School Reform: Thoughts?

hiddendriver34 said:I think you might have missed the real point of Smith's piece. It’s not really about some romanticized glassblower spending his nights lost in historical novels; it's about a worker who, in this new class-based society, is basically locked into the glassmaking trade for life, with zero doors left open for him to try anything else.

How exactly is he going to be "pigeonholed"? By whom, and for what possible reason???

He’d only "be pigeonholed" if he were forced into trade school simply because he drew the shortest straw. Or maybe because his last name starts with an M. Or... well, some other arbitrary factor that has absolutely nothing to do with him as an individual.

In reality, it’s more likely that he puts himself in that position—and if he decides he wants out, he should probably be the one to pull himself out. There isn't some federal law forbidding him from pursuing a different education. Is it hard? Sure, it’s difficult—but so what?

BTW, let's be clear: telling a story about some kid from early May or mid-May who somehow ends up as the CEO of the universe is about as relevant as me claiming I know a legendary figure like Mar who, in her hundredth year, chugs three liters of stout a day—which would mean I'm basically advertising alcoholism as a foolproof way to live forever.

hiddendriver34 said:Whose, and which one exactly?

Well, I think I actually laid all of that out pretty clearly in my last post.

Michelle Nelson4 said:I’m not really sitting here wondering what the future holds for glassmaking as an industry, but I suspect most kids currently enrolled in vocational high schools aren't particularly concerned with it either. If they actually cared about the history or the deeper context of their craft, they would have shown some interest back in middle school and opted for a different specialized academy altogether.
First off, we need to distinguish between whether these students are genuinely interested or not. Because let’s be honest—if they *are* interested, there are countless ways to master the trade without needing a formal diploma to get started.

If they aren't interested, why on earth are we forcing every single fifteen-year-old to make this impossible choice? It shouldn't feel like they have to decide between studying history or risking being stuck without a high school diploma entirely.

Continuing their education later is definitely an option through evening programs, and it should be available to anyone who has to step away from traditional schooling for any reason. My only gripe is that these programs shouldn't cost a fortune. It’s simply not true that they lose their shot at a degree; it just becomes a bit more demanding because of the credit requirements and catching up on missed coursework. Honestly, what’s stopping our standard high schools from letting students who missed certain classes make up those credits through a single intensive course or perhaps by adding one extra semester to their regular schedule?

Give me a break! Four years of general education? You really think that’s actually feasible?

Nicholas King said:How exactly is he going to be "pigeonholed"? By whom, and for what possible reason???

He’d only "be pigeonholed" if he were forced into trade school simply because he drew the shortest straw. Or maybe because his last name starts with an M. Or... well, some other arbitrary factor that has absolutely nothing to do with him as an individual.

In reality, it’s more likely that he puts himself in that position—and if he decides he wants out, he should probably be the one to pull himself out. There isn't some federal law forbidding him from pursuing a different education. Is it hard? Sure, it’s difficult—but so what?

BTW, let's be clear: telling a story about some kid from early May or mid-May who somehow ends up as the CEO of the universe is about as relevant as me claiming I know a legendary figure like Mar who, in her hundredth year, chugs three liters of stout a day—which would mean I'm basically advertising alcoholism as a foolproof way to live forever.

The pressure comes from society. The old way was actually more humane because it told a fourteen-year-old kid that their life wasn't set in stone at that exact moment and that all doors were still wide open.

The new system basically points a finger and tells them exactly where they belong, and if they want a change, they're on their own to "pull themselves out." The system isn't going to lend a hand.

Honestly, I still don't get why focusing solely on a trade without any general subjects would even take three years. A program like that should realistically only last one year day.

Brandon Foster7 said:They won't get bogged down in specific war dates, but they’ll definitely realize that war is garbage. They'll see how people try to drag them into a new conflict under the guise of patriotism, when really, it's just a way for the ultra-rich to pad their bank accounts.
Wars start over territory and ego, but you feed those ideals to an unsuspecting public. The people die while the architects of the war cash in.

It's simple, really, but you have to give everyone a fair shot at realizing that war and aggression aren't the answer.
Education gives them that chance; whether they actually get it is up to them.

History is life's greatest teacher.
Biology helps you understand evolution.
And geography? That’s just to make you believe the world is flat.

You can't learn this stuff in a history class. No nation is ever going to willingly teach you about patriotism, national pride, or religious fervor—all that nonsense used to cloud reality. It’s just a smokescreen they use when they need to prep the population for an invasion by another country.

urbantinker8 said:well, I guess...
firstly, things just look clearer on the white ones because those green tiles feel like they've been sitting around since the colonial era—all scratched up, greasy, and covered in lines.
secondly, considering those old chalkboards date back even further than that, they're just so incredibly gross; there's so much dust, hair, and grime embedded in them that just looking at one might give you contact dermatitis, and getting too close could probably trigger asthma.
thirdly, on a more personal note, I'd rather not have sandpaper for skin on my hands, so I suppose I'd prefer having a marker in my hand instead of dealing with chalk.🙂

but hey, I mean, I'll settle for the green ones if I absolutely have to, assuming we get some decent chalk and maybe upgrade to some modern chalkboards.🙏

and speaking of history and glassblowers, the Secretary of Education mentioned how much history matters to the glassblowing trade. okay, I can see her point to an extent, I suppose.
but then in the very next breath, she suggested that the history professors at that vocational school would have to drop general history entirely just so they could teach exclusively the history of glassblowing😲 🤣 🤦
yeah. that's clearly a matter of extreme life-and-death importance.
general history versus the history of glassblowing.🙂

so, that's the kind of "reform" she's talking about.🤦

Why wouldn't we focus on learning the history of our specific field, especially instead of that broad, general history nonsense?
You’re right; there’s an entire course dedicated to the history of law. I don't see what's so wrong with adding the history of electrical engineering to the curriculum at the engineering school. You spend all your time listening to Ohm's law, Kirchhoff's law, and Hertz's law—those men worked incredibly hard to reach those breakthroughs. Maybe someone could actually come up with something new based on their specific moves, devices, or ideas?

hiddendriver34 said:Sure, if they wanted to, there could be plenty of ways to support someone looking to level up their education. But right now? They’ve basically slammed the door shut on them.

I don't know the exact stats on how many tradespeople actually went to college (probably next to none), but I do know way more than 1% of them used to take an extra year of vocational school after finishing their initial three-year program. Now, that path is totally blocked.

Besides, I think that whole "Why would a glassblower care about history?" line is just incredibly condescending and snobbish. Look, his job is to cut glass and do it well. Honestly, the less time he spends filling his head with stuff he doesn't need for the workshop, the better.

It isn't that he’s being barred because he refuses to sit through some useless history or geography class just to pad out a teacher's schedule. It's a pure administrative mandate: three-year high school grads aren't eligible for college. If anything is creating a class divide here, this policy is doing it—and it's completely unnecessary.
Why bother imposing mandatory exams when there’s zero difference? Just let people take evening classes or rely on the SATs and entrance exams. It doesn't matter if they're wearing designer suits or work boots,

hiddendriver34 said:Sure, if they wanted to, there could be plenty of ways to support someone looking to level up their education. But right now? They’ve basically slammed the door shut on them.

I don't know the exact stats on how many tradespeople actually went to college (probably next to none), but I do know way more than 1% of them used to take an extra year of vocational school after finishing their initial three-year program. Now, that path is totally blocked.

Besides, I think that whole "Why would a glassblower care about history?" line is just incredibly condescending and snobbish. Look, his job is to cut glass and do it well. Honestly, the less time he spends filling his head with stuff he doesn't need for the workshop, the better.

It’s the system itself that’s doing the condescending, not that sentence.

hiddendriver34 said:Give me a break! Four years of general education? You really think that’s actually feasible?

The pressure comes from society. The old way was actually more humane because it told a fourteen-year-old kid that their life wasn't set in stone at that exact moment and that all doors were still wide open.

The new system basically points a finger and tells them exactly where they belong, and if they want a change, they're on their own to "pull themselves out." The system isn't going to lend a hand.

Honestly, I still don't get why focusing solely on a trade without any general subjects would even take three years. A program like that should realistically only last one year day.

Come on, let’s dial back the melodrama here. It isn't like the system is chaining a fourteen-year-old to a basement floor for life...

And honestly, can we pick a lane? Are we arguing based on the "general culture" our tradespeople should have, or is this really about letting people get an education whenever they feel like it while the public picks up the tab? If it's the latter—if that's the real issue—then what happens when you have an eighteen-year-old who enrolls in some random degree just because they couldn't get into med school? Why shouldn't we let them study anatomy on the side too, just in case they change their minds and don't want to commit to the full four-year degree?

I still don't quite grasp why studying a specific trade, without any general subjects, would even take three years. A program like that should last a maximum of one year day.

In the context of the current vocational training model, "one year day" actually means—once you subtract all the holidays and half the classroom instruction—only a few months spent actually working in a shop.

I certainly wouldn't trust those kinds of plumbers, masons, or electricians to build my house.

Brandon Foster7 said:They won't get bogged down in specific war dates, but they’ll definitely realize that war is garbage. They'll see how people try to drag them into a new conflict under the guise of patriotism, when really, it's just a way for the ultra-rich to pad their bank accounts.
Wars start over territory and ego, but you feed those ideals to an unsuspecting public. The people die while the architects of the war cash in.

It's simple, really, but you have to give everyone a fair shot at realizing that war and aggression aren't the answer.
Education gives them that chance; whether they actually get it is up to them.

History is life's greatest teacher.
Biology helps you understand evolution.
And geography? That’s just to make you believe the world is flat.

The thing is—and I'm thinking of a buddy of mine who taught at those three-year vocational high schools—they basically just waste time. They'll spend hours drilling cosmetology students on things like the lactose cycle within a cell and all that technical jargon that, let's be honest, they'll never use in their actual jobs. And more importantly, none of that helps them wrap their heads around basic common sense—you know, stuff like how evolution works, or the fact that vaccines protect against diseases rather than causing them, or that birth control is what prevents pregnancy (and no, drinking a Coca-Cola isn't a contraceptive method).
I mean, honestly, the way things have been handled until now (and frankly, how most of those vocational schools still operate) doesn't help anyone. We're just bogging students down with nonsense they don't care about and will never find useful in the real world. Those subjects really need to be scrapped entirely—or better yet, totally overhauled and reframed so they're actually learning skills relevant to their trades, alongside the absolute essentials that might actually stick for once.
Maybe, then we might actually end up with people who don't fall for conspiracies about the Earth being flat, or claims that vaccines cause autism, or that prayer alone cures cancer, or that rinsing your mouth with Coke prevents pregnancy. ☕

Nicholas King said:Come on, let’s dial back the melodrama here. It isn't like the system is chaining a fourteen-year-old to a basement floor for life...

And honestly, can we pick a lane? Are we arguing based on the "general culture" our tradespeople should have, or is this really about letting people get an education whenever they feel like it while the public picks up the tab? If it's the latter—if that's the real issue—then what happens when you have an eighteen-year-old who enrolls in some random degree just because they couldn't get into med school? Why shouldn't we let them study anatomy on the side too, just in case they change their minds and don't want to commit to the full four-year degree?

I still don't quite grasp why studying a specific trade, without any general subjects, would even take three years. A program like that should last a maximum of one year day.

In the context of the current vocational training model, "one year day" actually means—once you subtract all the holidays and half the classroom instruction—only a few months spent actually working in a shop.

I certainly wouldn't trust those kinds of plumbers, masons, or electricians to build my house.

Wait, what?😕

I didn't write anything even remotely dramatic. Honestly, you're the only one here seeing chains and basements in this conversation—that's all in your head.

nimblelynx7 said:You can't learn this stuff in a history class. No nation is ever going to willingly teach you about patriotism, national pride, or religious fervor—all that nonsense used to cloud reality. It’s just a smokescreen they use when they need to prep the population for an invasion by another country.

Why wouldn't we focus on learning the history of our specific field, especially instead of that broad, general history nonsense?
You’re right; there’s an entire course dedicated to the history of law. I don't see what's so wrong with adding the history of electrical engineering to the curriculum at the engineering school. You spend all your time listening to Ohm's law, Kirchhoff's law, and Hertz's law—those men worked incredibly hard to reach those breakthroughs. Maybe someone could actually come up with something new based on their specific moves, devices, or ideas?

It isn't that he’s being barred because he refuses to sit through some useless history or geography class just to pad out a teacher's schedule. It's a pure administrative mandate: three-year high school grads aren't eligible for college. If anything is creating a class divide here, this policy is doing it—and it's completely unnecessary.
Why bother imposing mandatory exams when there’s zero difference? Just let people take evening classes or rely on the SATs and entrance exams. It doesn't matter if they're wearing designer suits or work boots,

It’s the system itself that’s doing the condescending, not that sentence.

Are you seriously trying to compare studying law or engineering to a three-year vocational program for glass cutters?🤦
When you're actually studying, I guess it's only natural to dive into the deep details of a specific subject, whereas for a glass cutter, I suppose the priority is just knowing the practical side rather than the theory. Aren't you the one who has always been advocating for that very thing?🤔
So, if he doesn't care much for general culture—which, honestly, seems to be the modern trend of being narrow-minded—then I guess he definitely doesn't need a history of glass cutting either.

Nicholas King said:Come on, let’s dial back the melodrama here. It isn't like the system is chaining a fourteen-year-old to a basement floor for life...

And honestly, can we pick a lane? Are we arguing based on the "general culture" our tradespeople should have, or is this really about letting people get an education whenever they feel like it while the public picks up the tab? If it's the latter—if that's the real issue—then what happens when you have an eighteen-year-old who enrolls in some random degree just because they couldn't get into med school? Why shouldn't we let them study anatomy on the side too, just in case they change their minds and don't want to commit to the full four-year degree?

I still don't quite grasp why studying a specific trade, without any general subjects, would even take three years. A program like that should last a maximum of one year day.

In the context of the current vocational training model, "one year day" actually means—once you subtract all the holidays and half the classroom instruction—only a few months spent actually working in a shop.

I certainly wouldn't trust those kinds of plumbers, masons, or electricians to build my house.

Exactly.
Personally, I feel like for some similar trades, even three years isn't enough, so what on earth is a single year day of schooling supposed to accomplish?😲
I mean, I wouldn't even trust my trained hair stylist to handle anything delicate after just a meager year day of practice, let alone trust a technician to install an AC unit or do any wiring in my house.🙂

hiddendriver34 said:Wait, what?😕

I didn't write anything even remotely dramatic. Honestly, you're the only one here seeing chains and basements in this conversation—that's all in your head.

Sending a message to a fourteen-year-old telling them their life is effectively ruined forever.

No, it’s not pathetic—not even a little bit. God, I’ve got tears welling up again just thinking about that poor kid whose future you're trying to seal shut.

urbantinker8 said:well, I guess...
firstly, things just look clearer on the white ones because those green tiles feel like they've been sitting around since the colonial era—all scratched up, greasy, and covered in lines.
secondly, considering those old chalkboards date back even further than that, they're just so incredibly gross; there's so much dust, hair, and grime embedded in them that just looking at one might give you contact dermatitis, and getting too close could probably trigger asthma.
thirdly, on a more personal note, I'd rather not have sandpaper for skin on my hands, so I suppose I'd prefer having a marker in my hand instead of dealing with chalk.🙂

but hey, I mean, I'll settle for the green ones if I absolutely have to, assuming we get some decent chalk and maybe upgrade to some modern chalkboards.🙏

and speaking of history and glassblowers, the Secretary of Education mentioned how much history matters to the glassblowing trade. okay, I can see her point to an extent, I suppose.
but then in the very next breath, she suggested that the history professors at that vocational school would have to drop general history entirely just so they could teach exclusively the history of glassblowing😲 🤣 🤦
yeah. that's clearly a matter of extreme life-and-death importance.
general history versus the history of glassblowing.🙂

so, that's the kind of "reform" she's talking about.🤦

Did I seriously once buy a massive yellow sponge at $0.67 per piece from Target, or am I just losing my mind?

It was for some Pinterest project—lots of slicing and dicing involved...

If I haven't completely hallucinated that they sell them at $0.67, what’s the damage for a single sponge?

urbantinker8 said:well, I guess...
firstly, things just look clearer on the white ones because those green tiles feel like they've been sitting around since the colonial era—all scratched up, greasy, and covered in lines.
secondly, considering those old chalkboards date back even further than that, they're just so incredibly gross; there's so much dust, hair, and grime embedded in them that just looking at one might give you contact dermatitis, and getting too close could probably trigger asthma.
thirdly, on a more personal note, I'd rather not have sandpaper for skin on my hands, so I suppose I'd prefer having a marker in my hand instead of dealing with chalk.🙂

but hey, I mean, I'll settle for the green ones if I absolutely have to, assuming we get some decent chalk and maybe upgrade to some modern chalkboards.🙏

and speaking of history and glassblowers, the Secretary of Education mentioned how much history matters to the glassblowing trade. okay, I can see her point to an extent, I suppose.
but then in the very next breath, she suggested that the history professors at that vocational school would have to drop general history entirely just so they could teach exclusively the history of glassblowing😲 🤣 🤦
yeah. that's clearly a matter of extreme life-and-death importance.
general history versus the history of glassblowing.🙂

so, that's the kind of "reform" she's talking about.🤦

I highly doubt anyone would actually spend two years studying the history of glassblowing.

hiddendriver34 said:Give me a break! Four years of general education? You really think that’s actually feasible?

The pressure comes from society. The old way was actually more humane because it told a fourteen-year-old kid that their life wasn't set in stone at that exact moment and that all doors were still wide open.

The new system basically points a finger and tells them exactly where they belong, and if they want a change, they're on their own to "pull themselves out." The system isn't going to lend a hand.

Honestly, I still don't get why focusing solely on a trade without any general subjects would even take three years. A program like that should realistically only last one year day.

In the States, we don't have those weird three or four-year vocational tracks. It's basically twelve years of school like everywhere else, and then if you actually want to become a glazier, you just go apprentice under a pro who can teach you the ropes in six months.

urbantinker8 said:Are you seriously trying to compare studying law or engineering to a three-year vocational program for glass cutters?🤦
When you're actually studying, I guess it's only natural to dive into the deep details of a specific subject, whereas for a glass cutter, I suppose the priority is just knowing the practical side rather than the theory. Aren't you the one who has always been advocating for that very thing?🤔
So, if he doesn't care much for general culture—which, honestly, seems to be the modern trend of being narrow-minded—then I guess he definitely doesn't need a history of glass cutting either.

Exactly.
Personally, I feel like for some similar trades, even three years isn't enough, so what on earth is a single year day of schooling supposed to accomplish?😲
I mean, I wouldn't even trust my trained hair stylist to handle anything delicate after just a meager year day of practice, let alone trust a technician to install an AC unit or do any wiring in my house.🙂

I disagree. A university degree takes four years. An associate degree takes two. What’s it going to take someone three years to learn a trade—like mastering how to hold shears, foil hair, or frame glass? I’m not saying they’ll become a master craftsman overnight—honestly, you might not reach that level even after ten years on the job—but you can definitely pick up the technical fundamentals of a craft in much less than three years, especially if you spend that entire time focusing strictly on the trade instead of wading through endless general education requirements.

Nicholas King said:Sending a message to a fourteen-year-old telling them their life is effectively ruined forever.

No, it’s not pathetic—not even a little bit. God, I’ve got tears welling up again just thinking about that poor kid whose future you're trying to seal shut.

Fine, then swap out that "pathetic" phrase for something like "their professional destiny is permanently predetermined." Or is that still too dramatic for your sensitive soul?

Michelle Nelson4 said:I’m not really sitting here wondering what the future holds for glassmaking as an industry, but I suspect most kids currently enrolled in vocational high schools aren't particularly concerned with it either. If they actually cared about the history or the deeper context of their craft, they would have shown some interest back in middle school and opted for a different specialized academy altogether.
First off, we need to distinguish between whether these students are genuinely interested or not. Because let’s be honest—if they *are* interested, there are countless ways to master the trade without needing a formal diploma to get started.

If they aren't interested, why on earth are we forcing every single fifteen-year-old to make this impossible choice? It shouldn't feel like they have to decide between studying history or risking being stuck without a high school diploma entirely.

Continuing their education later is definitely an option through evening programs, and it should be available to anyone who has to step away from traditional schooling for any reason. My only gripe is that these programs shouldn't cost a fortune. It’s simply not true that they lose their shot at a degree; it just becomes a bit more demanding because of the credit requirements and catching up on missed coursework. Honestly, what’s stopping our standard high schools from letting students who missed certain classes make up those credits through a single intensive course or perhaps by adding one extra semester to their regular schedule?

Nothing actually stops them, but it rarely works out. Ever since this policy was put in place, we see maybe three to five students like that every single year. Only one student ever actually managed to make it through and get into their senior year on the regular track.

urbantinker8 said:Are you seriously trying to compare studying law or engineering to a three-year vocational program for glass cutters?🤦
When you're actually studying, I guess it's only natural to dive into the deep details of a specific subject, whereas for a glass cutter, I suppose the priority is just knowing the practical side rather than the theory. Aren't you the one who has always been advocating for that very thing?🤔
So, if he doesn't care much for general culture—which, honestly, seems to be the modern trend of being narrow-minded—then I guess he definitely doesn't need a history of glass cutting either.

Exactly.
Personally, I feel like for some similar trades, even three years isn't enough, so what on earth is a single year day of schooling supposed to accomplish?😲
I mean, I wouldn't even trust my trained hair stylist to handle anything delicate after just a meager year day of practice, let alone trust a technician to install an AC unit or do any wiring in my house.🙂

I compared two different levels of education. Even though they aren't on the same scale, I don't see what the big deal is. What's the problem?

Of course I’m going to advocate for hands-on practice over theory. Always. If we absolutely have to cram more subjects into a history teacher's schedule just to keep them busy—since having "surplus" staff is common in the private sector but feels like an insult in public education—then fine. Let them teach the history of glassmaking. Anything is better than listening to some instructor drone on about Napoleon's wars or the Roman conquests for the 74th time.

copperpuma11 said:Nothing actually stops them, but it rarely works out. Ever since this policy was put in place, we see maybe three to five students like that every single year. Only one student ever actually managed to make it through and get into their senior year on the regular track.

I mentioned this before regarding my best friend's situation. He’s a bus driver who decided he wanted to switch over to operating light rail. Big mistake. The training academy hit him with thirty different supplemental courses—everything from English and German to technical specs and even ethics classes. It absolutely hammered his bank account. Once he finally paid the fees and cleared all those exams, he felt a lot smarter—mostly because he realized what an idiot he was for signing up for the whole mess in the first place.

Probably the same deal where you guys have to retake astrophysics. Even if you passed it before, what they teach here just isn't the same. It’s not even the same language—it's different everywhere you go.

Quincy:

I suppose I was thinking about those Katjes gummies earlier, though I can’t quite put my finger on why they specifically crossed my mind today. It’s funny how certain snacks just sort of linger in the back of your head, isn't it? I was looking at some vegan candy options over at Trader Joe's the other day, and it made me wonder about the whole texture thing with fruit snacks. Some people seem to swear by them, while others find them a bit too chewy, or maybe not chewy enough, if that makes any sense. I guess I’ve always been somewhere in the middle, just drifting between different brands depending on what happens to be on sale at the local grocery store. Anyway, it’s probably just one of those random, wandering thoughts that doesn't lead much of anywhere, but there's something oddly comforting about the idea of a good gummy candy when you're just sitting around. urbantinker8 says: I guess I once had this massive, overwhelming corporate entity—one of those huge, yellow-branded giants you see everywhere—decide to buy up... $0.67 Am I just seeing things, or did someone actually put that in the offer? I guess maybe I’m just overthinking it, but I couldn't help but wonder if I misread the fine print or if my brain is just playing tricks on me today. I guess it was some Pinterest project I saw, something involving a bit of cutting... I guess I might have been slightly off base when I thought that... $0.67I guess it really depends on what you’re looking for, honestly... like, are we talking about a quick fix or something more substantial? I mean, if you just need a basic patch or a simple repair, it might not cost much at all, maybe just enough for some supplies and a little bit of time. But then again, if you're looking at something more involved, the price could jump up quite a bit depending on the scale of the job. It’s kind of hard to say without knowing the specifics, I suppose. Maybe it's worth checking around with a few local contractors or looking up some estimates online just to get a better sense of the ballpark figure. There isn't really a single answer, I guess.

I guess I just don't know.
I honestly don't really care, I guess.
I suppose I might as well just go ahead and pick that up myself, if I'm being honest.🙄
I guess if I’m teaching eighth graders, I should probably figure out whether I need to go out and buy eight separate sets of supplies—one for every single class—or if it’s more practical to just carry my own kit around in my bag all day. It's one of those things that seems simple until you actually start thinking about the logistics of moving between rooms, I suppose. Maybe it's better to have everything right there on hand, though carrying extra gear might get a bit heavy after a few periods.🤣
I guess I used to spend way too much of my own money on all sorts of school supplies and textbooks, though I suppose I’ve become a bit more sensible about it as time goes on.🙂
Quincy:

I suppose there's a certain kind of person who just refuses to grow up, though I can't quite put my finger on why that happens so often, maybe it's just an easier way to navigate things, I guess. It’s like they’re perpetually stuck in some sort of adolescent loop, avoiding any real responsibility while everyone else around them is busy actually functioning like adults, which feels a bit exhausting if you think about it too long. Maybe it isn't even intentional, just a slow drift away from maturity, but still, it leaves a bit of a mess for everyone else to clean up, I suppose. urbantinker8 says: I guess I have my doubts about whether they could actually stretch the history of glassmaking into a full two-year curriculum, though maybe there's more to it than meets the eye.

I suppose one really ought to ask the Secretary how she actually envisions this working on a global scale, though I'm not entirely sure what kind of answer we'd get. 😉

hiddendriver34 said:I disagree. A university degree takes four years. An associate degree takes two. What’s it going to take someone three years to learn a trade—like mastering how to hold shears, foil hair, or frame glass? I’m not saying they’ll become a master craftsman overnight—honestly, you might not reach that level even after ten years on the job—but you can definitely pick up the technical fundamentals of a craft in much less than three years, especially if you spend that entire time focusing strictly on the trade instead of wading through endless general education requirements.

Fine, then swap out that "pathetic" phrase for something like "their professional destiny is permanently predetermined." Or is that still too dramatic for your sensitive soul?

I mean, there’s just no way I’d let someone touch my hair if they only had, what, one year of training and some textbook theory under their belt? It seems like a massive gamble, I guess. Maybe some people are okay with that, but personally, I couldn't do it.
I guess I’m just not really interested in all that technical stuff, like the specific way you hold a brush or diving deep into the theory behind color mixing. It’s just not my thing, I suppose.
I mean, I just want someone who actually knows what they're doing to handle my haircut, color, and waxing, you know? Since I'm paying top dollar for this kind of service, I feel like I should probably be getting some actual expertise in return rather than just hoping for the best.☕
I don't even want to get started on all the construction and electrical work we've been dealing with around the house lately... honestly, it’s probably best if I just don't go there.
I guess you have to wonder if you're really getting much help when the person sent to fix your machine is someone who probably just finished their freshman year of trade school or maybe only has about a year of actual experience under their belt. It’s one of those things where you find yourself sitting there, watching them work, and you can't help but weigh whether they actually know what they're doing or if they're just following a manual they learned six months ago. I mean, maybe they're brilliant, but I suppose there's always that nagging feeling of uncertainty when you realize you might be paying for someone who is still very much in the learning phase of their career.
I mean, I guess you could say that, though I’m not entirely sure how one would even begin to process something like that, if that makes any sense. It feels a bit surreal, honestly, almost like we're looking at a situation that shouldn't actually be possible, but here we are, I suppose.

nimblelynx7 said:I compared two different levels of education. Even though they aren't on the same scale, I don't see what the big deal is. What's the problem?

Of course I’m going to advocate for hands-on practice over theory. Always. If we absolutely have to cram more subjects into a history teacher's schedule just to keep them busy—since having "surplus" staff is common in the private sector but feels like an insult in public education—then fine. Let them teach the history of glassmaking. Anything is better than listening to some instructor drone on about Napoleon's wars or the Roman conquests for the 74th time.

I mentioned this before regarding my best friend's situation. He’s a bus driver who decided he wanted to switch over to operating light rail. Big mistake. The training academy hit him with thirty different supplemental courses—everything from English and German to technical specs and even ethics classes. It absolutely hammered his bank account. Once he finally paid the fees and cleared all those exams, he felt a lot smarter—mostly because he realized what an idiot he was for signing up for the whole mess in the first place.

Probably the same deal where you guys have to retake astrophysics. Even if you passed it before, what they teach here just isn't the same. It’s not even the same language—it's different everywhere you go.

if you ask me, it's either Napoleon and the Romans or nothing at all.
The idea of a history of glassblowing actually makes me laugh, honestly.
Same goes for the history of hair styling or butchery.

Most people doing home improvement work actually picked up those skills on the job, whether they were apprentices or working independently.
It’s not like they went to school specifically to learn how to lay tile or hang drywall...

It’s highly likely for the facial recognition side, but definitely not for Knauf. Though, I suppose some professions have probably had that part added to their coverage recently.

Sent from my Samsung Galaxy S7 using Reddit

rowdypanther12 said:Most people doing home improvement work actually picked up those skills on the job, whether they were apprentices or working independently.
It’s not like they went to school specifically to learn how to lay tile or hang drywall...

I mean, I don't know if I'd go so far as to say "most" of the work is done that way, I guess.
The professionals I actually hire for my house aren't really just winging it based on experience; they're pretty well trained.

They aren't exactly self-taught; their bosses trained them from the ground up.
Or they might have started out as masons and eventually worked their way up to being plumbers or tile setters.
Yeah, some definitely finished trade school, but there are so many who just learned everything on the job.
I tend to chat with people and pick things up along the way—like knowing an auto mechanic who actually graduated from MIT.