The School-to-Work initiative has evolved from a mere appendage to current educational reforms to the tale that wags the dog. The reform movement has evolved from a clarion call alerting Americans that their schools were in trouble to a bandwagon being driven by an enormous number of educrats, change agents, politicians, psychologists, business leaders, etc., all pushing to "reinvent American education."
The original blueprint was relatively simple. The basic idea as expressed in the federal bill, AMERICA 2000, was to improve the acquisition of the kind of cognitive knowledge needed for the new century. By the time the bill was signed by President Clinton in 1994, not only was its title changed to Goals 2000, but it had been permeated by a newly conceived and unproven educational theory known as Outcome-Based Education (OBE) which espoused outcomes that are "real-life based" and that called for "real- life performances." It was this aspect of Goals 2000 that eventually received the support of major political and business figures such as the nation's governors, top CEOs, David Rockefeller, the secretaries of Education and Labor, etc. This led to further legislation that called for schools shifting their attention from teaching cognitive knowledge to the preparation of what is repeatedly called a "world-class work force."
The driving force behind this movement was a little-known change agent, Marc Tucker, who in the late 80s had been working closely with Hillary Clinton and Ira Magaziner to realize changes in American education similar to the failed reorganization of American health services. This program became known as Workforce 2000. Tucker described his "vision" as follows: "[A] seamless system of unending skill development that begins in the home with the very young and continues through school, postsecondary education and the workplace." The "vision" interestingly coincided with the OBE mantra, "It takes a whole village to raise a child."
As government leaders, especially governors, top business moguls and union heads fell into line, it became clear that education was indeed being "reinvented." All school subjects, from K-12, had somehow to be connected to career planning so as to have an appropriate balance of school-site and worksite learning experience. This was in turn to rest on information supplied by Big Business as to what kind of skills and jobs would be in greatest demand in the new century, and how best to teach those skills. What is more, through an umbrella group called ACHIEVE, these special-interest groups were to measure and report each state's annual progress in establishing internationally competitive standards. Members also agreed to take into consideration the quality of each state's standards when making business location and expansion decisions. They surprisingly seem unaware that eventually businesses are to contribute up to 2% of their payrolls to a general training fund, whether or not they participate.
So education is being subjected to an elaborate network of workforce needs as defined by Big Business, Big Government, and Big Labor. Added to this picture are other federal and state programs that provide not only health and various social services, but elaborate pre-K schooling. Ultimately, schools are to become institutions that would provide for the public welfare from cradle to grave.
As for students, their reward would consist of skill certificates known as the Certificate of Initial Mastery (CIM) awarded at the tenth grade level, and the Certificate of Advanced Mastery (CAM) awarded upon graduation showing successful completion of the new programs. Without such certificates, youths cannot work before the age of eighteen. Since job registry programs would be linked internationally, Tucker's vision of a managed global economy would ultimately be realized - as would the dream of old-line socialists. Thus, the ultimate product of America's "reinvented education" will be skilled laborers and compliant workers rather than well-rounded individuals.
Aldo S. Bernardo, PhD