Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I think the Minister is now proceeding in the direction that I was concerned about, which is that Pathways seems to be an alternative stream to get kids still active and learning, but yet I'm concerned that it's a vehicle that may not get them, in the end, to where maybe either parents may want to see them go or maybe where their dreams may eventually want to take them. I'm concerned from the perspective of a parent that felt that their child was being pushed into Pathways because they were failing certain elements of the typical academia elements.
So their math and science weren't doing so well, yet they saw themselves as being nudged into Pathways as the alternative program and from the perspective of the parent, which I've encouraged to speak to the school board, felt that this was a dead end for them.
In speaking to the school board, like, I'm just trying to get a sense on what options are left for these students being pushed in this direction because if we're pushing them into a dead-end direction to one extent, they still have to continue to upgrade their skills. I guess I'm going to take the perspective I'm concerned about because if a student at Grade 9 level can't pass Grade 9 level math and then is pushed into Grade 10 and then they start to reach the age where their next option outside of the multiple levels of how difficult school you want to take, whether it's metric or what, but one of the options presented to them is quitting. I don't want to see that as an option due to frustration if they can't get somewhere.
The fact if they're falling behind, for example, like you say, in math, and they reach the age and finish school, the system seems to keep nudging them forward and the only way for them to get high school level to qualify for a college level program, like high school level...Sorry, my apologies. I'm tripping over the words. High school level math in order to qualify for a college or university to proceed forward is, after they get through the typical system, they're going to have to go back and pay for it themselves. So nudging them through the education system onto the Pathways system causes some concern from a parent perspective that the kids were falling behind in particular areas and the solution was to nudge them over to Pathways and hopefully they'll fit into some type of groove and life will turn out.
I guess it's the limiting factor that has been the issue being brought forward. Are the choices limited if the kids are falling behind in a particular subject, like math, or English, or whatever the case may be? Are they being moved forward to Pathways as the system to keep them, as a way, I should say, that keeps them moving in the system and further gets them out of the system? I want to ensure that they're still having productive choices before then, if they wish to go forward to college or maybe to trade school. Because I'll say, you know, even the military nowadays is expecting a high school graduation level, I believe. I don't know the details, but years ago they used to take people once you were 16 and you had your Grade 10, but they don't take people anymore at 16 with their Grade 10. They want a high school diploma. Colleges, they want a high school diploma as a minimum. The world's moved forward.
I guess really all this process of questions I've been asking for and trying to get the details before I step forward is with the ultimate question of are we limiting our kids by putting them in Pathways? Are they really set up for grocery clerk jobs or whatnot? Do they still have the option to go forward to college if they wish? Thank you.