Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

Expendable_Red_Shirt t1_j6dvkoz wrote

Reply to comment by PleaseBmoreCharming in The Maryland Education Blueprint is Old Wine in New Skins by S-Kunst

I honestly don't get /u/S-Kunst's criticisms.

They seem mad that we're establishing vocational programs that were largely taken away even though they're pro vocational programs?

They're mad we're not providing vocational programs for engineers (a job that famously usually requires a college degree) or starting early for singing/athletes when we don't have a problem producing singers/athletes and those really aren't the jobs schools should be emphasizing....

This is going to allow far more kids to jump onto a vocational track far earlier and get a head start. They seem to be furious that it's not exactly what they'd do... which is silly.

1

PleaseBmoreCharming t1_j6e7bti wrote

Took the words right out of my mouth. I think if they took the time and actual re-read what they were talking about and not just start jotting down their gut reaction on things they would see it as not as bad as they initially thought. Not the first time I've seen post by theirs where I had these same thoughts.

1

S-Kunst OP t1_j6edzjk wrote

As I said, I will continue to read and reread, to better understand. But when they provide all the classes a student in each grade will take, and there is nothing which indicates technical programs or intro to careers, nor space for them , I have to believe they are not going to be included.

0

Expendable_Red_Shirt t1_j6ewohr wrote

>and there is nothing which indicates technical programs or intro to careers, nor space for them ,

There's a literally goal for 45% of students to have completed a 450 hour apprenticeship by the time they graduate along with studies of local, domestic, and international programs, barriers etc. But OK, vocational isn't included.

1