In response to my entry on helicopter parents, Julie of Shanan Trail shared some insights in relation to her experience raising a child who is probably not college-bound.
…Only a minority of high school students are “non-college-bound” and go directly into the work force. These students are seen as ill prepared to be workers in an economy which values high-skilled workers. It seems we have forgotten that there are people who are not gifted academically and need another option. I wonder if the reason we began noticing the children with autism, fetal alcohol syndrome and dyslexia is more related to the fact that our “new economy” does not make room for these individuals ~ Julie
It is a minority of students who are not college-bound, but it is a rather significant minority. Some interesting statistics from USA Today’s analysis of Department of Education statistics:
- 10th graders with educational aspirations who expected to earn a four year degree (or higher):
- 1990: 59%
- 2002: almost 80%
- Percentage of high school graduates entering college:
- 1990: 60%
- 2002: 64%
- Percentage of Americans ages 25 to 29 with a bachelor’s degree:
- 1990: 23%
- 2002: 29%
The most significant change in these statistics is in attitudes and expectations. I suspect the dearth in information that Julie laments regarding preparing young people for not attending college lies not in the minority status of such young people, but in the lack of acceptance of reality for a significant number of American youth.
With this emphasis on higher education, it comes as little surprise that there also seems to be greater political interest in grappling with the perceived barriers to a college education. Last year, the Department of Education’s Commission on the Future of Higher Education released its report (pdf) which included recommendations for change.
The most interesting barriers to me include:
- high schools which do not yet see preparing all students for postsecondary education as their responsibility
- time and money wasted learning skills that should have been learned in high school
- college graduates lacking the skills expected of a college student, with evidence of declining literacy among college graduates.
The problem may not be that high schools are not adequately preparing these students for college, but that schools and parents are setting unrealistic goals of college for young people. By not accepting the fact that not all students are college bound, we are only setting them up for failure.
As Julie notes, there is not even very much information out there on how to prepare a child who will not be going to college. Even though this affects close to 40% of high school graduates (not to mention those who drop out) and even more who begin college never to finish. Matthew K. Tabor, an educational consultant, shares some interesting thoughts on this discordant approach to education:
Many lament the “me me me” culture with young adults in the workforce, but can you blame those kids? This teacher’s approach is representative of young teachers…and their proclivity for creating a mismatch between a student’s mind and the reality of employment. The French call it anomie, which is defined loosely as a a rift between one’s existence in the world [or how they perceive their existence] and its actual structure. A teacher need not batter students with the harsh realities of life to overcome this anomic feeling of self-importance - in truth, sometimes our own thoughts and feelings just don’t factor into the situation. Giving students a blank slate and showing them that defining their own career path to the nth degree won’t match up well when someone kicks them a mop and bucket and tells them to clock out at exactly 5:00pm. Some call it cognitive dissonance; I call it being miserable at your job because you were groomed to be a free-thinking CEO. matthewktabor.com
I am all for increasing a child’s opportunities through education and for encouraging them to set career goals to work toward. But could forcing college as the only path to the workforce actually be limiting real opportunities by not valuing other skills and turning a blind eye to the majority of Americans who do not earn a degree?
[tags]education, college, higher ed[/tags]
Principled Discovery is a place to stop and discuss news and information related to faith, family and particularly education. Pour yourself a cup of tea and join the conversation! 
Excellent and insightful post. I might have been guilty of the same train of thought until I discovered that my child was dyslexic. It opened my eyes to the wide range of opportunities out there for different sorts of learners. We have been quite sad to find that in the United States, there are many less opportunities for apprenticeship type experiences, as even the trades have “schools”, complete with testing and textbooks. I do think that in our narrow-minded pursuit of univeristy, we are short changing a large number of kids.
Very good post!
In my life before kids, husband and homeschooling, I was a clinical nurse specialist. Yes, I collected and examined data, read scientific journals/accreditation manuals and wrote and rewrote clinical operating procedures so that our hospital’s practice would align itself with what the research said we were supposed to be doing, gave classes… and hardly ever did patient care (which was what I went in to nursing to do and was passionate about…)
[a rift between one’s existence in the world [or how they perceive their existence] and its actual structure] In my own career, I can relate to this statement. There were times I was miserable because I was groomed and suited to be a bedside nurse and instead I was a special projects officer and theorist.
But, what I really thought about as I was reading the quote by Matthew Tabor was a period when I was working at a large military hospital in San Antonio. My immediate supervisor had a doctorate degree in nursing (which meant she was even further from the reality of the patient at the bedside than I was). Her dream was to create a “Center of Excellence for Quality of Life (QOL)Research.” I worked with cardiovascular patients. At the time, most of the research done on QOL was related to functional status after a cardiac event.
One of my patients taught me functional status had nothing whatsoever to do with QOL. He was a very young man who had a very big heart attack. After his heart attack he was limited in the amount of activity he could do before getting short of breath. In fact, of all the patients I had, his functional status was probably near the bottom of any scale designed to measure such things.
He told me one day that he was going about the business of “redifining” normal. He worked at embracing his new reality. Others with the same or similar functional deficits were miserable, depressed cardiac cripples. He mowed one row of his lawn and sat down with a glass of water, paid bills… caught his breath and then did the next row. “I can still get everything done. I just have to rearrange how I do it.” He had a good QOL because he had a good attitude.
Now this is only mildly related to your story, except that this patient changed my thinking ~ and serves as a reminder to me that I need to mentor my daughter into “defining” normal within the context of her fetal alcohol syndrome. We need to be creative about how she gets through life ~
This is interesting for me because we are an a-typical family. I went to college and earned an Elementary/special ed degree +art minor and certainly do not use those things in the workforce–I homeschool our three, two of which have learning issues and do the web designs as well as commissioned art–both of which use almost nothing that I actually learned in college. My husband did not go to college, being completely self taught and is much more “successful” than I am, having written a book, two webcomics that have a large readership, written a variety of Wordpress based plugins and small computer game mods, as well as working as lead programmer at a game company. Both of us are mostly self taught in our actual fields of expertise. His siblings did not go to college and are all doing fine in their fields.
On the other hand, my family is very college oriented–my brother having attended a “good” college and now working at NASA (using is education) as well as running a webdesign business (he is self taught in that as well.) My parents are finally realizing that college isn’t everything and are finally recognizing that my younger brother, who is good with hands but not at school, will do better being trained in a technical, hands on, field than in a typical college setting. There are actually a lot of those sorts of jobs out there since so many people are going the 4 year route–someone has to be able to fix the broken stuff they leave in their wake and electricians and plumbers are becoming rarer (or at least in our area) and thus commanding more money.
It is also interesting to note that, with such expectations, there are still a lot of steel mill towns like ours where the expectation is that when you grow up you will work in the mill.
Thank you, everyone, for your thoughtful comments! It is easy to think we “need” college, but I also wonder how much college acts as a sorting mechanism itself. In other words, those who have the mental ability, financial resources and determination to finish may be more likely to succeed with or without a degree. A manager I once had said the only reason he preferred college grads was because it showed the applicant could finish what he had started. Especially in a Liberal Arts degree there is little that directly relates to the workforce. In fact, the term is derived from older notions of “liberal” which focused on a status that did not require the acquisition of skills needed by the common man. It was a pursuit of a liberated elite.
Early in America’s history, we preferred to judge a man’s ability by his by his character and used apprenticeships to develop skills. That may no longer be possible in our society and is likely why “credentialization” has taken over.
On the one hand, it is probably necessary given the structure, size and mobility of our society. On the other hand, I think a recognition of the fact that it is a somewhat arbitrary means of judging strangers (as well as something that can be taken away for misbehavior) could be advantageous both to the workforce and to those entering it. It would allow for greater flexibility in how one becomes certified in any given field and would allow for exceptions to be made.
While I want my children to obtain some type of training after highschool, the type of training that they obtain will be up to them. I have one who knows where he wants to go to college and what he will major in. I have one who is academically gifted who wants to be a farmer. I have one with learning disabilities who wants to be a doctor (this one changes career paths on an hourly basis, so don’t hide the scalpels yet).
My ultimate goal for all of my children is that they are happy and able to provide for themselves. Going to college will not necessarily insure that either of those things will happen.
Love the topic!
I groomed my boys for college from practically birth. Imagine my disappointment when my oldest just wasn’t interested nor truly college material. It has been a difficult adjustment to say the least…thus I have relaxed much expectations with my 2nd son.
Having been in the high school classroom as a teacher, I do think that many high school students are ill prepared for college work and college expectations; I do feel they are manipulated by a system that favors and caters to the under achiever or the college bound; and I do think our societal views leave kids feeling like there is little else for them if they are to be viewed as contributing members in a respectable fashion. We have become a society of snobs, so to speak…and the high schools is where we are grooming our children with this attitude.
Until we can once again value the physical labors and creative and nurturing efforts of people that do not follow the path that has been paved for them, we will continue to have unhappy individuals always needlessly feeling like failures to some degree. And that is a shame, because where would we be without all aspects of humanity?
You mentioned a manager who wanted to hire college graduates, because they finished what they started. I have heard that as well. It is, in a sense, trying to judge character by a piece of paper.
During my Principle Approach training, we had a big debate about math. Why should we force students to do higher mathematics if they will never use them? It was an interesting discussion. We basically all ended up agreeing that it is a discipline that develops the mind. It can be used to strengthen character, but it isn’t the only thing that will.
You definitely have to be creative to find alternatives to apprenticeships in our society. We have told students for so many years that they have to go to school to get a good job. Now(almost)everyone believes it.
I hope I didn’t misrepresent the Principle Approach in my statement. Children are not “forced” to learn math in PA. The goal is to inspire them. We were discussing the concept of higher math requirements in college, not how to teach it.
There were times I was miserable because I was groomed and suited to be a bedside nurse and instead I was a special projects officer and theorist.
I’ve always found this fascinating. It sounds like you missed and loved caring for people, Julie, and I’m not sure how you got out of it. But I’ve especially noticed the strange transition (reward) for doing a good job teaching in the schools.
In ‘the system’, where is the teacher to go and be compensated financially for a good job? Many go into the administrative level. The very gift that they had is usually lost in that move.
There is a Master Teacher program here…maybe it’s a fed thing, I can’t remember. But between the union and the difficulties and frustrations of staying in a classroom upon being recognized as an outstanding teacher, there should be a more rewarding return for the teacher to stay in the job. For the kids’ sake and as compensation.
Why is a career path for a good job to move away from that job to a completely differently defined job? It’s odd. I’ve seen it with medical jobs as well. Bureaucracy? I dunno.
My first job out of college was working for the Army as a procurement clerk. Part of my job was to review construction contracts for compliance with the Davis-Bacon wage act, which specifies the minimum wage for certain government contractors. I couldn’t believe how much skilled construction workers earned! Made me really wonder at the time why I had spent all that time & money on college.
Now, within a few years I worked my way up into a much better paying job. I would likely be making six figures now had I continued my career rather than leaving for full-time homemaking. So college did ultimately pay off for me financially. It also presumably helped my financial status indirectly by introducing me to my DH.
While I benefited from attending college, I don’t think that everyone does. Many college graduates who wind up stuck in low-level white collar jobs would’ve been better off with training in some skilled trade instead.
I’m going to strongly encourage my kids to do some sort of post-high school education/training. But that doesn’t necessarily mean going to a 4 year university. I’d be just as proud of my mechanically-inclined DS completing an apprenticeship and becoming a skilled tradesman as I would be if my highly verbal DD graduated law school.
My husband is running a nearly 1.3 milllion dollar job right now. He’s the head dude and he never went to college. I think spunk and total will to succeed figure into what you do with your life….more than a piece of paper.
In some areas of employment, jobs that previously went to the person who had the skills to do them, regardless of educational degree, now are more narrowly defined by requiring a degree. For example, my husband, who has been at his job for 25 years, has only a BS but has responsibilities equivalent to a higher degree . He says that if he started at his place of employment now, this would be much less likely to happen and having the proper degree would be much more important.
Schools have gotten into the business of advertising that certain degree levels automatically assure specific skills. They have, to some extent, become more job training (used loosely) institutions rather than educational institutions.
This could become more of a problem in the future, as capable people who are not college educated get shunted into low-skill jobs rather than career-track employment. This may also be a problem in certain fields, such as nursing, in which education has become more important than skills. My mother, a nurse for over 50 years, received her RN at a three-year hospital based school. She says she is now supervised by nurses with a BS who have little skill with patient care and whose knowledge is so theoretical that patient care has declined.
There are a host of issues engendered by making college the new high school.
My firstborn showed mechanical skills early, so we started looking for ways to encourage that. When he was 16, we found a local HVAC comapny who were thrilled to have him as an apprentice. When he got to AIT, the teacher let him take over the class on more than one occasion, because he already had 2 years of experience. All he had to get were the certifications to handle substances such as freon and Puron.
I remember reading somewhere, maybe the Callihan’s website, about how many required first year classes are remedial (another word for ‘waste of time’ for the average HSer). I can’t imagine taking four years of English, and then having to take another year of it in college because you didn’t get it the first four times?
I am shocked that so few are going to college. I just assumed that the percentage was higher based on the way the subject is talked about.
That disconnect between expectation and reality is a little scary. Between that and the way kids are spoiled with material goods, I worry about how this generation will fare as adults.
One of things I love about homeschooling is that I can work with my kids to prepare them for the future that is best suited to each of them, and that they want.
While I am mindful of how what we do will translate into college (such as what math we do each year in order to keep them on target), I also want to expose them to other opportunities while I have them under my roof, in case they do not end up going the college route.
I love having the flexibility to work to their strengths.
Thank you, everyone, for the discussion!
Susan Ryan, I had never thought of it that way, but you are right. The lowest paying jobs are often those with direct contact with the “customer.” I remember even working at Burger King, I used to wonder how much the business could be improved if the corporate structure weren’t so top-heavy.
It is nice to be able to tailor our children’s education to their talents and interests. My daughter wants to be a vet, and with her strengths in math and science, I don’t think that is unrealistic. We aren’t doing much in that direction at the moment, other than using it to aid in motivation for other subjects, but we have begun talking about opportunities if she decides she is serious.
Volunteering at the Humane Society, the zoo, etc. All things she will have time for in order to explore the field and gain experience.
Renae, I know what you are talking about. : ) I don’t mind that when someone looks at the applications of three different applicants, they are going to look more closely at the one with a degree in a related field. That is natural, and the greatest benefit of college.
What I don’t really understand is when someone is working for you and has demonstrated competence in the field why it is some will say, “I’d love to promote you, but you need a degree in the field.” Hasn’t the person proven themselves at that point?
And Emily, one need only look as far as Bill Gates to see that there are other paths to success. Success in society’s terms, anyway. I don’t know that you can say that someone in a fast food job isn’t successful…one of my managers absolutely loved his job. It is all he had ever wanted to do since he first started working at BK as a teenager. He was working toward his own franchise.
In fact, in my economics class, we worked out the economic costs of college. And I found out that it was economically better for me to remain at Burger King than it was to go to college. While my degree promised three times the starting wage, I was already beyond the starting wage and had already turned down promotions. Had I sought them, the four years I would have put into the business would have probably put me on equal footing (salary-wise) with others with an education degree.
The statistics about lifetime earning can be misleading. You have to consider that aspect of “finishing what you start” that one of my managers noted. A lot of people with “only” a diploma, GED or not even that change jobs frequently, barring themselves from really ever working their way up. If that isn’t you, the income potential is far greater, I’m sure, although I do not know the actual statistics.
Thanks so much for participating in this week’s Carnival of Family Life hosted at Pajama Mommy Community! Be sure to drop by and check out some of the other wonderful entries this week!
This is a serious issue! Building trades need skilled workers. Plumbers make more money than physicians up to age 40 and continue to make more if they own their own business. There is something disturbingly wrong with the over emphasis on success=university in high school counselling. It isn’t true for individuals and it isn’t true for the economy.
Wow! What an interesting discussion.
Of course I can’t remember the source, but I remember reading a history of education that made an arguement abou the main reason for education being keeping people out of the workforce until the workforce is ready for them. When we were a mainly agricultural and industrial society, we needed young people to work early and often. Therefore young men stopped their schooling early (and during harvest or planting seson). As the workforce became more flooded, a high school education became required, now we don’t seem to need younger people in the workforce, there is no plac efo them. Therefore, we are moving toward a college degree (or at least some form of advanced or vocational eduction) as being expected.
If this argument is true, and I think it is convinving (much more so when I read it than when I re-told it), I wonder what the impact of losing the baby boom generation and our lower birth rate will be? Will we revert to requiring less education of our children because they will be needed in the work force??