The School to Works Program in America

In writing her expression An Avenue to High Academic Standards, Lynn Olson confronts the unwarranted side of the commandment arrangement a recently added comp wiznt of the curriculum. Olson title of respects that this new job would hike up enhance the resource and practicality of the educational system. The take to imparts schedule was introduced in state and federal law in 1994 but its legality and utility is n nonp ariltheless being dis hurled over by various concerned parties.Being the juicyer-ranking editor of the national newspaper knowledge Week, Olson would appear to be well dependent to provide her readers with a persuasive and practical(prenominal) analysis to an issue that is being astray debated. Olsons term gives one the natural depression that this object would be a super in force(p) one to our high indoctrinate scholars. However, though Olsons word deals with around of the issues relevant to this schema, a few atomic number 18as pack n on been covered by her. On the whole, it would seem that this scheme should be brought into tendency as soon as potential as suggested by her.Olson has written a in truth voice condition in which she persuades her reader through the means of earphone logic well substantiated with real spright draw and quarterss examples to further strengthen her claims. She contains give of a simple and well-organized diction to enable her vast readership to understand the article. Also Olsons sources seem to be well founded and apply in a logical manner. Olson has written a convincing article because she substantiates her claims with real livelihood examples of divergent instill to drill course of instructions.She embarks on this path by giving the examples of a young high school bookman and that students positive and enriching visualize with the school to work program. In this accompaniment guinea pig, Olson writes that the school to work program attend tos this planless studen t to find her vocation in life and thus make a valuable contribution to lodge. She further adds that this students experience is non an free one and that numerous students use up benefited from this program Olson excessively writes Studies suggest that school-to-work programs can assist address one of the greatest jobs in education motivation.However, she writes that this program solves this problem and she substantiates this by giving the example of the 1994 evaluation of Pro-Tech, a Boston school- to work program. In this evaluation it was found that students who participated in these programs obstinate to take more rigorous maths and physics courses than their peers. Thus, she ascends that this scheme gives the students a readable indication ab emerge the direct railroad tie that exists between a better quality education and a good job.Therefore, these examples in her article enable her to provide her readers with a logical and realistic cause that seems to make se nse. However, by providing real life examples to prove her point, Olson is fairishified in writing that the school to work program provides a self-explanatory answer to the question Why do I have to learn this? Olson further strengthens her case by elaborating some valid reasons that make this program a beneficial one to the students. Olson writes that the school-to-work program engage students in active, hands-on-learning rather than teaching solely from textbooks.She states that the primeval aim of this program is to inculcate supposititious knowledge with practical knowledge, thus alter the student to practice the theory wise to(p) in school in routine life. However, Olson does admit that there is still a slight confusion on whether this scheme actu aloney encourages students to operate higher degrees aft(prenominal) they have graduated from high school. She counterbalances this by stating that it does help students who intend to go to college on deciding which major the y would expect to pursue in college.Furthermore, she also writes that these schemes provide students with the added inducement of acquiring extra credit hours. Olson also pads her argument by stating that this program provides society with an educated and skilled workforce desperately required by firms. The argument put forth by Phyllis Schlafly, in her article School to Work will train, not Educate, that these programs are the cause of frugal requirements of society and are not collectable to educational upliftment is oversimplistic and lacks in logical coherency.Schlafly whitethorn have some substance in her theme that these programs would cause a psyche or animal to be in effect(p) in the performance of tasks by responding to discipline, didactics and repeated practice. However, her entire article uses negative emotion to pursuade her readers to follow her line of thinking. Furthermore, her argument that this program will unclothe a child of a sound education is counterm anded by Olsons claim that this program will motivate students to baffle a better education.Also George Willetts statement in his e-mail message that greater learning occurred where the practical was aline with the academic. However, one of the countenance shortcomings of Olsons article is that it does not provide her readers with all the information relevant to this topic. Her article has used only the positive sources that strengthen her case but overlooks all negative aspects that could have been assessed and resolved by her. Thus, as pointed out by Schlafly, one of the realistic drawbacks of the scheme is that it whitethorn be made a compulsory program with the students having no cream in the matter.In that case, the system would pull a musical mode all the advantages of encouraging students to learn and would just evolve into modern child slavery, where the student may be oblige to work whether or not he or she may want to. Also, she has not looked into the concomitant that the students would not be able guide their own programs. It would be allotted to them ground on their grades and other factors by an name body called The Workforce Development mount up, which is a very disturbing thought, placing the very ideals of a democracy at risk.This is one of the realistic fears put forth in Schlaflys article. Also, as pointed out by Brian Faranell in his e-mail message that postulation a freshman in high school to declare his major is way to early. This too is a legitimate fear that Schlafly has not confronted in her article. Therefore, it is recommended that the school to work program be an ex gratia program wherein the only requirement is cause students. Thus, no student should be forced to enroll in this program, as this would be counterproductive to the childs upbeat and make the very reason for its foundation obsolete.Also, there should be sufficient choice in the different types of school to work programs, so as to enable students to tak e aim among the various programs, so that they might be able to choose something that corresponds to their courses and which will help them in the future. Presently, there are original countries that have already inculcated this scheme to their education system. Thus, it would be judicious to study their system for a period of time forwards going head long into one of our own. This would help in looking at all the shortcomings in their system and subjugate them in our own.However, we must keep in mind that our basic society and education system may be different and that what works in those countries may not necessarily work in ours. It may also be a good idea to schedule a collection of teachers and professors and other educators to use their ideas. It should be forever remembered that they are an integral part of the system, and the brass should always take their opinion into grievance before enacting any bill. Thus, if all these shortfalls are removed the school to work pro gram seems to be a viable attachment to our educative system.Olson has covered none of these areas, in her article, which leads one to believe that she may not have researched the topic well decent or else she may not want to provide any negative aspects to her argument. though her not confronting these issues may show that these are really serious problems that have no real short term solutions. Hence, her argument might have actually been fortify if she had confronted these areas and tried to provide some air of solution to them. However, on the whole her article seems to be well written.She has based her ideas on sound logic, which enables her to provide a transparent and well-organized thesis. She has well developed and organized her use of sources and has analyzed them well. Therefore, it would seem that her article would chastity a good reception from the public. Therefore, it would seem that Olson succeeds in her purpose of providing a powerful argument for the impleme ntation of this program. However, as express earlier it would have been stronger if it had been comprehensive tackling the harder issues as well.