Training for trades: who’s going to do it?

October 1, 2009 | Janet Preus, associate editor of Specialty Fabrics Review

Many years ago I was an English teacher. I learned a great lesson from my students who challenged me daily to prove the value of what I was teaching. For the most part, the adversarial students were perfectly willing to do assignments that made sense to them, and that usually meant skills that supported their interest in technical training.

I thought then, and I still think, that more young people should opt for technical training-not because they hate English class (many are good English students, too), but because we need trained workers in industry. (And this from an English teacher!)

Oh, I could recite a history of 15-year-olds who just reassembled the engine of a Ford Ranger in auto mechanics class but can't reliably construct a complete sentence to save their lives. I happen to think that all students should be able to write a coherent paragraph before receiving a diploma, but, then, I suppose I should know how to change the oil in my Pontiac.

The issue of technical training, however, goes far beyond entry level auto maintenance. Preparing for a trade career requires training in highly sophisticated computer programs, equipment and manufacturing processes. The people on your plant floor need to have a fairly comprehensive understanding of the equation that combines design and execution into a perfect finished product. Where are they learning this?

Our high school had an incredible graphics program fueled primarily by the personality of one teacher, not by school district policy. Our community college offered stellar health career training, but little that could be applied to fabric product manufacturing. If schools aren't going to promote training for skilled trade jobs—not as a second choice but as the right first choice for many young people—then the trades have to do it. Seems to me it could be more of a joint effort. Labor statistics tell us that by 2014 the number of jobs for workers without bachelor's degrees could be double the number available for people with a college education. Who is going to do the work?

I was pleased to see college-aged visitors at this year's Expo, and I was impressed by how engaged they were in the whole event—attending seminars and special events, and ‘meeting the industry' in person on the show floor. It would be great to see even more young people, who might discover a career they had not known before.

Education should be about cultivating an environment that not only rewards the success of students who choose technical training, but encourages them by elevating its stature in our schools. We can start with the English teachers.

One year my son gave me a t-shirt for my birthday that pictured a teacher at a chalkboard, pointer poised on a nonsense equation. The caption read, "School for the Mechanically Declined." My son thought it was apropos. In fact, I tiled my own kitchen and figured out simple repairs on my riding lawnmower, but in my case these are tantamount to Oscar-winning performances. People like me who forgot algebra by the beginning of 10th grade and think mechanical drawings look like an etch-a-sketch printout should encourage those who are not ‘mechanically declined' to use their gifts. We're going to need them.

Comments

Comments are the opinion of individual posters and do not reflect the views of Specialty Fabrics Review or Industrial Fabrics Association International.

• 

  Chris Nolan

  Oct 21, 2009
  12:12 am CDT

  Education for its own sake!

  I do not think we should confuse education with training; or frankly even use them in the same sentence. There is a world of difference between seeding a mind with a love of learning, and producing industrial robots. Render unto Caesar what is Caesar's and to English Teachers the joy of the written word.