Obama proposes requiring students to stay in high school

[castlewise]

According to this article: http://www.washingtonpost.com/business/not-all-college-majors-are-created-equal/2012/01/12/gIQAfz4XzP_story.html

Unemployment for people with a degree is around 7-11% depending on major.

Unemployment for people with a high school diploma is 22%

Unemployment for people without a high school diploma is 31%

So not finishing high school is a terrible idea, irregardless of what the law says.

(Now whether there *should* be rules prohibiting people from doing stupid things is another question entirely. But we already have a number such laws and one more which keeps the population educated is fine by me.)

 

[Dethenger]

I don't think they should be forced to go to school until they're 18, but if they drop out, they should be required to get a GED. Or, they should have to get a GED before they are allowed to drop out. That way it's entirely on them.

 

[Thedutchjelle]

http://www.cnn.com/video/?hpt=hp_c2#/video/politics/2012/01/24/sotu-obama-education.cnn

1:02

In his state of the union speech, Obama got on the topic of education. One of the biggest things that got me listening was obama requesting that states make laws that require kids to finish high school or until they turn 18.

What do you guys think of this? Should kids be required to finish high school?

You mean that this isn't the law already?! o_o

In The Netherlands one is forced to follow education until the age of 18. I don't even dare to think how many people will voluntarily leave school otherwise. Trying to get a job without even a high-school diploma is not going to work anywhere. Just passing elementary school isn't enough.

 

[Lilani]

well here there are altenitives to "school>further study" such as aprrenticships/ traineeships/ work exereince based learning and all that jazz

the Idea is that they are doing SOMTHING...not just dropping out of school to do nothing

I see. I could get behind something like that I suppose (maybe have some exception to help them earn a GED while working full time if they want/need a job), but only as long as there is a system to help them out with that. I can see this easily turning out to be "OH YOU WANT TO STOP ATTENDING SCHOOL? TIME TO FIGURE OUT LIFE ALL ON YOUR OWN THEN, BYE!" and having very few dedicated resources and counselors to helping students make those decisions.

 

[Mick Myers]

I'd say this is actually a good idea on his part for once. I'm tired of hearing about fucktards that are living off welfare and then still complaining they can't have anything nice because they were too lazy or too stupid to go through high-school.

Actually, in all honesty, I'd be ok with a "Finish high-school or fuck right off" law, which basically states that if you don't finish highschool, you will be doomed to fail no matter what you do.

Normal people do what they can, go through high-school, and are at least partially successful because they actually tried to get somewhere in life. The people that don't sit around, ***** about not having a life, and leech off of others success via welfare.

In short, Obama, yes, please, get this enforced, or something even more strict that would severly punish those that choose to drop out on account of being lazy fucks.

*Quick addition*- an idea for the "more strict" version. Require people to have at least a GED before they are able to get on welfare, and while I'm mentioning welfare, ATTACH A FUCKING DRUG TEST. I have to be clean to WORK for my money, make the fuckers that sit around and DO ABSOLUTELY NOTHING be clean to get their leeching as well.

 

[Zack Alklazaris]

I completely and totally agree. You can barely get a decent job these days if you don't go to college, without a high school degree you can't even become a manager at McDonalds.

 

[Edhellen]

IIRC, you can't drop out in the US until you're 16, so the extension of this requirement to 18 wouldn't be the radical change people here are making it out to be. This is not to say I'm unopposed to it: Personally, I don't think schooling should be a requirement at all.

As for whoever was bringing up unemployment statistics, three things:

1. What's the statistic for how many graduates are working in jobs that don't require their diplomas and degrees, i.e., are working in jobs instead of a dropout solely because they had a nice shiny diploma? It's no secret that education is overvalued and oversupplied.

2. It doesn't follow that taking all the dropouts and giving them diplomas will eliminate their unemployment problem: It'll just make employment levels for high-school graduates worsen.

3. Even ignoring those factors, the very idea of mandatory public education being acceptable is only so because it's been ingrained into our culture for much longer than any of us have been alive. How is "Getting a diploma is correlated with success; Therefore everyone must get a diploma" any different in principle from "Having whitened teeth is correlated with success; Therefore it is now punishable by law to have dirty teeth" or even "Being white is correlated with success; Therefore non-whites are no longer allowed to reproduce"? Enforcing a life choice onto someone else solely because you approve of that choice is wrong.

 

[Vampire cat]

Yeah we have that in Norway and it's not a bad system in itself. About go-nowhere jobs though, I don't think it's important to have a job that pays all in the world, as long as you have a decent quality of life. I guess thats where the problem lies though, as far as I can understand jobs in USA pay extremely poor (aparently so poor that people can't live off one job and need to have several to support their kids), a bit absurd for someone like me from a country where even the lowliest toilet scrubber has a right to a decent wage.

 

[GrandmaFunk]

If they don't think finishing will benefit them, forcing them by law to say isn't going to change that.

It doesn't matter whether or not they THINK it benefits them.

it simply will.

 

[Bloodtrozorx]

Unless the drop out rate is so enormous that it imperils the nation I can't stand behind legally demanding that High School be completed for a child under 18. School should be reformed to engage students and make completion of school a forgone conclusion.

 

[spartan231490]

I see no point. Thanks to every(no) child left behind, a high school diploma is next to useless, especially in the current economy. You won't end up in any better of a job just cuz you have a hs degree. Further, I believe in the rights of an individual to choose what he/she does with her life, and that means letting that individual make shitty decisions if they want to.

Also, how would you enforce it? As it is, most attendance laws punish the parents. Are we going to punish parents because their 17 year old druggy son keeps skipping school to get high? Seems a bit unfair to me.

Further, I am sick and god damn tired of the federal government manipulating the states through the political equivalent of extortion to gain more power than they are constitutionally supposed to have. Sure, it isn't technically unconstitutional, but that doesn't make it right, and that doesn't stop it from violating the intent of the constitution.

What do you guys think of this? Should kids be required to finish high school?

what?! you mean they aren't already? if not, then why are there truancy laws?

In the US most states let you leave at 16. I think you need parent permission though.

 

[RJ 17]

I think it's absolutely pointless. If you mandate "No more official drop outs!" Then all you're doing is saying to all the kids who would have dropped out "We're going to baby sit you on tax-payer dollars until you're 18, THEN you can go be as much of a failure as you want."

What are we looking for? 17 year olds still in their freshmen year, counting down the days like a convict eagerly awaiting his release date? The old adage still holds true: "You can lead a horse to water but you can't make him drink." Sure, some lessons might rub off on the kid if he's forced to go to school. But when you're forced to do something, you're much less receptive and much more closed off. I can only imagine that such students will be much more likely to be disruptive towards the students who are there to learn, skip classes, and just cause more trouble in general.

 

[Subbies]

No I don't think it's a good idea.Some people aren't cut out for studies and staying in school till you're 18 is a waste of your time and can make you doubte yourself and your capacities (that is if you suck at school and don't want to have a job which requires a diploma). Highschool doesn't get you anywhere unless you go to university, so why bother with it if you want to work in a garage? In Switzerland we finish compulsery school at 16 and then we choose whether we want to go to highschool or an apprenticeship (basically you get a job but you still have certain basic courses and exams and the place you work at has certain duties like informing the authorities, not being allowed to fire you etc.).

 

[Lilani]

With all due respect, you're hardly an expert on what motivates a young teenager. Though I think we can all agree that they aren't exactly known for their foresight or sense of planning ahead.

I've heard interviews with the leadership from inner-city schools with high drop-out rates. They say the exact same things--the students don't see any point in school because they've either got families they've got to look after or the gangs offer a better life, and school doesn't help them with either of those problems. So maybe if we got the system to work with them rather than trying to scare them away from those lives (which really just scares them away from school) so they'd have a reason to stick around? It's not that they're looking into their future and seeing the lack of possibilities a high school degree can offer. It's that they are seeing their present and not seeing how education can help with any of that. As you said, they aren't known for planning ahead. And if the system is only showing them the future possibilities, why should they bother?

This is a problem with the system. We know kids, and the system does not work with them and give them a reason to stay.

By your logic, we shouldn't force kids to go to elementary school either. Yes, "forcing" kids to go to school doesn't automatically teach them anything, but it sure as hell is more likely to educate them than not going to school at all. Fact is, you're basically doomed to a life of, at best, mediocrity and at worst poverty if you don't even have a basic education. Get updated with the times, these days basic education means high school. Elementary school isn't nearly enough.

When did "gearing the system toward helping the circumstances of different types of students and giving them an education system worth sticking around for" become "letting out any kid who says 'I wants out?'" If that's what you got out of what I said, you've clearly misunderstood. I'm talking about education reform, which we are in desperate need of.

 

[The Cor]

My country seems to be just doing fine with that law in work, we still have drop outs of course but that will continue to happen. From my point of view such a law helps to let some of them stay in just a bit longer till they graduate and those who won't stay are just idiots anyway, but after dropping out the first time they still get pushed to attend to drop out school so they still have a chance afterwards at least over here.

 

[emeraldrafael]

You're not really allowed to just start leaving until youre (I think) 17 anyway or its truancy. Or youre emancipated from the home, but tahts a much more difficult thing than most people think.

However i would say that this is a good idea. Jobs are more and more requiring a highschool education minimum and if you need it, you may as well stay. I would say that some classes should be dropped so that the "useless" classes arent being taken. Or at the very least you should complete some kinda highschool level technical program.

...

And just as a personal opinion sorta thing, I dont see the need to drop out of high school. To me, its just laziness.

EDIT:

Actually... it wouldnt be a popular idea and no one would agree with it (in congress at least), but I would just say if you wanna drop out, feel free to, but you get no governemnt aide whatsoever. No welfare or similar benefits. you put yourself in the situation, so you should deal with the consequences.

 

[theevilgenius60]

Making it to where a person has to finish HS isn't going to fix things. They'll just complain about it and drag the other students, who want to learn, down with them. America's school system is diluted enough, we don't need more distractions dragging our education system further down. What would probably help is to make it harder to drop out. Have it involve a process, maybe even a class. Show them what lies ahead if they do go through with it, Scared Straight style. Maybe it wouldn't work, maybe the kids are too jaded these days, but maybe it would for some. And let's face it, anything that helps even a little is worth pursuing

 

[Thamous]

What do you guys think of this? Should kids be required to finish high school?

what?! you mean they aren't already? if not, then why are there truancy laws?

To ensure that they are attending high school until they are legally removed from it. Whether by graduating or by dropping out.

so this will prevent them from dropping out then? if not, then what will it do?

As it is now, students can drop out at 16/17 (depending on the state) with parental consent. The bill he proposes would outlaw this practice and would only allow 18+ year olds to dropout.

 

[Doneeee]

Let them drop out, I don't want to be stuck in a class with someone who would rather not be there and disrupts my learning. Also if you force them to wait til they turn 18 some people woud be unable to drop out at all, I graduated when I was 17.

That is exactly what I thought when I read this. If the idiots don't want to come to school don't lump them in with people who want to learn.