Meet Carlos. He’s a senior at American High School in the Bay Area suburb of Fremont. He’s also a central character in a recent public television documentary on U.S. education. Carlos is a big fellow with a crew cut and a friendly manner. We see him driving his pickup truck, strolling with a girlfriend and playing in a football game. “I don’t want to graduate,” he says at one point. “It’s fun. I like it.”

If you want to worry about our economic future, worry about Carlos and all those like him. It is the problem of adolescence in America. Our teen-agers live in a dreamland. It’s a curious mixture of adult freedoms and childlike expectations. Hey, why work? Average high school students do less than an hour of daily homework. Naturally, they’re not acquiring the skills they will need for their well-being and the nation’s.

Don’t mistake me: I’m not blaming today’s teen-agers. They are simply the latest heirs of an adolescent subculture that’s been evolving for decades. American children are becoming more and more independent at an earlier and earlier age. By 17, two-fifths of Americans have their own car or truck. About 60% have their own telephones and TV sets. Adult authority wanes; teen-ager power rises. It’s this development that has crippled our schools.

Consider the research of sociologist James Coleman of the University of Chicago. He found that students from similar economic and social background consistently do better at Catholic high schools than at public high schools. The immediate explanation is simple: Students at Catholic schools take more rigorous courses in math, English and history; and they do nearly 50% more homework. But why do Catholic schools make these demands when public schools don’t?


The difference, Coleman concluded, lies with parents. “Parents (of public school students) do not exercise as much authority over their high-school-aged students as they once did.” Since the 1960s, public schools have become less demanding--in discipline, required course work and homework--because they can’t enforce stiffer demands. By contrast, parents of parochial school students impose more control. “The schools therefore (are) able to operate under a different set of ground rules,” Coleman said.

There are obviously many good public schools and hard-working students. But the basic trends are well-established and have been altered only slightly by recent “reforms.” Change comes slowly, because stricter academic standards collide with adolescent reality. In the TV documentary, Tony--a pal of Carlos--is asked why he doesn’t take tougher math courses to prepare him as a computer technician, which is what he wants to be. “It’s my senior year. I think I’m going to relax.”

Adolescent autonomy continues to increase. Teenage Research Unlimited, a market research firm, estimates that the average 16- or 17-year-old has nearly $60 a week in spending money from jobs and allowances. By junior year, more than 40% of high school students have jobs.

These demanding school-time jobs are held predominantly by middle-class students. Popular wisdom holds that early work promotes responsibility, but the actual effect may be harmful. In a powerful book, “When Teenagers Work,” psychologists Ellen Greenberger of UC Irvine and Laurence Steinberg of Temple University show that jobs hurt academic performance and do not provide needed family income. Rather, they simply establish teen-agers as independent consumers better able to satisfy their own wants.


Our style of adolescence reflects prosperity and our values. We can afford it. Our culture stresses freedom, individuality and choice. Everyone has “rights.” Authority is to be questioned.

Parental guilt also plays a role. The American premise is that the young ought to be able to enjoy their youth. Schools shouldn’t spoil it, as if 1 1/2 hours of daily homework (well above the average) would mean misery for the average teen-ager. Finally, more divorce and more families with two wage-earners mean that teen-agers are increasingly left to themselves.

Americans, young and old, delude themselves about the results of these changes. A recent study of 13-year-olds in six countries placed Americans last in mathematics and Koreans first. But when students were asked whether they were “good at mathematics,” 68% of the Americans said yes compared with only 23% of the Koreans.

This was no quirk. Psychologist Harold Stevenson of the University of Michigan, who has studied American and Asian students for years, finds the same relationship. Americans score lower in achievement but, with their parents, are more satisfied with their performance. “If children believe they are already doing well--and their parents agree--what is the purpose of studying harder?” he writes.


Good question. No one should be surprised that U.S. businesses complain about workers with poor skills or that a high school diploma no longer guarantees a well-paying job. More school spending or new educational “theories” won’t magically give students knowledge or skills. It takes work. Our style of adolescence is something of a national curse. Americans are growing up faster, but they may not be growing up better.