By Matt DeVeau, Project Associate.
At Market Street,
we talk a lot about looming workforce skill shortages and education delivery
systems that are struggling to produce even adequate results, let alone
world-class outcomes. Many of our client communities are dealing with one of
these issues and some have the unenviable task of facing both. So pervasive are
these issues that it’s only natural to – on occasion – become desensitized to
them. But inevitably, a new study or report will be released that quickly
brings the true gravity of the situation back to the forefront. Such was the
case this week when the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development
(OECD), an international economic organization of 34 developed nations,
released its “Skills
Outlook 2013.” Now it can be said again, in no uncertain terms: the United
States is facing a mounting talent crisis.
OECD surveyed approximately 166,000 individuals aged 16 to
65 in 24 countries and sub-national regions to assess proficiency in three
areas: literacy, numeracy (mathematics), and problem solving in technology-rich
environments. The full results are available in a massive 466-page report, but
this article
from The New York Times does a good job of summarizing the key issues.
On the whole, the United States fared poorly in the
assessment, but there is one sliver of data that stands out as the most
alarming: performance broken down by 10-year age groups. Among the oldest age
group comprised of people aged 55 to 65, the United States performs well in
literacy on average, ranking fourth behind Japan, Slovakia, and
England/Northern Ireland (Figure 1). But among the youngest age group, 16 to 24
year-olds, things are markedly different. The United States is well below
average, ranking fifth worst (Figure 2).
Source: OECD, results
include only OECD nations and sub-nations, with England and Northern Ireland
treated as a single entity
So what happened? It’s not the case that younger Americans
are less literate. In fact, they score higher than their older counterparts.
Instead, the decline is a relative one – other nations have had more success in
improving literacy through successive generations. In Finland, the oldest age
cohort produced average literacy scores, but younger Finns rank second behind
only Japan. In Korea, the difference is even more pronounced: older Koreans
rank fourth worst, younger Koreans rank fourth best. And though older adults in
the United States did not score as well on numeracy (mathematics), the trend is
similar. Americans aged 16 to 24 actually had the lowest numeracy proficiency among 22 nations and sub-nations. The
world isn’t just gaining on the United States – they’ve already passed us.
A study such as this raises many questions, and according to
Anthony P. Carnevale of the Georgetown University Center on Education and the
Workforce, the first one is: “If we’re so dumb, why are we so rich?” In The Times article, he provides his
answer:
“Our economic
advantage has been having high skill levels at the top, being big, being more
flexible than the other economies, and being able to attract other countries’
most skilled labor. But that advantage is slipping.”
I agree with Carnevale, particularly on that last point. So
logically, the next question should be, “What can be done to fix this?” Here,
the answer is more complicated, so instead of offering an incomplete set of
prescriptive solutions, I’ll touch briefly on how this work can get done.
Ideally, the information in this OECD report and other
studies would set off alarm bells that would lead to a concerted, nation-wide
effort to improve education. I don’t think it’s overly cynical to say that this
will not happen. As I write, the federal government has been shut down for 11
days, and the short- to medium-term prospects for any kind of significant
legislative action are dim. Things are not necessarily better at the state
level, either. The vast majority of states cut funding for education in the
wake of the Great Recession, and seven states have cut per-pupil spending by more
than 15 percent.
But while the federal government can set high-level policies
and states frequently determine curriculums and funding formulas, primary and
secondary education still remains largely under local control. This is the
level at which concerned parties can have the biggest impact. Many of Market Street’s client communities from
around the country have taken bold steps to improve educational delivery
systems and outcomes and, ultimately, create a more skilled workforce. One
notable example is Nashville. Since 1998, the Nashville Area Chamber of
Commerce has supported high-quality candidates for the community’s board of
education through its SuccessPAC
political action committee. Various public, private, and non-profit leaders in
the community have also coordinated their efforts through Alignment Nashville, a
501(c)(3) formed in 2004 to positively impact public school success, children’s
health, and the success of the community as a whole.
These initiatives are not easy to implement. School board
elections can be contentious, and being involved in them requires conviction
and courage on the part of the community’s business leaders. The members of
Alignment Nashville’s 23 distinct committees put in long hours in pursuit of
strategic goals. But as the latest OECD data indicates, this hard work is
vital. A handful of local initiatives cannot by themselves improve the United
States’ top-line skills proficiency, but they can help secure a community’s
competitive future. And if nothing else, the represent what is possible at the
moment. This is the work that can be
done, so it is the work that should
be done.
