AA> Granted, exposure to computers as a TOOL is a good thing.  But don't
 AA> try to sell it as a way out of SS. 
This is PART of the problem that I have with our provincial government
"selling out" Welfare-placed students to the commercial "schools" (ie -
CDI, TSB and others)...
Many of these people have been "set-up" with (false) promises of (immediate)
employment after graduation from these places by well-intentioned social
workers. I have my doubts for the ability of any social worker that can
readily - and effectively - discern a "good" commercial school from the rest
of the pack, especially where any form of Technology is concerned as the 
asis
of training !
I've heard of "specialty schools" that tend to place more emphasis on 
ehavior
acceptance (of candidates with perspective employers) than to (seriously)
concentrate on any (educational) aspect of computer operations. Many of these
places, IMHO, are practicising a most deceptive form of "education" in that
I've met quite a few "graduates" who are so damnably more politically correct
than they are knowledgable about the applications that run on PC's. The farce
here is that these "schools" have been "approved for use" by unknowing, over-
worked (and, possibly, under-paid) social workers who, if they are at all
lucky, may just barely come to understand how to originate email over the
internal office network from the "insides" of some wordprocessor at a PC
placed on their desks.
It's one thing to be attentive to statistical information alluding the number
of graduates placed in meaningful positions...and quite another thing to know
the durations for such placements afterwards. For example, I could tell you
that I had placed 1,000 people per year in jobs upon their graduations, and
that would carry very well with most folks. BUT, what I'm _not_ about to talk
about freely with you is the number of former students that had come back to
me seeking another opportunity....and another....and another ! THAT number
might over-shadow the rate of success that I had alluded to in the first
place, and give the impression that "something's wrong here".
It would also bring up another negative face: why are so many coming back,
time and again ?
The concern here is that welfare-placed students to any of these "specialty
/commercial schools" _deserve_ better than another opportunity to become 
tate
-subsidised. Too many have been led to believe that these places are prepared
to really ensure that the employment opportunities that they list are long-
lasting opportunities offering both professional and personal growths such
that ex-welfare students are enabled a chance to substain their own growths
over the long-term.
As far as I'm concerned, the best place for instruction with Technology
remains the community colleges: the "commerical schools" are perhaps better
with retraining people who have already been taught the basics so that they
may go on, upwards, towards the attainment of an improved lifestyle. I'll
also go on record to suggest that any degree of "behaviour acceptance" be
left solely to the concerned individuals and the professional people who know
exactly what they are doing.
Certainly, as an employer I would _prefer_ people that I can work with, but
it's of even greater importance that I have employees that know what they are
doing with the resources I'm able to afford them. This is a point that many
social workers - and even those at the "specialty/commercial schools" - have,
I believe, come to practically ignore over time. Just as software is to a PC
- tools - so it is with employers and employees. Though methodologies may
differ in some aspects, I don't really care how the work gets done: I just
want the work done in as efficiently and timely a fashion as possible.
Semper Fi
RTP
~~~ PGPBLUE 3.0 
... Even crime wouldn't pay if the Government ran it.
---
---------------