[Jormundir]

Apprenticeships aren't a good answer either, though. They create too much of a caste system, and are very restricting. What if at 18 I don't actually know what I want to do? If I join an apprenticeship I'm learning one thing. What if I don't like that one thing? What if I get 5 years into an apprenticeship and realize I can't get to the level I want to be at? I have to start over from zero in another field?

I don't like the college system we have now, but switching to the extreme of apprenticeship is definitely not a good answer. Right now I'm an engineer, but with my rounded education, if I don't like it, I can go and switch to a myriad of other fields that I'm educated enough for.

The world already had apprenticeship systems, and it's not some magical system we forgot about. Apprenticeships lead to weird power dynamics that aren't very good for the individual, such as being indentured to your employer for providing the training.

The main problem I see with our education system is that it's inefficient, and growing too large and slow to keep up with modern needs. This doesn't mean a well-rounded education is a problem though.

[justizin]

apprenticeship via a union is class conscious, organized labor in software engineering would also help us to be a part of opposing our employers' doing things that harm the community / world, even if unintended consequences, and connect us with workers in other industries.

why do i feel a class separation from a BART maintenance worker? because they are organized and conscious and probably see us, fairly rightfully, as bougie.

[rm_-rf_slash]

Many of the reasons you point to are the result of guilds, which were very territorial about their workers and markets. What I am proposing is for apprenticeships to be democratized by being made available for any employer willing to accept the wage subsidy. So if you decide after 5 years that engineering sucks, you can always find an apprenticeship elsewhere (assuming your former employer doesn't give you a dreadful reference)

[Jormundir]

This is an interesting topic to brew on. There would certainly be a lot of problems that would be tough to address using apprenticeship, but it's not like our current education system is lacking in problems.

I wonder, though, how apprentices would fair in competition with people having general education and degree focus. Fields require skills to change over time, and quite quickly now. I wonder if an apprentice would be stronger in the short-term and outpaced in the long-term.

Also, where does the wage subsidy you talk about come from? Would people be paying for their own apprenticeships? The government paying for some like public institutions?

[smaudet]

There are better, middle-of-the-road alternatives, such as Trade Schools and Adult Education.

Trade Schools ditch the concept of a 4 year degree for a more affordable, focused alternative, but which doesn't entirely ditch the concept of an education (still requires high school, still puts you through basic requisite courses).

Because of the reduced time frame, they are also better matches for on-the-job training, meaning, lets say you decide you want to be an X, well, get hired by a company that does X, and have them directly subsidize your Trade School (you can get scholarships, but that's beside the point). You get a re-usable education, the employer gets a trained employee. If you decide your employer sucks, save a bit of money, and go another 2-3 years for a full fledged degree. Now you have work experience, and a completely re-usable degree.

This goes hand in hand with the second concept, Adult Education. Lets say, everyone gets hired to work at age 16, only they get on-the-job training in the form of an Apprenticeship. Require employers (by law, potentially subsidized by the state) to provide you with an education, as a part of your training. Don't just limit it to 16-21 year old's, though - education should be something available to everyone - no matter your age. Notice that this sounds a lot like the previous paragraph - that's because it is basically the same thing. Some companies do provide on the job training, but apprenticeships are rare, and so are Trade School/employer combos.

We should be combining the two.

[rm_-rf_slash]

The subsidy should come from the state, as it does for other forms of education. Honestly I think apprenticeships should start at 16 (and if I had my way, 14. I live in a generally rural community and kids in the sticks learn how to work a tractor pretty young).

Ultimately, people's competitiveness comes from their investment in their own skills. As Ron White taught us, "you can't fix stupid." What you can do is ensure that people will be working (instead of claiming welfare, etc), and that if their skills atrophy or their job is automated away, back to a new apprenticeship. Better than getting a new 4 year B.S.

[bryanlarsen]

Ask Tobias Lütke, founder of Shopify, if apprenticeship restricted him.

[cholantesh]

Presumably, he's not the only person to ever undertake an apprenticeship...

[burkaman]

It probably did restrict him, he still works in the industry of his apprenticeship. The point is, what if he realized two years in, or five years in, that he didn't want to be a programmer?

[bryanlarsen]

He finished his apprenticeship at a younger age than most people finish college. Switching fields would have been easy.

[rm_-rf_slash]

As I have written elsewhere on this thread, this is why we have state-funded apprenticeships. It is far cheaper than 4 years at college, and it will also reduce costs for colleges that don't have to accommodate students who would otherwise be off at a debt-free apprenticeship.