Almost daily, the gulf between education and employment widens. Careers officers complain

about a system that presents them with school-leavers without ideas for employment. Employers deplore the fact that teenagers are unable to spell and write and calculate. Graduates discover that a knowledge of Ancient History or Zoology counts for nothing when they are looking for a job.

With all our magnificent new colleges of further education, the super-polytechnical schools springing up like mushrooms, and our much-praised increase of students in full-time education, one vital point is being left out of educational thinking. What will it earn？ Because--sad as it may seem to those who believe in its mind-broadening, horizon-widening and strength-testing qualities--you cannot eat education. There are thirty-nine universities and colleges offering degree courses in Geography, but I have never seen any good jobs for Geography graduates advertised. Or am I alone in suspecting that they will return to teach Geography to another set of students, who in turn will teach more Geography undergraduates？ On the other hand, hospital casualty departments throughout the country are having to close down because of the lack of doctors. The reason？ University medical schools can find places for only half of those who apply.

It seems to me that the time is ripe for the Department of Education and Productivity and the Department of Education and Science to get together with the universities and produce a revised educational system which will make a more economic use of the wealth of talent, application and industry currently being wasted on certificates, diplomas and, degrees that no one wants to know about. They might make a start by reintroducing a genuine "General" Certificate of Education. In the days when it meant something, this was called the School Certificate. Employers liked it, because it indicated proficiency in English, Arithmetic, Science and Humanities--in other words, that you had an all-round education. You could use it as a springboard to higher education, but it actually meant something in itself, in every industry from chemicals to clothing.

From there on they might take a giant step forward by offering the alternative of sandwich courses or full-time training for every career. I can think of a good few medical students who would willingly "work their way through college" by filling in as nursing auxiliaries at our understaffed hospitals. And it would be interesting to see just how many would-be Geography graduates pressed on with their courses when they discovered at an early stage the scarcity of jobs available in their specialty.

Given the option, I think the majority of those now taking full-time college courses would leap at the chance of combining theory and practice while earning their living. This would leave the full-time courses for the minority of our student population, who can afford to love learning for its own sake, and not as a meal ticket.

Which of the following is NOT taken good care of by colleges？

A．Widening the students' horizon.

B．Broadening the students' mind.

C．Providing the students with practical skills for employment.

D．Providing the students with moral strength.