Last night, a newspaper lay open on my desk to an article titled 'On VMBO, the image of not good enough sticks to it.' Left by my in-laws, who know this topic dominates our family discussions, it advocates for more students in vocational education. A worthy call amid current and looming shortages of skilled professionals. But is the VMBO's reputation really the problem?
I've pondered this deeply, my mind revisiting it several times daily in recent months. It's why I wrote a personal letter to my son Luc last week, reminding him that 'late bloomers bloom best.'
Table of Contents
Am I the kind of parent pushing my son toward a higher level than suits him, like VMBO-T over VMBO-K? His mentor and teachers might say yes. But is that fair?
I completed VWO myself, and my husband Frank advanced to university after gymnasium. Does our background make us pushy if we believe VMBO-T better fits our son than VMBO-K? Not at all.
I was a rebellious teen too. After VWO, I enjoyed my first year of HBO but then left for work, unable to commit to more schooling despite my potential. I prioritized exploring the world over classrooms. Yet, I found fulfilling work. Multiple paths lead to success.
That's the heart of it: finding work that fits and brings joy. Spending most of your life unhappy at work is the real tragedy. Luc has chosen MBO, a path that suits him.
The Brabants Dagblad article highlights Thomas Verhoef, who succeeded after VMBO-K. It aims to boost VMBO's appeal by showing high achievement is possible.
But success isn't the point—happiness is. Thomas thrives on TV; that's great for him. It doesn't mean VMBO-K is right for everyone.
Education shouldn't be dictated by future labor needs alone. Encourage hands-on paths for kids who love craftsmanship, even if they're academically capable of VWO. The best fit honors the child's nature, unrelated to VMBO's image.
Consider the 12- or 13-year-old still figuring life out—not handy, unsure of career dreams, struggling with traditional teaching and homework. Does VMBO-K suit them? No. Its practice focus narrows options prematurely for an undecided child, prioritizing short-term enrollment and economic gains over exploration.
Is VMBO-T better for such kids? Forcing unfit paths harms long-term outcomes. A reluctant 'craftsman' may burn out or need retraining later—especially with family commitments. Unhappiness hurts individuals and the economy.
As his mother, I see my son isn't practical; VMBO-T keeps doors open without premature commitment.
Promoting specific paths feels shortsighted. Let kids discover themselves. My son doesn't need early certainty. If he explores longer or stays home post-school, so be it.
Prioritize growth, options, and true fit over guilt-tripping parents. At 12, not knowing is normal.
