As an education policy observer, one of the most alarming weaknesses of the monopoly system prevalent in this country is the large number of high school dropouts.

I used to watch lawmakers fixating on minute details of high school operations and policies. They might be wrangling over which kind of statewide science test all high school students should take, while seeming to ignore the fact that one in five students is not even in school at all, and only one in four complete high school on time.

The education of 16- to 18-year-olds in Washington is more uniform and less practical than most of the rest of the world, and it will get more so for the class of 2019.

Our factory-style approach to education seeks to keep programs for students as similar as possible, and student choice in the matter is not required. Uniformity is efficient for the adults operating high schools. For example, requiring three years of ambiguous “social studies” makes it easier to keep the payroll intact in a school building.

One could conclude we were designing high school for the convenience of the institutions and the adults they employ.

Since the high school course offering is primarily prescribed, students can avoid taking ownership of life-impacting decisions. Students with even average capability can easily coast through their senior year and lose the opportunity for valuable self-development.

I think high school uniformity and the high rate of dropouts are related.

A 17- or 18-year-old young adult has the maturity to know they ought to have a role in selecting a relevant path for their life, and they certainly are equipped to recognize when their time is wasted. Sometimes they’re right to roll their eyes about how others have decided they should spend 1,000 hours of their life in a school year.

As any free market advocate knows, choices promote ownership and engagement. Young adults are less likely to criticize their own selections than those made for them. Personal selections are also going to be a closer match to needs and interests.

Australia

As I dream of how laws might allow for more customized approaches to secondary education, and how laws might invigorate student engagement, the system I imagine looks much like Australian secondary education.

First, Australian society does not embrace a monopoly regarding education, but permits education to be provided with public funds by both public and private schools. Private schools—including religious private schools—that receive public funds are regulated regarding staff and content. At the primary school level, 31 percent of students attend a nongovernment school.

Funding for non-government schools is a form of an allowance provided to schools on behalf of families on a per-student basis. It is typically provided by the national government as a proportion of public school funding, and the amount ranges from approximately 20 to 85 percent of public school funding.

Compulsory schooling ends at age 16 or 17—usually “year 10″—in most states. If a student leaves school before year 12, it is hoped that they will continue with some form of education and the government funds continued education.

To ensure this goal, public resources for an even greater range of training options are made available. The government has also used policies to withhold benefits if these young adults are not in school, training or employment.

The choice of how to continue years 11 and 12 is left to the student and their parents. Students typically continue in their regular school to grade 12, and that last two years of secondary school are general with students selecting from a wide range of options.

Completion of school based education is signaled by the awarding of a Senior Secondary Certificate of Education (SSCE). The SSCE has a different name and slightly different requirements in each state, but is generally made up of the best ten units of study undertaken by the student. The units will usually include two units of English and at least four other different subjects selected from a widely varying list of options. Subject scores are made up of a combination of school based assessments and the results of state based standardized examinations.

If they prefer not to take one of the general pathways, students may take any of a host of approved vocational education and training (VET) programs from a wide range of providers who also prepare students to pass standardized vocational evaluations and receive a certificate. These training programs are nationally accredited, with the programs, skill sets and credentials are determined by those in the industries or craft councils.

Students also have the flexibility to combine general education subjects with VET subjects that contribute to both a secondary school certificate and a nationally accredited VET qualification. VET qualifications are assessed on a set of competency standards, rather than being determined by a set amount of time to undertake a course of study.

Completion of secondary education is not thought of as obtaining a “diploma” as in the U.S., but instead requires accomplishing the training in five or six two-year courses of study in general education or vocational education and training.

Scores of these courses are available, and the number of possible combinations is immense.

A student ending year 10 has already been thinking about their preferred path and subjects. The decision about what to study in year 11 is a real decision, and it presumes certain student goals. If university attendance is intended, these decisions will take account of any prerequisite subjects for the preferred university courses. 

In Washington, 57 percent of recent high school graduates enrolling in community colleges discover they are lacking prerequisite learning, and they must retake high school content as remedial courses.

As a result of customized training being available from government schools, vocational programs, trade apprenticeship programs and private schools, 41 percent of secondary students get their education from a nongovernment source.

All the various courses of study culminate in a standardized student assessment relevant to that training or education regardless of the provider of that education. Student scores are known, and they are used to evaluate program quality, prospective university students and job applicants.

Because students and families are selecting the most relevant training during these young adult years, evidence suggests the ultimate the “dropout rate” would be lower than in the U.S. The specific rate of on-time completion of high school as understood in the U.S. is not known in Australia because of the variety of pathways available to students.

First, clarity of “in-school” versus “not-in-school” in the states and territories of Australia is missing. Students blend work, school and training in various combinations, so data about grade 12 on-time completion is similarly unclear.

Second, of those who do not complete year 12 on time in Australia, 82 percent return to education within five years. Again, this would be expected if a wide range of secondary schooling and vocational training is available at no cost for life.

The Australian Bureau of Statistics does track and report the rate of young people attaining year 12 or an equivalent accredited vocational certificate by the age of 24. In 2011, the nationwide rate of attainment of year 12 or equivalent school or non-school qualification for young people aged 20–24 year was 85 percent.

Finally, the accomplishments of Australian 15-year-olds on international comparisons exceed those of students in most other countries including U.S. students. Many countries with aggressive school choice policies rank higher than the U.S. on the Program for International Student Assessment.

Is the grass greener?

I recognize the temptation to see green grass when you are not close enough to notice the weeds. However, Australia provides a real-world example of practical policies which embody the values of:

• student responsibility to select customized training relevant to personal goals;
• no monopoly approach and embracing a wide range of service providers; and,
• multiplying options which are available for students and families.

Suggestions to adopt any of these values in the Washington State Legislature would generate cries of doomsday and predictions of the destruction of quality education.

The Australian policies that embody these values have not resulted in disaster, but instead have produced a lower dropout rate and put Australia among the world leaders in educational attainment.

I want to express gratitude to my fellow education policy analysts in Australia who helped me understand this issue. Jennifer Buckingham of the Center for Independent Studies and Vicki Stanley of the Institute for Public Affairs both took time to confirm, clarify and correct my understanding of how high school works in Australia.