Not everyone should go to school. Not everyone needs school. School is not for everyone. Not every one has the ability to do well in school. In general, schools just are not for everyone!
. . . . Well, at least not schools as they are currently envisioned.
I was talking with a parent in the hallway of my son’s school this morning and I had a chance to listen to this man discuss his life through school. In the end, he found other ways to make school work, but it could have been better.
Mike is a great guy. His perma-smile pulls you in, and his positive outlook on life keeps you listening. Other than that, there is nothing overly remarkable about Mike except for the fact that he has become successful despite his school experience.
When he found out I was a teacher, he shared his story and hoped that I could use the story to make schools better for children. Here is what he told me:
“Hey, school is not for everyone.” He went on to clarify saying that knowing how to read, and write, and do math and explore was important and he uses them regularly in his job, he hit me on the shoulder with a smirk saying, “Probably more than you do.”
You see, Mike is a smart guy. Ask him a real world question involving math or linear feet, and he will tell you. He understands angles, degrees, and load bearing weights. But this knowledge was not gained from school.
For Mike, school did him a disservice. He told me that he would have loved to have had someone in school pull him aside and say, Mike, you know…you show great dedication and you have the ability to build. College may not be for you. I mean, we are not going to wrestle you to the ground if you want to go, but we have a trade program here where you can learn carpentry. Would you like that?
In fact, Mike would have.
Not everyone needs to go to college, should go to college. Are we doing our students a disservice, as Mike suggests, by having them sit through class upon class of information that do not need? What is the ultimate goal of school? For some, it is gainful employment (see also productive members of society….I think I read that on a school district mission statement somewhere). If it is gainful employment so you can put food on the table for your family, purchase a house, and live, information on Copernicus’ life is not the solution.
Apprenticeships: Mike mentioned that high school was a holding tank for he and his buddies when they could have gone into the work force, learning the skills of a trade (he emphasized the “learning” as if I would have not seen the apprenticeship idea as a viable learning opportunity).
Trade Jobs Looked Down On: Why are jobs like carpenter, or roofer, or house painter seen as lesser jobs? Can’t deny it. We do. My first job was painting houses. My boss dealt with complex skills everyday; took care of the needs of his family; and employed 7 people who, in turn, were able to make a living. In fact, from a money standpoint, he makes more as a painter than I do as a teacher. Even with his successes, Mike said that he sometimes feels uncomfortable when people are sharing what they do for a living because he knows that carpentry will not seem as worthwhile in comparison.
School as Holding Tank: I have read social theories on how school, especially high school, serves the purpose of delaying the age of the work force going in. If we are going to do this, Mike asks, why can’t we provide a more purposeful learning situation, one that mirrors what a student will do out in the work world?
The Idea that College is the Goal: For some it is. The idea that anyone from any walk of life can make it in America by pulling themselves up by the bootstraps is great. I am a believer. However, as a side effect to this dream, college has become the final goal, thereby negating the skilled trades. Four generations ago, the idea of the farmer sending his son off to school to have “a better life” than he did made sense. But, for most, we have long since left the agrarian lifestyle behind. Mike points out that what many kids get today for education is not a way to make their lives better because, even after college, they may struggle to find employment.
America Needs Skilled Trades: Who will repair and build the bridges 30 years from now? Who is going to plant the trees in your yard? Put the roof on your house? Fix the plumbing in your bathroom? If it is carpentry, I know who to ask–Mike–and I will be glad he is a highly skilled professional.
“Think this is bunk”, Mike asked? He asked me where are the wood shops, metal shops, auto classes, home EC, pottery, etc. Basically, anything that involved using your hands has been slowly removed from schools, starting when he was a kid until now, when there is not any of the aforementioned programs in any of the schools to which his children go.
Funny, when you think that “hands on”, “manipulatives”, “real world”, and “multiply intelligences” are buzz words in education.
Thanks to PedalZine for the photo.
@Jane, love the thinking. You bring up the concern that people are either seen as working with their MINDS or HANDS. This can be rephrased as either having success with your mind or your hands. It can be further rephrased by saying that it is okay to work with either your mind or your hands.
I totally agree with the anecdote of your carpenter. A carpenter should know math…and much more: reading, writing, science, physics, whatever is of interest and will help him/her to be successful and find that passion of learning and sharing.
The problem, as you also noted, and this is on what I would love to hear from other people, is that there is little chance for students to have a passion like “landscaping” (working with hands) being the focus, rather than the ambiguous goal of “college”.
Why not acknowledge that working on motors is a valuable skill and one within which other skills can be taught? I took plenty of mechanics classes in high school and through them, I learned about the science of welding, the science of metal, the science of motion. The math of gears, the math of balance, the math of timing. And the whole thing required me to express my ideas to my classmates and teacher by speaking, listening, viewing, reading, and writing (NBPTS strands).
Jane…thanks for sharing. I am all pumped up now.
“Four generations ago, the idea of the farmer sending his son off to school to have “a better life” than he did made sense.””
I know this is a throwaway line…but…The reason the farmers (men and women) send their son AND daughter to college is so that they learn and understand the biology, chemistry, financial analysis, regulatory requirements, agronomy necessary to operate a modern farm. And also to know and understand enough Shakespeare (King Lear, anyone) to mange the pitfalls of operating in a family business enviroment to take over the farm if they chose.
Carpentry/contracting is a whole lot easier if the contractor understands geometry, trigonometry and finance.
There seems to be this idea that one works with their hand OR their minds. I don’t think that is true, but there doesn’t seems to be an option in high school for the people who do both.
Our contractor (who did a wonderful job on our house) graduated from college with a math degree. Is much of it useful…no…but having it is a signal that he is smart and can follow through.
I think much of a college degree is a signal that the person who has one is a) not an idiot
b) can jump through some hoops to get something of value.
The question seems to be, at what age do we allow an individual to determine that he or she has had enough general education?
Okay, so I am back to this topic. I cannot get enough of it as I try to synthesize my thoughts. I was at a dance show tonight with my sons, America Best Dance Crews Live (break dancing/hip hop)…so after you laugh that off. It was great. Here is the point: there was this one group called Super Crew. They were passionate about what they were doing. They were well spoken. They have an idea of what they wanted to do in the future. Solid.
School is great. Having a liberal exposure to topics is great. But who decides how much is a wide spectrum of knowledge? I have taken physics, astronomy, calculus, pottery, wood shop, auto mechanics, small engines, photography….does that make me better than the person who had all but one of those classes? If the answer is “no”, then you and I agree. And if we agree, let me take my point one step further: If one less is okay, then how about two, four, most? I do not think that having a variety of classes is essential to having a purpose and passion in life. I do not think that having a variety of classes makes you a “better” person. I know lots of liberal arts majors (friends) who are not great people.
I think a student needs to find their passion and follow that passion to the greatest extent, learning along the way. If working with your hands in the dirt is your thing, follow that all the way…take classes in biology, horticulture, planting, yard layout, layering, and pruning, and get out there and share your passion with the world, learning and teaching along the way.
By the way, I did not take home economics in high school. Does that make me a shallow person?
I want to piggy-back on something Scott said, or at least add to it in my own words as he brings up a point that I think I tried to make clear, but may not have. The point is that there should not be anything wrong with someone not pursuing an intellectual based pursuit (something involving mostly the brain) and one that involves mostly the hands. Scott mentions that someone interested in wood shop could take it to the next level while working through a program and I think that is spot on. Is there anything wrong with being the most popular, skilled, and talked about cabinet maker in all of Seattle, WA, whose clever and creative designs are showcased in Mr. Gates’ home? I think having a passion about something is what matters. I also think that while having a breadth of exposure in life is great, in reality no one person can experience everything. And since you cannot experience everything, what is wrong with experience and then loving a focus in life?
I seem to remember from my exchange student days that high school level education in Germany involved dividing students between three different schools, based on aptitude testing and their stated goals. One school in each district was for those who were prepping for college, one was essentially a trade school, and I can’t remember the other. While I’m not inclined to simply declare “Let’s do it like the Europeans do,” I am interested in the option to take different paths through high school, again based on aptitude and interest.
As a useful illustration, look at the way most American universities are structured: each student is required to fulfill basic requirements in a variety of subjects. I somehow managed to dodge art history, but I had to take classes in math, science, writing, communication, etc. I was glad of it: I hadn’t decided on a major when I started college. But after some time students (most of them, anyway) decided on a major, and their classes from that point on were focused. Some focused on writing, some on math, and some on physical education. I had a friend who chose two majors: vehicular design and physics. Now he can design a car driven entirely by anti-matter collected from transient wormholes (or at least that’s what I like to think).
The point: Perhaps there is room for these sorts of choices at the high school level. Couple basic requirements with a choice of focus in advanced topics. Let students who excel in math take it further than just trigonometry and basic calculus, on to … umm… whatever comes after calculus. Those with an interest in shop classes can go further than the basics, and may actually want to choose a school that adds to its wood shop classes some carpentry, cabinetry, and even architecture classes.
In answer to the question about offering both types of classes – YES! Hate to bring up an example from an independent school again, but I attended one and had shop every week in elementary school (along with art and foreign language and music). At the secondary level, I had to make some choices and opted for some art and a lot of foreign language (my passion). I also graduated with six years of high school science credit.
Is it currently possible to do both? Not really. At the same time, I think as public school institutions we’re sort of stuck on this all or nothing philosophy. We’re completely uncreative about the schedule, as you’ve mentioned before. I believe students can become competent at things such as shop and science without having to have 46 minutes of class every day or during the six hours designated for school. What about trades classes after school or on Saturdays? While I think they ought to be fully integrated, it might be a way to bring them back in during an uptight policy era. There certainly is a lot of conversation about extended time at the moment and crafting a solution that doesn’t butt heads with those that feel very strongly about providing kids the type of education that they feel will prepare students for college might be more feasible.
I think there are compromise solutions within the school day as well. In my middle school, when kids fail the WASL, they are assigned to an extra reading class. If they fail in math, to a math lab class. If both, reading wins. What if those remedial classes alternated with shop or something similar? I imagine the math as well as the problem-solving skills involved in a well-taught shop class would actually do as much to boost the goals of remediation as the drill and kill work. And, kids would gain an introduction to some alternative career choices.
Travis, thanks so much… that was fast. Interesting article too, I couldn’t agree more with you that school just isn’t for everyone. There’s a lot to be said for other forms of education.
@Alex Ramon, my sincerest apologies. I guess the URL needed the HTTP. Fixed. Again, thanks for the use of the photo. I love tools and love the look of the photo.
Travis, would you mind fixing the source link to bicycletutor.com? ‘PedalZine’ is not the source name, and the link is still broken. It was the only condition I had when I gave permission to re-publish my photograph here. Thank you.
@ Travis. You asked can we solidify the comments into a concise narrative of how to make an impact on the educational system? Concise, yes: schooling is to learning what others know in shorter time than by random trial-and-error in real life, including the arts, trades and crafts. Impact: probably not, because “the education system” doesn’t exist beyond rhetoric. Yes?
Okay – I have to speak here because I’m a shop teacher who is cross crediting my classes with academics… The science department chair hates me as does my principal…I was also the AP student in high school who wanted to take ag classes because they got to do the fun things…My counselor informed me that I wasn’t “that type of a student.”…You should have seen the look on her face when I visited to tell her what I had achieved with my college education – I was an agriculture teacher.
I try to teach students the practical applications of the pure academics. I believe that students need some knowledge just to be an informed voter, but they need to know how to apply it to their lives. I care that students know how and where their food comes from. That is my passion as a teacher. My passion comes from watching my Dad learn how read when my younger brother did (they learned together). I see students who are much like my Dad, and Mike, they see school as a holding tank and a place to gain skills that they can use later in life. I want my students to begin to understand why they need to become lifelong learners and hopefully even if they choose to not go on to college themselves, I want them to understand why that is important for some people to do, maybe even their own children some day.
I currently have a 9th grader of my own. 4-year planning was an experience. He speaks of going to community college, but all he would actually mark on his sheet was being a commercial fisherman and the military. The interesting twist was the classes he forecasted for 4-years of high school (which I realize can be a real farce) are geared toward those of a student aiming to apply to a 4-year college.
So with all this being said…sometimes I think we really just need to let these kids be kids and have the opportunity to explore different areas to their hearts delight. Yes, we need a skilled workforce, yes we need an educated electorate, but….our kids are growing up way faster than we did and I think maybe the ramifications of that may outweigh many other considerations. I just don’t know what the right answer is except – college isn’t for everyone and I wish I would have gotten more work experience myself before going onto college.
…..PS, I have made reference to painting houses and my boss. Just for perspective and angle, perhaps even an interesting Hmmmmmm, my painting boss graduated from college with a degree in teaching, social studies. He went for the intellectual pursuit and he is one of the most well read men I know. I enjoyed painting with him because I enjoyed his conversations.
@Nancy Flanagan, first, I do not know if Mike’s story is my theory. It is his story, my post. I would really have to consider the finer points of his ideas. I like the point that Kelly makes about a balance of experiences and even more her query about who will choose for the student. However, I wonder if we could honestly say that there is currently a balance (between shoppy and labby classes) and I wonder even more if there will be a balance if states are pushing for more testing. Shop classes are not on the WASL.
But more to your comment, Nancy. You stated, “Your theory–higher education isn’t for everyone–works perfectly if the purpose of schooling is job training. But what if the purpose of schooling is building a more knowledgeable society? Or enhancing democratic equality in a diverse nation? Don’t we want the people who build our homes to know about the universe?”
The theory that Mike gave does not presuppose job training as total goal, at least how I would see the purpose of shop classes. Now, for Mike, gainful employment may have been his goal. Or it may have been the idea that he felt good when his skills were honored. Or it could be that for eventually his intellectual pursuits were placed at at the same level of worth as those skills people get when they come out of college. Or, for him, the end result of a job is the recognition that the intellectual pursuits that he chose were just as worthy as someone who pursues biology.
However, for me, and I took many shop classes, it was for the “knowledgeable society” and “diverse nation” that shop classes give.
I do want the people who build our house to know about the universe if they want. I also want geeky people like me to have had the experience of dismantling an engine and rebuilding it; I want academic people like me to know how to use common tools; I want white collar people like me to not think that they cannot put in a fence.
For me, and I would argue this as a key point to shop classes, shop classes offer experiences. CAD classes are often connected to the shop class track and we all know that CAD takes math and science and dedication to master.
So…in a nutshell, my (not Mike’s) theory would be that shoppy kids should have access to lab experiences and labby kids should have access to shop experiences.
One more point, and one that I am starting to see creep up out of the comments, is the idea that these hands on skills are not educated skills. Can a distinction be made? If a skill involves more complex mathery (made up word), is it a more educated skill than a skill that involves more understanding of the three-dimensional nature of a transmission? Can we rate learning experiences on a continuum with HIGHLY EDUCATED on one side and NOT-SO EDUCATED on the other? Is a person who pursues political science having a stronger learning experience than someone who pursues small engine design? Where would you put artistic pursuits in this continuum? Are they more educated learning experiences (we typically see them as such because if the artist is “good” the work sells for lots of money and garners an elitist crowd), or are they more on the NOT-SO educated side, because the art involves the heart and not the mind? Or does the art involve the mind, complex patterns and colors, and if so, should not art be considered a worthy learning pursuit? And if art is considered a worthy learning pursuit, how does it differ from an interest in welding or an interest in chemicals?
And no, I do not think any one has argued against the giving up of reading (math or science or writing…) in exchange for mechanical skills. Being a reader and carpenter are not mutually exclusive.
Great thoughts every one. Continue to dialogue. Can we solidify the comments into a concise narrative of how to make an impact on the educational system?
I will have to reread my comment and reflect some more on it.
@Kelly, so is the solution to offer “shop” classes and “lab” classes both AND provide a open opportunity, with encouragement to explore, to all students? Sounds good. Is this currently possible with the disappearance of the “shop” classes?
Thoughts any one? I am sure I do not speak for all. I loved shop classes, but excelled in the lab setting.
One of the reasons I like Mike’s story is because it illustrates that not everyone wants school or policy people to try to save them from the world, as some infer and declare in various ways. I too once thought I had a duty to save children by teaching them. And, sometimes I wish for those days to return.
Mikes position appears on the surface consistent with a political position that holds that individuals can and will learn what they decide to learn when they decide to learn it. Advancing communication technologies make that policy perhaps as viable today as it was for most of us school attenders 20 to 50 years ago.
I have learned, as have many others, over the decades that this latter policy is not popular among public school certificate holders, but is an accepted position among private school educators and supporters.
Kudos for your individual initiative, Mike, whatever your politics.
I’m honored that you wanted to use my photo here. Please note that the source url ‘PedalZine’ was a temporary account and is no longer active. The original source of the image is at BicycleTutor.com
Thanks!
I’m on the fence. I nearly cried the day I returned to my school after a summer remodel many years back. I knew the shop would be gone, but not that all tools had been packed up and sent away. I cringe when I hear science teachers (at least at the middle school level) say they don’t have time for a building project; there’s too much curriculum to cover. Personally, I think everybody should have some shop and other practical classes.
What I have a concern about is at what point is that decision made and by whom. In our district, more trade classes are offered at the high school in the neighborhood with the highest concentration of poverty. Some of my most inquisitive science students have gone on to learn a trade in high school. I’m not saying college prep is a better choice, but what if these students had had the same exposure and opportunities for science investigation in their elementary years like their wealthier peers in the suburbs? How can you be sure a trade is truly a choice?
By all means bring back trade-based courses, but along with that, ensure there is equity of opportunity to explore before choosing a career path.
Hey, Travis. Interesting post.
Your theory–higher education isn’t for everyone–works perfectly if the purpose of schooling is job training. But what if the purpose of schooling is building a more knowledgeable society? Or enhancing democratic equality in a diverse nation? Don’t we want the people who build our homes to know about the universe? Don’t we want our plumbers to understand the machinations of political science? Don’t we want people to read, understand the economy, explore new perspectives? The most prosperous, progressive and creative societies on the planet are those where people are most highly educated.
I was amused by Bob’s comment that “many of us have relatives with ideas like Mike’s.” (And I agree that Mike’s story was a compelling one.) I have a friend who runs a Vocational Ed Center for HS kids here in Michigan–a true 21st century learning center which offers lots of technology-based options as well as building trades, cosmetology, health careers, etc. He’s long been an outspoken advocate of school-to-work programs for high schools, and 2-year vocational programs in community colleges.
And then his own son decided to be a car mechanic, and skip college. Suddenly, he had to re-think his position. He and his wife were both teachers, first-generation college grads. Did they think it was OK for their (bright, motivated) son to finish his education at HS? At the moment, he’s in his first year at a community college (a compromise with mom and dad).
What I wish is that we could get rid of is the idea that HS graduates need to go to college and get their BA immediately. I think young adults need to have work experience (like painting houses), travel and independent living before investing in a college education–and that college-level learning should be easily accessible for adults in all stages of life. The European concept of a “gap year” between HS and college is very appealing–helps young adults see the need for further education or training, develop some ideas about what they want to accomplish in their lives.
I give this post Five Stars! Great story. I vote for Mike’s ideas. Thanks, Mike, for sharing your story with Travis, so he could share it with us. And thanks, Travis, for sharing the story on storiesfromschool.org! Many of us have relatives with ideas like Mikes. I’m looking forward to reading more such descriptions from schools.