Book Review: Schools Cannot Do It Alone by Jamie Vollmer

Jamie Vollmer’s Schools Cannot Do It Alone exposes readers to fundamental aspects about education addressing some of the factors that affect student learning experiences and outcomes. Vollmer discusses the role of the society when it comes to shaping attitudes towards education thereby influencing the rate of enrollment towards particular courses. The book’s key point is that the system has been structured in such a manner that it limits or defines student success with bias. The implication is that a threshold is created which every student must meet to be considered as having succeeded at school. However, the domineering issue is that the system is inflexible which undermines efforts towards having an open-ended approach towards education. The idea is not to abolish standards but rather to set them in such a manner that they are flexible to change. Thus, Vollmer’s approach towards issues in education projects a clear argument against the rigid nature of the system within which students are forced to conform and follow a particular definition of success. 

The essence of education is to have it applied to various sectors in the society hence promoting growth. Economic development, for instance, demands a body of competent graduates who can help save the country from outsourcing jobs due to unavailability of skills in a particular sector. The implication of having a reliable and competent workforce is that it helps reduce the rate of unemployment thereby promoting standards of living among the public. Understandably, a connection between school and the employment sector is critical. The education given to students should align with employment needs in the market in turn filling in employment gaps. However, Vollmer (2010) strongly noted that the symbiotic relationship between the workplace and schools is broken. He explained that every year, teachers instruct more children in more subjects to relatively higher levels compared to previous cases. Shockingly, millions of students leave school with no jobs to look for hence undermining the essence of education itself. The lack of a clear connection between the job market and the school system questions the value or significance of education. 

Advancing the point above, Vollmer (2010) spoke about the American Dream and how it has become an elusive concept. However, a factor to consider is what the American Dream really means. There is no clear description of the phenomenon in question which raises questions about Vollmer’s (2010) intention in stating “But it is abundantly clear that low-skill/high-wage jobs are gone. Strong back, a willingness to work, and a tolerance for tedium will no longer afford access to the American Dream”. With the statement in question, Vollmer’s (2010) argument is that the current system is limiting access to the American Dream. He provides a link between high-paying jobs and the American Dream. Consequently, the American Dream is presented as a fundamental aspect to consider when structuring the education sector. A critical look at Vollmer’s (2010) focus on the American Dream demonstrates somewhat of a biased approach towards the significance of education. With access to high-paying jobs, graduates are likely to have economic self-sufficiency and hence can meet their daily needs. Furthermore, they will have the ability to live a luxurious life. It is not clear whether Vollmer’s (2010) conception of the American Dream is mainly focused on acquisition of material wealth or whether it constitutes of other dimensions of wellbeing such as social, physiological and psychological wellness. 

Thus far, Vollmer (2010) presents a compelling argument about the missing link between the education sector and the job market. From a personal point of view, while schools are institutions where education is acquired, they are also profit-making entities. That being the case, they are likely to deviate from their core function of promoting a literate and informed population. Thus, instead of focusing on already existing gaps in the society, schools are promoting courses that are on demand to remain competitive in the market. The outcome is an influx of graduates with the same degree but limited job opportunities. In support Vollmer (2010) explained how America has shifted towards giving priority to some jobs while leaving out others. He stated 

“ Americans find themselves in a brutally competitive global market where our traditional competitive advantages are being marginalized, stolen, or sold. Even in Iowa, where my house sits surrounded by row crops for as far as the eye can see, less than ten percent of the people work in agriculture” (Vollmer, 2010). 

The statement demonstrates that the education sector has shifted towards a particular system whereby there is emphasis on some courses while others are left out. The example given shows that the agricultural sector, for instance, will suffer due to lack of competent individuals who have graduated with agriculture-related courses. The stigma and discriminative practices waged against certain courses in schools has continued to undermine the efficiency of education not only in America but also in other countries across the globe. 

Up to this point, it becomes clear that emphasis on some courses, for instance, projects a particular conceptualization of success with the American Dream being a determining factor. The idea is that the education sector is vulnerable to economic changes or job market demands thereby investing more on some courses while leaving out others. The relevance of a particular degree is based on how popular it is in the market. Thus, one can notice the capitalistic effect of the current economic atmosphere on the education sector. Higher learning institutions are looking to make profit which explains why there is specialization in some schools compared to others. Limiting focus to certain courses creates an ever-growing gap leading depreciation of information on various sectors which play a vital role in determining the society’s wellbeing. For instance, Vollmer’s (2010) reference to the limited focus on the agricultural sector in schools demonstrates the biased nature of the system within which education is provided. Learning institutions are no longer objective but rather unintentionally focus on advancing specific courses. Opinionatedly, education should be all-rounded in that there should be equal attention towards the different sectors in the society. Investing in agriculture, for instance, can help generate a body of competent graduates who can apply their knowledge in meeting the society’s agricultural needs. Vollmer (2010) touched on the dissociation between the society’s needs and the education sector demonstrating how the system controls what is taught in schools. 

Conclusion  

The book in question provides clear insight towards various issues facing the education sector. One key limitation involves the lack of an objective approach towards the society’s needs. The system within which education is provided is biased and considers some courses more important than others. However, Vollmer dismisses such kind of thinking arguing that a sector such as agriculture is as important as one that mainly deals with technology. Therefore, the nature of defining success in terms of high-paying jobs while in pursuit of the American Dream has distorted the society’s understanding of the essence of education. Materialism has overridden the significance of advancing knowledge in some selected sectors. For that reason, there is a need to reevaluate the society’s needs and how the education sector helps address them. The system should be made flexible and accommodative. 

Reference  

Vollmer, J. (2001). Schools Cannot Do It Alone. Enlightenment Press.