Conclusions and Recommendations

In several ways--particularly because of the lack of information, students' weak connections to employers, and uncertain employment benefits--sub-baccalaureate education does not work very well for its students. With some exceptions, it does not work well for employers either since employers rely on sub-baccalaureate credentials only in certain well-defined conditions and because they complain relentlessly about the sorry state of basic skills. Evidently, there is considerable room for reform and in four areas in particular:

1. There is a crying need, at both secondary and postsecondary levels, to improve the teaching of basic academic skills.
2. Information about the employment effects of various education and training programs is almost completely missing in most local areas and could be improved in many ways. This would benefit students seeking to improve their employability, administrators and instructors trying to improve their programs, and policymakers seeking more effective public programs.
3. Educational institutions can strengthen their connections to employers. This will involve scrutinizing the weakness in the various mechanisms which now exist, like advisory committees, placements efforts, and student follow-up. Co-op programs appear to be especially promising ways of linking employers and providers and of providing students with the appropriate variety of preparation.
4. Skill standards have great potential for creating organized labor markets from the unorganized relations characteristic of sub-baccalaureate labor markets and for bringing employers and education providers together in a common task.

While conventional analyses place the burden on education providers to reform, it is clear that employers are also partly to blame for the sorry state of sub-baccalaureate labor markets. Their unstable employment patterns, lack of incentives for mastering basic skills, and inattention to schools have created some existing problems. More generally, their employment policies can undermine any reforms that education providers make. Therefore, it becomes necessary to ask what responsibilities employers should bear in reconstructing the relation between education and employment. While this is a relatively novel question, there are several obvious responses:

• Employers should participate actively with both high schools and postsecondary providers, providing better information about the requirements of work to students and educators alike and cooperating in the development of co-op programs and skill standards.
• Hiring decisions and wage structures should be more responsive to educational accomplishments and skill differentials in order to provide greater incentives for prospective employees to learn those capacities which employers say are in short supply.
• Employers should preserve and enhance career ladders and reduce the cyclical variation in employment in order to provide additional incentives for the accumulation of skills and knowledge.

Even though the tradition of laissez faire in this country has prevented much attention to the responsibilities of employers, addressing this question is crucial. Because markets operate through the interaction of demand and supply, improving the operations of the sub-baccalaureate labor market in the interests of employers and employees alike will require the reform of both educational policies and employment practices.