Obama : states should require kids to stay in school until 18 or graduation, page 2

privacy

Pages: << 1 2 >>
ATS Members have flagged this thread 5 times

reply posted on 28-1-2012 @ 03:37 PM by snowspirit

reply to post by charles1952

Pleased to see you again, especially since you're making me rethink math problems. Here's how my thinking goes: Kindergarten = Age 5, 1st Grade = Age 6. There are 12 grades, so 12 years. Twelve years and starting at age 6 gives 18? I'm willing to listen to 17, but I don't see it right now.

You're right, my math is off by a year, age 17 would be during grade 12, so finished at 18ish

Remember years ago, our ancestors were married with children by the time they were 15 or 16, it was normal then. These days, the kids aren't expected to grow up until later in their teens, or even just after teen age. Meanwhile, when you're age 14 to 16, in your own head you think you're an adult. No wonder the rebellion and confusion.

I, as a parent, wouldn't want to be responsible for a teen over the age of 17.

They just get into too many things.
Thankfully up here, that's considered adult enough in courts, nothing is on the parents after that age.

reply posted on 28-1-2012 @ 04:11 PM by David9176

reply to post by Vitchilo

Like that has ANY CHANCES of passing, not to mention EVEN IF IT DID... won't fix anything.

Yeah, no chance of passing.....not that I don't think it's a good idea...but it's simply not feasible.

Yes, there are some bad teachers out there, but that's not necessarily the reason why our education system is in trouble. It's because it has been neglected the last 30 years...alogn with the decline of the middle class. Both parents having to work has severely hurt education as there is no longer one parent always home...less time is spent with our children.

that's a huge huge part of our problem.

reply posted on 28-1-2012 @ 04:21 PM by FlyersFan

Obama : states should require kids to stay in school until 18 or graduation

Many public schools aren't safe for children to be in. Thugs, gangs, drugs, rape, pedophilia ...
For many kids, dropping out and getting a GED is the safest thing for them to do.
So, not that the government cares, but I can't go along with this requirement.

reply posted on 28-1-2012 @ 05:08 PM by Darkblade71

Personally, I think it would be a good thing. I watched so many of my friends drop out and never finish. They went on to get GED's eventually, but well, dropping out, is copping out. It is true, when it comes to a job, they don't ask to see a diploma or your GED if you got one, they just want to know you finished the education. You could quit and never get a GED and most places won't even know the difference if you lie.

The education system in America is messed up and needs to change, this is a step in that direction. We are failing in the world of education. It seems the teaching method is at fault if you ask me. Just take a look at how Japanese kids learn, they get a much better education.

Hell, I even dropped out at one point, but the head of the school board called a meeting and the teacher I had problems with was reprimanded right in front of me and my mother. I went back the next day feeling totally vindicated and finished school.

Bottom line to me, is unless there is a very good reason for dropping out, and I mean a very good reason, all US kids should finish high school, weather they like it or not.

The system sucks and is not working like it should and needs to change, I don't see making kids finish high school as a problem, only a good nudge to do what it should of been all along.

reply posted on 28-1-2012 @ 05:35 PM by sean

If you have bad apples falling off your tree, then maybe you should check out the tree.

reply posted on 28-1-2012 @ 05:48 PM by Miraj

reply to post by charles1952

In my opinion it's usually just apathy. Most of the kids I knew who wanted to drop out and did, just didn't want to work. They just wanted to fool around.

That said, I do have a friend who did get his GED.. He is quite intelligent, and the lack of material bored him enough that the didn't want to even be in class.

reply posted on 28-1-2012 @ 06:11 PM by Still

Originally posted by snowspirit
If they're still in school at 18, they've either started late, or failed at least one grade.

Apologies but given the tone of the thread (education sux) I could not help but feel a little basic math could be of help. If you are 18 and still in school, like most people, you had a birthday during the school year.

I'm assuming the grade system is the same as up here, kindergarden at age 5, grade 12 at 17?

And a school year is 9 months long. The chance of you starting kindergarten at age 5 and ending it at age 5 is 1/4. The chances of you starting kindergarten at age 5 and finishing at age 6 are 3/4. So most kids are 18 by the end of their 12 year.

I dropped out myself at 16, and went straight to work. Then went to college later, on a GED.
Some kids just aren't good at staying in school, I appreciated it more when I went back as an adult.

Could not agree more with appreciating it more now, only it is too late to catch up on some things for me and I wish I had been forced to do it then.

I guess I do not understand all the education bashing when the US is failing primarily because we have a population of unskilled labor and uneducated cashiers. That is what we produce and it is killing us.

reply posted on 28-1-2012 @ 06:42 PM by snowspirit

reply to post by Still

Clearly, we have problems up here too, you've seen that math wasn't my strong point

I made the correction at the top of the page, my last post.

There are things that I wish I had taken more interest in school, things that are harder to grasp when older. Also, if the right things were studies when younger, I might have been able to make different choices.
Now, I'm a high school dropout, with a college education.

Forcing by law, to graduate though, just creates one more law. Too many "laws" being created these days. Situations should have to be assessed on a person to person basis, somehow.

There needs to be better ways to keep kids interested in school while they're teens.
And way more emphasis on math skills, all over North America

reply posted on 28-1-2012 @ 06:47 PM by Still

reply to post by snowspirit

But it is not one more law.
I think it is great that you did go back to school when you were ready. I am a college dropout who went back later so I get that. Maybe both math and US law are not your strongpoints?

Let me ask you this.

How many laws does it take to make the legal drinking age 19?
How many laws does it take to make the legal drinking age 21?

reply posted on 28-1-2012 @ 06:49 PM by NoRegretsEver

This sentence alone

Obama : states should require kids to stay in school until 18 or graduation

just reinforces that the indoctrination is now going to be a government and legal problem for parents that know that the education system is BS.

For those parents that dont care, this is a dream come true, and for those that want their kids to know the truth they will have to work overtime. I figure 8 hours a day at school, 5 days a week... hmm.. it would take parents.. ummm.. about..... I wish I could figure this out mathematically, but I went to school

Peace, NRE.

reply posted on 28-1-2012 @ 07:05 PM by snowspirit

Originally posted by Still
reply to post by snowspirit

But it is not one more law.
I think it is great that you did go back to school when you were ready. I am a college dropout who went back later so I get that. Maybe both math and US law are not your strongpoints?

Let me ask you this.

How many laws does it take to make the legal drinking age 19?
How many laws does it take to make the legal drinking age 21?

No, I don't know very much about US law, so about how many laws does it take.....Probably more than I would think?
I would think a stroke of the pen to state the age, but there's probably other laws that it affects that I don't know about, that might need changes to accommodate, like being served alcohol in restaurants and bars, maybe ID laws.
Plus, individual state laws, as well as possibly federal

I'm still learning about your system. Sometimes it seems complicated, but that could be the media complicating things. Or it could be that some of our laws up here, just happen so suddenly, they seem too simple.

Here, probably only one provincial law to make the legal drinking age 19 ( or 18 where it applies). But I could be way off here too...

reply posted on 28-1-2012 @ 07:07 PM by HangTheTraitors

This SHOULD be passed as for one thing, it will CUT down on the government assistance to drop-outs for one thing.

Especially so in the RED republican states who enjoy the handouts the MOST. Despite their mindless PARROTING of "less handouts" and "less government" nonsense that the extreme far right-wing crowd down there chant day in, and day out, it is THEY in the Conservative RED states who are the WORST offenders.

.

In the Conservative RED states, the South, education is not all that important to them in life. Having babies at 13 and quitting school as soon as possible is FAR more important to them. In the Southern bible-belt, they believe "jesus" will come to their rescue in life,

(I know this by experience in having lived there for several years) but that isnt the case as most sensible folks already know. Their "rescue" comes from government-handouts, through MY TAXES. The REST of us PAY for them to drop out of school and get assistance.

This needs to be passed for just THAT one single reason ALONE. The saving of TAX DOLLARS and more education. WIN-WIN.

In addition, perhaps better education in the South would help them produce smart politicians unlike Bush and Perry.

Both of them have a combined IQ score equivalent to that of a rock.

Education for the WIN!!

edit on 28-1-2012 by HangTheTraitors because: (no reason given)

reply posted on 29-1-2012 @ 12:08 PM by charles1952

reply to post by HangTheTraitors

You've given me something to think about, and I'm grateful to you for that. It's your first sentence:

This SHOULD be passed as for one thing, it will CUT down on the government assistance to drop-outs for one thing

I'm not sure you're right, but it's worth thinking about.

It's not that assistance is going to dropouts, it's that assistance is going to the unemployed. Someone with no skills, bad attitude, gang connections and a diploma still won't do very well. In fact a drop out with good skills and attitude may very well work out just fine, as some of our posters have noted.

************THIS PART IS FOR EVERYBODY*************

May I suggest an alternate solution? I will use Math as an example, but the same thing would be done for every subject. Figure out what is needed to have legitimate high school math skills and figure out how to get to those skills. Break that path into 10 parts. As an example, at the end of Part 1, you might have addition and subtraction down cold.

Now, when a student finishes Math Part 1, he goes to Math Part 2. His age doesn't matter, he stays in Part 1 until he's got it, and if he gets it quickly he moves to Part 2 quickly. When you get to Part 10 in all subjects, you're given a diploma, whether you're 13 or 23. Each class would have students of the same ability in it.

This should eliminate boredom because you're moving as fast as you want to. There's also the incentive of "The faster you get it, the faster you're out of here."

I like the idea, but that's because it's mine. Please tell me what you think.

With respect to you all,
Charles1952

reply posted on 29-1-2012 @ 12:43 PM by sligtlyskeptical

Originally posted by charles1952
reply to post by Vitchilo

Dear Vitchilo,

Always a pleasant surprise to run into you, and a Vitchilo thread is something special.

I agree with you that
More years of crappy education doesn't fix the crappy education.
It does allow more years for indoctrination, government control, and increased federal monies taken for "education."

You're more optimistic than I am, though.
Like that has ANY CHANCES of passing, not to mention EVEN IF IT DID... won't fix anything.

Why do you think Obama has to get a law passed to put this into effect? He doesn't have to go to Congress at all. I suspect that he will just go to his Secretary of Education and say "In your next batch of regulations, put in that any state that doesn't comply with my idea gets no education funding."

This is why Obama scares me. That, and the idea that the federal government is the place that should have all the money and all the control.

Vitchilo, another thread up to your high standards. Don't know what we peons would do without you.

With respect,
Charles1952

Why is everything on this site always discussed using false facts? The article clearly states the Obama wants the STATES to pass laws. He is not pushing this to be a Federal law. Duh. Shows what not having a good education does to folks ability to comprehend.

reply posted on 29-1-2012 @ 12:53 PM by charles1952

reply to post by sligtlyskeptical

Dear slightlyskeptical,

Now that I'm old, my writing skills have deserted me. I can't come up with any other explanation for why we can come to the same conclusion yet you appear to be scolding me. Let me try to straighten this out.

He doesn't have to go to Congress at all. I suspect that he will just go to his Secretary of Education and say "In your next batch of regulations, put in that any state that doesn't comply with my idea gets no education funding."

What I apparently should have added to that was that in order to comply with the regulation the state would have to pass a law requiring attendance until 18 or graduation. If the state doesn't pass the law by such and so a date, funding will be cut.

It's been done before.

Best wishes,
Charles1952

reply posted on 29-1-2012 @ 02:00 PM by snowspirit

reply to post by charles1952

************THIS PART IS FOR EVERYBODY*************

May I suggest an alternate solution? I will use Math as an example, but the same thing would be done for every subject. Figure out what is needed to have legitimate high school math skills and figure out how to get to those skills. Break that path into 10 parts. As an example, at the end of Part 1, you might have addition and subtraction down cold.

Now, when a student finishes Math Part 1, he goes to Math Part 2. His age doesn't matter, he stays in Part 1 until he's got it, and if he gets it quickly he moves to Part 2 quickly. When you get to Part 10 in all subjects, you're given a diploma, whether you're 13 or 23. Each class would have students of the same ability in it.

This should eliminate boredom because you're moving as fast as you want to. There's also the incentive of "The faster you get it, the faster you're out of here."

I like the idea, but that's because it's mine. Please tell me what you think.

With respect to you all,
Charles1952

That is a great idea.

Up here, for a while, the elementary schools tried something similar, but they did it all wrong and scrapped it after a couple of years. What they tried was, to let the kids work at what they wanted to work at, but some subjects were clearly lacking.

When a person goes back to school, to pick up on subjects they were poor at, that is how they do it. It's how the GED works too.

My son at 15 years old

did some investigating on his own, and got really creative, behind my back.

He went to a doctor, complained that he couldn't sleep at night, so he couldn't physically do school in the morning. The doctor wrote a note to the school, and my son got into a program where they worked on one thing (afternoons only) until the subject was done, then moved on.

He did all his math, grades 10, 11, and 12, and then all his sciences. He was out a year early, except he didn't do english and socials. They wouldn't let him do school through the summer, if they did, he would have finished it, but he lost interest over the summer and started working instead.
He had his math and science, so when he went to college for electrical and millwright, they let him in because his math skill was so good.

reply posted on 29-1-2012 @ 03:39 PM by Indigo5

Originally posted by seabag
reply to post by Vitchilo

This is a state issue. The federal government should never pass a federal law regarding education IMO.

Of course Obama and his handlers would like this. This would be 18 years of federally mandated indoctrination.

You do realize that he said he wants the states to require kids tog et diplomas? No federally mandated anything...Up to the states and the Prez. said as much.

reply posted on 29-1-2012 @ 04:07 PM by xuenchen

Originally posted by charles1952
reply to post by sligtlyskeptical

Dear slightlyskeptical,

Now that I'm old, my writing skills have deserted me. I can't come up with any other explanation for why we can come to the same conclusion yet you appear to be scolding me. Let me try to straighten this out.

He doesn't have to go to Congress at all. I suspect that he will just go to his Secretary of Education and say "In your next batch of regulations, put in that any state that doesn't comply with my idea gets no education funding."
What I apparently should have added to that was that in order to comply with the regulation the state would have to pass a law requiring attendance until 18 or graduation. If the state doesn't pass the law by such and so a date, funding will be cut.

It's been done before.

Best wishes,
Charles1952

I agree,

Obama and the Executive branch could somehow mandate this.

They have been doing their best to circumvent regular procedures.

We all KNOW this is what was in his mind when he made the original statement.

Obama has a bad habit of thinking out loud.

The "wide-area" generic solutions have mostly failed.

reply posted on 4-2-2012 @ 08:51 PM by ownbestenemy

Originally posted by snowspirit
If they're still in school at 18, they've either started late, or failed at least one grade. I'm assuming the grade system is the same as up here, kindergarden at age 5, grade 12 at 17?

It all depends on your date of birth and the State's requirements for starting kindergarten or first grade. I graduated at 18, not because I was behind, but because of the factors I stated.

An example: My oldest son started kindergarten at age 5 cause of the end of year birthday cutoff and my youngest son started the same at age 6 because of the beginning of year birthday.

Pages: << 1 2 >> ^^TOP^^