I realise this is just one example, but I wouldn’t be a fan of this as a standard package for all - tying niche interests into progression as a one-size-fits-all solution would make the issue of Googling without understanding even worse.
What I could get on board with, is producing packages of three subjects for use at Senior and Master that niche into a specialism. Tie exam-tested theory elements in with practical application and possibly with the current Bronze/Silver levels where appropriate.
So you could be a Senior Cadet Comms Specialist (Radio, Cyber, Something), Aviation Specialist, Field Specialist (Fieldcraft, Shooting, Navigation), Training Specialist (CDI, MOI, Leadership), etc if there are more possibilities.
Contentiously, I would split MAC under this system:
Cadet Specialist, taking the same topic area a level higher
Cadet Generalist, taking a different topic area to the first level
Master Cadet Specialist, taking 2 topics to the CS Level
Master Cadet, taking all topics to the CS Level
It sounds convoluted and difficult to manage, but with self-study at the higher Specialist levels (they should be independently motivated to achieve these) the only practical difference for management is a different/additional certificate and an ability to clearly indicate a cadet’s specialism and interest when handing out jobs or identifying topic instructors.
The specialist/generalist split also allows an extra level of progression to those who plateau - a cadet struggling with the highest level has the option to pivot to Cadet Generalist
It also extends the process, alleviating the issue of MACs with nothing else to do for several years.
Not saying it’s the best system, or perhaps even high on the list of “Giminion’s Best Ideas”, but I think it would be an interesting system, lengthens and extends progression, and is more cohesive with the PTS (and I think as well the broader ASTRA changes related to training development with increased relevance and cohesion).