Part One in a two-part series. Read Part Two.

Our public education system, as it exists today, was not built to prepare young people for jobs in the present and future labor market. For decades, it has been deeply divided, in both policy and practice, into two camps: “College for All'' and “School-to-Work.” These competing stances are often pitted against one another resulting in a bifurcated system in which students are forced to choose between pursuing college or entering the workforce. However, data shows that nearly a quarter of high school students both work and attend school. This trend does not stop once the students enter college, where 64% of college students are working while they learn. When we falsely assume that students do not hold both the identities of student and worker, we leave young people unsupported in preparing for one or both pathways, and we delimit their current and future contributions to society.

“School-to-Work” policies have historically curated pathways for students from high school directly into a career. Models like vocational programs, career and technical education (CTE), and traditional apprenticeships allow for a pathway to employment for students who do not want to or cannot pursue traditional higher education due to economic or social barriers. While this experiential approach to learning and job training is effective, it has been narrow in terms of industry participation. As a result, the stigma associated with blue collar fields alongside the expanding “College for All” narrative have resulted in a social devaluing of the “School-to-Work” pathway, despite the model’s practical applications. Additionally, with the rise of the “College for All” position, concerns over “tracking” students of color into less valuable or desirable pathways has raised important equity considerations and has stunted efforts to expand or innovate within existing models. 

In turn, the “College for All” stance emerged under the “No Child Left Behind” federal educational policy. These reforms aimed to address growing gaps in academic achievement by eliminating differences in standards across subgroups of students. Any deviations from these strict standards were considered avenues for “soft bigotry” and were scaled back to make way for expanded investment in college preparation and matriculation (Anderson & Nieves, 2020). 

Today, while the “College for All” position represents a democratic belief system of equal access, low-income students, who are disproportionately students of color, face compounding barriers to degree attainment. More young people than ever are pursuing a postsecondary education to compete effectively for available jobs, but completion rates are alarmingly low for students experiencing poverty, for Black students, and Latinx students. Financial considerations, like spiking tuition price tags and familial responsibilities, create forced trade-offs for working students who are juggling employment and full-time course loads (Anderson & Nieves, 2020). 

To further complicate matters, there has been a steady decline in youth employment due to automation and elimination of jobs historically occupied by less skilled labor (Anderson & Nieves, 2020). As a result, fewer young people are able to participate in the workforce, gain work experience, and earn a wage that may be necessary to persist through secondary and postsecondary schooling. Students who must prioritize short-term financial stability above long-term career prospects (and corresponding earnings) are forced to drop-out, leaving them too often in debt and without a degree.

These policy tensions prevent substantial movement towards economic and racial equity, and will prevent the labor market readiness and participation needed to thrive alongside industry growth. Leaders across education, government, and the private sector are not collaborating to equip young people with the skills and competencies needed to be competitive in the job market. As a result, a large talent pool is going unleveraged and companies are left with a severe shortage of workers to develop and support growth. We must look critically and creatively at outdated models to deliver better results, and this begins with integrating work with learning.

A New Path Forward: Work-Based Learning

We argue in our book, “Working to Learn: Disrupting the Divide between College and Career Pathways for Young People” that work-based learning is an emerging, interdisciplinary approach to address the college and career readiness crisis. Work-based learning programs like prolonged internships and apprenticeships include: a classroom learning component; attaining one or more industry-recognized credentials; paid, on-the-job training; mentorship; and an expedited and affordable pathway to both degree attainment and a career. Alongside traditional jobs, modern work-based learning occurs in high-growth fields like financial services, information technology, and healthcare, and students are oftentimes encouraged to enroll in credit-bearing college courses alongside a work placement. National programs like CareerWise Colorado, CareerWise New York, and Genesys Works are models we should be holding up as exemplars of effective work-based learning programs for young people.

To support these efforts, we must invest in research and evaluative projects related to work-based learning practices so that we may learn from and scale effective models smartly and strategically. We must also expand resources for nonprofits who are frequently brokering the cross-sector relationships required to build innovative, cost-effective, and integrative work-based learning programs. 

The crisis we are facing is complex, but it is not insurmountable. These challenges cannot be addressed by education or industry alone; well-coordinated partnerships using evidence-based decision making will allow us to maximize opportunities for collaboration, while keeping the interests and futures of our young people at the center of this work. 

____

Original contribution by Noel S. Anderson, Clinical Professor, Educational Leadership & Policy Studies, NYU Steinhardt; Lisette Nieves, President, Fund for the City of NY and Program Faculty, Educational Leadership & Policy Studies, NYU Steinhardt; and Becca Huntting, Doctoral Student, Educational Leadership & Policy Studies, NYU Steinhardt. 

Source:
Anderson, A. S. and Nieves, L. (2020). Working to Learn: Disrupting the Divide Between College and Career Pathways for Young People. Palgrave Macmillan.