In an address to Pellissippi State Community College on January 9^th, 2015, President Obama stated that “…we deliver…[by] making sure that our education system works on behalf of every person who lives here. America thrived in the 20th century in large part because we made high school the norm, and then we sent a generation to college on the GI Bill”.

High school graduation rates have indeed increased over the past 50 years to the point where, according to the National Center for Education Statistics, almost 81% of students who entered high school as freshman would eventually graduate (Statistic for the 2011-2012 academic year).

And this is good. But what does it mean?

The increased completion of high school indicates that our society consists of more educated individuals, a progression which is both natural and necessary to keep up with the changing times, specifically in terms of technology. But is this enough? What do these students even know upon graduating? Do standardized tests alone do a well enough job assessing us in the most general of skills upon which we are judged and directed accordingly? These are the questions I believe we ought to be asking of our educators, the answers to which will affect the structure of public education and be main determining factors for the level of unemployment in future America.

Let us consider.

10-30 years ago in American public high schools it was quite common to see children being taught wood-shop or metal-shop or engaging in classes for vocational training of a sort. The point of these classes was to prepare people for the working world and increase their ability to obtain a job of some sort upon reaching a working age. And did it work? Well, based off of graphs provided by the Bureau of Labor Statistics, the average unemployment rate between 1980 and 2000 was around 6.15%, a quite manageable figure.

So why did we stop offering these things?

Well, metal-shop and wood-shop were considered “dangerous activities” and people sued school districts whenever a student was injured, so schools naturally found it significantly easier to simply remove the liability (they had nothing to stop them from doing this since these classes were merely electives). Vocational training was for the most part removed in many places because it was seen as career limiting at an early age, and “domestic activities” classes were removed because they were seen as detrimental to the female equality movement even though in latter years enrollment was not limited to females only or even required for females.

I’m not saying we necessarily need to go back and re-instantiate these classes to be successful, but we definitely need a major paradigm shift if we hope to ensure that future graduates don’t fall into the same patterns of unemployment we are currently seeing.

Consider a quote given by the brilliant Sir Ken Robinson during his 2006 TED Talk, “…an internationally recognized leader in the development of creativity, innovation and human resources in education and in business” (description taken from his biography page):

“I think you'd have to conclude the whole purpose of public education throughout the world is to produce university professors. Isn't it? They're the people who come out the top. And I used to be one, so there."

Sir Robinson’s statement is in fact one of the most accurate things I have ever heard, and we have failed to realize it nine years after it was first put forth even though over 250 million people in over 150 countries have seen the talk in which he says those very words. The only ones who come out of high school successful are those prepared go on to college: It’s a societal notion that has been perpetrated for years, so much so that it is now almost entirely true. Frankly, it’s not reasonable. College was never meant to be enjoyed by all: It is a luxury and always has been. In summary, unless you get good grades in Math or English, or are phenomenal at a sport or instrument, you will not be attending college and in turn will not be ready for the workforce of today - You will be left behind. We as a country need a serious overhaul to remedy this.

So here is what I propose:

In order to ensure a job, children need to graduate high school with skills; the problem is right now we somehow think that math, science, language arts, and social science are enough. They aren’t. We need more. Similar to college attendees, high school students must have the opportunity to take classes which educate them for a profession or sector of the workforce, though these need not be traditional classes like Wood-Shop and Home Economics. - we need vocational training suitable for the modern age. Classes ought to be directed towards topics such as management, basic accounting, design (all types), and general business - some programs might even advance so much that through advanced study, students would be able to attain certificates in vocations such as CAD/Drafting or Vocational Nursing similar to those granted from community college institutions. High school doesn’t push its students to do anything more than graduate with the basic requirements; essentially it puts students through and doesn’t care where they go afterwards. The disparity is such that one will either be a waiter for the next thirty years or they will spend another four to eight years in college studying to become a businessman; an engineer; a doctor; a university professor - The middle ground between these two extremes is shrinking faster than we can even imagine and yet we somehow fail to realize how critical it is that we stop this.

A secondary amendment to the existing school system canon would occur within the realm of graduation requirements. We have adapted with the times and made it mandatory in most states for students to graduate with semester-long classes in Health and Communications, but what about everything else? I graduated high school with full knowledge on why it's important to not snort cocaine but I have no idea how to file taxes, pay off a mortgage, or manage my finances: The first time I saw a W9 I thought I was being fined for something I did wrong! Students ought to be required to become familiar with these topics because whether one attends college or not, that knowledge is required to become a successful member of society, and the sooner one learns it, the better.

So why should we consider these ideas?

First, the vocational training argument. Over the past 50 years, we have shifted to the point where many jobs that used to require a high school degree now require a Bachelor’s, ones that required a Bachelor’s now require a Master’s, and former Master’s positions are not even considerable without a PhD. Eventually we will get to the point where everything requires a PhD and then what do we do? I believe the introduction of higher-level vocational training opportunities for those students desiring to take them could take students out of the lower section of the disparity model described above (those in the waiter category) and grant them the opportunity to approach the middle class without requiring them to attend college - let’s be frank, even a $15 an hour salary with benefits isn’t enough to enter the middle class by any stretch of the imagination. Such an outcome simply contributes to the growth of the lower class and the relative deprivation of the middle class. Similarly, students who are currently attending college upon graduation might find more suitable programs at the high-school level which would now allow them to achieve their career goals without attending a two- or four-year institution, an outcome which would remove severe pressure from the increasingly burdened American higher-education system.

Second, the requirements. I apologize to the designers of the current educational curriculum, but we are doing very little to explain to students how real life works - there are quite simply a multitude of things that everyone ought to learn before going off on their own, and many of these things ought to be taught by public schools. Briefly, I believe that these topics ought to include (keeping Health and Communications which many already have): Money Management, COMPUTER SCIENCE (At least some level of computer science, in this day and age, cannot be done without), Time Management (I understand this would be hard to teach as a course, but at least a seminar or something…. creativity in developing curricula ought to be exercised and cherished), Mental and Physical Health Care techniques (Health may not adequately cover these topics - if it does, more power to you). This is by no means a conclusive list; it is simply a series of suggestions that can hopefully move others to continue thinking and pushing the boundaries of public education in America.

All in all, I believe it’s time we take a step back and consider improving the basic and shared high school system which every student must partake in instead of shuffling millions more into colleges and universities each year as unprepared as they are, unready as they may feel, and unnecessary as it is.