The problem is that there is a lot of bias in deciding who goes on the college track and who is not.
The trouble with this is that not all kids mature at the same rate. My son-in-law is German, and they do this in Germany. Since he slacked off early he wound up in a non-academic track, The only way he could go to college was to go to a secretarial college. (Which taught some useful skills.) He got a masters in business, and is now a reasonably high level manager at a big company in the US. A lot better than where they thought he would be.
In addition to what others have said: How is an elementary school kid supposed to decide, for the rest of his life, if he intends to go to college or not?
Don’t worry; the kids won’t decide. Their betters will decide for them. It worked 200 years ago so of course it’s a great solution for today.
Yeah, they don’t. We hosted a bright and inquisitive Swiss 14-year old two years ago and she was already lined up for an apprenticeship as a tiler. She started her practical training this year, and by all accounts hates it.
I’m not sure- maybe do the tracking a little later than elementary school?
My point is that this whole “prepare everyone for college” basically only is setting up about a third of the students for long-term success (that’s roughly the percentage of high school graduates who actually go on to graduate college) , and the other two thirds are taught a bunch of stuff that’s not very germane to their lives or careers (if indeed they have careers, and not just a series of jobs).
I feel like we can do better than that, and actually educate people for where they’re going to be, not necessarily for some abstract ideal.
At what age did you and people you know know exactly what they wanted to do in life?
But that’s the thing, before a child knows what they want, their parents have already decided what they want, and that is almost always college.
College isn’t a “what you want”, it’s a prerequisite for most things you might want.
If you can figure out which third of high school students are going to graduate from college, I’m sure deans of admissions would love to hear it.
From the Social Security Admin
Regression estimates show that men with bachelor’s degrees would earn $655,000 more in median lifetime earnings than high school graduates. Women with a bachelor’s degrees would earn $450,000 more in median lifetime earnings than high school graduates.
This is after correcting for socioeconomic factors which influence income. It is $900K for men without this correction.
With some college, but no degree, people still do $170K better, after the correction.
Quite apart from the issues that other people have pointed out with the difficulty of identifying which kids are college material (and not falling back on ethnic and class prejudices while doing so), I’m not sure the set of things you need to know to be prepared for college is all THAT different from the set of things you need to know to be prepared for life. Everybody needs to know how the government works to be an informed voter, for example, and to understand enough math to spot when someone is scamming them or lying with statistics. Everyone should be learning how to read a complex text with a reasonable degree of comprehension, including ones where the writer’s historical or cultural background might be different from the reader’s. Everyone should have some exposure to classic art, music, and literature; they might not like all of it, but they should know it exists, and a little bit about why other people consider it great. Everyone should know some stuff about history, if only so that they understand why people care about Confederate statues and can fairly evaluate the arguments over removing them. If most students are not going on to college, that’s all the more reason they should learn these things in high school; it might be their only chance to be exposed to them.
And to an earlier point I made, was anyone exposed to something academic in high school or college, that they would never have been exposed to otherwise and fell in love with? I had to take a lab my last year of college and had I had that class earlier in life I might have become a botanist. Even if you limit it to high school, for me it was the book All Quiet on the Western Front. Or how about being able to gather evidence to argue against my Comparative Government teacher. And technical drawing … that’s not buying a car or doing taxes skills.
And it becomes a self-fulfilling prophesy. Put them on a path away from college prep and they won’t learn what they need to be prepared for college. Shocking I know. My son’s 6th grade teacher refused to teach him math because of his learning disability. Because of that my son couldn’t get through community college because he was missing the formative year of math.
And what about learning for its own sake? Can’t we have learning impractical things just because its learning?
Hey my daughter in a very “good” (read predominantly white and affluent) school had the hardest time convincing her school guidance counselor and principal that she should pursue STEM, even after she aced math all the way from elementary to sophomore year, they dis-enrolled her from AP Computer Science and tried to convince her that she could never take AP Physics C and AP Calc BC and should take less challenging classes.
The college admissions counselor added a bunch of liberal arts schools (Wellesley, Mount Holyoke, Union) to her application list and refused to help her on her Engineering school applications. Because girls in Engineering is just not on for girls from well-off families.
Yeah, these are the people I want “tracking” kids at age 11.
You’re making me even more glad than I already am for the school I’m teaching at now. We’re all-girls, and for an enrollment of around 700, we have an entire engineering department with three engineering teachers, and an official honors program geared specifically towards engineering.
And for some of our students, AP Calc BC does count as a “less challenging class”. I’m not sure what greater challenges we could set for them, but if we did, they’d meet those, too.
If they actually dis-enrolled her from a class just because she’s a girl, there could be a lawsuit there.
Sister
That’s awful. How recent was it?
How about letting the kids and their parents choose the track, with clear explanations of what’s taught, what the aims are, and how you’re prepared?
All I’m trying to get at is that the current “Teach everyone like they’re going to college” scheme seems to be not well adapted to the reality of how many students go to college and graduate. Maybe it should be better tailored/more granular in what they are taught, so that it’s more pertinent to what they’ll do in life. I’m not convinced a mechanic has to have read Thomas Hardy, or have pre-calculus, never mind Algebra II, or know about the War of the Spanish Succession. All great things for college bound students to know, but not necessary for everyone.
And considering that there’s limited time to instruct, maybe that time could be better spent teaching stuff that grown people struggle with - how loans/financing works in detail, not just someone telling them the 'Pert" formula for compound interest in math class for a couple weeks. Tell them more detail about the judicial system and how that works so they understand the difference between criminal and civil courts in more than a very abstract way. Teach them why something like drinking colloidal silver or the various fad diets are likely scams.
While we’re at it, let’s stop making a college degree a threshold test for jobs that most certainly don’t need college.
Unfortunately, every part of our educational and job / career selection and hiring system is connected to every other part. And it’s all rather broken.
Tweaking any one part will have unmanageable side effects all over the place unless the whole thing, and society’s attitudes, are reformed at once.
To have read Thomas Hardy, or to know about the War of the Spanish Succession in particular? Probably not, but those are very specific topics that are sometimes (not always) covered in high school history and literature classes. I think there is a much, much stronger argument to be made that a mechanic should know other stuff about history – like, for example, what fascism looks like and how things turned out the last time people tried it. And I think most people should get some exposure to nineteenth-century fiction in general, because it’s a good way of expanding your vocabulary and reading skills and because it helps you sort through which of your assumptions about how society and people work are universal, which ones are culturally specific, and which ones are older attitudes that are still with us but in a different guise. (I mean, Tess of the D’Urbervilles is basically just about a powerful entitled dude taking sexual advantage of a teenaged girl because he can, and the girl getting blamed for it. Nothing to do with anything going on today, uh-uh.)
So in 7th grade student & parent need to decide if they are going to college?
So in high school, it is pre-determined who is the mechanic and who is not? It’s no different than Mighty_Mouse’s daughter who the school decided was not going to be going into a STEM field.
How old were you when you decided on what you would do with your life? I was 24.
My argument is that this is 2025. If someone wanted to learn that (and I’m not convinced all do. Some want to complain they were never taught it) then welcome to Youtube But where on Youtube do you get to discuss the significance of the weird sisters in MacBeth? Or answer scenerios like “Is this a violation of your civil rights?” while getting feedback? Or how area grows with the square of the linear measurements? Not saying they aren’t out there but who can find them and more importantly have a dialog with someone knowledgeable to explore at a deeper level. My son did his own oil change for the first time. Do you know how he learned? Watching Youtube videos, not taking a high school class.