Get Schooled

By Jeff

September 12, 2007 8:33 AM | Link to this

My Standard Operating Procedure is to go for the highest standard available and beat it. Even if it nearly destroys me - and a couple have pushed me right up to the limits of sanity - I WILL prove myself worthy of said standard.

Its why I will not stop until I get a PhD.

It is why when I was considering going military, the USMC was really the only branch I was actively considering.

And I could name countless other examples from my life.

Since I hold everyone to that standard, I believe college prep should be the ONLY standard in HS. No lazy way out. You do it, or you fail. Either option is ENTIRELY in your hands, but there IS NO safety net.

But I forgot. Schools are more worried about passing the lazy bums than actually TEACHING them something.

By jim d

September 12, 2007 8:39 AM | Link to this

Here we go again

By jim d

September 12, 2007 8:48 AM | Link to this

Unless we are prepared to consider offering a vo tech alternative school in lieu of a regular HS we must keep a vo tech track in order to prepare the children that won’t be attending college an opportunity to enter the work force prepared for success.

But hey—whatta I know?

By V for Vendetta

September 12, 2007 8:49 AM | Link to this

We can’t compare them until we actually have MORE votech classes! With so many districts dumping votech left and right, this is a moot point — and a perfect example of why our system is so screwed up.

College aint for everyone, AND THAT’S OK. Once these districts get that through their (thick) heads, we’ll all be better off. Of course, by then it will be too late and the dropout rate, failure rate, and teacher suicide rate will have skyrocketed to epic proportions.

I’m only half-joking.

By jim d

September 12, 2007 8:55 AM | Link to this

Scuse me there Jeff,

Let me make sure I understand what you just said. We should teach them all to be above being plumbers, electricians, auto mechanics, bus and or truck drivers, and such, fail them —turning them out with absolutely no marketable skills.

Is that about it?

Have you a plan to get the Latino’s to do all that work?

By CMS

September 12, 2007 8:56 AM | Link to this

I graduated high school in ‘94 with a College Prep and Vo. Tech dual seal diploma. I opted to go to college because it was what I wanted to do. Often times in our public educational system we sensationalize college and hold vocational schools in a lower light. This is totally the wrong perception to give to students. One path is not greater than the other because the truth of the matter is a person with a vocational degree can make just as much money in a shorter amount of time compared to someone with a four year bachelors degree … provided he or she really applies themselves. Both plans are relevant in today’s technologically driven society.

College prep and vocational tracks have often been part of the source of classism that exists in some schools. Therefore to stream line both standards which will ultimately look like college prep will only make a bad situation worse.

By jim d

September 12, 2007 8:58 AM | Link to this

So V,

You don’t think the dropout and failure rates will really increase?

:-)

By Jeff

September 12, 2007 8:58 AM | Link to this

jim:

A CP-trained HS grad can THINK and has a proven capability to LEARN.

In my experience, the only “training” worth a hoot was on the job. Even in the CS field, I’ve probably learned more in my 6 months in Macon than I did in 5 years getting my BS - and I’m a PROGRAMMER that focused on PROGRAMMING while earning my BS!

By jim d

September 12, 2007 9:03 AM | Link to this

Bridget,

To address your question. Is one really better than the other

NO—They both have a place. Something I guess that our lawmakers are having touble understanding.

By jim d

September 12, 2007 9:05 AM | Link to this

Thanks, jeff.

YOU just made my case.

By Jeff

September 12, 2007 9:07 AM | Link to this

Jim:

We already have tech-training schools in this state - the Tech Schools. We don’t need to turn HS into them. The Tech Schools do a GREAT job of providing the training to become plumbers, mechanics, etc.

But even they require basic skills that a Vo-Tech program graduate does not usually have.

Better to graduate HS with the ability to DECIDE to be a plumber than being routed to being a plumber at an early age because you thought you’d never be able to be more.

By JustMe

September 12, 2007 9:37 AM | Link to this

There is no ‘better’ it is just ‘different.’

If a student has career aspirations to become a carpenter, why would they go the college prep route? It doesn’t make sense for that student. In that case, the Tech Diploma is a ‘better’ choice.

If a student has career aspirations to become a doctor, why would they go the Tech route? It doesn’t make sense for that student. In that case, the College Prep Diploma is a ‘better’ choice.

Can students make career decisions in high school? Sure they can!

Can students change their minds on their careers after high school? Sure they can! Neither diploma ‘locks’ the student into a career choice for the rest of their life.

A carpenter can decide to change careers and become a doctor. All they have to do is get the proper education to do so.

A doctor can decide to change careers and become a carpenter. All they have to do is get the proper education to do so.

Why are people so hung up on this?

By jim d

September 12, 2007 9:41 AM | Link to this

I don’t know jeff,

I could show you a handfull of 16-17 year olds hacks that I know personally that will not be attending college that have the ability to set in front of a computer programm—tear it down and rebuild it. These same kids struggle with regular classes in HS. If we go to a total CP curriculum, I fear we will dumb it down so bad it would look like water running through a sieve. So how do you see that benefitting those that want an advanced education?

No my friend—Mo Vo tech schools are in order. Teach regular classes with an emphasis on many of the different fields of interest that a student may wish to focus on. It’s called Choice

By jim d

September 12, 2007 9:44 AM | Link to this

Dang Just me,

Again we concur.

By jim d

September 12, 2007 9:50 AM | Link to this

I find it amusing that we guarantee kids with disabilities a Free Appropriate Public Education (FAPE) Yet we don’t make that guarantee to kids without disabilities. If we did we would see an abundance of Vo tech high schools.

By Jeff

September 12, 2007 9:50 AM | Link to this

jim:

Without a college degree, those same kids will be flipping burgers at McD’s before they step foot in an office as a programmer.

By jim d

September 12, 2007 10:02 AM | Link to this

I’d giving 2:1 odds on this one.

These guy’s will not only step foot in an office as programmers but will own the office.

And you can take that one to the bank!

By HS Teacher Too

September 12, 2007 10:22 AM | Link to this

Jeff, I think you are missing the forest for the trees here. What GOT you your programming job was your college training in it. They knew you had some basic level of ability and understanding as evidenced by your degree, and that you would be able to, in short order, adapt that knowledge to the specific goals and skill they needed. I’m not saying all programmers must be college-educated; but all programmers at some point along the way demonstrated a background knowledge that got them in the door.

If that background knowledge came from a vo-tech program, or even just fiddling and being brilliant (and having some way to demonstrate it on paper to get an interview) I imagine it would be no less valid.

I am 100% in support of keeping, and expanding our voc/tech programs. Students (and the marketplace) need alternatives. I’m not even talking about “learning styles,” but if you want to go there, surely we need an avenue for tactile learners.

Jimd, Amen to your comment about FAPE for non-disabled students. And a double-amen to the watered-down classes that might result from all this. Might result? I misspoke. They are already here; all that’s left is to get worse. We’ll have to watch the universities’ responses — will they adjust their freshmen classes to incorporate remediation, or will we just see the numbers of kids in remedial classes skyrocket? Time will tell …

As to Bridget’s question, No, I don’t see any problem with requiring the same amount of credits, as long as we maintain a meaningful method of choice for the tech students. If we require the same amount of credits today, but tomorrow we creep in more restrictions, and then next week more, and so forth to the point of effectively forcing the students down a CP path, we do everyone a disservice.

By HS Teacher Too

September 12, 2007 10:36 AM | Link to this

JustMe,

I think the people are hung up on it are not the ones “affected” by it. The people who make the rules, after all, were not Tech students. They (the “educrats”) think that simply SAYING everyone gets a CP education will make it so. Of course they are wrong, as we have said so many times on this blog. The CP designation will just become even more meaningless, because we all know that kids can, and do, work at different levels for infinite reasons, some “fixable,” and some not…

I’m 100% with you. Take the diploma path that best suits your goals. Change your mind in 10 years, and make the accomodations in your life that will allow you do to what you’ve decided you prefer. I’m of the mind-set that anything you want badly enough, you’ll find a way to do — and I adamantly believe seeking new/different/more education is something that fits that category.

By SET

September 12, 2007 10:40 AM | Link to this

Choice is always good and high school students should not have to sit next to or even be in campus with other students who have no committment whatsoever to the program.

Moreover not everyone is intelligent enough to take science, foreign language, or even english clases requiring a 9th grade reading level. So they shouldn’t have to.

Proletariat children don’t have to be burger flippers. With training they can do a number of occupations that still pay a living wage. But the training had better start at puberty and they have to start working much earlier than Ken and Barbie who go to University.

By jim d

September 12, 2007 10:59 AM | Link to this

Here’s a thought.

If we were to change our attitudes from a one-size-fits-all approach to one of “all sizes fit”, perhaps we could then focus on finding where they fit rather than laboring to hammer the square peg into the round hole of education.

By HB

September 12, 2007 11:01 AM | Link to this

Yes, one is better than the other. Of course, it depends on the individual student as to which one that is. Both should be offered, not only to benefit students, but society on the whole. We need well-trained people who can fill tech jobs! Why would we only try to prepare kids for college, leaving those not suited for college prepared only to work at Mickey D’s? And we need to get over the idea that the votech route is “easier.” A high school votech track should be tough, but appropriate to the content. Example: my AP English teacher also taught business English. She demanded a lot of her students, including reading some literature like Catcher in the Rye, but they read fewer works of fiction than the CP class and had fewer lit-based writing assignements, focusing more on instructional writing and comprehension, business correspondence, etc. The course was not easy, but it had a appropriate content focus.

Where’s Oldschool this morning?

By Jeff

September 12, 2007 11:05 AM | Link to this

jim:

When you have HSs with even 1000+ students and MAYBE 50 teachers, you REALLY don’t have the time or resources to do this.

To pull your idea off in the REAL world, you need EXTREMELY LOW student-teacher ratios (10:1 or lower). While 60 kids still is a bit much, a teacher can focus MUCH more individual time on 60 kids than 150+.

By RW

September 12, 2007 11:05 AM | Link to this

Have any of you actually looked at the proposal? No one is suggesting dumping vo tech, just trying to make sure that vo tech students have adequate basic knowledge to function in the world when they graduate. The requirements are only 1 each of math, English, and science every year, plus 3 social studies and 1 PE somewhere along the way. Do you think it’s OK to graduate vo tech students that can’t read, speak adequate proper English to get a job, or balance a check book?

By jim d

September 12, 2007 11:13 AM | Link to this

OMG, HB

Are you suggesting that a teacher actually asked students to read a book that has been one of the favorite target of censors since its publication?

Was she fired?

By GOB

September 12, 2007 11:17 AM | Link to this

Without a college degree, those same kids will be flipping burgers at McD’s before they step foot in an office as a programmer.

Yeah, I hear Bill Gates still works the night shift at Burger King.

By high school teacher

September 12, 2007 11:23 AM | Link to this

Well, I see that nothing has changed with this blog!

It saddens me to think that the person who made the statement, “I believe college prep should be the ONLY standard in HS. No lazy way out.”, was actually in a classroom with students.

Vo-tech does NOT equal lazy.

By Jeff

September 12, 2007 11:24 AM | Link to this

GOB:

And how many Bill Gates’s are there?

99.99999% of the time, no college degree means you don’t stand a CHANCE getting a job in computing. Matter of fact, MOST programming jobs that are available at any given point require 5+ years programming EXPERIENCE (Professional level, not school-related) AND AT LEAST a Bachelor’s degree.

And I should know - I was searching in field off and on for about 3 yrs.

By jim d

September 12, 2007 11:27 AM | Link to this

Jeff,

Segregated schools for vo tech wouldn’t have to require teachers to all be certifed teachers. Many retired tradesmen could be utilized.

RW,

Let me answer your question with a couple of questions.

Do you think it’s ok to fail a student because they fail to grasp advanced math concepts or a scientific concept they will never use?

Do you think we might just take a lesson from the way parents measure their children’s success? Their assessment is not generally based on one factor, but on their child’s cumulative experiences in education, work and life.

Perhaps focusing more on preparing them for work and life would behoove us all.

By Jeff

September 12, 2007 11:33 AM | Link to this

HST:

In my experience, both with students and other kids in my life (family, friends, kids of friends, church, etc), at LEAST 75% of the time a vo-tech kid was simply a lazy kid that COULD have done the CP work if they had put forth the effort.

By jim d

September 12, 2007 11:34 AM | Link to this

Oh my Jeff,

Having a college degree does not assure success.

I know of college educated people that ended up in prison. Some living on the streets and many people without a degree that own their own business’s. One without a HS degree that is the largest employer in the county he resides, owns properties around the globe and a plane to get him to them.

Another with only a HS diploma that owns a company grossing over mid- 8 figures anually.

Please share your definition of success.

By Jeff

September 12, 2007 11:39 AM | Link to this

jim:

Tradesmen are a no-go. You’d have to change the structure FAR more than simply building vo-tech schools. (Which I still maintain we already have - we have a Tech school within about an hour’s drive of ANY SINGLE SPOT in this state. Maybe SLIGHTLY further out, but not much!)

ALL teachers have to be certified and “highly qualified”. Retired trademen do NOT meet this criteria…

By Lee

September 12, 2007 11:42 AM | Link to this

Oh Lord, here we go again…

Educators, who have spent their entire life in academia, whose salary structure is based on how many degrees they have (regardless if the degree is relevant or not), think that the only measure of a person’s worth is if they get a college degree.

Bullcrap.

I’ve said this before, and I’ll say it again and again. I have used the three W’s (welding, wiring, and woodshop) that I learned in high school industrial arts far more than any of the college prep classes I took.

This whole college prep curriculum or nothing is more of the same “let’s group everybody into the same class” social engineering failure that has caused the general decline in the school system over the past 30-40 years.

By HB

September 12, 2007 11:44 AM | Link to this

Well, this was two years before a student went to the school board asking that the book be banned (booked stayed in the curriculum by one vote). Funny thing is, there weren’t too many complaints about that one. Down where we were, religious overtones got people more worked up. The English dept was very clever about it. When parents complained about Wiseblood, their kid could read a replacement book, come in after school to discuss it with the teacher, and take a test/write a paper on it. If parent rumblings got too loud, they didn’t give in to those complaints, but the next year quietly replaced the book (before the next group could complain) with something equally blasphemous like Their Eyes Were Watching God, and the cycle would begin again. It usually took 2 or 3 years for a book to rile up too many people. They hoped by doing this they could prevent a book from ever being banned by the board as that would set a precedent and open the door for parents to try to dictate the entire curriculum. They felt, though, that Catcher was vital to the CP/pre-AP program and too well known to disappear unnoticed, so they chose to fight for it rather than try to pull off another switch.

By jim d

September 12, 2007 11:47 AM | Link to this

Change the damn criteria Jeff. geez if we can have a shop teacher running the largest school system in the state surely we can have a licensed tradesmen teaching his trade.

By jim d

September 12, 2007 11:50 AM | Link to this

HB,

You age yourself. :-)

By Janine

September 12, 2007 11:52 AM | Link to this

RW…RE: “The requirements are only 1 each of math, English, and science every year” followed by the assumption that without this requirement schools would ” ….it’s OK to graduate vo tech students that can’t read, speak adequate proper English to get a job, or balance a check book?”

Just because a student doesn’t take trig and organic chemistry, or science in math in the college prep progrssion does not mean he/she …how did you express it..can’t read, speak adequate proper English to get a job, or balance a check book?” Look around you for goodness sake! At least 75% of those contributing to our society today did not do the college prep path in high school …did not take the advanced science and math and are not employed in fields that require a college degree. It is a great disservice to our young students today to drum in their collective heads that the only way to become a contributing member of our society is to go and complete college! There are many paths to a successful life and most don’t require a college degree.

By Lee

September 12, 2007 11:53 AM | Link to this

Jeff, maybe those vo-tech kids had no interest in sitting behind a computer screen for the rest of their lives.

Maybe before you throw off on the tradesmen, you should try to pass the exam to become a certified electrician, or certified HVAC (heating and air), or certified plumber, et al.

Might open your narrow mind a little bit…

By Jeff

September 12, 2007 11:56 AM | Link to this

jim:

I’m still a proponent of making GA schools online-ONLY. TRUST me, I have ZERO problem changing the entire system!

By Janine

September 12, 2007 12:02 PM | Link to this

To answer your question today, Bridgett: It’s the old Apples and Oranges thing. Both are good…and good for you! OH…and I think jimd is right on when he mentioned having licensed tradesmen teaching their trade. One who is make or has made a good living as an auto mechanic is absolutely Highly Qualified to teach a student that skill! I had one of my really gifted students tell me that he didn’t want to go to college. He loved working on cars, felt he had a talent for it, and wanted to do an apprenticeship with his uncle who ran a successful auto mechanic business.

By jim d

September 12, 2007 12:03 PM | Link to this

Jeff,

Cool—then we are in the same book, albeit different pages.

By Jeff

September 12, 2007 12:04 PM | Link to this

Lee:

I could study for one week - less probably - and know enough to pass ANY such test you throw at me with at LEAST an 80%.

They AINT that hard, and more than that it goes back to my whole point: Teach them to THINK FIRST, and they can LEARN anything!

By Janine

September 12, 2007 12:07 PM | Link to this

OH…and IMO, Middle School is the place to begin discussing and offering classes that lead to career options that include vocational paths as well as college prep

By Jeff

September 12, 2007 12:10 PM | Link to this

Also, in regards to those who want to learn a trade and start their own business:

Learning a trade is only HALF of starting a business. You’ve got to know marketing, accounting, and other such, and if you grow to where you have more than a dozen or so employees, you need management skills.

In other words, you need the very thing a college-level College of Business program will give you, even AFTER you’ve learned the trade…

Therefore, should we not be preparing ALL to go to college- even if they have a decade+ long break between leaving HS and starting college? After all, the very school I graduated from traditionally has more 40yos than 20yos….

By jim d

September 12, 2007 12:10 PM | Link to this

Jeff,

I just love your positive attitude at times regardless of how erroneous it may be. :-)

By jim d

September 12, 2007 12:12 PM | Link to this

Janine,

I agree, middle school is where it should be decided and HS is where it should be put in practice.

By jim d

September 12, 2007 12:20 PM | Link to this

Uhm Jeff,

One need NOT have all those skills, they simply need be smart enough to a) know where to find the answers or b) surround themselves with people with those skills.

It isn’t rocket science.

By Jeff

September 12, 2007 12:24 PM | Link to this

jim:

Never underestimate me when it comes to a test. I GARAUNTEE you, given one week to do nothing but study, I can pass nearly any test you give me, with ZERO prior knowledge. The only exceptions to this rule are Calc and Chemistry.

More on topic:

I spent 5 yrs tutoring Programming. I saw enough in that time to draw some conclusions about learning a skill first vs learning how to think first.

If a person was trying to learn programming without first learning how to think, 99 times out of 100, they wound up coming to me, about to fail the class.

If they knew how to think first and happened to be trying to learn how to program, their programs were typically very nearly perfect, but they just had one or two slight hangups that they couldn’t quite get without coming to me. Their test grades were typically in the A/B range.

The ones that couldn’t think are the ones that got me the most frustrated - and that continued into my teaching career.

I really don’t mind if people make mistakes when doing something. We ALL do - I even ran a program wrong yesterday that I BUILT!! But I was able to detect that I was running it wrong and fix my process.

HOWEVER, I wouldn’t be working here if I couldn’t think!

By Lee

September 12, 2007 12:29 PM | Link to this

Jeff, here’s the link to purchase the 2008 National Electric Code, all 822 pages of it.

Have fun next week.

BTW, some of the shrewdest businessmen I ever met were selling coon dogs off the back of a truck in a flea market (no pun intended) in Alabama.

One more thing, one of the main things I learned when I went back for my MBA after about 15 years of “real world” experience was that most of those 28 year old Phd’s couldn’t run a business if their life depended on it.

They could sure spout off the buzz words though…

By jim d

September 12, 2007 12:31 PM | Link to this

Holy thoughtlessness!!

I better close my business of 40 years since I am incapable of rational thought without a college degree!

Why didn’t I realize that before? Well probably because I lack a college degree.

By SET

September 12, 2007 12:36 PM | Link to this

Jeff: Your position that schools should use college prep as the norm for students sound like something an “Educator” might say if they are young and idealistic, that is to say utterly clueless about real life.

Only a minority of all students have the intellectual ability to do college level work. And a lot of them are no longer participating in the public school systems (at least in the Urban areas, Large Cities & States)

Have you seen what’s attending urban public schools?

Your policy is what’s causing the disconnect between proletariat/underclass students and education and society in general. You seem unwilling to match the student to the educational program, instead insisting that the students much change to fit your preconceived idea of what they should be able and willing to do.

This gets you violence, drop outs, vandalism, and resulting underclass pathology we have grown like mold since we changed our school models in the 1960s.

I don’t even think you respect “Choice” - that is allowing the families to enroll their students in college prep, vocational, agricultural, military, football, or whatever programs. You want to be dictator and set the rules of life for everybody else.

Well, no one has died and made you King.

By Janine

September 12, 2007 12:37 PM | Link to this

You know, Jeff, before the “everybody has to go to college craze”, our country was quite successful with 90% of its “thinking” people without college. In fact, we are standing on their shoulders now…You are absolutely right that successful people have to know how to think!!!However,Some of our greatest thinkers never saw the inside of a college classroom. Then, like now, most jobs do not require college. In fact, many say that there are too many people with college degrees and not enough to fill the positions that do not require them

By HS Teacher Too

September 12, 2007 12:49 PM | Link to this

Jeff,

spelling tests included? ;)

By jim d

September 12, 2007 12:51 PM | Link to this

Actually Lee,

The 08 edition of the NEC won’t be adopted in most states until around 2010. Jeff wants a copy of the 05 edition for exam purposes since it takes states about 2 years to ammend or approve the changes in each code edition.

Lottsa luck Jeff.

By jim d

September 12, 2007 12:54 PM | Link to this

Oh Lee,

Think we should tell Jeff he has to document 4 years in the trade before he is even qualified to take the exam, or just let him flounder a bit?

By Jeff

September 12, 2007 1:02 PM | Link to this

jim:

In other words, you trust your electrician - who DOESN’T have to undergo a criminal background check and who DOESN’T have to be liscensed by the state in anything other than owning a business - more than a teacher - who DOES have to do BOTH aforementioned things - around your kids?

(Personally, I like their practice though. Wish teaching would STOP saying “you have a degree, here’s your classroom”!)

By JustMe

September 12, 2007 1:05 PM | Link to this

SET -

Sometimes you sound really ignorant. Anything that you disagree with on this blog, you claim that it sounds like an ‘educator.’

That is like anything that a republican disagrees with must be ‘liberal.’ Even though they have no clue what the word ‘liberal’ really means!

Try to have a more open mind and also a wider (and more accurate) vocabulary when you want to stick labels on someone or someone’s ideas.

By jim d

September 12, 2007 1:12 PM | Link to this

your electrician - who DOESN’T have to undergo a criminal background check

Whose? mine? Everyone of them within the past 12 months.

Sorry to tell you this but we work in secured areas. (you know that pesky old homeland security thing)

Do they make teachers do that too? I mean comply with Homeland Security background checks?

By jim d

September 12, 2007 1:18 PM | Link to this

In SET’s defense, can we say adjective?

Educator— “young and idealistic”

By jim d

September 12, 2007 1:23 PM | Link to this

Hey Jeff,

just out of curiosity how is it that we read about so many teachers having sexual issues with students and then discover it has happened more than once with the particular teacher. Don’t those back ground checks reveal these previous offenses?

By Old School

September 12, 2007 1:27 PM | Link to this

Confession: I did NOT read all the blogs on this dead horse and frankly I could not care one iota less if my remarks are way off base.

We are coming full circle…again. Our CTAE programs (vocational or whatever the name du jour is) are being shut down or shoved aside and all the while the success of every school is being based on a test (SAT) that is required to get the training only 20% of the jobs require. 80% of the technical jobs do require training beyond high school but let me assure you, there is NOTHING Mickey Mouse about the skills & smarts required to be successful in them!

Ideally, high school “vocational” students would chart a course of study that is EXACTLY THE SAME as the college prep’s student with the exception of foreign language (medical careers students excepted). The higher maths and sciences are crucial in many technical areas. That would open far more doors than taking the easy way out. It is all to obvious that far too many of the adults who are making life-altering decisions for students have not set foot in a technical college in the past few years. It’s a vastly different world and it takes well-prepared people to handle it. I’ve done both the technical college and the 4 year university. I’ve taken the knowledge and skills I got in the tech school and the life enhancing experiences of university and made an amazing life for myself. I encourage my students who haven’t a clue as to their futures (other than “I’m going to UGA”) to give our technical college a try…if they can get in.

And I’m STILL waiting for someone to explain the foreign language requirement for a college prep diploma. 2 years of French in high school and zero in college? Honey, please!

By Jeff

September 12, 2007 1:40 PM | Link to this

Old School:

THANK YOU!

You make the very case that I have been trying to make: put the emphasis on CP in HS (with the Vo-tech classes as electives, which they are even under the current proposal), and use the Tech Schools to get more in-depth training in a given trade.

For example: My two younger bros are perfect for this argument: both are roughly equivalent to me as far as academics go (middle bro struggled more, but maintained a similar GPA to me and youngest in HS - good enough to qualify for HOPE).

Middle bro is more mechanically inclined - to the point that I call him if something happens to my car. He has put my CD player in my car, as well as a satellite radio. He’s been to a tech school (no diploma yet), as well as KSU and a 2 yr school (hey, he turns 21 next week, still trying to figure out WHAT he wants!).

Youngest bro is the most likely of the three of us to get accepted to MIT, USC, UGA, GT, basically anywhere the kid wants to go. (Something like a 3.98 GPA, unknown what his SAT score is)

BOTH got a CP diploma (technically, youngest gets his next May). BOTH are choosing FOR THEMSELVES what to do post-HS.

By Old School

September 12, 2007 1:41 PM | Link to this

“Tradesmen are a no-go. You’d have to change the structure FAR more than simply building vo-tech schools. (Which I still maintain we already have - we have a Tech school within about an hour’s drive of ANY SINGLE SPOT in this state. Maybe SLIGHTLY further out, but not much!)

ALL teachers have to be certified and “highly qualified”. Retired trademen do NOT meet this criteria…”

Jeff, you are SO WRONG! In 1973, our school became a comprehensive high school. 6 of us were hired STRAIGHT OUT OF INDUSTRY to teach in the new vocational center. We were hired for our expertise, put through 6 weeks of intensive training in classroom management, and charged with helping students develop job entry-level skills in an open-entry, individualized setting. Not only did it work for us, it worked throughout our state. IT STILL WORKS in those schools who have kept the programs. We hired 3 men out of industry just 4 years ago to staff our automotive, metals and construction labs. When I retire, my replacement will come from industry.

May I suggest you take a day off this spring and attend the Georgia SkillsUSA competitions in Atlanta? And maybe even the Nationals in June in Kansas City, MO.? Or just drop by some of the fine high school programs anywhere in your area. The level of skill these kids have is incredible. I have had many, many of my students go straight to work after high school as truss designers, residential design drafters, mappers, survey crew, detailers, and the like. The majority of the companies they work for have put them through technical college and even 5 year engineering programs.

WE NEED QUALITY VO-TECH (CTAE) PROGRAMS IN OUR HIGH SCHOOLS. And we need continuous funding to keep them current.

By jim d

September 12, 2007 1:41 PM | Link to this

Old School,

explain the foreign language requirement for a college prep diploma.

I’ll give it a shot today using a Bushism.

Learn more so you can talk “gooder.”

By SET

September 12, 2007 1:46 PM | Link to this

Just Me: It’s the “Educators” that got us in the mess we are in.

Most of the products of the public schools around here can’t read or write and nobody wants to hire them.

Not true generations ago.

Glad I got your attention. What do you mean “sometimes” I sound ignorant? (That’s a favorite word my older less educated relatives use when they don’t like the news they are getting.)

I think I’m consistent in the points I make.

Jim D: In CA teachers, janitors and parent volunteers at a dance all have to be fingerprinted and the results examined before they are given access to the school grounds or the students. I believe there is a provision that the private schools may run fingerprint checks also but I’m not sure if they are required to do so.

This process allows the schools protections that individuals hiring a nanny or business hiring a bookkeeper are denied by this government. Because private industry are denied quick and cheap access to public records they must resort to proxies such as credit scores, MMI results, and rudimentry backgrounding and other vetting to keep out undesirables.

Thus the rise of profiling for private employment and not for public employment. Both methods have disadvantages.

The schools will hire time bombs because they are not profiling. Criminal records will only keep out certain people. Private Industry will hire people with distant or episodic criminal activity where the candidate has not reached the level where trouble is shown in the behaviorial profile.

By Jeff

September 12, 2007 1:48 PM | Link to this

Old School:

Perhaps I should rephrase:

“retired tradesmen do NOT meet the NCLB definition of ‘highly qualified’ and therefore CANNOT teach in the schools of 2007”

By SET

September 12, 2007 2:03 PM | Link to this

Old School: I believe the foreign language requirement in High School serves to make sure the student has a grasp of English and the structure of language in general.

And it doesn’t matter what the foreign language is, Russian is just as good as Spanish, Latin or French.

So I can respect the requirement even though it is time consumning. The point of a HS program for college bound students is to prepare them to learn - or make them more teachable upon arrival in University. Thus the emphasis on language skills and the PSAT/SAT emphasis on Verbal Score. If that isn’t high enough they can’t manage a real college.

This is different from the way Voc Ed students learn which is more the see and do approach. More sophisticated vocations require the ability to work with manuals and reference guides but you still never write a term paper or read comprehensive texts.

Which goes back to the thread we’re posting under. Remember the CA Graduation (8th grade reading level) tests and how some people are failing in droves? Those that struggle with that childish test are not college material and frankly they aren’t high school material either.

If we don’t have vocational education what are we to do with those children? Send them off to the nearest drug dealer and pimp? If we don’t have a good vocational education program and make it available at puberty - which is when the differences between the haves and have-no-smarts become apparent - we have nothing for these kids to use to bind them to society at large.

As it is now we bore and frustrate the left side of the bell curve until they are 18 when we kick them out of HS, minus the diploma because they can’t pass the graduation test. then they go to Jr College and finally start Vocational Training that they should have been in all along. That is if they haven’t gone to prison and/or started producing unwanted children and thereby missed out of Jr College Voc Ed.

By HB

September 12, 2007 2:03 PM | Link to this

Actually, a lot of colleges do require foreign language as part of part of the core curriculum and specific majors sometimes require courses as well. Don’t colleges usually require two years (or more outside GA) for students to even be admitted? High school foreign language teaches 2 things: the language itself and more importantly, how to learn a foreign language. Students need to be prepared to take an intro level language course if required in college, and they won’t be if they’ve never studied foreign language at all. A student entering Spanish 101 would likely struggle if they had never taken a language course before, but if they had 2 years of high school German, I bet they’d be fine. It’s just part of laying the groundwork for higher learning. And 2 years of h.s. is very basic — at best equals two college semesters, but many colleges recommend that students with only two h.s. years sign up for 102 rather than advanced to 2nd-year courses.

Those courses aren’t just about content, but also about the thinking skills learned. My university actually had one part of the core curriculum (a critical thinking requirement) that could be fulfilled either by taking a mid-level language course or calculus because the thinking and reasoning processes used in those courses were considered similar despite the vastly different content.

By HS Teacher Too

September 12, 2007 2:08 PM | Link to this

Jeff, Again I think you miss the point.

Let’s say retired tradesmen do not meet current requirements if they were to move immediatly from industry to the classroom.

So? That’s EASY! If it doesn’t already exist, you create an accelerated “classroom management” program like OldSchool spoke of; you require the background checks, and you put whatever other checks and balances in place that you like, short of making these people go back to school for four years to learn diddly. (Personal bias coming through here: I am NOT a fan of education degrees … I think there is merit in about 1 to 2 years’ worth of the courses and that’s it.)

End result is that the people teaching tech courses, by having BEEN TECHNICIANs IN THE FIELD ought to be de facto “highly qualified” — would you rather learn auto mechanics from someone who read all about it in a book/online, or someone who did it for 20 years and got grease under their nails?

Likewise, I’d rather learn construction from someone who used to build houses, than from a physics teacher … individual building skills of individual physics teachers notwithstanding. :)

By SET

September 12, 2007 2:14 PM | Link to this

Jeff: Skilled tradesmen are teaching at the Jr Colleges and not even a high school diploma is required if they have the trade qualifications and the school likes them.

Around here in CA the Jr Colleges have the best Voc Tech - money, equipment, physical plant and well paid staff. They don’t advertise it but high school students are being admitted to take classes concurrently with their high school programs. Not all Jr Colleges have the same Voc Tech, one may have a nursing school, another have a huge Auto Mechanics program, another a Electron Microcopy certificate program, etc.

CA is very proud of the Jr College system. You can have 20 thousand students enrolled on a large campus. You can parachute in from Mexico and have arrest warrants up the gazoo and no high school diploma and they take you in with open arms. They have day care and social services, will help people apply for financial aid. There are student jobs.

One thing they usually don’t have is student housing and student medical services. Those who get credentials in Voc Ed at these schools usually have jobs waiting.

My concern is that by then more people than necessary have been lost to the prison-industrial system that could have been saved if they’d been taken into Voc Ed when they were younger.

By Old School

September 12, 2007 2:23 PM | Link to this

Jeff, I passed the NOCTI in Architecture with flying colors. (National Occupational Competency Test). I passed the ADDA Certification Exam to become a certified mechanical drafter.

I most certainly was NOT trying to agree with you on the CP thing. I think Vo-tech students ought to have academic courses that are related to business/industry/world of work. That is not to say that any of it should be less challenging. Every course should be relevant and grounded in the real world. Opportunities to job shadow, apprenticeships, and internships will enhance their training.

Every student needs a comprehensive course in managing their personal finances and lives.

By Old School

September 12, 2007 2:24 PM | Link to this

Jeff, I passed the NOCTI in Architecture with flying colors. (National Occupational Competency Test). I passed the ADDA Certification Exam to become a certified mechanical drafter.

I most certainly was NOT trying to agree with you on the CP thing. I think Vo-tech students ought to have academic courses that are related to business/industry/world of work. That is not to say that any of it should be less challenging. Every course should be relevant and grounded in the real world. Opportunities to job shadow, apprenticeships, and internships will enhance their training.

Every student needs a comprehensive course in managing their personal finances and lives.

As far as NCLB…do you really think that the hundreds of vocational teachers who “don’t qualify under NCLB” are going to be fired? Especially when there is a general shortage of teachers now?

By jim d

September 12, 2007 2:26 PM | Link to this

Thanks SET,

But I fear states in the Southeast may not be as diligent as Ca.

research has indicated that teachers, coaches, employees, who are child sex offenders in some of these states;

1)there are an awful lot of them;

2)they generally get probation,

3)not all of them lose their teaching license, and

4)many seem to be ”allowed to resign” and just move to another school.

Child Abuse on all levels appears to be more of a pastime than a crime here if not the whole country. The MEDIA only uses the subject matter first for ratings and second to lead us to believe progress is being made.

By federal law we have to send our children to school. It then follows, by law, people who molest should be charged with a federal crime and banned from all schools.

But then that is just one mans opinon.

By SET

September 12, 2007 2:26 PM | Link to this

PS: The local JC has a auto, culinary arts, theatre, nursing, police, & building trades programs (and many other one or two year voc programs), as well as bookkeeping and accounting, typing, computer certificates, etc. JC Academic students can transfer to Univ of CA or to the lesser State University colleges for 4 year and graduate degrees. Tuition is relatively cheap.

Our local parole office is pushing/requiring the parolees arriving back in town from state prison to go to the JC and try classes in something useful. Many of them are ready for it at that point in their life, and it beats working all the time. They have night and weekend classes and internet classes for suitable courses. The campus is VERY busy and the parking lots are larger and busier than the airport’s.

The town loves the Jr College but doesn’t support the urban school district. The JC maintains standards and kick people out - and produces homeowners and taxpayers.

The School District produces kids who can’t read and acts as if it is the fault of the students.

By jim d

September 12, 2007 2:38 PM | Link to this

vo tech at the jr. college level is great but why wait and waste 4 years in a cp HS program that one has no intention of using? Why subject kids that are in HS with a desire to continue their education at the college level to the disruption caused by those that aren’t.

Why not develop vo tech to a higher degree at the HS level? This would benefit both groups and make teaching a whole lot more enjoyable.

By Old School

September 12, 2007 2:44 PM | Link to this

HS Teacher Too, it’s called the New Teacher Institute and Valdosta State has an excellent one. I’ve mentored new teachers from this program and they are still successfully teaching today. 2 of the three we hired were in my high school drafting classes.

My biggest problem with the way things are going today is that we CTAE teachers are being forced into the same mold as academic teachers…and our class structure couldn’t be more different. Academic classes are pretty much homogeneous and everyone is doing the same thing at the same time. Our classes have all grades, all abilities, all interest levels, and all levels of experience (first timers through 5th & 6th semester all grades). In any given class, I’m covering a minimum of 4 completely different subjects/skill sets.

Off topic but brilliant: My students have learned to point to their heads when the admins ask where the word wall is! We “talk technical” in my lab, using the terms of the industry everyday.

SET: In my South Georgia lab, students still show me some respect and I am very much in control. I’m not afraid to “get in their faces” and can back down the biggest of ‘em. I just don’t have to. My biggest problems come from students who don’t want to be in my class but are here because we have too few electives and there is no other class available.

By Jeff

September 12, 2007 2:44 PM | Link to this

jim:

It goes back to preparing the kid for as much as possible.

With a CP program, even if it is NEVER used, it is MUCH easier to pick it back up if you decide to at a later point.

As virtually anyone of your age can tell you, trying to go back at your age and learn the things typically found in a CP program today is INCREDIBLY hard. Going back to REFRESH it is almost as easy as riding a bike.

Why do you want to cripple kids so?

By Old School

September 12, 2007 2:48 PM | Link to this

jim dear, any citizen can report any school personnel suspected of any wrongdoing to the PSC and ask them to investigate.

By jim d

September 12, 2007 2:50 PM | Link to this

Jeff,

Why would you cripple those that will use their CP diploma to further their education by subjecting them to less at the HS level? That is what I see demanding an entire CP curriculum as doing. JMHO, but students that haven’t the desire to go on to a 4 year program somewhere should not be slowing down the ones that will.

By jim d

September 12, 2007 2:54 PM | Link to this

Old School,

Yeah Right!! have you been to Gwinnett, where the super violates federal laws and doesn’t even get a hand slap?

Yes, we did our “investigation” but to what avail? Nothing was done.

By Janine

September 12, 2007 2:58 PM | Link to this

“Why do you want to cripple kids so?”

The crippling of kids begins by drumming into their heads that the only acceptable way to have a successful life is to go to college!!!

By jim d

September 12, 2007 3:00 PM | Link to this

oops, sorry.

“did get our investigation”

By Janine

September 12, 2007 3:04 PM | Link to this

BA/BS, MA/MS, Phd. DO NOT ensure much less equal adequate sense, adequate skills, adequate $$$, or adequate success one’s life.

By Jeff

September 12, 2007 3:04 PM | Link to this

jim:

So you track kids in a similar fashion to what we already do.

The difference being that where once the standard was “graduate HS”, the standard is now “graduate HS prepared to do SOMETHING with your life”.

Much like how I typically graded my classes, now you would put the truly exceptional ones in one track - one that sets them up for AP level classes, for example, the truly average kids in another track - one that sets them up for getting into a decent college without having to take any remedial classes, and the truly dumba$$es that don’t give a rat’s tail about anything in a third track - one that sets them up to be prepared to go to college if they decide to, but they may have to take a remedial class or two once they get there.

All of a sudden, you’ve even solved HOPE’s problem of people not being able to stay. You’ll still get a few - the ones that graduated from that third track but still somehow qualify for HOPE - but it won’t be NEAR the crisis we see today.

By jim d

September 12, 2007 3:14 PM | Link to this

The bottom line here Jeff is a word of advice I’ve offered many times over.

“Find something you love and pursue that passion.”

I highly recomend doing so and feel we should not only be encouaging our youth to do so but making that as easy as possible to accomplish. That is how I envision a vo tech HS program working.

By Jeff

September 12, 2007 3:15 PM | Link to this

Janine:

Tell ya what:

Live two lifetimes.

In one, grow up watching your parents work their a*******es off in hourly “blue collar” type jobs, never having enough money to even cover the BILLS most months, and watch your dad lose his job as the plant literally shuts down around him.

In the other, grow up watching your college-educated parents work in their white collar jobs with enough money saved to be able to send you to any college you want - money not an issue - where the only worry about money is that they don’t think they’re getting paid enough and there is no worry that if your dad doesn’t get a lot of overtime, Christmas is going to be EXTREMELY slim.

Tell me which one you would prefer.

Because I lived the first one, and I will do everything within my power to make SURE that MY KIDS live the second one.

Post-HS education is ABSOLUTELY ESSENTIAL and we CRIPPLE kids by telling them otherwise, and by not preparing them for said Post-HS education.

By JustMe

September 12, 2007 3:18 PM | Link to this

Having a PhD in many areas often results in less pay compared to Masters Degrees. Why? PhD’s are too specialized and there are too few jobs available.

More education does not automatically mean more money!

By jim d

September 12, 2007 3:20 PM | Link to this

Jeff,

I honestly feel much of our differences on this issue lie in that I don’t presume to know what that “Something” is for every student. That, “that something” must be the students choice, not that of the educational community nor that of a group of politicos and business people with their own agendas.

By Jeff

September 12, 2007 3:23 PM | Link to this

jim:

We are on the same page, quoting the same line there!

Our difference is that I believe the key is preparing them in HS to be able to choose POST graduation what they want to do and be ready to persue whatever it is.

Too often kids in HS get roped in to doing something because their friends are doing it or their bf/gf wants them to do it or their parents want them to do it.

I say let them get away from those stresses, find themselves, and know that they are prepared to persue the education that will allow them to be exactly what they want to be.

One of the main reasons I went into K-12 teaching wasn’t so much that I liked it or was good at it - truthfully, while I still say I am a great TEACHER (teaching material period - no classroom management, no politics) no matter the level, I am not cut out for K-12, and that is a fact I readily admit. I went into it because I wanted to make my HS mentor proud. He was a principal, and I wanted to follow in his footsteps.

It was only when I fell flat on my face that I came to my senses and went to the industry that I truly excel in.

But at least I had the education to do EITHER.

By jim d

September 12, 2007 3:27 PM | Link to this

Jeff,

You do know of course that there is help for those pent up hostilities?

By jim d

September 12, 2007 3:32 PM | Link to this

Maybe our difference then is in what we feel is the age of accontability.

I think many 13-14 year olds know what they want. Not all—but many. So I fail to understand why we should delay, deprive, or deter them from working towards those goals.

By HB

September 12, 2007 3:34 PM | Link to this

“Post-HS education is ABSOLUTELY ESSENTIAL and we CRIPPLE kids by telling them otherwise, and by not preparing them for said Post-HS education.”

Jeff, this is exactly the point that people are making when they say votech should be an option. We know not everyone is a good fit for a traditional college. Those students have a right to receive a high school education that will prepare them for the type of education they wish to pursue after high school. On the other hand, if we try to force kids into a track that they have neither the aptitude nor the desire to pursue, we are setting them up to fail or perhaps even drop out (what’s GA’s grad rate again?). Those are the kids that end up in dead-end jobs instead of tech school because they haven’t been shown that there are other oppotunities available to them. Some of which will pay more than my job, that I prepared for by earning a BA and MA at top-tier schools.

By high school teacher

September 12, 2007 3:45 PM | Link to this

retired tradesmen do NOT meet the NCLB definition of ‘highly qualified’ and therefore CANNOT teach in the schools of 2007

Yeah, and NCLB has done soooo much to help our schools.

I worked with a business teacher whose original degree was in economics. However, because econ is in the social studies curriculum, he couldn’t teach economics because he had not taken the Social Studies Praxis test to become highly qualified. How stupid is that!!

Our yearbook sponsor was the French teacher. Under her guidance, the students put together a stunning yearbook that won awards. However, yearbook is an English class. With the implementation of highly qualified, she can’t teach the yearbook class because she has not taken the English Praxis. And we wonder why teachers leave in droves.

Back on topic: how can the state department expect us to differentiate our lessons to meet the needs of all students, yet offer only one diploma option?

By Lee

September 12, 2007 3:46 PM | Link to this

Good God Jeff, give it a break. You’re starting to argue with yourself.

“Too often kids in HS get roped in to doing something because their … parents want them to do it.”

“I will do everything within my power to make SURE that MY KIDS live the second one”

By HS Teacher Too

September 12, 2007 3:47 PM | Link to this

Jeff,

I think I see part of where our philosophies differ here. You seem to think that only when kids are given a true (and I think we both agree that THAT isn’t happening these days) CP track are they prepared to think critically — to think at all, really — and then to make educated choices when the graduate. Am I correct here?

I think that students can get many, if not all, of these SAME skills in the tech classes they take in earlier (high school) years. There is just as much critical thinking that goes into analyzing a car’s problem, finding it, and fixing it as there is in any upper-level math class — and to some extent, there might be MORE critical thinking, as there may not be a readily-available book to look towards for an example of a similar problem. Likewise for deisgning the best way to build something in a woodworking/construction class, or a welding class. And there is certainly plenty of systems analysis in even a basic electronics class.

My point is, you’re advocating teaching these kids fundamental skills to be good decision makers, if I am reading you right.

I think they get that no matter which path they choose — and I might go so far as to say that with the state of “test, regurgitate, test, regurgitate” that we currently have in CP, the tech kids might be getting a BETTER education in this regard.

By Chris

September 12, 2007 3:49 PM | Link to this

Jeff:

I couldn’t disagree more about the necessity of a college degree. I am in the Technology field as well. I am a senior network engineer and have been in the industry for the better part of a decade now. I dropped out of college at 22 during the dotcom boom to get out into the world and get experience. I didn’t need a degree to land my first job working for one of the largest technology companies in the world. I spent the next six years traveling all over the country and europe building computer networks.

I made two or three times what my friends who finished up their degrees and went into entry level positions in local companies. Now I am back in school finishing my BS because I want to, not because it was needed to avoid being a burger flipper.

There was a time when it was a requirement to have a college degree to get into a certain job sector, but computers have changed a whole lot of that.

Universities need to go back to being places of higher education for people who want academic degrees. A practical education is 100x more relevant to most of today’s workforce and I can guarantee that when I hire Jr. Engineers that I look more at practical ability than college education. Give me a 18 year old geek with a CCNA over a 22 year old CS grad any day.

I agree that VoTech is just as viable a career path as College Prep more so in that you gain actual hands on experience in the career you want to enter. Combine that with industry certifications where applicable and you can graduate high school and be extremely viable in the work force, by the time you would get out of college you will be four or five years behind.

It isn’t even an issue of Bill Gates, Steve Jobs, or any of the other Silicon Vlley wonder kids, but the IT field in particular is hugely populated with adults without college degrees because the universities have actually been Dreadfully behind the times in adapting to the needs of the industry.

By Jeff

September 12, 2007 3:56 PM | Link to this

Chris:

As someone who was searching for a CS-related job this decade (indeed, this year), I think I know somewhat more of what HR Departments are saying they are looking for…

By jim d

September 12, 2007 4:02 PM | Link to this

your determination never ceases to amaze me!

By Chris

September 12, 2007 4:06 PM | Link to this

Jeff:

As someone who /hires/ IT people. I know a bit about the whole process as well. Please don’t make assumptions.

By Chris

September 12, 2007 4:09 PM | Link to this

Jeff:

As someone who interviews and hires IT people, I believe I know a bit about the whole process as well…

By Jeff

September 12, 2007 4:18 PM | Link to this

Lee:

My “second one” comment was in regards to how I grew up vs how my kids will grow up as a direct reflection of parental academic achievement. I grew up with two parents that graduated HS, but didn’t go any further academically.

MY KIDS will grow up with BOTH parents college-educated, likely with at least one of them holding a PhD.

HST2:

“you’re advocating teaching these kids fundamental skills to be good decision makers”

Essentially, yes.

“You seem to think that only when kids are given a true (and I think we both agree that THAT isn’t happening these days) CP track are they prepared to think critically — to think at all, really — and then to make educated choices when the graduate. Am I correct here?”

Agreed, and yes. I’ve seen FAR too many Tech prep kids that can barely tie their shoe, much less frame a house!

HB:

If you prepare them for college, they are also ready for a Tech School. The same cannot be said in reverse. Therefore, prepare them for college so that they have the OPTION POST-HS of becoming the person THEY want to be, rather than the person SOMEONE ELSE thinks they should. (Note that this is the exact standard my parents have held my brothers and I to, and it is the same one that I shall hold my kids to.)

jim:

Maybe our difference then is in what we feel is the age of accontability.

Clearly. I say let the kids get out of HS, spend that last summer with their friends, let reality set in that August when they’re no longer in school, and THEN decide for themselves where they fit in with the world and exactly what they want to become.

You advocate letting kids that in many cases haven’t even started puberty yet make decisions that will literally affect them the rest of their lives.

By Jeff

September 12, 2007 4:31 PM | Link to this

All:

My brother and I have both done our share of spinning our wheels as far as “our future” goes.

He is doing it post-HS, floundering around taking various classes at various schools while keeping a variety of more “vo-tech” oriented jobs. His has so far lasted 2.5 years.

I did it post-college, floundering around taking jobs at a variety of levels (even including burger flipping, in the months where I was still in one class but did not yet have my degree). Mine lasted 6 months after graduation before I found the track that put me where I am now.

Which is better? All he has right now is a HS diploma with “college courses taken”, mostly gen-ed type stuff. I had a college degree with “major in__, minor in _”. Guess which one is more marketable? Here’s a tip: One has already spent 5 times as long as the other, with at least another couple of years to go….

By Jeff

September 12, 2007 4:37 PM | Link to this

Oh, I meant to add:

On the flip side, guess which one has more PRACTICAL knowledge about things? Tip: It ain’t the one with the college degree! :P

By HS Teacher Too

September 12, 2007 4:48 PM | Link to this

Here is an idea. I think part of the problem is that schools “dump” their lower-achieving kids into “Tech” classes. Might we have a tech/voc track, a CP track, and a third, parallel, lower-than-CP but not necessarily TRADES track?

This “academic” track could move more slowly than CP classes and maybe cover less material but more thoroughly, allowing time for some of the necessary remediation those kids will demand and require. The purpose of this program would be to prepare students to enter Junior Colleges, as opposed to four-year universities. It doesn’t force “the trades” on students with a mind to going to college, but does allow for the idea (the reality, really) that not all students are equally prepared —or preparable, necessarily — for college while they are in high school.

That might take some of those kids Jeff speaks of, that can barely tie their shoes, and instead of merely dumping them into tech/voc programs that perhaps don’t serve them well either, it would provide them an alternative and perhaps solve this problem we’re all in a loop over.

I know it’s not realistic here in Georgia, but assuming that it COULD be implemented, would it work, do you think?

By HB

September 12, 2007 4:52 PM | Link to this

Jeff wrote: “If you prepare them for college, they are also ready for a Tech School. The same cannot be said in reverse.”

And this is where I think you are wrong. Certain courses will better prepare students for tech, others for college. The business English class I mentioned earlier is a great example. One thing those students focused on was instructional writing. That is a very different style from literature analysis and the two are not easily interchangeable skills. I know because there are days that I use have use both styles in my work and have to “switch brains” to go from to the other. Throw in a journalistic task, and my brain is mush by 5:30. I think all students should learn different writing styles, but what’s wrong with giving greater emphasis to one or another based on a student’s goals?

My school in the mid-90s had an excellent vocational track with challenging courses. The most difficult diploma to earn was the joint Voc-CP track. I knew several students who did that because they were planning to go into engineering or architecture. They knew they were going to college and needed the CP track courses to be ready for the required core college curriculum, but also wanted to acquire techinical skills they knew would be valuable for their chosen courses of study. They did not pursue the vocational track for easy electives. In fact, they said several of the classes they took were more difficult than CP classes. All 3 tracks — CP, Voc, and joint — were good options and none could replace the others in preparing students for certain career paths. Why should we insist the student well-suited for Voc who has a passion for it spend their valuable education time on a CP track instead?

By SET

September 12, 2007 4:53 PM | Link to this

I though of something while reading the posts: People do not choose to be smart or dull. They can’t decide how smart they want to be. People are for the most part born smart they are not made smart by education.

The reason why we should not have half of our hs students in college prep is that over half of the population of HS students have IQ’s below 100 and are not suitable for college prep. That’s why so many are gone before a hs diploma and that diploma doesn’t qualify everybody for 1st year college work.

CP is not something we give or take away from the left side of the bell curve. It hurts them to be forced to sit in classes with the right side of the bell curve for years and have their failure rubbed in their faces. College Prep should at least be reserved for people who ask for it and other programs offered for those who know that they are better off elsewhere. And those programs should put people to work as early as possible.

By jim d

September 12, 2007 4:53 PM | Link to this

HSTII,

It could work if we had a class in shoe tieing

By HB

September 12, 2007 4:59 PM | Link to this

HS, we actually had that — general, voc, and CP — at my school until ‘93 or ‘94 when the state eliminated general (around the time the graduation test first went in). Is there still a certificate of attendance? That’s what we had when general was first eliminated. Basically a piece of paper that said you showed up for 4 years but didn’t earn a diploma. Kind of like people who attend college for four years, take enough hours, but never settle on a major, complete the core, or whatever.

By HS Teacher Too

September 12, 2007 5:11 PM | Link to this

HB, We had it too, where I grew up, only you actually DID earn a diploma — a “general” diploma as opposed to a “Regents” (CP) diploma. Of course there were honors and AP classes as well but those kids simply exceeded the requirements for CP; they weren’t part of a separate diploma track.

Last I knew certificates of attendance still existed. I never did understand the idea. It invalidates anything those kids did, and that’s hardly sensible if we want to keep these kids in school.

p.s. to jimd — I can tell you, we could certainly use courses in arithmetic! I routinely had freshmen who didn’t know their times tables! (And we could also use a course on telling time. I couldn’t believe I had high schoolers who couldn’t tell time.)

By jim d

September 12, 2007 5:18 PM | Link to this

Let us face it SET, we non-eductaors just ain’t smart enough to Choose what’s best for ourselves or our offspring so the education establishment has taken on the chore.

By jim d

September 12, 2007 5:22 PM | Link to this

HSTII,

Well memorization is now taboo and god forbid we have clocks with hands on them in this hi-tek age, so we can’t really fault the kids. I recall vividly being told my child should not memorize his times tabels and running right out and buying flash cards and a chart. These folks just scared the hell out of me.

By HB

September 12, 2007 5:31 PM | Link to this

I think the idea was to raise the value of a diploma by treating it as an earned degree with criteria that had to be met, a path followed, graduation test passed, etc. The state wanted to make it clear that those with diplomas did more than just show up, but created the certificate of attendance so those who didn’t meet the standards didn’t go away empty handed. Sort of a consolation prize…

By HS Teacher Too

September 12, 2007 5:52 PM | Link to this

Thanks, HB. I don’t agree with it, but at least now I know the logic behind it!

By DB

September 14, 2007 12:17 PM | Link to this

A little late to the party on this topic, but what strikes me as ironic is that out of one side of the mouth is coming, “Embrace diversity! Embrace our differences!” and out of the other side of the mouth is the proclomation that “All students are identical and have identical needs.”

So … which is it?

By Maggie

September 20, 2007 2:42 PM | Link to this

I teach high school at a district with Vo-tech and I’m FIRLY against it. Why? Because there are schools you can go to AFTER high school to get the training you need for vocational carreers, and sorry to say - those jobs by and large are disappearing or being snatched up by people with college degrees. Our vo-tech offers pre-nursing. That’s great. But you need to go to college to get a nursing JOB, so they are missing college prep classes, and this is why many nursing students FAIL their anatomy/phys. classes - they aren’t prepared. And they never actually become nurses because they can’t hack it in college. Most students are NOT hired straight from high school without post-secondary vocational training or college degrees - it’s a fact. No, college isn’t for everyone.. right now. But whose to say these students won’t return to college years later or their job require college degrees in the future? I think it’s selling kids short to stick them in vo-tech.