Vocational Education or College Education?

I found this article from the Washington Post very interesting please read the article (note the civility of the disagreement) and then join the discussion.

For those of you who don't want to read the article but want to participate in the discussion... basically the article was a discussion based on Chris Peters plan that would give both college-oriented and job-oriented students an equal chance. His 3 step plan is as follows:

Step 1:

Condense all universal high school requirements down to those which can be completed within two years and which consist of standards that are essential for the development of an informed citizenry and ensure that the student has the basic skills and knowledge base necessary for life-long learning. Then require all students to master these super-standards before starting either upper-level, college preparatory courses (AP/IB, intermediate algebra, chemistry, etc) or voc ed. course

Step 2:

When high school students reach the end of their sophomore year, present them with four choices:

(1) Continue on a college preparatory path leading to a four-year university or a four-year college transfer track at a community college. This choice would be contingent upon their having passed a standardized exit exam in English composition and literature, health and environmental science, elementary algebra and geometry, U.S. history and government and economics; or

(2) Enter a community college vocational program of their choice , with close supervision and support by their high school and continued access to the high school's extra-curricular activities. This would be contingent on their passing the same battery of exams the Choice 1 students take. Using existing and underutilized community college vocational programs means high schools would not have to reinvent the vocational wheel at their own sites, or:

(3) Receive intensive tutoring in high school, if unable so far to pass all or some of the exams, until they do so. They would have up to two year to climb over those barriers, and then an extra two years of free schooling to take AP and other prep classes on the college track if they so desire. This choice is just for those who want college prep their last two years of high school, including any who started the vocational track, choice 2, but changed their minds, or:

(4) Quit school and choose some other path.

Step 3:

Create a simple report card to evaluate the instructional effectiveness of individual high schools that everyone could understand. It would consist of five simple and largely unfudgeable - measures of the school's success: its pass rate on the two-year exit exams; its rate of graduate enrollment in four-year colleges (either right out of high school or as community college transfer); its AP/IB test-taking rate; its rate of students earning vocational certifications within four years of completing the exit exams; and its rate of graduates earning bachelor's degrees within six years of completing the college preparatory program.

The three steps would eliminate the high school diploma (an utterly meaningless document) and all standardized tests at the high school level except the eight subject-specific exit exams.

I think this is a discussion our school district should have... I don't agree with eliminating the high school diploma but I do think there is merit in much of Mr. Peter's plan. I also share some of the concerns of Mr. Mathews that there is a danger in sending students on one track or the other at the age of 16 (though many European countries do so at a much younger age and I don't believe it is the student's choice, the system decides).

So what do you think?