Issues In Education

D. MOLEFE
O. PANSIRI and
S. WEEKS | Monday April 16, 2007 00:00

There have been many studies concerned with the factors that account for longevity, but most that have looked at location or geography, work history, family structure, church attendance and friendship networks were not rigorous. In America, the rich live longer than the poor, and Caucasians longer than African-Americans, but this is also a demographic fact, not an explanation about what causes longevity.

For a long time both educational researchers and health economists have thought that there must be a link between formal schooling and longevity.  The hypothesis is that a few extra years in school adds more years of life and a healthier time as senior citizens.
There have been small-scale studies in the past that have suggested that the relationship existed between number of years of schooling, general health and longevity. In Botswana, it has been found that primary school teachers were more likely to die of AIDS than secondary school teachers, and that tertiary instructors are even less likely. 
Now a graduate student at Columbia University in New York City, Adriana Lleras-Muney, has found what is the critical factor contributing to longevity. Much of this may seem like common sense, but there is more to it. In each nation there are records for 'average life spans' and on the different subsets related to location, religion, occupation and level of education.

It was usually believed that socio-economic status, as reflected in income and health insurance, was most important. But research centres in America like the National Institute on Ageing are aware that being wealthier and having health insurance doesn't make people healthier. It has been known for a long time that a good diet and not smoking do make a difference, but cutting across those factors is the primacy of education and the fact that more schooling adds to longevity and health.

What was not really understood until now was 'why?' or 'What really matters?' Dr Lleras-Muney read in 1999 an article published in 1969 by three economists that asserted that an investment in education was more likely to improve the health of the population than an investment in health care. This would seem to be contrary to logic and she decided to investigate this further.

Dr Lleras-Muney used data related to state laws on compulsory attendance and age. She found that it is significant to keep young people in school, as the more years of schooling, the greater the likelihood of living longer and experiencing better health in old age. The so-called 'education effect' has since been found in other countries: those that required children to stay in school until they were older also had people with better health later in their lives.

It is felt that people with more education are more likely to plan, to think ahead and to delay gratification.  Those with less education live in the present and want immediate gratification. For example, studies of Seventh Day Adventists found they had a 'slower rate of ageing', and this was attributed to their vegetarian diet.  They also have social networks that are cohesive. These studies found that people with good health tended to have higher incomes; and the reverse could also happen, as people with poor health could experience a decline in their incomes.

If a nation's goal is longer and healthier lives for its people, the evidence now suggests that public money should be spent on education first to achieve healthier lives.

All these findings become part of renewed arguments in favour of both compulsory school attendance and lengthening the period of basic education in Botswana.

There was soundness to the old slogan, 'Educate a girl and you educate a nation', but laws and resources need to be there to support the education of both girls and boys for their future wellbeing.