(no subject)
Jan. 21st, 2004 01:32 am![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
OK, here's the part of the speech that surprised me:
At the same time, we must ensure that older students and adults can gain the skills they need to find work now. Many of the fastest-growing occupations require strong math and science preparation, and training beyond the high school level. So tonight I propose a series of measures called Jobs for the 21st Century. This program will provide extra help to middle- and high school students who fall behind in reading and math, expand advanced placement programs in low-income schools, and invite math and science professionals from the private sector to teach part-time in our high schools. I propose larger Pell grants for students who prepare for college with demanding courses in high school. I propose increasing our support for America's fine community colleges, I do so so they can train workers for the industries that are creating the most new jobs. By all these actions, we'll help more and more Americans to join in the growing prosperity of our country.
will someone explain to me what the catch is on that? because i'm listening to it, going, hey that sounds good! expanding AP programs in lower income schools -- good! (well, we could debate the efficacy of AP exams, but they DO count a lot in college admissions). extra help to kids who fall behind? good! larger pell grants? good!
ok, so what's the catch.
is it just going to be one of those things that he passes then refuses to fund, but since he passed it he'll be able to trot it out on the campaign trail, like that funding for NYC after 9/11 or the AIDS funding to africa? or is there actually something intrinsically sinister about it that i don't see on first glance?
At the same time, we must ensure that older students and adults can gain the skills they need to find work now. Many of the fastest-growing occupations require strong math and science preparation, and training beyond the high school level. So tonight I propose a series of measures called Jobs for the 21st Century. This program will provide extra help to middle- and high school students who fall behind in reading and math, expand advanced placement programs in low-income schools, and invite math and science professionals from the private sector to teach part-time in our high schools. I propose larger Pell grants for students who prepare for college with demanding courses in high school. I propose increasing our support for America's fine community colleges, I do so so they can train workers for the industries that are creating the most new jobs. By all these actions, we'll help more and more Americans to join in the growing prosperity of our country.
will someone explain to me what the catch is on that? because i'm listening to it, going, hey that sounds good! expanding AP programs in lower income schools -- good! (well, we could debate the efficacy of AP exams, but they DO count a lot in college admissions). extra help to kids who fall behind? good! larger pell grants? good!
ok, so what's the catch.
is it just going to be one of those things that he passes then refuses to fund, but since he passed it he'll be able to trot it out on the campaign trail, like that funding for NYC after 9/11 or the AIDS funding to africa? or is there actually something intrinsically sinister about it that i don't see on first glance?