There’s been some fanfare of late now that the Indiana Department of Education (IDOE) finally announced its plans to overhaul Indiana’s high school diplomas. They’re calling it a “reinvention” of high school.

The proposal reduces Indiana’s graduation pathways to two: the Indiana GPS Diploma and the Indiana GPS Diploma Plus. (The nomenclature is a little too reminiscent of streaming service tiers for me. Do you want your diploma with ads or are you willing to stretch for the ad free version?)

Is this really a reinvention? Will this fundamentally change the high school experience in unprecedented ways when you look at the past 100 years? And, most importantly, will it better set kids up for success after high school graduation?

What do the new diplomas mean?

The IDOE said in a release that the two new, streamlined diplomas are designed for “maximizing flexibility for students to personalize learning pathways and experiences.”

Here are the broad strokes.

• Regardless of the diploma type pursued, students will spend grades 9-10 focused on essential knowledge and skills (aligned to the characteristics outlined by Indiana’s GPS).
• Grades 11-12 allow for additional flexibility and personalization with things like earning college credit, pursuing a certification, getting hands on work experience, etc.
• Beyond completing the foundational elements, students need to complete at least 20 additional points of “courses and experiences” to earn the Indiana GPS Diploma.
• Want the Diploma Plus? That entails earning a selected industry credential and completing a “high-quality, work-based learning experience.”

If you want to dig deeper on the particulars, the IDOE put together this slideshow. As of writing, none of this is set in stone as the state is currently collecting public feedback on their proposal. (If you’re so inclined, you can submit feedback to the IDOE through this form.)

Is Indiana “leading the way”?

Back in September, an article on this topic from the Indiana Capital Chronicle quoted the CEO of ExcelinEd, a national school advocacy organization, as saying, “You all are actually in the lead in these conversations.” By “you all,” they meant Indiana. And presumably, that remains true today. But in this case, it’s more a matter of being the first mover rather than the most excellent mover (not to say this isn’t an excellent move, it’s just too soon to know). As IDOE indicates in that pretty slideshow, no other state has tried to go as comprehensive as we are going. It’s a bold swing.

But despite all the hype and rhetoric, it looks to me like we’re just doubling down on the direction Indiana has been moving for the past decade. And it’s not clear the direction we’re moving is always best for our graduates. We seem to be accelerating away from supporting students in attending college toward getting them industry certified and into the workplace as soon as they graduate. Perhaps that’s an oversimplification but it’s the aroma wafting off the dish IDOE is serving.

Students deserve a range of options. Various higher education, the workforce, enlistment, etc. It should all be on the table. And students should have clear knowledge about and access to whatever pathway fits them and their aspirations best.

But back to a couple of points in IDOE’s very pretty slideshow. Strap in for some fast facts. 1) 76% of Indiana graduates intend to pursue some form of higher learning. 2) Only 53% actually do. 3) 99% of the jobs created since the Great Recession go to people who have at least some education beyond high school.

Here’s another doozy factoid: Indiana’s college-going rate has fallen by 11 percentage points since 2016. It’s all well and good for Indiana to tout itself as #1 in the nation “in terms of students completing at least one college course in high school,” but it’s clear that doesn’t mean much if students don’t continue their education after high school. Which, right now, many of them do not.

Are we doubling down on past mistakes?

Just recently, IndyStar published an opinion from Michael Hicks, a professor at Ball State University. While he seemed encouraged that Indiana is pushing for a reinvention, he warned the state, “The last time Indiana made significant changes to school curriculum, we failed badly.” He was referencing a 2013 move under then-Governor Mike Pence to shift high school to be more career-focused.

This is what I mean when it looks like we’re doubling down on that previous move. Hicks noted the drawbacks to that blinkered approach, which was grounded in faulty economic data about where the job market was headed. Essentially, the demand for high school graduates (with no further education) was wildly inflated.

And the focus on careers immediately after high school wasn’t just pushed at the high school level. It trickled down to middle school.

College isn’t a silver bullet. But it remains crucial. As Hicks notes, over the past three decades in the United States, “8 in 10 [new jobs] have gone to 4-year degree holders.”

They do not yearn for the mines

I’m not college or die (I’m all too aware of how crippling loan debt can be for those who pursue a college education). But I am very wary of downplaying the importance of college. I’m also wary of pushing “career readiness” and “workforce certifications” and “industry experience” on teenagers. On, dare I say it, kids. Do students need that to feel ready for life after high school? Or do businesspeople and economists think they need that to fill their productive capacities? If it’s what kids want, I’ll happily put my concerns aside. If it’s what businesses and state government wants, I’ll happily defend the hill.

I think it’s right to say America’s high school experience needs a reinvention. But the reality is that it was always set up to produce reliable worker bees. Is Indiana just trying to maximize the worker bee production line? If so, what we’re doing is not reinvention. It’s the oldest story in public education.