In the United States, elementary and secondary education follows a fairly clear and somewhat inflexible path for most students. Our children typically enter the school system in Kindergarten at age 5 and leave the system after completion of the 12th grade at age 18. Certainly, there are variations in this path—some students enter earlier and/or exit earlier. Schools/districts permit alterations in the path if the individual needs of the student merit the change and/or the school/district has the resources available to facilitate a variation. For the most part, however, this is the path that the typical student will follow in the United States.

However, is spending thirteen years in school pursuing basic/core skills attainment the best use of our students’ time and our hard-earned dollars? It might be more effective and efficient to have students exit school at the end of grade 10. At least, that is the conclusion the New Commission on the Skills of the American Workforce reached this last Fall.

For many educational leaders in the United States, however, the very idea of shortening the school path by two full years is mind-boggling. Because of the No Child Left Behind movement, educational leaders in the United States have, for the most part, been looking at ways to increase school graduation requirements for students; not shorten them. Now a learned body is suggesting that educational leaders make moves to end secondary education at grade 10? That’s utterly preposterous!

Perhaps it is; and perhaps it is not. Let us think about it for just a minute. Many countries throughout the world have successfully built their educational systems (both public and private) on similar models. Why? Because their educational leaders recognized that diversity in the educational experience is necessary to remove obstacles to future opportunity and to meet the requirements of the information age. The educational leaders in these countries recognize that personal and public resources are limited; and time and money must be spent efficiently and effectively. In response, they developed educational systems that provide students not only with the opportunity to gain basic/core skills, but also with opportunities and experiences that prepare them for employment in the 21st century.

Could such a model work in the United States? The Commission’s recommendation certainly has a great deal of potential. By the end of 10th grade most students in the United States have mastered basic/core skills in reading, writing and mathematics and are either preparing to take or will take their state’s high-school exit exams. Also, by the end of 10th grade many students are or will be enrolled in college-level academic or technical courses (Advanced Placement/International Baccalaureate courses, duel-credit/duel-enrollment courses, tech-prep articulated courses, etc.). Therefore, providing paths for these students to exit out of school to pursue immediate employment, to move directly into vocational/technical training programs, and/or to enter college immediately as a regular student would certainly be a more efficient use of our students’ time and a more effective use of our dollars.

What would this mean for students? Admittedly, a drastic change in the educational system such as the one the Commission suggested would mean some students who might have personally opted for college after high-school graduation may be directed onto an alternate track. But, it could also mean that some students who would likely consider dropping out of the educational system because they were unable to pass their state’s exit exam, had no interest in continuing their studies beyond the basic/core skills requirements, or had interests other than college might be retained if they perceived they had the option to either successfully exit school at grade 10 and/or enter a vocational/technical program.

Educational leaders in the United States have not exactly embraced the recommendations of the Commission. But, they are at least talking about them. Why? Because the factory approach to elementary and secondary education in place in most schools/districts in the United States is not supportive of the type of skills and experiences students need to be successful in the information age. On this, at least, many of our educational leaders agree. In an official statement to the press on 14 December 2006 California’s State Superintendent of Public Instruction, Jack O’Connell, stated that “we must be willing to rethink the way we deliver education services if our state and nation are to survive, let alone thrive, in this rapidly changing, technology-driven world.”

Progress in the United States, as always, comes in very small increments. Cheryl Etters of the Florida Department of Education commented that “there are new reform efforts taking place in Florida.” Other states are likely pursuing similar efforts to align their educational programs with the needs of business and the workplace in the new information age. Even though states are unlikely to adopt the Commission’s recommendations entirely, especially in light of the push for standards and measurable performance resulting from the No Child Left Behind movement, California’s Jack O’Connell noted that the Commission’s efforts have proven valuable “by encouraging us to rethink our traditions and engage in comprehensive dialog.”

Shifting the focus of education in the United States from a product-oriented, factory model to a flexible, student-centered model would mean drastic changes for many schools/districts. Hopefully, educational leaders will move beyond rethinking and dialoging the issue and students will soon see some direct benefits as a result of either the Commission’s recommendations or the recommendations of other current researchers. In the information age, as Jack O’Connell noted, “[our students] must be prepared to be lifelong learners, creative problem solvers, and analytical thinkers." The educational system presently in place in the United States is an artifact of a prior century; and we have a great deal of work to do to bring the system into the information age. The pathway to graduation must become more flexible and more student-centered if we are to progress successfully as a nation. It’s that simple.

Interested in reading more on this reform movement? Check out Martin Covington's Making the Grade.

Until next time!

Lynn Byrne

Preparing for college admissions? Trying to find direction? Need a little help with the planning? Check out my college planning series:

• College Planning Made Easy--the planning and preparation workbook for the take charge, college-bound student,
  
• Paying for College Made Easy--a college financing guide designed to assist students and families in preparing and planning for higher education expenses; and
  
• The Great Scholarship Search--my guide for students and parents researching and applying for scholarship funding.