Arts United States. Congress. Senate. Committee on Labo.

Education's impact on economic competitiveness : hearing before the Subcommittee on Education, Arts, and Humanities of the Committee on Labor and Human Resources, United States Senate, One Hundred Fourth Congress, first session ... February 2, 1995 online

. (page 15 of 15)
Online LibraryArts United States. Congress. Senate. Committee on LaboEducation's impact on economic competitiveness : hearing before the Subcommittee on Education, Arts, and Humanities of the Committee on Labor and Human Resources, United States Senate, One Hundred Fourth Congress, first session ... February 2, 1995 → online text (page 15 of 15)
Font size
QR-code for this ebook


There are many more people entering engineering programs than
finish them, and the reason they do not finish them is because they
cannot handle the work.

Senator Pell. I guess in essence, we need more engineers and
fewer lawyers.

Mr. Bishop. Yes. So many talented people go into law.

Senator Pell. Another thought. Dr. Bishop, is as to the dif-
ference between education and training. To my mind, there is a tre-
mendous difference between the two. Would you agree with that,
or do you think they can blend together?

Mr. Bishop. Well, I consider professional education just about ev-
erything that happens once you get to higher — at least into the
master's and above, and most of undergraduate education is profes-
sional, too. So that while I love economics and do it partly for its
love, my graduate training in it was professional education, and it
is not really training, it is professional education. And just moving
it down into a community college level, when a person really goes
deeply into EMT — medical technician — they have to learn science,
they have to learn a lot of stuff that fits right into a regular bach-
elor's degree program of a liberal arts character, but also they need
to learn a whole bunch of other things as well. So it blends in that
sense.

Senator Pell. Thank you.

Dr. Lloyd, I was fascinated by the graphs that you showed us.
Could you describe to me a little bit what you meant in the infor-
mation portion, the pink portion, and also could you explain what
you mean by tangible versus intangible?

Mr. Lloyd. In the first chart, the pink represents the rise in the
number of people in the United States who are in the information/
knowledge economy. Back in the 1800's, 1840-80, and 1920-60, you
can see that curve rising dramatically.



117

Peter Drucker has described this phenomenon, and we have
taken this chart from Beniger and Baumol and extended it to 1990
figures and then to 1993

Senator Pell. I understand the chart. My question to you is
what constitutes the information portion of it; give me a few exam-
ples. What kinds of occupations?

Mr. Lloyd. Well, at the very top of the information economy, the
knowledge economy, would be research and development, profes-
sors who are developing new knowledge, executives who are mak-
ing decisions based on knowledge. Agriculture today is agri-
business, and again, that has become based on science and knowl-
edge. At the very lowest levels of the information economy, you
have people who are processing credit cards, for example, just deal-
ing with the data — the data workers, if you will. Today in banks,
you have people who are dealing with computers and so forth in
the middle levels. So that is what we mean by that definition.

Senator Pell. And now on the tangible versus intangible chart,
what would be some examples of what is tangible and what is in-
tangible?

Mr. Lloyd. Surely. The tangible, as measured by most econo-
mists today, relate essentially to investments in physical capital,
that is, structures, equipment, inventories, computers, plants, etc.

In the parlance of economics today, they are now talking also
about what does it cost to raise a child to 16 years of age that is
the parallel to producing an information knowledge worker, and
the investment in raising that child and paying for his health, his
food, his shelter, etc, is that he is then able to be a producing work-
er.

The nontangible has to do again with largely, as we can see, edu-
cation, health, mobility, and research and development. Mobility is
vour moving around, travel cost; health, of course, is the health
benefits that have to be paid; and education and training, we
should add, are the biggest component, 82 percent of the
nontangible.

Senator Pell. I think I understand. Thank you very much.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Senator Jeffords. I thank all of you, and I hope that you will
continue to remain a resource for us as we go forth. Unfortunately,
we are running into another time bind.

I deeply appreciate your efforts, and we look forward to working
with you as we move into the future. Thank you very much for ex-
tremely helpful testimony.

With that, the hearing is concluded.

[Whereupon, at 12:20 p.m., the subcommittee was adjourned.]



88-005 (128)



BOSTON PUBLIC LIBRARY

, illlliilllill

3 9999 05984 112



ISBN 0-16-047120-6



9 7801 60"471 209'



90000





1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 15

Online LibraryArts United States. Congress. Senate. Committee on LaboEducation's impact on economic competitiveness : hearing before the Subcommittee on Education, Arts, and Humanities of the Committee on Labor and Human Resources, United States Senate, One Hundred Fourth Congress, first session ... February 2, 1995 → online text (page 15 of 15)