Back in 1997 fresh out of college I had interviewed at a teaching shop. As a part of the interview process I was asked to present on the topic of "Our education system is outdated and needs a revamp of the syllabus" or some similar topic.
Playing the devils advocate I had put forth the position that The role of our education system is not to teach everything about the latest technology but to provide a framework on which we could build our knowledge base. And it is performing that role sufficiently well.

When I entered the job market It was for a role which applied a fraction of my learning. As I continued working I learned new things.

Stuff which were two lines in one of my text books expanded to thousand page standards document. And then each page of the standard document expanded to 10 pages of architecture spec. 20 pages of implementation spec and 50 pages of verification spec. And this consumed nearly half a decade of my work life.

For my class mates who worked in different domains those two lines were some unimportant technical details which they had to memorize for their Exams and forget the next day. And never use again.
I was reminded of this incident recently when I saw a school kid raising the same Issue. For him, his school was teaching him outdated technology(Word 2003) where as 2007 was already available(BTW My employer who was a leading player in technology at that time thought that word 97 was more than enough for us). What will the kid do two years later when he has mastered word 2007 and word 2010 arrives in the market? What will he do when he enters the job market and sees that the current version of MS Word is 2015? Or horror's of horror's his employer uses OpenOffice? Does he expect training on the latest incremental/decremental tech at every step in his life?
Or should the school rather teach him the fundamentals of word processing and leave him to build on this scaffolding as per his requirements.