This interview with Willard R. Daggett, president of the International Center for Leadership in Education, focuses on the reality, roles and responsibility of educational leadership.
As Kenneth C. Gray noted in Getting Real: Helping Teens Find Their Future, in the past, a four-year degree nearly assured someone a ticket to professional/managerial employment. However, by 2006, 43 percent of college graduates will face underemployment. Consequently, Gray insists that higher skills and technical work do not imply a need for a college degree, and he describes labor market advantage as the way one looks different from others in the workforce. To what extent should four-year institutions be responsible for preparing graduates for living wage jobs in sustainable sectors of the U.S. economy?
Both the K-12 and higher educational systems have always been expected to turn out students who become good citizens and family members. The reality is that these systems must provide students opportunities to compete in the middle class. Nearly 100 percent of the parents of today’s students entering college want their children to obtain the skills that lead to sustainability. The Millennium Generation (the children of Gen-Xers) are demanding and have high expectations. They focus on the utility of their courses. In the past, generations rarely questioned their coursework while the system sought more rigor. Now, national trends tie rigor and relevance.
And what role must educational leaders play in preparing U.S. high school students to make better career decisions without being accused of tracking?
The changing American workplace is impacted by fast changing technologies. Leaders must prepare graduates for this rapidly changing world by instilling the concept of lifelong learning in a technological world. In the past, the U.S. school system offered two tracks: college prep and voc-ed. In the 21st century this strategy no longer makes sense. Therefore, in today’s world it can no longer be an either/or proposition. It must be a mixture of both. Herein, students receive an applied academics program where vocational skills become the platform in which the academic skills are delivered. Too many college graduates receive degrees but have nowhere to go upon graduation. In the end, all students require academic rigor and relevance.
What recommendations would you offer public officials—who value the benefits of education—when they are concurrently faced with the pressures of cutting budgets and fending off global competition?
These officials must perform one-, three- and five-year follow-ups to find out what is happening with their graduates. They may be surprised to discover that the programs that are expensive and not highly valued at the secondary school level have the greatest financial benefits for the students and society (i.e., many students graduating from career and technical education (CTE) programs end up with jobs beyond entry-level status. Whereas, college graduates often find themselves functionally unemployable). Ultimately, it becomes an issue of pay now or pay later.
With evidence—such as that from Achieve—suggesting that the U.S. high school diploma has lost its currency, should states utilize tiered diplomas and/or workplace readiness certifications (i.e., WorkKeys’ Gold/Silver/Bronze level certificates) in the short to midterm in order to serve the needs of U.S. business and industry?
This is probably good for the short term, but we really need to focus on rigor and relevance in the long term. There are two problems with differentiated diplomas: they tend to stratify students into have and have-not categories, and they do not hold much value in the eyes of many in the general public. Therefore, differentiated diplomas (e.g., youth apprenticeships) may be seen as second-rate diplomas versus college prep-type diplomas.
In light of the recent remarks by Harvard University’s president, what strategies should be implemented to encourage females (and minorities, other than Asians) to take more depth and less breadth in content areas valuable to U.S. business and industry (e.g., higher levels of math and science courses)?
Last year, nationwide 57 percent of all undergraduate degrees went to females as well as 58 percent of all graduate degrees. Compared to decades ago, there has been a role reversal when it comes to females earning degrees versus males. Nevertheless, few of these degrees earned are in the areas of math, science or engineering. We have not provided adequate career awareness and preparation with women and/or minorities. We need to nurture their interests earlier in math and science topics.
Accordingly, 60 percent of all Asian college graduates major in a science-related field. In addition, China, Korea, India and Singapore are graduating as high percentages of young people from colleges as in the U.S. In fact, last year, only 5 percent of college graduates earned science-related degrees in the U.S. More importantly, 42 percent of those mentioned above were foreign students.
If the goal of high school is to graduate students with skills and knowledge they need to be productive citizens, then why are high schools and universities adhering to graduation credits based on seat time (one Carnegie Unit = 120 hours in class) versus competency-based learning that is measured by standardized exit exams (i.e., end-of-course testing)?
The root of the problem is that American education is focused around teaching and not learning. Another part of the problem is that, from a historical standpoint, public education’s purpose was to select and sort kids. One-hundred-plus years ago, the economy that existed was made up largely of farming jobs. The education system was designed to allow those 15-20 percent of the students capable of becoming future business, government and community leaders to rise to the top.
In addition, is it feasible for a nation reared on agriculture to dump the agrarian model for one that is more flexible and meets the demands of a knowledge-based economy? Why?
From a political standpoint, it is very difficult to enact change, especially when one considers the current rules, regulations, certifications, tenure and contracts. Nevertheless, change of this magnitude is absolutely necessary if this nation intends to compete in a global economy. Consequently, this issue may present its biggest challenges for the leadership of the teachers’ unions.
In your opinion, which actions must advocates of career and technical education take in order to ensure continuous and adequate financial support from federal and state legislators?
Career and technical education must be seen as a primary deliverer of strong academic preparation. In today’s environment, in terms of garnering state and federal support, CTE programs must go beyond skills only and contribute to results on state testing.
A recent study reveals that many of the 30 highest performing U.S. high schools have organized themselves around small learning communities in the areas of CTE. For instance, teachers—in a functional area like carpentry—build a strong academic base by relating the state’s math standards to the CTE curriculum. As a result, students go beyond learning academic math concepts because learning how to apply these concepts equates to better retention. In essence, CTE programs must show officials that they now contribute to academics and continue to contribute to the workplace.
According to Judy and D’Amico in Workforce 2020: Work and Workers in the 21st Century, American workers now import more goods from low-wage countries; therefore, the high wages earned by unskilled U.S. workers are no longer protected. What must postsecondary institutions do in order to assist low-wage/low-skill workers in meeting the ever-changing demands of the global marketplace?
In terms of providing education to this group, one must think outside the box. Today’s traditional full-time school model will not work for this audience. When it comes to building skills, this group needs immediate financial rewards. Apprenticeship programs serve as models for this group since they provide relevant classroom instruction and workplace experiences. However, for this group, the balance between classroom and workplace activities must lean toward the latter—versus the former—since family maintenance issues tend to arise.
According to the National Governors Association (NGA), U.S. employers continue to espouse that today’s workers are unprepared for the available jobs that require higher levels of competence, yet, by 2012 employment in science- and math-based occupations will increase nearly four times the rate of other occupations. To this end, the NGA recommends that governors connect workforce development to economic needs through education.
Which alternative paths to career development/advancement would you suggest pose the greatest benefits to low-skilled workers in a churning economy with regard to delivery of instruction, credentialing and financing?
Bona-fide/comprehensive apprenticeships!
And, should the U.S. accept the notion that India (the world’s R&D lab) and China (the world’s factory floor) possess the comparative advantage in these related occupations? Why?
No, but as stated earlier, the facts reveal that Asia is graduating 60 percent of its college majors in science and engineering fields while the U.S. is graduating only 5 percent in these areas. Not to mention, in the last five years, the U.S. has experienced a 12 percent reduction in science and engineering majors. In addition, with exception of the 30 highest performing U.S. high schools, there has been a dramatic decline in CTE programs due to No Child Left Behind (NCLB). This did not have to happen, but it did, since many educators tried to implement NCLB using their 1960s mindset for program delivery.
Nevertheless, the U.S. has another competitive disadvantage that stems from culture. One must consider the impact of the fall of the Berlin Wall, India shifting toward a more democratic form of socialism, and China’s participation in global trade. Over the past 16 years, nearly one-half of the world’s population became part of the free enterprise system. The Russians, Indians and other Eastern Europeans seek to be American: they want a middle class! These people are willing to work hard to get there while many Americans merely seek to enjoy the middle class. This may prove to be our biggest challenge.
What roles can parents and educators play in assuring that tomorrow’s employees (today’s students) are better equipped to leverage diversity and teamwork issues in the workplace?
We need to change how we teach and interact with students. Students should be expected to work as teammates on projects and tests; wherein, they would be evaluated as a team not only on the quality of the project but their effectiveness as a team. Educators must also teach students how to ask questions and not just answer questions. The challenges are, on one hand, that older students view the teamwork concept as contrary to their mindset of education. While, on the other hand, the Millennium Generation sees all students as perfect no matter what the outcomes indicate. With respect to the latter, in order to avoid instilling a false sense of security, we must be willing to interject measured portions of tough love.
From a business ethics perspective, in your opinion, is there value-added in school districts that require (senior-level) community service projects? Why?
Yes, there is value, and most U.S. public high schools have moved toward implementing community service projects. In fact, this is now a requirement in 68 percent of high schools versus 21 percent 10 years ago. However, there are some purists pushing back on this concept. Interestingly enough, when measuring the attributes of the 30 highest performing U.S. high schools, ranked number two, just behind test scores, was social and personal development (e.g., teamwork, respect and responsibility).
According to the National Association of State Workforce Board Chairs, the U.S. must train incumbent workers with low or outdated skills because, as workers become unemployed, many jobs go unfilled (i.e., math and science teachers, health care professionals) and/or a knowledge- based economy’s technical skills must be updated regularly. With this in mind, by 2020, the U.S. will lack approximately 12 million people with some postsecondary education needed to fill these knowledge-based jobs. What roles do community leaders play in promoting the importance of lifelong learning?
They have to set the stage for lifelong learning by creating massive awareness of why lifelong learning is important. In addition, they must provide the resources for programs while ensuring the availability of and access to these programs for adult learners.
And, which strategies might our political leaders undertake to champion the notion that continuous skills improvement is not only a matter of a country’s economic well-being but its national security as well?
Chambers of Commerce, Workforce Investment Boards and political leaders should create awareness for lifelong learning while providing tax incentives; wherein, these tax incentives might extend to employees as well as employers.
What steps would you prescribe in the near term and long term, when it comes to building this nation’s stock of quality teachers for math- and science-related fields?
In the short term, we are going to have to recruit qualified teachers from other countries. Meanwhile, we need to attract people from industry and provide them with a pay differential. In addition, the unions must confront the supply-and-demand issues of teachers—in sought-after fields—in terms of tiered compensation.
In the long run, we must start earlier preparing women and minorities in the belief that they can be successful in the fields of math and science. We need to attract a larger portion of these graduates into these targeted fields of national interests (i.e., the hard sciences versus the soft sciences). This pathway will require a 14-year process and, thus, the necessity for short-term solutions as mentioned above.
John Gaal, director of training and workforce development for Carpenters’ District Council of Greater St Louis, Missouri, conducted this interview and can be reached at jgaal@carpdc.org.
Willard R. Daggett is the president of the International Center for Leadership in Education. For more information, visit www.LeaderEd.com.
- Techniques September 2005 Issue -
