|
icantfindaname posted:fixing school funding wouldn't really help that much, the root cause of urban poverty is that there are no jobs in post-deindustrialization and white flight urban cores. in theory it's possible better schools would cause a positive feedback and start the regeneration of those areas, but much more likely it will just allow a lot more people to flee those areas and find work elsewhere. rust belt cities that aren't gentrifying anytime soon will not be fixed by fixing the schools Isn't gentrifying a bad thing? Doesn't it push low income people out of the area due to rising costs of living? I've never heard it talked about as a good thing. It's just an influx of people that are already middle or upper class moving to a low income area causing prices to rise. I've never heard it talked about as a low income area whose people then were able to claw their way to middle/upper class. I might be reading too much into your comment. Are you saying there is something wrong with people fleeing jobless areas? If an area of a city or even a city, has lost it's jobs, what is the value to take jobs to the people if the people can leave? While I like the idea of fixing the area and providing jobs, I think it's rather cruel to make sure that the people there are stuck there until one day things turn around for them. Creating jobs is not that easy of a task where a politician can just walk through a neighborhood and suddenly everyone is employed. Giving people in jobless areas the means to find new jobs with a better education is a great answer. And if that means they leave the area they grew up in so be it. The people left may be slightly worse off with every person that leaves, but it seems a less cruel answer than making sure no one has the tools to leave a bad situation. If creating jobs for that area were an easy answer that could be done overnight I would see your point, but since it's hit or miss with a really high miss rate I disagree. OwlFancier posted:I, uh, am assuming you wouldn't go outright segregation and force black people to go to vocational schools while only having academic schools for white people... I am all for providing vocational schooling along side academic schools. Thinking back to all the people I knew in freshman college, and how few of them actually made it to graduation, some/quite a few, are just not motivated enough to see it through, or are just a bad fit for that sort of environment. I quick search, and I am seeing that the graduation rate of first time students is 60%. http://nces.ed.gov/fastfacts/display.asp?id=40 While I am certain a portion of those not completing their degrees did so due to cost, it certainly was not the case for all of them. So providing an alternative would be a benefit to make sure we are not failing those that do not like the college environment. There should be more options than 4 year degree, minimum wage, and military.
|
#
¿
Nov 6, 2016 15:10
|
|
BAD POSTER ALERT!
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 28, 2024 21:35 |
|
|
Cat Mattress posted:Vocational skills are good but they should not be considered to be enough. Why aren't they enough? The lowest average the ones I listed have is 37k a year. And with the exception of one, they are all average to above average projected job growth. That's all I could think of off the top of my head but I think it covers the major ones when people talk vocational skills. I am not sure why some of you are rejecting vocational schooling being offered along side 4 year degrees. There are millions of people in the USA that make comfortable livings with these jobs, and to act like only 4 year degrees give you what you need is bogus. There are many 4 year degrees that you will be worse off with than any of the vocational jobs I listed. http://www.bls.gov/ooh/construction-and-extraction/electricians.htm http://www.bls.gov/ooh/construction-and-extraction/plumbers-pipefitters-and-steamfitters.htm http://www.bls.gov/ooh/construction-and-extraction/carpenters.htm http://www.bls.gov/ooh/installation-maintenance-and-repair/automotive-service-technicians-and-mechanics.htm http://www.bls.gov/ooh/production/welders-cutters-solderers-and-brazers.htm
|
|
#
¿
Nov 8, 2016 02:05
|
|
|
A big flaming stink posted:So are we talking vocational as a substitute to undergrad, or are we talking about letting kids leave K-12 education for vocational training? The former isn't that objectionable (although there is pretty strong evidence that working skilled trades wears down your body like nothing else) but the latter has the potential to leave young adults crippled in pursuing jobs in the broader market. Especially relevant since skilled trades experienced higher unemployment rates during the Great Recession (iirc, feel free not to take me at my word), not to mention the complete unwillingness to retrain workers whosoe field is replaced by automation or simply made obselete. K-12, you finish that, then you get choices of 4-year degrees or vocational skills. Whether that is subsidized or free wasn't what I was discussing. But I see it as a list of choices for you to proceed, then the government in some way helps move you down that path. I wouldn't see the benefit of allowing kids to drop out of highschool for a vocational skill. Was that discussed and I completely missed the post?
|
|
#
¿
Nov 8, 2016 02:48
|
|
|
pgroce posted:The answer isn't more so-called vocational education, which is just a socially inferior educational track to funnel ostensibly inferior students into. A far better answer is the destigmatization of the trades (along with a dose of perspective about the "modern trades"), along with making the benefits of "university education"—a basic core of cultural literacy and class education that makes it easier to get jobs, loans, and many other things in our society—available to everyone, along with the primary and secondary education necessary to take advantage of it. What exactly are you advocating here? Do you think that if we make everyone read Shakespeare and write a 5 page paper on it they suddenly qualify for a loan? The class distinction that exists between a vocational jobs most 4 year degree jobs is wage. They are support jobs for the 4 year degree and up jobs. It has nothing to do with all the classes in a 4 year degree that are there to round a person out. Where is the time going to come from in order to round everyone out? Are we to add to the k-12 system that already sees too many drop outs? Or do you propose that all vocational degrees now require all the fluff that is included in 4 year degrees? It seems like you want to add to the barrier of an advanced education by making students jump through more hoops(classes). If someone wants to take a vocational degree and elect to add all the extra liberal arts requirements on themselves, they certainly can now. But all it does is increase the time it takes to complete their education, and probably add to their debt. No one will look at their college transcripts and go, "Wow you took a college Theater class, you suddenly get a car loan." It seems like you are making a correlation between liberal arts classes that most students sleep through and wage that just isn't there.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 9, 2016 00:41
|
|