arises for me with the usage of the term “real.” It inadvertently implies that other skills are somehow lesser, positioning them as “non-real” or “imagined”. A similar issue arises in the context of “real-world learning”, a term that often dominates discussions about pedagogy in academic institutions. For me, this concept fixates on an elusive, idealized notion of the real, overshadowing the genuine experiential aspects of learning. It is worth noting that the notion of real-world learning tends to align with the ideological discourse of neoliberalism, which I find unappealing.
Rather than perpetuating the dichotomy of real versus the imaginary, I advocate for a shift in focus towards “core skills” or, perhaps even more fittingly, “core capabilities.” This may seem like semantics, but language possesses inherent ideological meaning, significantly shaping our perceptions and beliefs. For example, the designation of skills in terms of “competencies” can inadvertently invoke associations with tick-box evaluations commonly observed in vocational training contexts. Conversely, the utilization of the term “capabilities” embraces attributes, values, and beliefs, placing emphasis on flexibility, adaptability, problem-solving, and the social nature of learning. By adopting this terminology, we can celebrate the inherent value of these attributes while concurrently acknowledging their coexistence and synergy with subject-specific disciplinary skills.
In truth, making steadfast claims regarding the real seems to reflect a lack of critical thought. The term itself remains elusive, with a definition that proves challenging to establish. In educational contexts, the notion of the real often emerges as a response to neoliberal critiques asserting that higher education fails to impart vocational skills deemed valuable by employers. Consequently, the term real assumes a particular connotation within the realm of higher education in the United Kingdom. It is commonly employed to delineate skills possessing real-world applicability. A response by university Learning & Teaching Developers that has arisen due to persistent criticisms from neoliberal media outlets, suggesting that higher education fails to adequately equip individuals with practical skills sought by employers.
People talk about “in the real world” as if there exists some kind of privileged lived experience that is fundamentally distinct from the experience of being-a-student. This perspective assumes that the primary purpose of higher education centres solely around preparing individuals for the workforce, relieving employers of any obligation to provide further professional development. Ultimately, such a viewpoint undermines the core educational objectives of our universities. Accepting this neoliberal critique diminishes the fundamental purpose of the university as an educational experience. What is worse is that it signals the internalising of this disciplinary discourse as a regulative framework for thinking about pedagogy. Another victory in the neoliberal culture wars.
This interplay between the real and the imaginary reveals the profound significance of language as an ideological tool. By shifting our attention towards CORE CAPABILITIES, celebrating their diverse attributes, and embracing the social nature of learning, we can reframe the discourse surrounding higher education. Let us challenge prevailing narratives, reaffirm the intrinsic value of higher education, and foster an environment that nurtures critical thinking, creativity, and personal growth.
If you have the time you can read more on Competencies vs Capabilities here:
Roy Hanney (2005) Competence or capability: Work-Based Learning and Problem-Based Learning, Journal of Media Practice, 6:2, 105-112, DOI: 10.1386/jmpr.6.2.73/3