Proposed...No Dropping Out!

[SEVERUSMAX]

...of high school anymore. That's an old rule that no longer fits the times. Such a heavy dropout rate can largely be stopped simply by eliminating that option for 16 year olds completely. If we ban sex with teens on the basis that pregnancy MIGHT ensue and MIGHT ruin their lives, why allow something that is GUARANTEED, 100%, to ruin their lives. If they are too young for sex and/or marriage, they are definitely too young to start a career! After all, what careers are availabe for high school drop-outs? Low wage ones that they must compete with illegal immigrants for? If they can not legally give consent to sex, because they are considered children, they are too immature to decide something momentous like ending their formal education, too. And they are also, IMO, too young to decide on abortion. Underage is underage and immature is immature! Be consistent!

Okay, end of tirade for now.

 

[mlady_france]

...After all, what careers are availabe for high school drop-outs?

They come to me and I teach them to say "Would you like fries with that?"

 

[Norajane]

OK. Make it so, Severus.

 

[3113]

...of high school anymore. That's an old rule that no longer fits the times. Such a heavy dropout rate can largely be stopped simply by eliminating that option for 16 year olds completely.

Counter proposal:

Change the exit requirements for High School (eliminating algebra, for example, which students have to take to graduate, but many just can't pass and which is rarely going to be used by any of them for anything), and make graduation for all be age 16. Those bright enough to go to College can usually get in at age 16, and those who are not going to college don't need that extra year anyway.

Problem solved.

 

[Norajane]

Counter proposal:

Change the exit requirements for High School (eliminating algebra, for example, which students have to take to graduate, but many just can't pass and which is rarely going to be used by any of them for anything), and make graduation for all be age 16. Those bright enough to go to College can usually get in at age 16, and those who are not going to college don't need that extra year anyway.

Problem solved.

Algebra isn't a high school graduation requirement. As I recall from my days in Chicago public schools, you needed EITHER two years of math (any math, even remedial) and one year of science (any science) OR two years of science and one year of math.

Algebra aside, you're still recommending that two years worth of requirements be eliminated. What other classes do you think are unnecessary? Do you think those going to college would be well-prepared for college-level courses or would you also dumb-down college course requirements?

 

[SEVERUSMAX]

Counter proposal:

Change the exit requirements for High School (eliminating algebra, for example, which students have to take to graduate, but many just can't pass and which is rarely going to be used by any of them for anything), and make graduation for all be age 16. Those bright enough to go to College can usually get in at age 16, and those who are not going to college don't need that extra year anyway.

Problem solved.

There's a thought. And make that "extra year", as you put it, an opportunity for the not-so-bright to learn a trade, either through apprenticeships or vocational school.

 

[SEVERUSMAX]

Algebra isn't a high school graduation requirement. As I recall from my days in Chicago public schools, you needed EITHER two years of math (any math, even remedial) and one year of science (any science) OR two years of science and one year of math.

Algebra aside, you're still recommending that two years worth of requirements be eliminated. What other classes do you think are unnecessary? Do you think those going to college would be well-prepared for college-level courses or would you also dumb-down college course requirements?

It WAS a requirement for me to graduate in high school. Of course, that was in WV.

I have come around to the thinking that, at least under 16, teens have no business having sex. However, I find it inconsistent to have such age of consent requirements and no provision for schooling for those we deem too immature to fend for themselves.

 

[mlady_france]

Counter proposal:

Change the exit requirements for High School (eliminating algebra, for example, which students have to take to graduate, but many just can't pass and which is rarely going to be used by any of them for anything), and make graduation for all be age 16. Those bright enough to go to College can usually get in at age 16, and those who are not going to college don't need that extra year anyway.

Problem solved.

What about those who are not "bright" enough to get a free ride and can't afford to pay for college but have a thirst for knowledge?

 

[mlady_france]

It WAS a requirement for me to graduate in high school. Of course, that was in WV.

I have come around to the thinking that, at least under 16, teens have no business having sex. However, I find it inconsistent to have such age of consent requirements and no provision for schooling for those we deem too immature to fend for themselves.

It wasn't a requirement here either, not exactly. You had to have 3 years of math. You could start out in general math and end up missing algebra if you chose your classes the right way.

 

[SEVERUSMAX]

It wasn't a requirement here either, not exactly. You had to have 3 years of math. You could start out in general math and end up missing algebra if you chose your classes the right way.

They required Algebra 1 and at least one other math course in my high school. I scraped by in Algebra, while classes such as Science, English, and History were usually a breeze. It clearly wasn't a lack of brains. Just got too far behind in math as a kid and never completely caught up.

 

[Norajane]

It WAS a requirement for me to graduate in high school. Of course, that was in WV.

I have come around to the thinking that, at least under 16, teens have no business having sex. However, I find it inconsistent to have such age of consent requirements and no provision for schooling for those we deem too immature to fend for themselves.

I agree with you - we do a poor job of preparing students who aren't going to college. I know at my high school, there were a lot of programs for students who wanted to get vocational training. What that translated to were half-days of school and half-days (supposedly) of part-time job somewhere where students could learn office skills, retail, or industrial arts (that's where your auto mechanics, plumbing, electrical, etc. would fit in). A hybrid of vocational and basics studies wouldn't be a bad idea for those not on the college track.

Some schools do much better at college prep than others, of course. My high school, for example, taught me fairly well in English and history, but math and science classes were so far behind what was being taught at the suburban schools, that I was at a real disadvantage when I hit college. Even though I had studied four years of both math and science, my placement tests put me in the 'rocks for jocks' and 'physics for poets' classes, as well as Math 101 instead of calculus, which is where most other students started.

 

[Typo Fu Master]

Algebra isn't a high school graduation requirement. As I recall from my days in Chicago public schools, you needed EITHER two years of math (any math, even remedial) and one year of science (any science) OR two years of science and one year of math.

Algebra aside, you're still recommending that two years worth of requirements be eliminated. What other classes do you think are unnecessary? Do you think those going to college would be well-prepared for college-level courses or would you also dumb-down college course requirements?

I think if they're motivated enough to attend college, they're motivated enough to learn the additional courses they'd need.

As far as unnecessary courses go, I'd make history an elective. I can't think of a time when knowledge of my past was critical to being able to do my job. If you want to go into a profession where knowing all that is a requirement, then take history. Otherwise, I think it's a waste of time better spent on something more important. I don't have anything specific in mind, but it should reflect subjects that matter in day-to-day living.

 

[SEVERUSMAX]

I agree with you - we do a poor job of preparing students who aren't going to college. I know at my high school, there were a lot of programs for students who wanted to get vocational training. What that translated to were half-days of school and half-days (supposedly) of part-time job somewhere where students could learn office skills, retail, or industrial arts (that's where your auto mechanics, plumbing, electrical, etc. would fit in). A hybrid of vocational and basics studies wouldn't be a bad idea for those not on the college track.

Some schools do much better at college prep than others, of course. My high school, for example, taught me fairly well in English and history, but math and science classes were so far behind what was being taught at the suburban schools, that I was at a real disadvantage when I hit college. Even though I had studied four years of both math and science, my placement tests put me in the 'rocks for jocks' and 'physics for poets' classes, as well as Math 101 instead of calculus, which is where most other students started.

Ah, "basic algebra" or remedial math?

 

[SEVERUSMAX]

I think if they're motivated enough to attend college, they're motivated enough to learn the additional courses they'd need.

As far as unnecessary courses go, I'd make history an elective. I can't think of a time when knowledge of my past was critical to being able to do my job. If you want to go into a profession where knowing all that is a requirement, then take history. Otherwise, I think it's a waste of time better spent on something more important. I don't have anything specific in mind, but it should reflect subjects that matter in day-to-day living.

Not so sure about that. Civics and history are useful for political awareness, which supposedly should matter to future voters (mind you, many don't vote, but that shouldn't be encouraged by teachers).

 

[WyoD_S]

Counter proposal:

Change the exit requirements for High School (eliminating algebra, for example, which students have to take to graduate, but many just can't pass and which is rarely going to be used by any of them for anything), and make graduation for all be age 16. Those bright enough to go to College can usually get in at age 16, and those who are not going to college don't need that extra year anyway.

Problem solved.

So, make those who want to go to college even more unprepared.

Dumb down the requirements not only for HS graduation, but for college entry as well.

We (the US) already fall behind when it comes to education in math and the sciences. Requirements need to be increased, not decreased.

What about those who are not "bright" enough to get a free ride and can't afford to pay for college but have a thirst for knowledge?

There are hundreds if not thousands of scholorships and grants available, most of them private rather than provided by the government. Of course, there are the Stafford Loans and Pell Grants from the government as well. There are many ways to pay for a college education for those who are financially disadvantaged.

 

[mlady_france]

I agree with you - we do a poor job of preparing students who aren't going to college. I know at my high school, there were a lot of programs for students who wanted to get vocational training. What that translated to were half-days of school and half-days (supposedly) of part-time job somewhere where students could learn office skills, retail, or industrial arts (that's where your auto mechanics, plumbing, electrical, etc. would fit in). A hybrid of vocational and basics studies wouldn't be a bad idea for those not on the college track.

We had a couple of vo-ed programs. One you could actually go to a adlut education center and get training needed for lawinforcement and medical assitiant and that sort of thing. Half day at school and a half day in the other school the first year and then the second year you did all your time at the adult education center. The funny part about this is people like my brother who earned the lawenforcement certificat but he didn't graduate highshcool an had to go back for his ged before he could go into the militarty a few years later.

The other type is where the kids had a part time job and went to school part time. Unfortunitly the job can include any type of work, not just nice office jobs. I know in my class the place to be was in the telemarket company. They didn't put the teens on until 6pm so it was only a 4 hour day and they were getting paid the same I am now . Todays trend seems to be sending them to fast food joints. It really surprises me because these kids that come in there are really good workers and really smart too, but most of them just hate school and if it wasn't the fact that they can do this and get out at noon they wouldn't go at all. But they have so much potencial, I try to point them in another direction. They are just too smart to stay in fast food.

 

[Typo Fu Master]

Not so sure about that. Civics and history are useful for political awareness, which supposedly should matter to future voters (mind you, many don't vote, but that shouldn't be encouraged by teachers).

Then perhaps a course called "Political awareness." Skim over the details and just provide a general "Who's Who" and why they were so important. Anyone fascinated with that could go on to take a more in depth course.

I'm not and never was a big fan of History. I was a straight 'C' student in it.

 

[SEVERUSMAX]

Then perhaps a course called "Political awareness." Skim over the details and just provide a general "Who's Who" and why they were so important. Anyone fascinated with that could go on to take a more in depth course.

I'm not and never was a big fan of History. I was a straight 'C' student in it.

Ah, I see.

 

[Colleen Thomas]

...of high school anymore. That's an old rule that no longer fits the times. Such a heavy dropout rate can largely be stopped simply by eliminating that option for 16 year olds completely. If we ban sex with teens on the basis that pregnancy MIGHT ensue and MIGHT ruin their lives, why allow something that is GUARANTEED, 100%, to ruin their lives. If they are too young for sex and/or marriage, they are definitely too young to start a career! After all, what careers are availabe for high school drop-outs? Low wage ones that they must compete with illegal immigrants for? If they can not legally give consent to sex, because they are considered children, they are too immature to decide something momentous like ending their formal education, too. And they are also, IMO, too young to decide on abortion. Underage is underage and immature is immature! Be consistent!

Okay, end of tirade for now.

Yeah. How effective are lawds against them having sex?

How do you propose to enfoce this?

What about students with a specific aptitude, say a kid who can already repair engines, or drive a dump truck, or operate a back hoe? For them, two more years of schooling is just denying them two years of work they could count towards their retirement and pensions, as well as two years worth of incremental raises.

 

[cloudy]

What about those who are not "bright" enough to get a free ride and can't afford to pay for college but have a thirst for knowledge?

Anyone who seriously wants to go to college, can.

I worked full-time, I had grants, and yes, I had one small music scholarship that barely covered my books. I also had my first child at the age of 19, so raised her during school as well.

Statements like that always irritate the hell out of me. If I wasn't too good to bust my ass to be able to go, why is anyone else too good to do the same thing? Please, show me my "free ride."

If someone wants to go, they can, it's just a matter of how badly they want it. Saying that someone just "can't" is a cop out.

 

[3113]

Not so sure about that. Civics and history are useful for political awareness, which supposedly should matter to future voters (mind you, many don't vote, but that shouldn't be encouraged by teachers).

I agree. There should be SOME Civics and history--though perhaps not as much is necessary. Students should have some idea of how things came about, how we got to where we are and mistakes made that shoud not be repeated.

Algebra aside, you're still recommending that two years worth of requirements be eliminated. What other classes do you think are unnecessary? Do you think those going to college would be well-prepared for college-level courses or would you also dumb-down college course requirements?

Only one year--Senior year--need be eleminated. I don't recall taking anything in my senior year that I couldn't have taken in College and gotten more out of it there.

As for dumb-down colege courses...I'm afraid that college courses are already dumbed down, severely, and this with that senior year in place. I taught at Jr. College/Commuity College, which is where those students go who can't make it into the Unversity but want more knowledge. The first class I taught there was for students who could barely write. Four years of high school and I had to teach them how to write a paragraph. Punctuation, grammar, sentence structure.

I don't think students need that extra year--they just need to be better taught in the earlier years. Three years (ages 14, 15, 16) of good, solid classes in good solid courses (math, science, English, history, music--art/gym/vocational electives) will do them far more good than four years of bad classes.

 

[zeb1094]

Counter proposal:

Change the exit requirements for High School (eliminating algebra, for example, which students have to take to graduate, but many just can't pass and which is rarely going to be used by any of them for anything), and make graduation for all be age 16. Those bright enough to go to College can usually get in at age 16, and those who are not going to college don't need that extra year anyway.

Problem solved.

You know that's exactly what I thought when in high school. When would I ever need to find X. Well 10 years latter I found myself having to do actuarial programming. Guess what? I needed to find X all the time.

And as Nora said, it wasn't required but I took it and Geometry because I was too smart to take plain old math.

 

[zeb1094]

I don't think students need that extra year--they just need to be better taught in the earlier years. Three years (ages 14, 15, 16) of good, solid classes in good solid courses (math, science, English, history, music--art/gym/vocational electives) will do them far more good than four years of bad classes.

I agree with this statement.

The only problem I see is that it will not happen in the current Imperial Federal Govenment Indoctrination Centers. The only purpose now is to produce voters who are dependant on that government. To keep those with the power in office to garner the votes of those who are now so uneducated that they are on the welfare roles.

The public school system in the United States is a joke. And while there maybe many GOOD teachers out there they are being hamstrug by a system of "No one stays behind." polictics. The more children pushed through the school system the more money they get. If a child is kept back a grade, the school district doesn't get any money for him/her because the school failed to meet their needs.

So the concept of 'No one stay behing.' was invented. Everyone passes. So the system now gets the money they want.

 

[Colleen Thomas]

Anyone who seriously wants to go to college, can.

I worked full-time, I had grants, and yes, I had one small music scholarship that barely covered my books. I also had my first child at the age of 19, so raised her during school as well.

Statements like that always irritate the hell out of me. If I wasn't too good to bust my ass to be able to go, why is anyone else too good to do the same thing? Please, show me my "free ride."

If someone wants to go, they can, it's just a matter of how badly they want it. Saying that someone just "can't" is a cop out.

Just so.

I worked upwards of 75 hours a week while taking 19 hours in almost all of my semesters in college. That was on top of loans (My fpolks made too much for me to qualify for a grant in all but one semester).

If you want to go, the only thing that will stop you is you.

 

[Lucifer_Carroll]

Okay, I'm definitely in a different world. I thought high school too slow and thought they needed to teach more which is why I went to a rapid pace college and then went to another rapid pace college for grad work. For undergrad I had some money from high school jobs I did in school and then money from jobs done out of school. I couldn't get any scholarships because my parent's got a promotion and huge raise the year before I went to college thus knocking me out of range for pretty much any scholarship and I applied to a shitload. I did what loans I had to, but avoided most based on the idea that paying 1200% interest without getting the added bonus of mafia connections was a shit way of living. They continually jacked up the prices, rent increased. I worked more jobs. College isn't some la-de-la free ride for most and it isn't about intelligence. I had a damn fine GPA in high school and college and it wasn't my brains that denied me my mythical "free ride". I just didn't fit the right categories at the moment.

And considering that there's a high school equivalency test, many national services that are happy to take money to give out AAs and testing for various decent careers like pharmacy tech, nurse, etc... Considering the rise of web-based college courses which as well can go towards degrees and community colleges that will accept many of those who don't get immediately turned over for grades, there are no people who are really fucked. In truth, some may drop out of high school because it doesn't teach car repair but there is a school that does and they can't afford to work, go to school, and get their courses. Plus, they can always just take high school equivalency test and effectively "graduate" before their peers. Thus they become more employable. Not to mention how many times I was turned down for jobs because I didn't have job experience in using a cash register. No matter I was a 3.8 college student in a science carreer who had aced all math through upper level calculus and could likely learn very rapidly how to use this idiot box. It was the job experience that counts. The thing no one tells anyone is that while the college degrees count for the cool jobs like scientist, most jobs look more at experience in the field. A person could aid their career more by dropping out and getting a job in the office than staying in school.

We want them to stay in school so they can learn why the constitution is important, finally learn what evolution and science are so they can make informed decisions on what they think about it instead of parroting their ignorant pastors, master the math skills that will become important if not in their job, at least in their finances, and have an opening experience in the choices out there so they can decide where to go.