Patrick M. Callan and
Michael D. Usdan

Like uncharted continents, K-12 education and post secondary education remain, for the most part, separate and self-contained worlds. Inter-level programs, like tentative bridges between the two worlds, are beginning to emerge throughout the country, but with the exception of the relatively new Education Trust, the College Board, the Southern Regional Education Board, and a few other entities, only a handful of organizations and networks are explicitly designed to link the educational levels in meaningful ways. Despite recent positive developments in a few states and communities, the issue of inter-level relationships remains largely invisible.

In most places, in fact, there is profound cultural chasm between K-12 and higher education. The two sectors continue to live and work apart, with separate associations, professional worlds, and networks. If education is to become a seamless enterprise, the two sectors need to get to know each other, but there are currently few connecting mechanisms that would enable them to work cooperatively on issues of mutual concern, such as teacher quality and admissions policies. These issues are of growing importance, but they remain on the margin and are no one's direct responsibility. As a result, there is no immediate audience or direct constituency for inter-level issues, which are largely ignored or allowed to fall through the cracks. No other country in the world has such a gulf of separation between K- 12 and higher education as does the United States, and none has such a lack of constructive dialogue between the education levels. There is little recognition of that fact in the professional education world, however much less in the lay community. All but a handful of policy analysts seem oblivious to the fact that there is too little systematic study of inter-level relationships or vertical analysis of educational issues. We believe more intensive efforts must be made to bring attention to the need for inter-level relationships and to project this issue on the nation's education policy agenda. It is likely, however, that it will take significant external forces to drive the necessary discussion and debate on this complex matter, which has the potential to change well established systems with strong traditions of separation from each other. School board and governing board members can play an important role in calling attention to inter-level connections. Indeed, leverage for moving this issue might well have to come from lay leaders who are unconstrained by the often static world views of K-12 and postsecondary educators. Locally elected officials such as school board members could become valuable allies of the business and political leaders who have been instrumental in driving and sustaining education reform in recent years.

Equity and economics

One inter-level issue of growing importance is equity. Demographic changes are reshaping the United States in profound ways. With approximately one-third or more of children under 6 growing up in poverty or in economically marginal circumstances, our elementary and secondary schools are confronting serious social and educational challenges. The dramatic increase in the diversity of the population, with growing numbers of low-income, non-English-speaking youngsters attending school, intensifies the challenge.

These demographic realities pose perplexing equity issues in a society in which economic polarization is widening and the middle class is increasingly squeezed. If education is the ticket to success in an increasingly competitive and technological global economy, equity must be paramount--both for its moral dimensions and for our collective economic and civic well-being.

The affirmative action debate is only the tip of the demographic iceberg. Higher education has a massive stake in the quality of K-12 education, not only in providing a pipeline of qualified students, but also in preserving colleges and universities as citadels of opportunity for growing numbers of underserved citizens in an increasingly pluralistic democracy. To the extent that equality of educational opportunity can be achieved in K-12 schools, there will be less need for costly remedial strategies in higher education. The work of the Education Trust in building K-16 alliances at the state, regional, and local levels is of particular significance in this realm.

Inter-level relationships will develop in the years ahead in the context of significant shifts in our intergovernmental system. Although student aid and research will continue to receive substantial federal support, there is little question that other major policy issues, such as education finance and governance, will be state-focused and -oriented. Devolution will be the prevailing political mantra for the foreseeable future, and education policy debates and initiatives will center in state capitols.

The national fixation will be on economic growth and competitiveness in a global economy. Our success as a nation will be predicted on the education, skills, and training of our citizens. K-12 and higher education have common cause with this emphasis and could potentially mount potent K-16 coalitions to work with the private sector and with political leaders to push an agenda stressing economic growth through education. Indeed, overriding concerns about economic competitiveness could intensify national efforts to work toward what John Goodlad has called a "simultaneous revival" of K-12 and postsecondary education as one seamless and continuous learning system.

Other levers for change

In addition, teacher education and renewal are likely remain a focal point of inter-level relationships, due to the quality of K-12 education and the central role of teachers in school improvement efforts. Higher education institutions and their faculties will be under growing pressure to improve their teacher preparation programs. This obviously will entail developing closer working relationships with school systems as well as stronger institution-wide commitments to teacher education.

Accountability might also drive change. Many believe that the age of accountability is dawning for higher education as it has already dawned for K-12. To date, there has been very little measurement of outcomes in postsecondary education. Achievement is often low and dropout rates are high, and the blame cannot be placed exclusively on elementary and secondary education. Higher education might find to its chagrin that it is facing accountability demands similar to those that have confronted K-12 education in recent years. A major challenge will be to make higher education more accountable without undermining public confidence, as we have unwittingly done in K-12 education. And as the accountability issue confronts higher education, its stake in improving the quality of K-12 education will become even more apparent.

Finally, we should note that technology could have a profound impact on inter-level relationships. The information revolution will provide opportunities for new modes of interaction and electronic connections between schools and colleges. The potential of technology obviously must be on the agenda any efforts to promote inter-level cooperation in the years ahead.

Challenge and change

These are only a few of the important inter-level issues that face American education. They are persuasive reasons why it would behoove school board members and policymakers at all levels to place a higher priority on framing inter-level issues and to set a "mutual interest" agenda for their relationships. There is an immediate need at the local, state, and national levels to begin joint conferences and to build a publications or literature base in this new policy realm. Such organizations as the American Council on Education, the College Board, the Education Commission of the States, and the Learning First Alliance should initiate strategic alliances and networks that span the boundaries of K-12 and higher education.

The education community needs to convene "big conversations" that are unfettered by the constraints of particular constituencies and that transcend limited local, state, regional, and professional perspectives. There is also a growing need for state higher education officers and chiefs and their boards and other relevant groups to interact more regularly. No natural forum currently exists under whose aegis such discussions can take place on a regular basis.

Local policymakers, such as school board members can begin to chart these largely unknown waters. The first step is an "environmental scan"--an analysis of K-12 and higher education to determine who is involved in inter-level issues, what issues need to be addressed, what information has to be exchanged, and who should participate in inter-level dialogue. We do not know the answers to these questions: we do know, however, that lay engagement in these issues will be of singular importance.

Our organizations are committed to generating greater understanding of the significance of inter-level issues. Through a series of special projects, forums, and publications, we hope to bring these issues to the attention of educational, political, and private sector leaders at the national, state, and local levels. We invite school boards and governing boards to join in this effort.