Is It Time to Abolish Compulsory School Attendance?

Introduction

Every U.S. state has some law requiring citizens of a certain age to attend public or private school. Most of the states require students aged 6-16 to spend approximately 180 days in a classroom (Source). The penalty for truancy is usually the arrest of the parents, though, if you happen to work in education, you know that parents are rarely arrested for their children’s truancy. These compulsory attendance laws arose with the spread of public education in the late 1800s and early 1900s.

The men who originally enacted these laws (given the time period they were most certainly men) were likely creating laws they believed would be beneficial to society. America was transitioning from a mostly agricultural economy to a mixed agricultural and industrial one. In an agricultural economy, the need for formal education is low. The ability to read and write is not even required as it has little to do with farm life. One doesn’t need an instructional manual to feed a cow. But, in an industrial economy, the worker needs to read and write. He must read instructions and follow them. Thus, the lawmakers felt a need to insure an educated population of workers.

Also, since America was founded as a democracy, it needed citizens that were capable of understanding the complex political and social issues that the country was facing. Since the average person would be voting on certain laws, he must be able to read and understand them.

I agree with these ideas. But, why did the laws demand compulsory education? Shouldn’t free public education have been offered but not required? What other services does the government demand that citizens submit themselves to? I can think of no other free public service to which the government declares that its citizens must give a minimum of 10 years of their life. The very idea seems contrary to democracy and individual freedom. Sure, we give up certain rights to enjoy privileges in a democracy. For instance, we agree to drive under a certain speed in return for the privilege of driving a motor vehicle. But, I am not required by law to drive a vehicle. I choose to drive one and then choose to abide by certain laws. But, with education, there is no choice.

The Case for Compulsory Attendance

Public education is the greatest socializing force that the United States possesses. Think about all of the rules that govern your daily life that you learned in school:

1. When you must wait on something, you are to wait in a line.

2. When you walk in public, you walk on the right side.

3. To speak while in a group, raise your hand or wait your turn.

Without compulsory attendance, it is possible that certain societal rules would disappear.

Additionally, many working parents rely on schools as a form of free daycare. When school is canceled due to weather or other events, many parents are unable to work, so school, as a babysitter, is enmeshed in our society.

Lastly, educational funding is tied to statistics that rely on compulsory attendance. Take, for instance, graduation rates. If there are no compulsory attendance laws, dropout rates can not be calculated.

The Case Against Compulsory Attendance

Compulsory attendance no longer matches our society. With the proliferation of technology and content on demand, American workers have greater flexibility in their schedules than ever before. Telecommuting is sharply on the rise (see this NY Times article and this Forbes article). Except for service occupations, the future of work is virtual and self-scheduled.

Higher education is experiencing growth in online course enrollment. In 2011, 20% of college students took an online course, and the number is growing exponentially each year (Source).

Additionally, the early experiments with flipped classrooms are indicating that students can work effectively in the model and are experiencing increased achievement (Source). How much money and time do state education departments spend on enforcing compulsory attendance? How much is wasted on maintaining huge buildings and other infrastructure to support traditional education? Will the structure of education change?

Conclusion

I do not know the answer to these questions. Also, I do not necessarily support one model over the other. I can see benefits of requiring attendance and of not requiring attendance. As an educator interested in technology, I do see many practical and pedagogical reasons to allow more flexibility in students' schedules. I don't believe that 180 days in a classroom is necessarily better than 80 days in a classroom. Duration does not indicate quality.


What do you think?