ABSTRACT
There continues to be ongoing debate among educators, politicians and the tax-paying public as to how well our educational system is serving the needs of our youth. The fact that the majority of students do not go on to higher education, or often even finish secondary school, would seem to be an indictment of our ability to serve the needs of students who are not academic abstract achievers, but may possess above average concrete learning skills. To quote Canada’s Report of the Special Senate Committee on Youth:
While it is the responsibility of schools to prepare youth for the next stage in their life in the workforce, they must do it in a way which balances practical and more general preparation. Unfortunately, the effect of many curricula is to polarize students. Academic courses serve the “achievers” and the 33% most likely to continue their schooling in post-secondary institutions. Specific skills training meets the needs of those who have already decided that they wish to pursue a certain vocation. For those who are somewhere between the two, the scenario is not as promising. They see little relevance in the courses they are taking as they lead neither to a guaranteed job nor to higher education. These students become bored, discouraged, disillusioned and therefore leave school. This is the group of young people who need an additional effort on our part, both before they drop out and once they have done so.
