Who does school cater for?

A few weeks ago, I wrote a post entitled: What are schools for, anyway? where I outlined that schools lacked a specific purpose and goal and in the same vein I want to revisit the notion that schools are doing something right, but that it may not be the appropriate course of action for most students, which leads us to the topic of today’s post: who are schools for?  Before I get into the discussion, I want to start with a story. When I was growing up, there was no question in the minds of my parents that I was going to college/university.  It was so enshrined in my head, I never gave it a second thought. Neither of my parents went to university when they finished high school (although my mother did end up with a degree later in life), but my siblings and I were, without a doubt, going to be university educated.  So, all through school, I knew why I was there: I was in school to get educated so that I could get into university, graduate from university and get a good job.  It was an easy formula, although It didn’t quite work out as planned, as a took a four-year hiatus from formal education to join the US Marines, but even then, I knew that at some point university was in my future – and that’s exactly what happened.

Let’s skip ahead to now. I now have two older children who have left high school, neither of them has gone to or plan to go to university. I have a young cousin, who graduated high school back in the US just this week who also won’t be going to university – he leaves for the US Army in just under a month.  So, I started to wonder (I’ve actually been thinking about this a lot longer, but this has reignited my curiosity), who is school for? In simple terms, I think school prepares students to be future students, but unfortunately not much else. Of course, what we learn in primary school in regards to basic reading, writing, mathematics and some basic ideas around science are invaluable, but once we get to high school, who is the curriculum designed for and why?

I can remember one of the first topics I taught when I started teaching in Australia: Romeo and Juliet to a year 9 English class.  It was term one of year nine in an all boys’ school and the way we were going to start the year was with Shakespeare.  Seriously?  Even back then as a fairly novice teacher I knew this wasn’t a good way to start the year.

Without a doubt some of the skills instilled in high school are important for all matter of life outside the classroom, but the curriculum, the way it is taught, the way it is expected to be learned, the way it is assessed, why it is assessed and many other facets of schooling do little more than prepare students to be future students. In a sense, this is great thing. Learning the skills and proficiencies of learning are invaluable in the pursuit of lifelong learning, which is a necessity in almost, if not all, features of life. However, most of the ideas within formal schooling have little to do with learning (see previous blog post Why School Sucks Part 1); if we just wanted to teach students how to learn, we could allow them to choose the disciplines and topics they study and teach them the skills in that way.

This leads me back to my sons and my cousin, who I realise are only three personal examples, but none of them find what they learned in high school to be of any use to their current/future work.  I would argue that the skills they learned in regards to learning, scheduling, being on time, organisation and all matter of other things are imperative in their working lives, but as far as what they were taught – it didn’t and doesn’t seem to matter.

I’m not suggesting that children and adolescents shouldn’t go to school, quite the opposite actually, but what I am arguing is that the curriculum and the current schooling environment is missing the mark.  If you agree, even a little bit, that the current schooling system is engineered and optimised to produce good students who will be…. good students then what I say next will be poignant.

Australia has more than tripled the percent of the population holding a bachelor’s degree over the past 20 years.  I personally think that it’s great that more of the population is taking advantage of a world-class higher education, but it also illustrates my point on two counts: Firstly, trebling the number of bachelor degree holders must mean that our high schools are doing a good job in preparing students for the higher education sector – as this is what I think they are designed to do. However, on the other hand, that trebling of bachelor degree holders only brings the total, after the trebling, to 39% in 2020 (35% in the US as of 2019). What this means, is that even after this increase, 71% of students, or thereabouts, aren’t continuing into higher education.  So, if the high school curriculum and experience is being optimised to prepare students for higher education, but 71% aren’t completing bachelor-level qualifications, where does this leave them? 

What I am advocating is a more realistic and relevant curriculum that prepares students for life outside of formal schooling. While there seem to be pathways for students who are not university-bound, these seem to be seen as second-tier alternatives, when in fact somewhere around 70% of students would seemingly benefit from the pathway. Why, in a system where only around 30% of the population pursues higher education, is the system of schooling, specifically in high school, so focussed on preparing students for a continuing education they have no desire to pursue?

I’m a university academic, so my livelihood is dependent on students going to university.  I have a number of degrees and my success was built on formal higher education and the system that operates under.  I was well-prepared throughout high school for continuing education and am grateful to all those teachers who pushed me, academically, to do better and try harder, but I am the exception!  And so is every one of our teachers, who are also part of that 39%; and all, or at least most, of our politicians are part of that 39%. Some of those teachers and politicians are also part of the 13% of Australians with a Master’s Degree or possibly even the 1.2% with a doctoral qualification. It is difficult, without serious reflection, to understand the perspective of people who are different than us. We, the teachers, and the politicians, who are responsible for the curriculum and schooling experience, don’t necessarily understand what it is like to not go to university; to not want to continue our education; nor to understand the needs of students and what they need from their schooling experience outside of continuing formal education. 

Schools and school systems shouldn’t be designed on the premise of further formal education; rather, there should be different, but equally demanding, paths for all students to maximise their potential and prepare them for their life outside the formal schooling system. While it is imperative to have a world-class schooling system to help develop the best and brightest, school as we know and understand it, is not for everyone. We can continue to encourage academic excellence in schools while affording pathways for all students to get the most out of their schooling experience. It’s time to start catering to and for the masses of students who are seemingly being left without the requisite skill-set to thrive in life after school.