Once in high school, it’s full steam ahead. Students hear from a young age that studying hard and getting good grades are their golden tickets to a bright future. If students are put in the right classes with the right teachers, they’ll do well. If they graduate with honors, they’ll be accepted to the best universities. Once students finish college, a well-paying job awaits. Not only does society prosper, students’ quality of life soars too.
Less capable learners land in average or low-level courses where they can meet graduation requirements without a lot of fuss. Some fall behind and transfer to the continuation high school. Others drop out. For those who do graduate, many go directly from high school into lower-paying jobs. Others pursue technical degrees that provide access to higher-skilled occupations.
The story many members of the public believe about education assumes the current system is sound. After all, the majority of us succeeded in this very system and are doing well today. For students who don’t do well, we assume we simply need to raise the standards, increase accountability, or provide more resources. However, this false narrative can be deceptive. In theory, education is supposed to pave the path to every youth’s future. But, Sir Ken Robinson (2015) has called this a “dangerous myth” that ignores
the alarming rates of nongraduation from schools and colleges, the levels of stress and depression … among students and their teachers, the falling value of a university degree, the rocketing costs of getting one, and the rising levels of unemployment among graduates and nongraduates alike. (p. xxii)
This inaccurate line of thought can also undermine many well-intentioned reforms that set out to improve the system.
Our job, as educators and administrators, is to provide a sense of perspective and context for the way we prepare students. Simply hoping change won’t happen or tying our wagons to outdated practices won’t cut it. The K–12 education system is of this world, not separate from it (Marx, 2014). Every institution in society is facing a reset. No one, not even our most beloved teachers and administrators, gets a free pass on this journey of rethinking the purpose of education.
This chapter lays the foundation for this book by discussing the shifting paradigm of schooling in a world that is experiencing technological, social, and economic changes at record pace. It makes the case for elevating students beyond average as we prepare them to enter an “any-collar” workforce. It will then delve into the characteristics required for future-ready teaching and learning, including the need for constructive rebellion against conformity. The chapter concludes with Points to Ponder and Rapid-Fire Ideas to get your team started on its journey to reimagine education in a world where learning is available anytime, anywhere, and at any speed.
The Changing Paradigm of Schooling
According to the PDK Poll of the Public’s Attitudes Toward the Public Schools, Americans overwhelmingly want schools to do more than educate students in the core subjects (Phi Delta Kappan, 2017). In fact, when judging school quality, the public gives more weight to students’ job preparation and interpersonal development than to test scores. While they still value traditional preparation, the vast majority of Americans (82 percent) wants to see career-related course offerings, even if it means students will spend less time in academic classes. And 86 percent believe the schools in their community should offer certificate programs that qualify students for employment in a field that doesn’t call for a four-year degree (Phi Delta Kappan, 2017).
If we want students to be prepared for whatever awaits them, our paradigm of schooling must change. One important change should be to the unrestrained focus on college entrance requirements. Algebra serves as a perfect case in point. Despite only 5 percent of entry-level jobs in the U.S. calling for proficiency in algebra, passing algebra remains a high school graduation requirement in most states (Rubin, 2016). If students want to work for NASA, they should be proficient mathematicians. But plumbers, playwrights, and pediatricians need other key competencies. Making algebra a mandatory graduation requirement overemphasizes a skill that’s not vital for the majority of the workforce. Even worse, it widens the opportunity gap for thousands of students who can’t pass algebra and subsequently leave high school without a diploma.
Another K–12 paradigm that calls for rethinking is the “college for all” philosophy that has come to dominate American culture (Fleming, 2016). Across the nation, we find policies and practices that encourage students to pursue a four-year degree over any other path. Meanwhile, student loan debt has closed in on $1.6 trillion, representing the second-highest consumer debt in America behind home mortgages (Goldy-Brown, 2019).
With 66 percent of students enrolling in a four-year university directly out of high school, young people are pursuing their dreams of higher earnings. However, many are discovering the job market and their subsequent earning power aren’t commensurate with the degrees they hold. Middle skills jobs, which require education beyond high school but less than a four-year degree, actually make up the largest part of the labor market in all fifty states (Fleming, 2016). Not only are these jobs in high demand, they offer good salaries and income mobility. Nonetheless, employees are struggling to find enough trained workers in occupations like law enfforcement, energy operations, aviation, and the construction and manufacturing trades. Unfortunately, educators, parents, state and federal policymakers, and the media perpetuate this misalignment by encouraging students to attend any university and major in anything under the pretext that there’s only one way to achieve job security, social mobility, and financial prosperity (Fleming, 2016).
As students, we have no say on what we learn or how we learn it. Yet, we’re expected to absorb it all, take it all in, and be able to run the world someday. We’re expected to raise our hands to use the restroom, then three months later be ready to go to college or have a full-time job, support ourselves, and live on our own. It’s not logical.
—Kate Simonds (2015), age 17, TEDx video “I’m 17”
In classrooms today it is evident that some practices have shifted on the surface, although the basic foundation of industrial-era schooling remains in place. Teachers now list assignments on a whiteboard instead of a chalkboard; they share content via document cameras instead of overhead projectors; they arrange desks in table groupings instead of rows. Chromebooks are now present and available for student use, but sit on carts waiting to be checked out. While instructional methods include “talk and turns,” group activities, and looking up information on the internet, most academic work remains teacher directed. Unless schools serve current students differently than they served previous generations, students will be confined to learning things because they have to, not because they want to or can.
Vital Skills for a Changing Economy
Social media manager, app designer, offshore wind farmer, and drone photographer are all jobs that didn’t exist prior to 2010. Today, these occupations are on the rise. Since job requirements change on a dime, the skills students need to secure a job aren’t necessarily the same skills they’ll need to keep that job. As such, employers are calling on schools to equip learners with skills and dispositions that can transfer to any line of work.
While a variety of frameworks describe the 21st century skills vital for success, seven themes stand out: (1) collaboration and teamwork; (2) creativity and imagination; (3) agility and adaptability; (4) critical thinking and problem solving; (5) initiative and entrepreneurialism; (6) oral and written communication; and (7) leadership and civic responsibility (Hanover Research, 2011; Wagner, 2008). Employers say the lessons students need for their future are less about reading, writing, and arithmetic, and more about influencing others, figuring things out, and engaging with people across time zones (Friedman & Mandelbaum, 2011). Additionally, these same employers expect new hires to be “creative creators or creative servers”—people who can refine and reinvent tasks as needed (p. 88). It’s hard to imagine how a student trained in passive listening can learn to create, collaborate, or think deeply about issues.
Regardless of how we define