Skip to main content
Thursday, October 29, 2026Oct 29

This story is free to read.

Raise the drop-out age

President Obama’s State of the Union call for all states to raise their minimum school-leaving age to 18 could be dismissed as just another political exhortation that sounds good and perfectly reasonable, but is not apt to turn the gears in most state’s education machinery. Twenty-one states have already done it. Tennessee and seven other states have raised the minimum age to 17. And those that remain stuck at 16, for whatever reason, apparently are not easily moved.

That’s too bad. Whatever whiny arguments remain against raising the minimum school-leaving age — classroom costs, controlling students, restraining truancy — the benefits are too great to ignore. Here’s the short list, according to research by education and economic professors Henry Levin and Cecilia Rouse, reported Thursday in The New York Times:

Reduce the drop-out rate. Raising the minimum school-leaving age actually works to keep students in school longer and raise graduation rates. And that must be accomplished for both economic and social reasons. On the nation’s current track, about 1.3 million students drop out of high school annually. Three out of 10 tenth-grade students in American schools do not graduate. About 20 percent of the drop-outs are white or Asian; 45 percent are blacks and Hispanics.

The high percentage of drop-outs relative to the graduation rates of our formidable economic competitors paints an increasingly bleak picture, and a more dismal economic future. The United States led the world in high school and college graduation rates in 1970. Recent figures compiled by the Organization of Economic Cooperation and Development show that the United States now lags behind 20 other nations in high school graduation rates, and behind 14 nations in the percentage of college graduates.

Social costs vs. economic benefits. Studies prove that students who fail to get a high school diploma usually fall far behind the economic curve of higher educational achievers. They earn less throughout their lives, cost taxpayers more in social expenditures related to public assistance, health care and crime, and produce far less tax revenue and job productivity gains than higher earners.