Workforce Preparation

In response to the draft California Master Plan for Education, I would like to first state that many of the findings and recommendations cited truly reflect the current state of the educational system and the changes needed in order to create  a more cohesive learner focused system.  However, it seems as though  the Master Plan was written as if education is solely for the enrichment of the student unrelated to the economy of the individual, state or nation—as if education was an end unto itself.

The Master Plan, other than a few comments, ignores the needs of the nation and California for a productive workforce at all levels.  Employees are looking to education to help allay the lack of skilled workers.  If education doesn't rise to the challenge, then employers will look elsewhere for workers, putting many out of work and creating a welfare economy.  It is important not to separate education from workforce development, as the "Master Plan" seems to do.

The Master Plan ignores many realities, such as; 1) seventy to eighty percent of the jobs in the U.S. do not require a four-year degree, 2) only about twenty-five percent of the population completes a four-year degree, and 3) most employers are small businesses who cannot afford to offer in-house training programs.  

As more than 100 million jobs (in the skilled crafts, trades as well as managerial and professional) open up in the U.S. over the next 30 years, will education be positioned to help fill the demands of business and industry?  In my view, not if our policy makers use the proposed Master Plan as their guide or blueprint.  If this plan's foundation is truly an effective and accountable education system that focuses first and foremost on the learner (page 4) then the Master Plan must recognize that not all students learn the same way and have the same motivation.  The Master Plan should recognize the value of contextual learning that takes place in Career Technical Education programs.  If the Master  Plan is to create access to rigorous curriculum that will prepare all students for success in postsecondary education, work and society (page 23), then why isn't Career Technical Education mentioned as part of the K-12 educational system?  Education has and will continue to fail its true mission if it doesn't offer a "default" curriculum that prepares all students for a successful transition to college or work (page 26).  This curriculum should include Career Technical Education.

The need for an education system that prepares students for postsecondary education and work is cited in many ways throughout the plan, some are listed below.  What is missing is the inclusion of Career Technical Education as part of the "default" curriculum.

Other document references supporting the need for Career Technical Education:

"a student's community environment is as much a focus for learning as the classroom"
page 33

"the choice of immediately joining the workplace or attending college is usually made far before high school graduation, typically via course choices made by students with incomplete information"
page 37

"schools should use authentic assessments that measure student's school accomplishments, including work samples and portfolio entries" 
page 38