Back in early summer, we spent some time taking about mandatory school ages for starting school. The discussion arose from a legislator’s (mis-guided?) previous effort to lower the mandatory ‘start school by’ age from 7 to 5. We talked of several related issues then.
I had almost forgotten that once upon a time, some Missouri legislators wanted to tinker with the mandatory age on the other end of the spectrum! I’ve lost some names and exact quotes, but back in the mid-90s or so, two Missouri lawmakers proposed legislation which would raise the mandatory school attendance age from 16 to 18. The bill, among other things, was designed to reduce juvenile crime and hopefully give kids a better start in life, certainly a noble goal. At that time, then-Rep Craig Hosmer, D-Springfield said, “If you’re dropping out at 16, you’re going to be out on the street causing trouble. I think education is one thing that can help.”
It’s hard to argue with education possibly being able to help. But let’s look at that more closely. In the first place, I think that Rep Hosmer’s implication that dropping out at that age automatically creates ‘trouble on the streets’ was perhaps a little reckless. Sure, that happens, even to the point of being a stereotype, but there are lots of ‘dropouts’ – aren’t there? – who take jobs, join the military, and/or find some other productive directions in which to head.
Be that as it may, we need to look at the flip side of that coin, which can be even more detrimental. If a youth/adult of age 16 to 18 really doesn’t want to be in school then it is just as likely – isn’t it? – that he or she will be ‘causing trouble’ in school instead of (and perhaps as well as) on the streets. One of the opponents of the bill at the time, apparently said something like “you can force them to stay in school, but you can’t force them to learn.”
A thought here. And please read the whole sentence: As much energy as we spend worrying about dropping out (and I’m NOT saying that’s bad!), I’ve often wondered if it wouldn’t be wise to spend as much or more energy devising a way to make it easier to ‘drop back in’ to the appropriate place in the community educational system (GE programs, adult high schools, etc.) when a young adult sees the need, wants the opportunity, and has discovered the ever-important motivation?
“You can force them to stay in school, but you can’t force them to learn.” As I look back at that statement, it leaps out at me with much broader implications than it did back then, especially following our recent discussions about helping students find their niche, their own area of genius, and their own motivations to learn.
Make just a couple of minor changes to the statement above, and you have this: “You can mandate that they be in school, but you can’t guarantee their learning.” Unfortunately, this broader version is true up and down the K-12 spectrum.
I’ve said this before, but I think we sometimes unconsciously take it for granted that student learning is automatically at the heart of everything educational, but it is simply not a forgone conclusion. For SO many (still to be discussed?) reasons, authentic learning is not always easy to achieve (and almost never easy to evaluate). Remembering this fact can go a long way toward our ongoing goals of successfully maximizing effective learning for all students of all learning styles and different needs.