Posted on 02/18/2010 1:59:08 PM PST by fight_truth_decay
I’m not dictating anything and don’t presume I am against home schooling.
The high school experience is worthwhile and I’m pleased that my son participated in it. He lettered (finally) in tennis, acted in a couple of school plays and took the time to pick a first rate college.
Folks, for heaven’s sake give this more thought.
We have kids today who are graduating from high school totally unprepared to continue on to higher education, and you folks think the resolution to this is to cut two grades out from under our high school students.
Why do you think this plan is being lofted? Is it to better the education system by 16.66%, or is it to cut the cost of educating our children by 16.66%?
In effect we’re dropping the age of adulthood by two years. If you graduate from high school when you’re fifteen to sixteen, then how can we claim kids are not adults until 18?
If a kid can graduate at 15, then they’ll be able to go out on their own as kids who graduate high school today do. By sixteen many of these kids will opt to go to work, leave home and get an apartment, like high school graduates do today.
If you think that portends for a better society, you’re not playing with a full deck.
As I said; What’s the rush ?
how far is it from graduating two years early into charging for graduating later?
Are you under the impression that our public schools are providing the same education you did for your children?
If not, then your post is worthless. And you know they are not.
Your children were able to move on properly under the current system. Other kids who are actually prepared, can also as it stands now.
Lowering the age and grades across the board will have apocalyptic results.
It’s also disturbing for you to state that these kids would earn $100,000 more by entering the work force two years early. What kids do you know today who are making $50,000 per year in their entry level positions? The average entry level position pays very little over minimum wage.
So what you seem to support, is 15 and sixteen year old kids leaving school to earn minimum wage or a little better.
Wow...
One other aspect of this that you seem to have missed, is that all this is being suggested with 10% unemployment. So what seems to be the case, is that some people think this is the perfect time to add tens of millions more people to the work force.
Who came up with this idea, Obama or Chairman Mao?
Well, I have no problem with that sentiment. Indeed, what is the rush? Why now?
If our schools had done a much better job over the last decade or two, one might be able to say our kids are so much smarter today, and thus could graduate earlier. Ah, no, our kids are less prepared today than at any other time in our history.
You are making the presumption. I did not say that you were against homeschooling, therefore, how can I defend a strawman of your creation?
It is the parents, child, and the college who should be making the decision about whether or not a child would be better off in college. For some children it is **not** a “rush” but, instead, a wise decision.
Regarding sports:
Why should the government schools have the monopoly on sports or theater for youth?
Why should a child's neighbor be forced (literally by threat of armed police action) to fund any child's theater or tennis experience?
What if all varsity level sports and theater programs were run by the Department of Parks and Recreation an open to all children grouped by age?
A better idea would be to completely privatize all varsity sports and arts programs for youth.
Statistics like this demonstrate that the institutional schooling model has failed. In my opinion, complete privatization is the only way to solution.
The question is.....what do they have in mind for all of these kids to do since they will be out two years earlier....saving tax dollars. Sounds like the new peace corps.
What kids do you know today who are making $50,000 per year in their entry level positions?
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Why are you counting the beginning years. If they start early they can work two years longer in their lifetime. If you count the **LAST** two years of an experienced worker’s extra wages the $100,000 is likely an **underestimate**!!!
I think that’s a valid thought. And if those kids are expected to join a peace core type of endeavor, you can count on those entering college to drop by a significant amount.
Wow.
Yep, that payoff in fifty years is sure a big sell today.
If you think your argument holds merit, let’s just kick kids out of school at ten. Imagine the additional wealth they will accumulate, or the additional adults that will be shoved out of work to make room for them, or the effect on wages as this pool of children hits the jobs market.
Yes, I am shouting. Those who believes that government workers can make better life decisions than parents is arrogant, indeed!
Those who are best able to make decisions for a child are his **parents**!
So you also buy the idea that our tenth grade kids are all ready to obtain an engineering degree, when most of the kids we’re graduating today after twelve grades are not.
Kids who are ready to graduate early today, can and do.
Sadly, those kids who are not ready after twelve years, are not kept behind.
Huh?
If the grade level for graduation is reduced to the tenth grade, what choice will parents have in that?
Pfffft... that was your premise in case you didn’t know it.
“Huh?”
Have you been paying attention at all? Our kids rank way down the line globally in math at graduation.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.