As a public high school student, I believe that in addition to academic enrichment like Advanced Placement programs, high school students should have the opportunity for vocational training to gain career-related skills through real-world experience. This training can provide students with a concrete path to employment and encourage them to graduate from high school and go on to college if the job they are interested in requires a degree to gain the specialized knowledge needed to get a job. Many vocational training programs assist students in attending two- or four-year colleges and grant high school and college credits to encourage students to graduate from high school and pursue higher education. Vocational training can be implemented through mentorship programs, where high schools partner with local agencies to connect students with experts from professional organizations. These opportunities allow students to learn skills related to their field of interest in a more engaging environment outside of the traditional classroom.
While advanced academic opportunities and career counseling can increase graduation rates and foster career development, providing vocational guidance can also be a more effective way to encourage students to enter the workforce and give them a more concrete understanding of what awaits them after college.
Sanchali Banerjee, Herndon
When President John F. Kennedy received an honorary degree from Yale University, he once joked that he lived in the best of both worlds: a Yale degree and a Harvard education.
Darnell Epps, in his June 25 editorial, “I Went to Yale and Trade School: Which Will Make You Better?”, aptly points out the difference between credentials and learning. The difference is in wisdom and dedication to doing things right. In machine tools and in life, a millimeter counts for a mile.
The story of how Darnell Epps decided to pursue a degree in manufacturing technology and machining in addition to his Juris Doctorate resonated with me in many ways.
I am retired from the Department of Labor’s Employment and Training Administration where for over 30 years I focused on identifying strategies and assisting individuals in need of gainful employment to find job opportunities. My first job out of college was teaching English to boys at a vocational high school in New York City. I am also the mother of a Yale Law School graduate who works for the New York City government.
As Epps points out, his path from Yale Law School to trade school “reaffirmed my belief in the potential of the skilled trades. It showed me that the future of American prosperity depends not just on lawyers and business owners, but on machinists, welders, and all the skilled tradespeople who are the backbone of our economy.”
Mr. Epps, I think it’s great that you’ve also created a personally machined metal mallet that supports “a new generation of workers thriving in the advanced manufacturing recovery” and ties together both a trade school diploma and a Juris Doctor degree.
Lois A. Engel, Washington
The Value of a College Degree
The Post’s June 17 front-page article was “Degree in Hand, But No Doors Opened Yet.” This comment about the lack of entry-level jobs for recent college graduates missed an important point made later in the article.
Labor expert Harry Holzer states toward the end of the article that “It might take six or nine months, but these graduates will find jobs.” This is true for the simple reason that they have a college degree. Despite much talk about skill-based employment, the evidence shows that having a bachelor’s degree is the main predictor of whether or not you can get a good job – one that offers good wages and benefits.
The article points out that while “service-sector jobs, such as hair salons, gyms and medical clinics,” are on the rise, these jobs are disproportionately filled by people without college degrees and typically don’t pay enough to support an individual, let alone a family. So while it may be news that recent college graduates are taking longer than expected to land their first job after graduation, it’s important for Washington Post readers to understand the long-term reality: A college degree is still a very good investment for anyone who wants to make a good living.
The author is executive director of the Aspen Institute College Excellence Program.
The Cost of Ending DEI
As described in The Washington Post’s June 27 front-page story, “Conservative Lawsuit Ruins Diversity Programs,” the disturbing backlash against diversity, equity and inclusion programs is not only misguided and racist, it’s also shortsighted.
Not only is it morally and ethically right, but equity and justice programs also help boost local economies.
In particular, programs that train and support ex-prisoners and individuals impacted by the justice system who are seeking employment (disproportionately Black men and other people of color) help reduce recidivism rates and promote economic mobility, contributing to stronger, safer families and communities. Additionally, these programs also help businesses. By strategically targeting and customizing training to meet industry needs in local markets, these programs provide a well-prepared, qualified workforce for jobs that are in high demand but difficult for businesses to fill. Examples include healthcare support, office operations, construction and maintenance, and logistics and warehouse management.
Businesses and industries that partner with Second Chance Workforce Training programs know they are gaining highly motivated, well-trained, and qualified employees who are eager to change their lives and communities for the better. Helping these individuals advance and achieve financial independence creates a ripple effect of long-term positive outcomes and helps stem the tide of poverty for future generations.
The author is communications director at STRIVE, a workforce development nonprofit.
Questions to ask about DEI
In his June 28 op-ed, “Meet Dr. DEI: A New Incarnation of Old Right-Wing Grievances,” Theodore R. Johnson extolls diversity, equity, and inclusion programs and belittles those who question the approach. In his view, no honest, kind-hearted person could question these efforts, only those who feel threatened by diversity, want to remain in power, and are easily manipulated by malicious far-right forces who rile them up for political gain.
In some cases this may be true, in my case it is not.
I’m a moderate Democrat, and I agree with the Supreme Court’s decision in 2023 to ban the consideration of race in college admissions. After more than half a century, I think it’s time to end affirmative action in college admissions. I also don’t mind the reevaluation of special government programs developed more than 50 years ago to promote minority businesses, which automatically assumed that minorities were “socially disadvantaged.”
And when racial disparities are identified, we need to ensure we are pursuing the best solutions. To cite one example, evidence has revealed that white social workers have a significantly higher rate of passing the licensing exam than black and Hispanic social workers. The response in many social work communities has been that new certification standards should be adopted that do not include a licensing exam at all. Illinois, for example, passed a bill that provides alternative paths to certification that do not include passing an exam. The DC City Council has proposed similar legislation, as have other states. Rather than eliminating opportunities for candidates to demonstrate the knowledge necessary to practice competently, shouldn’t we explore how educational institutions can address the educational challenges of historically marginalized communities and/or call for an in-depth analysis of the licensing exam itself?
In our democracy, nothing should be off the table, and DEI programs are no exception.
In a June 19 news article from The Washington Post, “Poll shows majority of Americans approve of DEI despite legal obstacles,” the authors present the results of a poll on questions asked in two different ways.
Half of the respondents were asked, “In recent years, some companies have implemented diversity, equity, and inclusion programs, or so-called ‘DEI programs.’ Do you think it’s a good thing or a bad thing for companies to implement these programs?” 61 percent of respondents said it was a good thing and 34 percent said it was a bad thing.
The other half were asked, “In recent years, some companies have implemented programs to promote equality in the workplace by hiring more employees from underrepresented groups, such as racial and ethnic minorities and people with disabilities. Do you think it’s a good thing or a bad thing for companies to implement these programs?”
Not surprisingly, the results varied widely: 61 percent of respondents overall said that DEI programs were good, and 69 percent supported programs that hire more employees from underrepresented groups.
I suspect an even bigger difference would be made if respondents were asked whether they supported programs that “favor certain groups, thereby resulting in discrimination against other groups of people, even when some individuals may be more qualified.” This is what the Supreme Court found inadequate, and why many think DEI stands for “Didn’t Earn It.”
