| |
Response and Reflection
Rosenbaum, J. E., Kariya,
T., Settersten, R., Maier, T. (1990). Market and Network Theories of
the Transition from High School to Work: Their Application to
Industrialized Societies, Annual Review of Sociology, 16, pp. 263-99.
Workforce development is an increasingly important aspect of our
education systems in the United States and abroad. Information
and communication technologies continue to advance in the business
world, and schools are already slow to respond. This article
focused specifically on one target population - high school graduates
not intending to continue higher education, but rather enter the
workforce directly. While this is still an important aspect of
our education system, I question its current need. Recent reports
suggest that well over 70% of high school graduates move on to higher
education in the United States. Albeit, this does not suggest that all
these individuals will complete their higher education. However,
it does indicate the growing need for higher education in an
information-based economy such as the US.
Further, this article was written in 1990. Since this time, there
has been an increased focus on building stronger relationships (such as
the Perkins Act reestablished in 1998) among high schools, community
colleges, universities, and ultimately, the public and private
workforce. This is not to say this particular population is not
important, but rather this population, by definition, is changing.
More and more students are seeking some form of education past
the secondary level. Thus, this article still serves an important
aspect of our education system and society, just in a different
environment - one in which more students are seeking post-secondary
education.
Regardless of an individual's academic level, the concept of developing
a highly skilled workforce remains an important problem that is always
in the limelight for politicians, researchers, educators, and the
business world. Thus, the article proposes four theories to
describe the transition of high school students to the workforce or
some other potential combination (such as Associate of Science or
certificate seeking students to the workforce). The theories, as
described by the authors, appear to build upon each other starting with
segmented labor market theory, to human capital theory, to signaling
theory, and finally, to network theory. As described by the
authors, segmented labor market theory suggests two types of labor
markets: primary and secondary. The authors suggest the theory
explains what types of people primary and secondary markets employ, but
does not explain why. That is when human capital theory steps in.
Human capital theory suggests that youth's (< 25 y/o) encounter
employment problems and that employers do not hire them because of
deficiencies in the population ranging from attitudinal to behavioral
problems. It also suggests that these individuals lack important
skills and maturity necessary to perform. While some try to place
blame on poor instruction, contrary research shows that many of the
skills are acquired primarily on the job. More importantly,
employers, for many good reasons, choose not to use grades and
transcripts to make employment decisions. The authors suggest
that the theory does explain why youth encounter problems finding
employment, it does not illustrate what information and incentives
students receive to make strides to improve their employability.
This is where the authors interject signaling theory.
Signal theory describes the use of information (or signals) in the
labor market to make informed employment decisions and to aid students
in improving their associated information to better prepare themselves
for employment. The authors illustrate many signals, such as age,
education credentials, and others. These signals are used by
employers, and should inform students. However, in the US, we
find that the educational signals often bear little influence on
employment decisions, and consequently, students do not use signals for
their job preparation. The authors compare the US system with
other nations including Japan, England, and Germany. They
attribute this problem in the US as the information (signals) lacking
credibility or trust. Subsequently, networking theory is
introduced while contrasting to these other nations.
Networking theory suggests that schools and the workforce should have
stronger and more formal ties to improve the articulation process.
The authors describe apprenticeship programs in Europe and
ranking systems in Japan, and suggest these relationships serve as a
checks and balance system between the entities. Ultimately, they
are suggesting that the workforce needs to "trust" the educational
signals. On a final note, I agree with much of what the authors
are suggesting. I do believe that we need stronger ties with the
workforce, but I do not believe it is a wise decision to build
litigation around these ties. I think that faculty should have a
close relationship with the workforce using devices such as co-ops,
internships, advisory boards, and many other existing program in the
US. I think the big change is that we need to encourage more
students to use them. |