Step 3: A European Model- Why Not Here?
Patrick Edmonds
Courtesy of Cliff1066The American Education system has many goals. Some of these goals are systematic, national endeavors, such as improving proficiency in the areas of Reading and Mathematics. Other goals are individually established by certain schools and their individual teachers, such as completing a mandatory portfolio or being forced to memorize a poem. Yet, regardless of the individual teacher’s goal or the large national ambitions, all educational today aims are seemingly predicated upon a desire to provide students opportunity, more specifically, a singular opportunity- college.
The idea seems simple enough. Create a meritocracy in which students are sold the notion that if they pay attention and work hard, they’ll be able to rise above any challenge set in front of them and eventually ingratiate themselves into the worlds of college and the global workforce. This is the ideal scenario, is it not? And why wouldn’t it be? College is surely the best option for all students, regardless of their backgrounds, levels and/or types of intelligence. Isn’t it? Statistics seem to support this notion, currently finding the college-educated unemployment rate at a mere 4-5% as opposed to the national avg. of 9.8% and far lower than the average for some minority groups, which is hovering between 18-20%. The numbers only become more convincing once one looks at the average yearly incomes of college graduates versus high school grads.
If it is so obvious that motivating students toward the path of higher education is the most sensible direction and goal, then one question should be how do we direct more students toward that path? The other should be what do we do with the students, who even with our best efforts, are still incapable of succeeding in the higher education environment? The answer to these two questions lies in again rethinking the structure of our current paradigm and radically adjusting it to match something similar to a European model, which in the end would motivate more students to legitimately pursue a higher-ed. degree while at the same time provide viable, purposeful alternative forms of education to the students who are unequipped to succeed in college. The end result of such an overhaul would be to fulfill a more beneficial goal and provide numerous opportunities rather than a single opportunity.
The European system of education is similar in some respects to an American one. There are six levels of education, beginning at Level 0, which would be comparable to American Pre-school and concluding with Level 6, which is essentially post-graduate studies in pursuit of a doctorate. In between there are levels that are similar to our forms of elementary and secondary schooling. However, where the European system takes a dramatic shift when compared to America’s system is at the secondary level, where students face a higher standard of accountability to be able to pursue a college/academic degree but are provided a wider array of alternative forms of education if they prove unfit for higher education.
Between Step 3 and Step 4, around the ages of 15-16, students are directed toward a form of schooling best suited for their skills, work ethics, and intelligences. Students are capable of pursuing an academic, college/university form of study or a more occupational, industrious form of study. The European system believes that the average student by the ages 15 and 16 have proven the basic direction of their educational desires and revealed their capacity for certain forms of study. Basically, it accepts the reality that not all students are able to succeed at the higher educational levels (Tertiary Level), and also recognizes that these same students deserve a different form of education to prepare them for the working world. These decisions, according to most literature on the European system, are not made wantonly or by a single test, but rather are the culmination of close observations of student performance, social behavior, and general academic capacity with input from teachers and counselors every step of the way. As a result, Europe has a far more balanced enrollment within the different academic offerings. Finally, the system always provides the opportunity for students from the occupational education direction to transfer back into a more academic setting, and even encourages students on the college bound track to attempt a dual enrollment in the industrious schooling as well.
The explanation above of Europe’s educational model may seem similar to America’s schooling, specifically in our offering of Vo-tech programs. The reality is though that very few students actually enrolled in such programs anymore, and that is because they are no longer encouraged to be. This has caused many schools, especially in middle-class and poorer communities where this type of schooling is needed the most, to cut these programs for lack of enrollment. Plus the American Vo-tech schooling is hardly as dynamic and diversified as the European system, where students are provided numerous types of schools from traditional industrial labor to more modern needs for technology. Many of these other forms of schooling in America have been outsourced to For-Profit institutions, which some people see as extremely manipulative, if not down right illegal.
If a similar system were instituted in America, it would surly motivate many students, who are capable but indolent, to work harder and take their schooling more seriously if they knew college was not a foregone conclusion that all people were entitled to, but rather something that must be achieved. Also, knowing that education is a life-long process and their performance in their elementary, middle, and early years of high school (not just their junior year of high school) will influence their placement on a certain path, will arguably improve their academic dedication and constitution. By raising the number of students qualified to pursue a college education, the whole system benefits.
Moreover, the students who are not prepared for higher education, either because of a lack of maturity or simply their form of intelligence, will receive far better guidance from a more industrious/occupational education. No longer will these students have to languish away in classes and programs that do not meet their needs and often only incite resilience and misbehavior which in turn demeans the educational offering to invested students. American high schools, especially in rural and urban communities consistently graduate sixty to seventy percent of their classes with no practical or applicable skills and no chance of going to college. Instead of America’s current model, which clings to a false notion that students as late as 17 and 18 can suddenly overcome their educational limitations and/or intellectual capacities and spontaneously fulfill the responsibilities to succeed at the college level, this new model would direct students toward a more appropriate path and actually provide them skills to succeed in this area of learning so that they can actually succeed in the working world upon graduation. As it exists right now, America’s system simply delays the inevitable truth that not all children and students can thrive in college and prolongs the feelings of failure and inadequacy these students feel at not being good enough for such a system of learning. Finally, this reformed structure would give credence to these other forms of learning and skills and reinstitute the much deserved respect that these different professions used to receive in America.
The largest opposition to such a shift in education would certainly come from the idealists who want to continue promoting the misleading and unrealistic idea of the new American Dream, which first entails acquiring a college degree. This belief in creating opportunity only through higher education has done America and its working class and impoverished citizens a major disservice by abandoning the industrial cornerstones that helped establish America as an economic world power. Ironically, by only directing students toward a world of higher education, specifically designed to integrate graduates to a global economy bent on nothing more than an evidently precarious form of free trade, is actually far more detrimental to the original American Dream of success through economic security, regardless of the manner it is achieved. Also, there will be those who argue the notion that such a system would create an economic caste that would cyclically inhibit entire generations to a relegated status in life. Unfortunately, the truth is this caste system already exists and fewer and fewer younger people are capable of extracting themselves from their limited financial and societal positions on account of the limitations of meaningful educational opportunities.
The sooner America and its educational and political leaders accept this reality and decide to learn from others, be it European schools or Asian ones, the sooner its education system will be able achieve its true goals and allow its students to achieve theirs.
Reader Comments (9)
I think this is an outstanding idea.
I agree with you on most, if not all points. The world needs specialized workers, and that specialization has to come earlier than college. Like adults, many high school kids are motivated by the question of how will learning this help me in my future. If we can make a stronger argument that their education has a direct impact on job skills, than I think they'll be more motivated to succeed and less like to be a burden on the education system.
The problem that your plan will encounter, though, is parent involvement. Some parents have clear educational goals for their child, even if they aren't realistic based on their kid's academic ability level. How do you plan on getting parent consent to put a kid in vocational school when his mother is convinced he'll be a doctor, even when it's clear to everyone else involved that the student will not?
You're right to address this as a radical shift in the American dream, but it will come with a lot of hurt. I can imagine the ACLU lawsuits when a impoverished student is told by the school that they won't be on the college track any more.
You're right, Carraway, that there would be resistance from parents, especially the extremely delusional ones who are still clinging as late their child's senior year to the absurd belief that their son or daughter is going to be accepted at a four-year college or university. It's sad, but I encounter it quite frequently.
However, the truth is we already are relegating students to certain statuses in life, mainly through tracking in high school, but we are not providing them any concrete structure or direction whatsoever. This is ridiculous if you think about it, because the whole idea of tracking is to separate students based on performance/academic levels, thus keeping the more motivated, capable students with each other so as not to inhibit their learning. Yet we keep tracking for all four years and keep all students, regardless of ability level in all the same curricula for four years all day long. Why? If we've admitted some students aren't able to transition, at least not at 17 or 18, into the world of college, why do we continue to prepare them as if they are?
I think if this idea was slowly integrated, enhancing the already existent vo-tech option and if we could bring students back from this program who have succeeded, at least by acquiring a decent paying job because of their training as opposed to working most likely retail, then that could help persuade reluctant parents. Also, if states and districts could do a better job of researching what becomes of their students once they graduate to help prove that so many students have little future ahead of them due to a lack of concrete, functioning skills, that too could aid in the presentation of such an overhaul.
Thanks for the feedback, and remember all of these ideas are based on the existence of an ideal world where teachers' voices actually matter when it comes to educational reform and people actually valued ideas of reason and promise.
One of my friends from college went through schooling in England, and it was easy to see the difference in the type of schooling that he had compared to American students. While I had been prepared with the necessary math and science prerequisites for engineering, I did not have any of the practical experience he did. Entering college, he was already proficient in CAD, drafting, and complex electrical wiring schemes. He had chosen an engineering track early in high school and thus entered college with the skill and knowledge that American engineering students probably wouldn't have until after two years of college. I know this is not the type of student that your proposal would be intended to help, but I think it shows that your ideas could also be extended to provide a more valuable education for college-bound students. Of course, my friend was able to sleep through most of freshman and sophomore year, maybe an indication that universities would need to be reformed as well.
One concern: with many students diverting to the industrious/occupational track, many traditionally-trained teachers would become obsolete. The need for retraining to adapt in the changing business world is common in some industries, but it would be new to education. It would be interesting to see how it would be received and addressed.
Although I mentioned it briefly in the original post, how in most European schools they actually encourage college bound students to dual enroll, at least in some industrious courses that could assist them with their academic pursuits, I think the benefits could certainly be expanded upon. Your friend's experiences in England are exactly the ideal system I'm contemplating, even if my focus is more driven to aid struggling students. My belief is that if you aid these struggling students, you helping the system as a whole, and therefore indirectly helping the more motivated, intellectually adept students. Imagine how much more could be accomplished in a classroom of 15-20 motivated, intellectually engaged students without the constant interruptions of students who don't want to be in such a class and some of whom arguably have no reason to be there to begin with.
As far as traditional subjects becoming obsolete, I don't necessarily see it this way. I think, ideally speaking, that there would be a rejuvenation of such subjects, especially if there were smaller class sizes. However, pragmatically speaking, you're probably correct that many of these teachers would be laid off and class sizes would remain obnoxiously large in most urban and rural districts. Anything to save money. Right?
Thanks for the feedback and firsthand experience.
I think it is a horrible idea.
But you have many strong points that convince me and even I was shaking my head yes at times. I can not believe that a 15 year old has the ability to choose his life's path. With the technology and information available, we should be talking about more schooling, like your summer one, not less. It is not a crime to sit in math class or to read Shakespeare. It forms synapses and fosters brain development in language and logic and a 15/16 year old is not ready to decide I have read enough, I have computed enough. That is the educational system's job and with the explosion of science, literacy, and well, everything -- we should not be curtailing efforts.
Europe sucks in their continual caste system and it is our belief in greatness, success, wealth, freedom, and independence that many want to reach higher education. Higher education is for us because that is the path to wealth and that it why we promote it. Because we were serfs in England to the royalty, and we will be royalty in this country no matter what.
"The European system believes that the average student by the ages 15 and 16 have proven the basic direction of their educational desires and revealed their capacity for certain forms of study."
I believe this is the very reason America was created. That whole continent makes me sick in their snobbery and it is the very reason they still have royalty in each place. Losers.
Dugan,
I admire your idealism and patriotism/nationalism (I'm not sure which). However, it's time to let go of this false notion of literature saving the disenfranchised youth of America, and it's time to replace it with a little pragmatism.
Let's first start with a little honesty here and admit that while you personally may attempt to instill a sense of literary passion within your students, the American education system does not really care, whatsoever, about the intellectual enlightenment of its students, especially in the realm of literature. Whether its local superintendents, union leaders, state and federal legislators, none of the real powers that be have any interest in legitimately investing in true critical thinking or forming a "synapses" that "fosters brain development in language and logic". Please, spare me the bygone Dead Poets Society era nonsense when discussing the ills of public education. These things don't exist, have never existed, and will never exist in the institutional paradigm of factory production schooling that America currently employs. It's run this way because it is the simplest way for the masses, not because it is the most effective.
Now, to your point that Europe has created a caste system, this is true, but America is no different. We only seek to deny it with fancy appealing words like equality and opportunity and freedom which we spew out, when the moods strikes us, more frequently than unprepared high school graduates. Economic gaps continue to grow more rapidly in America than ever before. Services to the underclass and minorities deteriorate year after year. Unemployment for minorities is as bad in some cases as it was pre-Civil Rights. We have less women in government than many Middle Eastern and African nations, ones that we see as Third World and inferior. Save rationale that America is the land of the free and encourages opportunity because Marc Zuckerberg can drop out of Harvard and started Facebook and Will Smith can get kicked out Overbrook and still become a successful rapper and movie star. For every success story like these, there's literally a million of failure and ruin on account of a system of education that is not prepared to accept its own culpability.
As for your notion that a 15/16 yr. old can't intelligently express a desire, not a lifetime commitment, to pursue something of their interest or that suits their manner of thinking is ridiculous. They've been apart of the system for ten yrs. at this point, and, assuming as you do that teachers have instilled in them sense of logic and critical thinking and autonomy over those ten yrs., then it stands to reason that they should be able to think for themselves. However, the truth is they can't think for themselves or make their own decisions because as a system, we don't want them to. We want to pamper and baby and pacify them, so they become more and more dependent on the same system, believing it will set them free to a world of boundless opportunity. In reality, all it does is delay the inevitable fact that they have no autonomy, no critical thinking, no skills (and no secure jobs if they did have any skills) to aid them in a working world, and it's not their fault- it's ours.
If education is the path to breaking down the castes of old, we first need to return to a direction of domestic economic stability in industries- old and new- to help rejuvenate the middle class again, who will then hopefully be capable of sending their children to college. Unfortunately, no ill-prepared graduates of today are going to be able to accomplish this while making minimum wage in some local retail job...no matter how much Shakespeare they memorize.
Thanks for the feedback!
Edmonds, you just gave me a good ole' ass whipping. Thanks for taking the time. That second paragraph was one of the best monologues written in the past 30 years. You killed me.
"Please, spare me the bygone Dead Poets Society era nonsense when discussing the ills of public education. These things don't exist, have never existed, and will never exist in the institutional paradigm of factory production schooling that America currently employs. It's run this way because it is the simplest way for the masses, not because it is the most effective."
I have just read how unemployment in the black community is near 20% and the gap between white wealth and minorities (including the Hispanic that actually raises it a bit) is at its largest ever including the pre-civil war era. And I do agree with the last paragraph wholeheartedly but higher education, and yes, time devoted to thinking, reading, analyzing, and creating on the highest level is the only way out of regenerative poverty and to create a society that is sensitive to the needs of all. A society realizing that money and capitalism is not the only way we can live together. Intellectual capacity and sharing resources will lead America back if we ever stop watching the damn commercials and believing in the the divine right of Will and Kate and Beyonce and J-Z.
Thanks
Re-reading this post, I am reminded of the biggest obstacle to this type of reform:: removing the stigma associated with paths other then the traditional academic, college-bound path. I witnessed an example of this at a graduation ceremony this past June. At the ceremony, every college bound student was recognized individually, asked to stand as his or her future college was announced. Although this was obviously intended to celebrate the accomplishments of these students, I couldn't help but think it also demeaned those who were not attending college, diminishing whatever alternate path they planned to follow. I felt bad for those students who remained seated, staring up at their classmates who were heading down the most socially acceptable and worthwhile track.