<p>Starting this year with S2 - students have to add a CTE course in
order graduate. They can fulfill the requirement with a cooking class,
a photography class, biotech, art of video. In the end it means
S2 will have to give up an AP class or music some time in the
last two years. Anyone have insight as to why California thinks
this requirement for every student is a good step? To me it
just looks like forcing top students to take something less
rigorous than they would otherwise.</p>
<p>I live in California and I don’t have to do this so it must not be for all of California. Unless I do have to do it and I haven’t heard about it yet.</p>
<p>I think you’re right - only some districts have adopted the requirement. But I think the state is putting out $$ incentives to get districts to buy in. I agree with making more CTE available. But if someone’s on a high level academic track then I don’t see why they should be forced into an easier class than they’d take otherwise or be forced to give up something they love like music.</p>
<p>I think it’s so that students are able to gain a wide-array of skills and explore an interest they may never would have obtained if they just took “the strongest academic track”. All I know it’s a hell of a lot better than having to take PE for four straight years. </p>
<p>@QuadMaster That’s a good thought as to perceived benefit to fast track kids. </p>
<p>PE btw is only required two years at the kids HS. But that’s a whole other question I have. If the kids are playing a school sport why is PE a requirement. JV and Varsity soccer for example go hard for three hours a day at least five days a week. </p>
<p>We have to complete at least 4 CTE classes, whether it be cooking, masonry, carpentry, or even a foreign language. (They stretched the requirement to a lot of areas because some kids wanted foreign language to count)</p>
<p>@patertrium My state(Illinois) requires four years of PE or some equivalent, and as for why you need PE even you have a sport is beyond me as well.</p>