When Marc Epstein, who was a history teacher at Jamaica High School in New York City (now closed to make way for small schools), read Carol Burris’s post opposing differentiated diplomas and tracking, he wrote to express his disagreement.
I invited him to write a post, and he said he had already written it.
What do you think?
Diane Ravitch's blog 
Carol wins. I don’t even get this weirdness New York used to do. Anywhere I’ve lived a diploma is a diploma. You get it by meeting certain standards which verify you have successfully completed High School. You can use this achievement to continue your education, or enter the workforce. It is the graduate’s choice and decision.
LikeLike
So far I have had two children graduate from the same public high school (the third is a sophomore there now). The two that have graduated are no where close in academic ability. A high school diploma does not really tell you anything about the academic achievement of the student.
LikeLike
Since when were there supposed to be different kinds of high school diplomas? Academic achievement is reflected in other school records and I see no purpose in designating different kinds of diplomas. I think they serve to reinforce a highly stratified social order, provide more opportunities for those perceived as being on the higher rungs and stigmatize those perceived as being on the average and lower rungs. .
LikeLike
Cosmic, our high schools are full of differentiation and potential “stigmatization” by ranking, from letter grades to whether you make the varsity team, etc etc. Why are suddenly different diplomas odious? And different diplomas have existed for decades, including the Regents Diploma in NY, which evidently had a higher standard, and the “Governors Diploma” here in Virginia. I don’t know that different diplomas is helpful or not. I want to see what they reflect. What I do know is that we need better programs to help weaker students get an honored place in adult life. And I really don’t want to hear than any such program is a “stigma” when it can actually help, and in fact the regular curriculum has succeeded in humiliating and stigmatizing these children.
LikeLike
Well, we don’t have different kinds of high school diplomas in my neck of the woods and I’d hate to see the push for standardization result in them being required across the country in the next version of RTTT. I want to see more course and program options for students, without tagging them according to perceived ability level.
LikeLike
Having multiple paths to graduation, multiple options open to everyone, and flexibility to change paths is perfectly reasonable and always has been.
The problem with tracking, streaming, etc., is that it’s historically been a rigid and racist and classist practice (likely sexist, too). And Mr. Epstein, whose link to the Fordham Institute is not confidence-inspiring, seems to gloss over these facts.
I’m all for vocational education. Indeed, I wish I’d taken advantage of it myself when I had the chance, and wish my son had gone to school at a local program that would have given him meaningful vocational and college-prep education, with college credit, free. Couldn’t get his mom on board, however, and didn’t have him living with me full-time early enough in his high school career. Now, looking to take a gap year after graduation, he faces the unenviable task of finding a non-minimum-wage job with not much to offer that would earn him one.
I worked for two years in Wayne-Westland (MI) schools. Their vocational tech program was enviable. There was a county program in north Jersey near where I grew up that helped generations of students get decent technical jobs. Last I checked, we still have a need for such training, and of course for countless jobs in the health care sector. Maybe if we paid better for them (perish the thought). . .
So, I don’t like tracking. I do like vocational education as an open-ended option. I find the mantra “college for all” incredibly foolish and perhaps hypocritical in certain instances.
LikeLike
Well, I totally agree that diverse goals and respect for all of them is the right way to go. As I wrote on your first post on Carol Burris’s letter, I think school-to-work is a huge opportunity to help students. I don’t know whether differently labelled degrees, or just different programs, with include one degree as a diploma are best. I think that’s really a political question. That there need to be diverse programs to help students after age 15 to progress successfully toward different vocational goals I think is hard to argue against.
LikeLike
I do not disagree that kids who want to take CTE courses should be able to do so. right now they can in Grades 11 and 12 along with academic courses. Taking an entirely different pathway at 13 is something else….middle schoolers should not make that decision, nor should a school make it for them. In this age of test based teacher evaluation, guess which students will be pushed into voc ed?
LikeLike
I’m arguing for specific programs that would appeal to (among others) those who hate doing chemistry and Shakespeare, and are demoralized by their failure in them, but who would be motivated by seeing the benefit of academic studies when their see their use in the world of work. This is not a matter of a course here or there, but programs, many of which would lead beyond high school, but not be as intensely academic, as in Germany and Singapore. I have a PhD and love academic studies, but I recognize that many children are better served by other programs.
LikeLike
I have had two children taking precalc in tenth grade, one who only managed to make algebra 2 by the senior year (and basically fail it). Would you have put all three in the same class in tenth?
LikeLike
All I can say is HUH? Giving different high school diplomas is another hair-brained idea and another way to LABEL and FUNNEL people. This works for the elite only.
LikeLike
Who are the elite, in your view?
LikeLike
I cross-posted with Michael Paul Goldberg, and I know I’m on my hobby horse here, but let me emphasize: this is of key importance because it is where new institutions and new money can make a difference, as an alternative solution to the punitive approach of the “reformers.” Michael’s point that some places do this right is important.
There are nations, like Germany and Singapore who do this better, but also scattered success stories all over the US.
I would love it if the anti ‘deform’ movement would become a positive movement for more early childhood and school-to-work programs. Are either of these problem-free? No. Are there many, many proven successes? Yes.
LikeLike
As I posted earlier, I think tracking, or something like it, is essential if you are going give each student the opportunity to get the most from their education.
LikeLike
I really don’t believe a high school student knows what he wants or is capable of becoming unless pushed.
I cannot speak for all students, but I may speak for myself.
My H.S. counselor placed me in college bound classes, but I wanted to become a welder. After looking through 2 years of grades, he said I should pursue a vocational program. My Father disagreed and I was forced to stay in the college track and take fewer vocational classes.
Bottom line, I taught for 38 years and retired with a Masters + 62 hours of semester credit.
LikeLike
Good for your Dad. Now thing of all of the children who do not have a Dad or whose Dad does not understand the value of college. Tracking replicates the social order.
LikeLike
Do you think you would have been unhappy as a welder?
LikeLike
This is a very complexed topic and both sides have valid points. As a teacher for 17 years, I have seen the problems of a one size fits all high school. The level of skills and prior knowledge has decreased. We are forcing nonacademic students into classes where they too often don’t succeed. We also fill their schedules with remedial classesso there is no room in a student’s schedule for the courses they like thus excel. Many students end up with double period math, English labs, reading classes, extra help… When do they take art, technology or other nonacademic courses? Many students want to, and would succeed in, these courses or attend a BOCES program during the day. How are we meeting their needs? These courses might be the only thing helping some students to look forward to school and feel like a success.
LikeLike
In high school, there should be different programs and emphases but some education common to all. Tracking should be by subject, so that a student can take an advanced math class and a regular history class, or vice versa.
Students with strong interest, dedication, and preparation should be allowed to take courses with students at a similar level, instead of bearing with peers who disrupt class. The kids who disrupt class are often impatient with difficulty; they would be better off in a course that built up to the difficulty gradually, with concrete steps. Then, if they wanted to move to a more advanced track, they should have opportunities to do so. Or, if their main interests are nonacademic or academic/practical, they should have a chance to focus on those.
I have heard good things about the vocational schools in Massachusetts. The students still study math, literature, etc., but at a slower pace than students in other schools (because every other week they are in vocational classes). From what I gather, the slower pace allows students to study things (like Shakespeare plays) in more depth.
LikeLike
I really hate how liberals are being scapegoated for the narrowed curriculum. All the different options previously provided to students began to be eliminated as a result of NCLB and the conservative DoE in place at the time, with their focus on high-stakes testing, reading and math.
That has been further extended by the current administration, RTTT and their supposed “all kids should go to college” doctrine. But they are NOT liberals, which is why so many conservatives support a lot of their policies.
LikeLike
Marc, I think you are great. I also know your good friend works at my school. I think his perspective has changed since leaving Jamaica High. When you see him, ask him what he now thinks about tracking. cb
LikeLike
I agree with Marc. College is not for everyone. Differentiation doesn’t work as well as tracking, IMHO. Earning a Regents Diploma was considered “pride of possession”. I missed out on earning one myself due to receiving a 42 on my Geometry Regents and a 63 on my Biology Regents. Lol However, to this day, I am still proud of the fact that I scored a 95 on my English Regents.
There are much bigger problems than tracking or not in the world of education.
LikeLike
College is not for everyone, but at 13, kids should not make that decision.
LikeLike
When should they make the decision do you think?
LikeLike
grade 11 or 12. I do think that schools have the obligation to prepare all students, with the exception of the developmentally delayed, to really make a choice. A welder may later decide to back to junior college and get an associates degree in business so that he has the knowledge she needs to open her own business. If we are educators and belief in the beauty of learning and the importance od developing a well educated citizenry, why are we so willing to write a liberal education off for so many students?
LikeLike
Dr. Burris, I am not proposing that kids are separated at age 13, but that there are multiple pathways to a terminal secondary school degree after age 15. The age at which there are branching paths is critically important as to whether they are helpful or harmful. To treat 16 year old young adults the same as 6 year old children is misguided, because they are developmentally so different. Does the NY State proposal have children have children (and their parents) decide among degrees at age 13? If so, I think it’s a bad idea. At 15 or 16? Then it could be a good idea, depending on how it is executed.
LikeLike
If students have to decide to enter a CTE program full time at grade 9, that is about age 13. Why is a separate diploma needed? Why should they be excused from taken Global History and Geo? They will compete with China without knowing where it is.
LikeLike
Dr. Burris, 9th graders are not ‘about 13,’ but 14 or 15 as you well know. I propose their making choices about their future education, in consultation with parents, teachers and counselors, in 10th grade, when they are 15 or 16. I am *not* “writing off” a liberal education. I am facing the fact that 1/3 of the students on average in high poverty schools—and yours is not high poverty—are dropping out.
I am against *forcing* them to choose between dropping out and taking courses that they don’t want and won’t study for, and won’t learn much from. In this situation, it is far better that they are in an apprenticeship program where they see how the real world works, and see the benefit of the academic studies that accompany their program. As they gain academic sophistication, hopefully they will learn more liberal arts, which should still be offered. But I am not going to force it on them when the practical effect is to drive them out of education, or pass them through with minimal learning. I want real learning and real world benefit.
It is a foolish and illiberal liberalism to force 16 and 17 years old students to take courses because you know it is better for them, when they won’t study and so it won’t be better for them.
I think more contact with the outside world, if done right, will be beneficial to all 11th and 12th graders, but for those in high poverty districts, I think it has the prospect of being a real life line that will keep students in school. Denying them the life line in the name of liberal education seems to me misguided.
LikeLike
My most academically able son was 12 in ninth grade. He graduated at 16.
LikeLike
Ops, take it back. He was 13.
LikeLike
I have always been in school systems that had one diploma, no exit exams, tracking and vocational courses as electives with major credit for advanced work an option in some systems. We all know that college is not for everyone, especially right out of high school. We owe it to our children to provide them a broad range of options. Vocational/ technical training draws on strengths that are not often recognized in a college prep curriculum.
LikeLike
I’ve had similar experiences and agree. For many students, it’s the electives that motivate them and make learning enjoyable again.
I’ve been at suburban high schools that had many more program options and types of courses for students at all levels than city schools, primarily because they have more funds.
I would like to see a change in the use of property taxes to fund school districts, so that inner city students had those kinds of choices, too.
LikeLike
So get this. My son’s high school requires the kids to choose an “academy” in 9th grade in which to focus their coursework. It’s a little like choosing a college major at 14. While I understand it’s somewhat easy to move academies, it still takes away students’ opportunities to try various classes, plus the same kids are in the same classes together all day long. My son is supposed to be picking an academy right now. His response? “None of them!” He doesn’t know what he wants to do yet, and I’m not pushing him. He’s 14, for heaven’s sake!
LikeLike
It is hard to know how to evaluate this choice without knowing what it means to choose an “academy”,
LikeLike
For those of you who don’t understand the New York diploma, you are not familiar with a system that requires you to pass state tests in 5 subjects (ie. the New York State Regents Exams). They are difficult (at least they were in my day) and provided a guarantee to all colleges that the student was fully prepared for college level work..
It was not quite as inflexible as some of you seem to think. There were those students in the Academic program who took commercial and/or vocational classes as electives.knowing they would have to work part time for college expenses; There were also students in the Commercial program who were not sure they could afford to go to college right away and planned to work full time and attend college part time. They opted to take the Regents classes as their electives. The General diploma (e.g non college track) were primarily those students who were unable to pass the State tests. I think it was preferable to award them a diploma than to dumb down the tests or prevent them from graduating. They also had the option of going to a less rigorous college—or a junior college.
Personally, as a graduate of NYC schools and a teacher in Chicago schools, I approve of tracking provided it maintains some flexibility. Many colleges are complaining that students are not prepared; eliminating tracking in the school is to blame.
Everyone is not “college material” and those who are not should not be forced into an academic program. Differentiating curriculum lets all students experience success.
There used to be dignity in being an EXCELLENT mechanic or plumber. That’s where we’ve gone wrong!
LikeLike
Just so we are comparing apples to apples here. Rockville Center is a very affluent area.
According to this: http://www.usa.com/rockville-centre-ny-income-and-careers.htm it has one third of the national average of families in poverty. And according to this: http://www.city-data.com/income/income-Rockville-Centre-New-York.html it has a median income nearly twice the state average, and still in relation to the national average. This is not to take anything away from Dr. Burris’s achievement at her high school, but we are not talking about the students that the schools are having the most difficulty educating to the point they have a good job in the adult world.
LikeLike
Have you ever been to Rockville Center? I have. It is not a “very affluent area.” It is a middle-income community. It is not akin to Scarsdale or other really affluent communities.
LikeLike
No, I haven’t been there. But the data on poverty in the school is here: http://www.usnews.com/education/best-high-schools/new-york/districts/rockville-centre-union-free-school-district/south-side-high-school-14024/student-body They have 10% on free and 3% on reduced lunches. According to this, low poverty schools are those with below 25% on free or reduced lunches. High poverty are those with 75% or more on free lunches. http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=2&cad=rja&ved=0CEYQFjAB&url=http%3A%2F%2Fnces.ed.gov%2Fprograms%2Fcoe%2Fpdf%2Fcoe_pcp.pdf&ei=bm_YUKOUGai10QGM_IHYCw&usg=AFQjCNHmqaUTkVBzG66Nia9H3imxLyS30A&sig2=UDLHKIAXgMyQOjRXABOJGQ&bvm=bv.1355534169,d.dmQ
In other words, South Side is a quite low poverty high school.
According to this news report in 2010, there were then 17% of schools with high poverty, and a third of students in the high poverty high schools didn’t graduate. And 40% of urban schools are high poverty. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/05/27/report-percentage-of-high_n_592159.html
Again, I don’t want to take anything away from Dr. Burris’s accomplishment—the school was rated in the top 100 high schools by US News. But it doesn’t address the situation of high poverty urban schools. And students in these, I believe, could most benefit from very strong school-to-work programs for those students who will not, in future, complete a four-year academic college degree. Many students in other schools could also benefit. And I think that properly done, contact with mentors in 11th and 12th grade could be very helpful for gifted students as well. I think that the model of having students have experience outside the school in the last years of high school is a very strong one.
LikeLike
I don’t think Dr. Burris ever pretended to be principal of a high-poverty inner-city high school. Can you find any indication that she did? Rockville Center is middle-income, not affluent. It has students who are poor, students with disabilities, students of color. It is a typical suburban (but not affluent) district. It is small town America. I don’t understand the point you are making.
LikeLike
The point I am making is connected to something you have long emphasized: that the main difficulty our schools are having is with students in poverty. What I am proposing is that diverse high quality school-to-work programs after age 15 will be helpful to addressing this student population, so that they are better able to achieve a productive and honored place in adult society. My point is that Dr. Burris’s school is not particularly informative on this issue, which is a critical one. Now I would make an exception on relevance: her success does raise one important question: does the concentration of poor students in high-poverty urban schools multiply the difficulty of reaching these students? That may well be, and I would like to know of research and analysis on this.
But I still think that structured contact with the outside world in the last years of high school, in the form or mentoring, internships, and apprenticeships can in fact help all children, but especially those who are not headed for long further education.
LikeLike
My mechanic is a millionaire. I hold a doctorate and I will never make as much money as he does.
I say if a kid entering high school hates Shakespeare but can take apart an engine blindfolded, let him pursue a different course of study than the kid who enjoys reading Hamlet and writing papers. I don’t believe students should be forced into tracks, but when they are old enough to know what they are good at and enjoy they should be allowed to pursue an education they can really use.
LikeLike
Not everone is college material. And not all college material students are ready for college at 18. While the term “lifelong learners” is greatly over used, it is true that we continue to grow and change even into our later years. Current educational practices are much more flexible and user friendly for those formerly known as “nontraditional” college students. If allowing students to grab the required courses and take on some other courses of interest is possible, then why not let them? The likely outcome would be a high school graduate. They will have success under their belts and can head off to college, the military, work, or any number of other options.
One thing I have always told my students is to stay in school and get the diploma – it is something no one can take away from you.
LikeLike
“One thing I have always told my students is to stay in school and get the diploma – it is something no one can take away from you.”
I used to say that, too, and then high profile incidents revealed that schools do ask that diplomas be returned due to plagiarism, such as with the Walton heiress, Elizabeth Paige Laurie, who had paid someone to do assignments for her: http://www.nytimes.com/2005/10/20/arts/20iht-peepfri.html?_r=0
Since then, I’ve been saying, “Stay in school and get the EDUCATION. No one can ever take back your education.”
LikeLike
Secondary education is not my area of expertise within education, so I don’t claim to be an expert on this and I have some questions.
First, some background info: When I went to a neighborhood high school in a large urban school district, we had Regular and Honors tracks (& some Honors students took AP courses). There were very few elective options at my high school for Regular students, and more options for Honors students, but it was possible to be identified for Honors courses based on grades and change tracks. There was a vocational high school nearby and few Voc Ed options at my school. The only non-college prep course that I took was typing. (Yes, I’m a dinosaur.)
Then my family moved and I spent my last year in a suburban high school district. They had the same Regular and Honors tracks there, with AP options, but oh so many elective choices for students at every level. I felt like I was in education heaven. (One locally famous course involved students building a real home in our neighborhood each year, long before there was a Habitat for Humanity). I looked into it and that school district still has tracks and a very wide variety of electives for students at all levels.
When I look for course offerings in my urban high school district, I see that they still have the same tracks and the course offerings look just as abysmal as they did when I attended, except at some selective enrollment schools and the occasional neighborhood school and magnet school with a special program.
Regardless of what “reformers” proclaim, it’s very evident that the disparity is related to differences in school financing which, in my state, is based on local property taxes, so the more affluent suburbs have many more resources than inner city schools.
So, I’m wondering:
1) Is anyone aware of research correlating high school achievement with funding, in states with more equitable financing practices than the use of local property taxes?
2) If so, do they track there, and do they offer a wide variety of choices to students at all levels?
LikeLike
When I first began teaching at my current institution, an R1 university, the in state admission requirement was simple: a high school diploma. At that time it meant a great deal more than it does now in terms of academic achievement. Today admission decisions have to look at the high school record in much more detail, but still a third of the entering class must take remedial mathematics and only 80% of first year students will make it to a second year.
LikeLike
Is Algebra Necessary? http://www.nytimes.com/2012/07/29/opinion/sunday/is-algebra-necessary.html
LikeLike
Yes.
LikeLike
NO.
LikeLike
The gap just got a little bigger.
LikeLike
If we like giving families a choice about choosing a school, why not give them a choice about the curriculum they study?
LikeLike
This post is realistic. Carol Burris is the principal of a school with 16% free or reduced lunch. My school and most inner city schools are 80-95 % at or below poverty. Herein lies the difference in outlook.
LikeLike
William Berkson,
I am responding to your post from 10:51 this morning.
I agree with what you wrote but would take the concept of contact with the outside world and use the way back machine all the way back to Kindergarten. I live in a county where there is a small private university, a community college, and a state university about 20 miles down the road. Unfortunately in the last 10 years or so most of the industry has baled and we have the highest unemployment rate in the state.
The above situation exacerbated an already high rate of poverty. Many of my students have never ridden on an escalator or eaten in a restaurant. Some have actually never been to the local Wal-Mart. They are familiar with their communities and what they see on television. It is important that we expose them to as much of the outside world as we can starting in the early grades so that they have something to connect to and to value. Our teachers strive to introduce them to the larger world through field trips and other learning experiences. The tiny seed of exposure needs to be planted very young and hopefully be nurtured for the next 13 years or so. Real life experiences are criitical to the well being of our students.
LikeLike
Absolutely, exposure is vital. When New Orleans was evacuated after Katrina there were children who were amazed at the things they saw, things like schools with playgrounds, snow, and hills. (Yes, hills. New Orleans is FLAT.) Many had never been out of the city.
When I worked in an inner city school in Atlanta that was isolated because of bad bus service, there were kids who thought groceries came from the truck—the rolling truck that came through their community. They had never been to a grocery store. Many had never seen a white person either.
When I worked in a rural school the first graders would wet themselves (there was no kindergarten) because they had never seen a flush toilet.
There is one thing that you cannot do with technology. It is called life experience. The best things that the schools could and should return to is the good old fashioned FIELD TRIP. Kids need life experience so they know what is in the world and how to interact with. That is education. Disadvantaged kids in particular should get one per month throughout elementary school and then come back to school and write and talk about it. The money is there you just have to pinch somje off of the standardized testing and consultant budget and do it.
LikeLike
I’ve taught students with learning disabilities, as well as students who were naturally advanced (regardless of SES). I’ve heard people say not to have any advanced or remedial courses. If that’s the case, isn’t that still a form of tracking since every student is on the same track?
I see a lot of teaching to the middle in some of the most extreme cases. I’ve literally seen 7th grade classes where some students are struggling with basic math facts and at least one student scored a 32 on the ACT (the DUKE TIP), as well as every ability in-between. It seems like some kind of flexible instructional grouping may be necessary because I’ve grown tired of in-services on differentiated instruction where the instruction about differentiated instruction is not differentiated.
I’ve been reading about tracking for longer than I care to admit. I always see Oakes (1985) cited, and her book is interesting. But The Tracking Wars (Loveless, 1999) provides some very interesting insights, particularly with regard to different populations.
LikeLike
The school in which I teach does something of the opposite: all students must take AP English and we’re a school with a very large ELL population. The result is that only a quarter of the students earn passing scores, but the school’s ranking improves due to the number of students enrolled in AP classes.
I’m a new teacher and I’m really torn about whether this is a food push for students or ultimately doing some students a disservice and setting them up to fail.
Thoughts?
LikeLike
Tracking, depending upon how it is done (ideally it is up to student choice), is an excellent way to develop individual strengths and interests. That is not to say there should not be a solid liberal arts offering to all up to a point, but it is to say that not all of us care about AP English or about going to college, so there should be some offerings that will help me fulfill myself as an individual under such circumstances (particularly by high school)– some specialized offering that will help me succeed when I graduate.
I have a friend who is a writer and has published 4 books. She did not choose to go to college and undertake big loans as she knew she would follow her heart and write professionally. She is not sorry for her choice. I hope she was able to take some good writing classes in high school as a choice knowing she was not moving on to college. She is taking advantage of local writing groups and developing herself that way right now.
I hope others who know they will never want to write also had some choices about taking some classes along their interests or strengths. My nephew hates writing and works as an assistant to a contractor. He did not want to go to college and didn’t. He did not have the opportunity to take courses in high school that would help prepare him for the line of work he knew he loved and would work in as soon as he graduated, but I wish he had. His mother was very frustrated that there were not other options for him and that he had to endure a pre-college program instead. It just made him feel inadequate when he was very good at other kinds of things.
Putting students in classes for which they do not have the pre-requisite knowledge doesn’t make sense in any scenario, but if that is their area of interest or strength, I hope the school encourages them and gives them what they need to follow such a course of study.
LikeLike
This has been a very interesting thread. My conclusion: calling all differentiated instruction “tracking” and to be rejected is a bad idea. Some is harmful, and some helpful. In current high schools, including Carol Burris’s, as she has explained, there are actually a lot of choices, especially in the higher grades of high school. Some are taking more academic courses and others not, yet she doesn’t label this ‘tracking’ Furthermore, as I have pointed out, we have no objection to complete “tracking” of everyone at age 18.
There are actually a separate issues: how much everyone should be required to study Shakespeare or Algebra, and whether all achievement levels should be in the same classes when they do.
What I have urged for over ten years is that we have a much stronger school-to-work support for students age 15 and above, in order to remedy the huge failing of our academically weaker students. These students are not going to complete 4 year college degrees, and they need help to transition to the world of work. Now, they are being throwing to the wolves, metaphorically, by the system.
My proposal has been to first have a minimal academic standard for math and language skills needed to hold a career-track job in our economy. This would be tested for at age 15, and would be a substitute for all existing high stakes tests. It would not be a high stakes test, as it would just inform whether the student needed more instruction to bring them up to the basic level in their further education.
The key thing is that the goal of achieving this level would be a positive motivator for students of all ability and achievement levels in earlier grades, as they would know that it is a realistic need. And those who haven’t achieved it yet would have motivation at age 15 and above by actually being involved in the work place as interns or apprentices, and having mentors who show them how the academics will help, while they have further academic instruction. And the terminal degrees would be diverse, many beyond the high school diploma. Whether to have differentiated diplomas or one ‘high school’ diploma with other degrees beyond I don’t know. But I do know differentiated instruction after age 15 is needed.
As I have said, I think that in the final two years all students could benefit from some kind of internships, and a beginning of sampling real world activities to see what direction they want to specialize then or later in their educations. And having mentors outside school could be a great motivator, from professors at local universities to skilled and wise tradespeople.
What I think was misguided in Carol Burris’s letter, in the previous thread which led to this one, that was was the attack on the German system. I know it is far from perfect, but it is a potential solution to our most grave school and social problems. We should learn from it, and other similar efforts around the world, not dismiss them.
LikeLike
Well said. I teach in what passes for an “urban” district in Rhode Island, and I too have seen too many students given a disservice by forcing them into college prep. It’s nice to want to give everyone the opportunity to graduate from college, but our system denies too many kids a realistic chance at success in the voc-tech world in order to give them a very slim chance at success in the academic world. We call this “fair”, but as I mentioned in my own comment, I suspect the real reason is often financial.
LikeLike
I do apologize for the typos. I’m in the midst of traveling, so have even more than usual.
LikeLike
One of the absurdities of education I have seen in my district, and one that I am certain is repeated elsewhere:
We have one vocational tech high school with limited seats. Students have to impress (usually through hard work) to get into this school. If they do what is required and get a coveted seat at the voc-tech school, they know that they can lose it if they do not keep their grades and attendance up. That’s right — if you fool around too much in voc-tech, you’ll get busted down to college prep so fast your head will spin!
Like many others, I think this issue is complex and both sides have their valid points, etc. etc. However, I believe that the real reason we do not see extensive use of tracking into voc-tech programs is that simple fact that it costs less to give someone a college prep education than it does to teach them how to be, say, a mechanic or an electrician.
LikeLike
Ron, I think you put your finger on a key factor. If we really believed in helping the students who, for whatever reason, don’t have an academic bent to achieve productive and honored places in adult life, it would cost money. And it would be a big undertaking, as it is in Germany, involving the private sector as well as the schools, and coordination between the two.
But it would change our country for the better. Of that I’m quite confident, given that programs such as in Germany and Singapore have helped millions of children. I recently went to my 50th high school reunion, and the failure of our system to help academically weaker students hasn’t changed since I was a student. It’s time we invest in what works, instead of loony ideas that schools can threaten and punish their way to nirvana.
LikeLike
When I think of the value of manual skills, whether a person goes to college or not, I think of my friend, who is absolutely brilliant and who went to LSU and got a degree in Marketing, which she did not not use much! Instead she worked as a rehabilitation counselor and a food stamp social worker. She is also probably one of the best auto mechanics in the state and can literally fix anything that can be fixed. As our church maintenance person she might one day be on the roof checking out the air conditioner, the next in the rest room installing a new toilet, and one time she put in 35 outlets for crockpots so we could heat up the food for potluck. She probably saved the church $30,000 in just the last year and also built a new computer. She does the church work for free as her tithe. In college she made money repairing TV sets. I also think of my brother who worked through high school and some of college as both the bookkeeper and a mechanic at a service station in Birmingham.
My opinion is that every child who graduates from high school needs something functional that they can do. College bound or not, a good trade is always of value whether the person can fix hair or repair cars.
I had an African-American friend who was also a fixer. That is how he made his living. He could do anything but computers and once straightened the frame of a totalled car with a chain and a tree so it passed state inspection He was actually learning disabled and had trouble reading—–anything but the Bible and a repair manual. Once he repaired a floor buffer, something he had never used because “a motor is a motor is a motor”. But his baby mama put him down because he worked with his hands.
The one size fits all diploma is a travesty. There is nothing wrong with learning a trade whether one is college bound or not. With the teacher abuse and corporatization in the schools there are a lot of teachers who are calling on their secondary skills to make a living. For special needs students a trade can be the difference between sitting on the porch collecting an SSI check or selling drugs and a life. For those who don’t have a desire to go to college it is the difference in a living wage and flipping burgers. And what is wrong with doing hair? Laying bricks? Roofing or plumbing?
Every child should come out of school literate, numerate, and with something he or she is good at. Every one should be able to work at their level of abililty and the unskilled work should be left to those who cannot do any more than that, mainly those who are mentally handicapped and substance abusers.
There no longer has to be a racial basis for tracking. America should be well beyond the point where a black child went to college to be a teacher, a preacher, or a nurse because that was all that was open to them. Once a child is in middle school he or she should be exploring what he wants to do other than an athlete or a rapper because only a few make it in those fields and doing it along with developing academic skills. By high school the curriculum should conclude with whatever is best for the individual. They can still go to community college with a vocational diploma and get a 4 year degree if they decide to, but they can probably make more money in a trade.
There is no shame in a good trade and the stigma needs to be removed by the schools, the churches and the community. We saw in 2005 what a lack of vocational education causes. Thousands of Mexicans and Central Americans with skills came to the Gulf South and made bunches of money because there were too few Americans who could roof and drywall. A 17 year old American boy with a Cuban mother got a job as a supervisor in New Orleans paying $50 an hour because he could speak Spanish.
Nobody wants to call it tracking, so let’s just call it EDUCATION and make sure every child leaves high school with something he or she can do that will pay more than minimum wage and leave the unskilled work for those who cannot do any better.
LikeLike