America’s Industrial-Age Education System Is Outdated 

The American educational system was not created by John D. Rockefeller, but Rockefeller and other industrial-era reformers had enormous influence over the direction education took during the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries. The system that emerged made considerable sense for an industrializing nation. America needed a population that could read, follow instructions, arrive on time, perform standardized tasks, and participate productively in a rapidly expanding economy. 

The problem is that the economy has changed dramatically while many fundamental characteristics of education have not. 

We are attempting to prepare young people for an age of artificial intelligence, automation, entrepreneurship, robotics, global competition, and rapidly changing technology using an educational structure whose basic organizational assumptions developed during a very different economic era. 

Rockefeller Did Not Invent Public Education 

It is important to separate history from mythology. 

Public education existed in America long before Rockefeller became involved. During the nineteenth century, reformers such as Horace Mann promoted the “common school” movement. Mann became secretary of the Massachusetts Board of Education in 1837 and advocated publicly funded schools, professional teacher training, standardized curricula, and broader access to education. His ideas spread throughout the country. (The Library of Congress⁠) 

Therefore, it would be historically inaccurate to claim that Rockefeller simply created America’s school system to manufacture factory workers. 

However, Rockefeller became extraordinarily influential in education during America’s industrial expansion. 

The General Education Board, established in the early twentieth century and heavily financed by Rockefeller, became a powerful philanthropic institution. Rockefeller initially committed $1 million, and his contributions had reached $43 million by 1907. The organization funded schools, universities, teacher education, agricultural programs and other educational initiatives. (Resource⁠) 

Rockefeller philanthropy particularly encouraged vocational education. Historical research catalogued by the U.S. Department of Education’s ERIC system concludes that Rockefeller and the General Education Board encouraged vocationalism and repeatedly promoted vocational programs for students who were not expected to attend college. (ERIC⁠) 

The objective was not necessarily sinister. Industrial America genuinely needed trained workers, farmers, technicians, managers, engineers and professionals. 

But education increasingly became connected to the economic needs of an industrial society. 

Education and the Industrial Model 

Think about the traditional school day. 

A bell announces when work begins. 

Students move according to a schedule. 

Everyone in a particular grade generally receives similar instruction. 

Students are grouped primarily according to age. 

Subjects are separated into departments. 

Authority generally flows from administrators to teachers and then to students. 

Students complete assignments according to deadlines and are evaluated according to standardized criteria. 

After completing the required sequence, students receive credentials demonstrating that they successfully completed the process. 

This structure is remarkably effective at organizing millions of people. 

That was one of its strengths. 

Mass industrial society required institutions capable of operating at tremendous scale. Factories standardized manufacturing. Corporations standardized management. Governments developed bureaucracies. Schools similarly developed systems capable of educating enormous numbers of children. 

The historical relationship should not be exaggerated into the claim that schools were literally designed as factories. American mass education resulted from numerous political, religious, civic and economic forces. 

Nevertheless, industrialization clearly influenced the environment in which modern schooling developed. Historical scholarship describes the emerging public-school structure as involving public funding, community-wide enrollment, teacher training, age grading and standardized instructional practices. (DOI⁠) 

Rockefeller’s General Education Board also promoted concepts of efficiency, rational management, scientific agriculture and business-oriented modernization, particularly in the South. (Resource⁠) 

These ideas fit naturally into the industrial age. 

The question today is whether they fit the twenty-first century. 

The Economy Has Changed 

The industrial economy rewarded the ability to perform repeatable tasks reliably. 

The emerging economy increasingly rewards something different. 

Machines are becoming exceptionally good at repetitive work. Software can process information. Robots can manufacture products. Artificial intelligence can write, calculate, analyze information, generate computer code and perform tasks that once required substantial human labor. 

That changes what education should accomplish. 

Teaching students simply to memorize information becomes less valuable when enormous quantities of information are instantly accessible. 

The scarce resource is increasingly not information. 

It is the ability to use information intelligently. 

Students need to know how to determine whether information is accurate, combine knowledge from different disciplines, solve unfamiliar problems, communicate persuasively and turn ideas into something valuable. 

Yet too much education continues to reward students for producing predetermined answers. 

The future requires people capable of asking better questions. 

Schools Should Teach Entrepreneurship 

One of the largest shortcomings of traditional education is its limited emphasis on ownership and entrepreneurship. 

Students commonly learn how to become employees but receive relatively little instruction about becoming employers. 

A student may graduate knowing algebra, biology and literature while knowing almost nothing about: 

• starting a company; 

• reading an income statement; 

• understanding cash flow; 

• obtaining financing; 

• evaluating an investment; 

• negotiating a contract; 

• understanding credit; 

• calculating return on investment; 

• managing employees; 

• selling a product; 

• buying real estate; 

• investing in stocks and bonds; or 

• using technology to create a business. 

These are not fringe skills. They influence people’s economic lives for decades. 

Financial literacy should therefore be treated as a fundamental part of education. 

Education Should Become More Individualized 

Industrial systems depend heavily upon standardization. 

Human beings are not standardized. 

One student might understand mathematics in twenty minutes while another requires two hours. The second student may excel at mechanics, sales, art or computer programming. 

Yet traditional education frequently moves both students through material according to approximately the same calendar. 

Technology gives us an opportunity to change that. 

Artificial intelligence and adaptive educational systems could increasingly allow students to progress according to mastery rather than merely time spent sitting in a classroom. 

Teachers would remain critically important, but their role could evolve. 

Instead of primarily delivering the same information to everyone, teachers could increasingly become mentors, coaches and intellectual guides who help students develop judgment, curiosity and discipline. 

Bring the Real Economy Into the Classroom 

Imagine a high school where students were required to create something of genuine economic value before graduating. 

Students might establish a small business. 

Another group might design an application. 

Others could rehabilitate a house, construct a building, develop a marketing campaign, manufacture a product or manage a simulated investment portfolio. 

Students interested in skilled trades could learn electrical work, plumbing, construction, welding or advanced manufacturing alongside mathematics and science. 

Business students could analyze actual companies rather than merely memorize definitions. 

Financial education could teach students the practical differences among debt, equity, cash flow, assets and liabilities. 

Failure would also become part of education. 

An unsuccessful business project could potentially teach more about entrepreneurship than memorizing fifty vocabulary terms about entrepreneurship. 

Education Must Move From Compliance to Creation 

The industrial economy had enormous demand for people who could reliably follow established processes. 

The emerging economy places an increasing premium on people who can create new processes. 

That requires a fundamental change in educational philosophy. 

Schools should certainly continue teaching discipline, mathematics, science, history, literacy and civic responsibility. The answer is not eliminating traditional academic knowledge. 

Knowledge provides the foundation upon which creativity operates. 

But students should also learn how to think rather than merely what to remember. 

They should graduate understanding how money works, how businesses operate, how technology changes industries and how to continuously teach themselves new skills. 

Most importantly, education should develop agency. 

The question presented to students should not merely be: 

“What job are you going to get?” 

It should also be: 

“What are you capable of creating?” 

Rockefeller’s generation helped build institutions appropriate for an industrial America. Those institutions contributed to extraordinary increases in literacy, productivity, scientific development and economic growth. Rockefeller philanthropy itself supported significant educational expansion and modernization. (Resource⁠) 

But institutions should not become permanent simply because they were successful in the past. 

America has moved from the agricultural age through the industrial age and into the information age. We are now entering an era dominated increasingly by artificial intelligence and automation. 

Our educational philosophy must evolve with it. 

The school of the future should not resemble a factory designed to move everyone down the same assembly line. 

It should resemble an innovation laboratory—a place where students learn, experiment, build, invest, communicate, collaborate, fail, adapt and ultimately create. 

The industrial age needed standardized workers. 

The twenty-first century needs adaptable thinkers, skilled professionals, entrepreneurs and creators. 

Our educational system should be designed accordingly.