Should Education be Compulsory, and if so, What Age Should It Be Set?
38 replies, posted
[IMG]http://cdn3.chartsbin.com/chartimages/l_qpp_7c79ec13e469767d2e519528a4bf2076[/IMG]
From the chart provided above, you can see that education is compulsory almost everywhere, to varying degrees. For example, it is quite strict in the US, while the UK and Japan have a slightly lower requirement - very few countries, such as Malaysia, however, go below 15 years of age.
[B]My View
[/B]I personallybelieve, as someone who suffers from anxiety and gender issues and thus has trouble coping in school, that only primary education should be compulsory and, even then, can be left a year early. Most practical skills are learnt then. Furthermore, I believe that moderation should be loosened - citing [url=http://www.neelb.org.uk/parents/ews/]Northern Ireland's Educational Welfare Officer System[/url] as an example. Quoting from it:
[quote]
What does an EWO do?An Education Welfare Officer:
*will meet with the school to respond to written referrals
*make an assessment of the situation and establish a support plan with the young person, parent and school
*can act on a parent’s request to talk to the young person’s school or other agencies on their behalf.
*can make referrals to other support services e.g. Medical officer or Educational Psychologist.
*can tell families about other specialist support projects in the area e.g. EOTAS, Parent or Pupil Support Groups.
What happens if school attendance does not improve?
If there is no improvement the EWO will have to:
*Ask you to attend a Family Consultation Meeting
*Convene a School Attendance Panel Meeting
*Convene an Education Planning Meeting, involving Social Services and other agencies. If the situation does not improve then the decision can be made to
*Apply to the court for an Order or prosecute the parent/carer.[/quote]
Note the final bullet point. This is obscenely strict, especially considering a majority of the time responsibility may well lay in the hands of the child and not the parent - e.g. getting off the bus, skiving, etcetera, with no say from the parent.
[QUOTE=Irockz;43453787]Most practical skills are learnt then.[/QUOTE]
You need more than just practical skills to get anywhere in modern society. Sure the skills learned might teach you how to read simple books, do simple maths, not be a raging asshole to everyone around you (a lot of primary schools focus on that because parents don't seem to). You'd be resigned to working manual labour jobs, or entry-level service jobs. Living off those is hard.
However, making any post-primary education optional does not seem to be the way forward. Understanding maths to a greater degree is useful for managing your finances, amongst other things. Learning how to read and write properly can make the difference between you getting screwed over in contractual agreements, and you getting the best of a contract. Education is incredibly important, and leaving it too early is extremely detrimental.
That isn't saying it's perfect, it does need reforms. There needs to be more in placed to deal with the problems that arise from various mental disorders, gender identity issues, bullying, etc. right now the systems in place aren't very good in most schools as they aren't properly standardised. I know my primary schools mental welfare was non-existent until mum made a fuss about it to the headteacher (it still sucked afterwards as it wasn't planned well). High school was only marginally better. Student welfare in the key stages of education is dire. It's pretty great in higher and further education however.
[editline]7th January 2014[/editline]
Wait, why has NI given the EWO that kind of power? Prosecuting parents of a student who isn't going to school won't solve the problem. It may make it a lot worse instead, but it's not usually the fault of the parents that the student isn't turning up.
Of course education should be compulsory. We just can't trust kids receiving most of their education from their parents, because for every good parent that does it properly there's going to be a few that don't.
Secondary education (high school) should be compulsory until 16 at least. The system here is that senior school (years 11 and 12) is what prepares you for university. Serious, you get a mark at the end of senior school which tells you if you can get into the uni course you want to do or not. If someone doesn't want to go to university, and instead wants to learn a trade, then they should be allowed to do that. Senior school would be a waste of time then, but by staying in school till he or she is 16 they are going to have a reasonable level of education.
Maybe, just so kids don't drop out of school just so they can do nothing with their lives, maybe kids will have to start an apprenticeship or traineeship if they are under the age of 17 and do not go to school (I say 17 because some people, like me, finished senior school at 17).
This is one of those things where I always told myself, "Hey, you just don't appreciate school because you don't understand it's benefits, but don't worry, when you're older you will understand." The problem is that I'm almost done with college and I still look back on the vast majority of my time in school as an absolute joke and a waste of time.
I learnt more about history, literature, government, philosophy, science, etc. on my own time, outside of school, then I ever did sitting in a classroom.
The only thing I can honestly say that I got from school is math, sports, and friends, but the friends came more from being in the same place every day then anything the school specifically did.
[editline]8th January 2014[/editline]
I was also homeschooled for a couple years (around 3rd and 4th grade) where I covered about 3 years schooling in 1 year of time with like 4 hours a day.
it should preferably not be compulsary at all (hint: everything that is compulsary is compulsary because otherwise noone would use the service)
the very least schools should only teach kids basic maths and reading/writing, then after that they should decide for themselves
[QUOTE=Kentz;43464437]it should preferably not be compulsary at all (hint: everything that is compulsary is compulsary because otherwise noone would use the service)
the very least schools should only teach kids basic maths and reading/writing, then after that they should decide for themselves[/QUOTE]
I agree with this, the best case scenario would be that schools aren't compulsary but rather kids want to be educated.
The most common argument made by children who are being forced to take common classes such as history or math are that they will never again use the information in the "real world". That once they complete the class and get their grade they will forget all the information given to them, never to be used again.
The thing to remember here is that people, from the time they are born until they reach a good ripe age of 30 or so, are in a developmental stage. You don't need to know that sin^2(a)+cos^2(a) = 1 to get a job, but critical thinking and complex problem solving expand one's learning capacity regardless of the subject's applicability to daily life. Learning capacity is necessary to do well at anything; a quick learner works smarter rather than harder.
Furthermore, being a programmer I personally do use higher mathematics on a daily basis. Would I have pursued my career choice if I hadn't been exposed to those subjects in my mandatory schooling? Absolutely not. General education is just that: general. They are subjects which can be learned by any willing student and they can be applied to most anyone's life at some point or another.
Lastly, school is in every case a benefit to humanity as a whole. There is not a single case that has been or ever will be that a society of absolute fools is preferable to a society of intellectuals. If the caveat of education is coercion of attendance then so be it.
[t]http://favimages.net/wp-content/uploads/2013/07/john-green-quotes-sayings-public-education-brainy-quote.jpg[/t]
just because education isn't compulsary doesn't mean people will be fools
if you truly think critical thinking and problem solving expands one´s learning capacity (this is obviously true, by the way) then you should also accept that compulsory schooling isn't a very logical institution in the first place
[QUOTE=bobbleheadbob;43465088]The most common argument made by children who are being forced to take common classes such as history or math are that they will never again use the information in the "real world". That once they complete the class and get their grade they will forget all the information given to them, never to be used again.
The thing to remember here is that people, from the time they are born until they reach a good ripe age of 30 or so, are in a developmental stage. You don't need to know that sin^2(a)+cos^2(a) = 1 to get a job,[B]but critical thinking and complex problem solving expand one's learning capacity regardless of the subject's applicability to daily life. Learning capacity is necessary to do well at anything; a quick learner works smarter rather than harder[/B]
Furthermore, being a programmer I personally do use higher mathematics on a daily basis. Would I have pursued my career choice if I hadn't been exposed to those subjects in my mandatory schooling? Absolutely not. General education is just that: general.[B] They are subjects [I]which can be learned by any willing student[/I] and they can be applied to most anyone's life at some point or another [/B].
Lastly, school is in every case a benefit to humanity as a whole. There is not a single case that has been or ever will be that a society of absolute fools is preferable to a society of intellectuals. If the caveat of education is coercion of attendance then so be it.
[/QUOTE]
okay so,
1. this could be solved by schools simply teaching out basic logic instead of giving you to do a mass of unnecessary assignments
2. the keyword here is [I]willing[/I]
also that quote is irritating my voluntarist ass as it is assuming without public schools everyone will be stupid
[editline]8th January 2014[/editline]
for some reason it isn't letting me edit my post, I was also going to add that
[QUOTE=bobbleheadbob;43465088]
Lastly, school is in every case a benefit to humanity as a whole. There is not a single case that has been or ever will be that a society of absolute fools is preferable to a society of intellectuals. If the caveat of education is coercion of attendance then so be it.
[/QUOTE]
nothing is ever beneficial to "humanity" if it's forced. Be it schools or whatever. The reason its forced is because it serves those in power, not those whom are exposed to it. Public schools can cause massive damage to a childs motivation. Many children has a very clear idea of what they want to do, and its very discouraging to them when they have to do a bunch of assignments they 1. Dislike, and in some cases, 2. Isn't actually useful at all. And if they do not do these assignments they are in the end punished for it and may not be able to follow their dreams.
[editline]8th January 2014[/editline]
You also have no legitimate authority to tell people what they should and should not do, saying that it "serves humanity" is a very scary and dangerous sentence.
I get the impression from some of the posters here that they are struggling at school and are trying to bag the shit out of it as much as they can.
[quote]You also have no legitimate authority to tell people what they should and should not do, saying that it "serves humanity" is a very scary and dangerous sentence.[/quote]
yawmwen is that you? You know, by you saying that we might as well not pay taxes. I receive government financial assistance funded through tax, but apparently that's very scary and dangerous.
Here in Australia (or my state at least) the minimum leaving age at school is 17, but I think it's as low as 16 if you promise to find an apprenticeship or traineeship. The other states are similar. But would you's look at this: [url]http://www.sbs.com.au/news/article/2014/01/08/illiteracy-among-apprentices-sparks-skills-shortage[/url]
We have teenagers trying out for these positions, but employers just have to let them go because they probably can't even read a fucking street directory. It's not saying that our K-12 education system is shit - although it could have some improvement, but these are people who leave school because they hate it and don't see the point in it. It would be so much worse if we had people leaving school at 12, or not even attending in the first place because they do not see the value out of it. And keeping in mind with that article, that it refers to apprentices that struggle with the most basic arithmetic, literacy and communication skills. I do not want to live in a society filled with people like that. If anything, and employers would agree, we need everyone to go through even stronger and more effective education.
[QUOTE=Antdawg;43466832]I get the impression from some of the posters here that they are struggling at school and are trying to bag the shit out of it as much as they can.
yawmwen is that you? You know, by you saying that we might as well not pay taxes. I receive government financial assistance funded through tax, [B]but apparently that's very scary and dangerous.[/B]
Here in Australia (or my state at least) the minimum leaving age at school is 17, but I think it's as low as 16 if you promise to find an apprenticeship or traineeship. The other states are similar. But would you's look at this: [URL]http://www.sbs.com.au/news/article/2014/01/08/illiteracy-among-apprentices-sparks-skills-shortage[/URL]
We have teenagers trying out for these positions, but employers just have to let them go because they probably can't even read a fucking street directory. It's not saying that our K-12 education system is shit - although it could have some improvement, but [B]these are people who leave school because they hate it[/B] and don't see the point in it. It would be so much worse if we had people leaving school at 12, or not even attending in the first place because they do not see the value out of it. And keeping in mind with that article, that it refers to apprentices that struggle with the most basic arithmetic, literacy and communication skills. I do not want to live in a society filled with people like that. If anything, and employers would agree, we need everyone to go through even stronger and more effective education.[/QUOTE]
It is scary and dangerous if you think your opinion which coerces people into abiding an institution (In this case public schools, but it could also be applied to taxation) somehow has any merit and actual validity at all. If I told you that I think everyone should exercise 4 hours a day and that it should be made a law, you would most likely think I'm insane. But exercising 4 hours a day is beneficial as well. I wouldn't want to live in a society full of fat people with bad backs, would you????
Wow a terrible public school that the students hate, what a surprise. Obviously the best choice is to force students into doing more work.
If a child hates to play the violin, but his parents forces him to, is that good?
[QUOTE=Antdawg;43466832]I get the impression from some of the posters here that they are struggling at school and are trying to bag the shit out of it as much as they can.[/QUOTE]
not sure if this was directed at me but I did well when I graduated from "swedish high school". National average was 14/20 points and I graduated with 18/20
[QUOTE=bobbleheadbob;43465088]
Furthermore, being a programmer I personally do use higher mathematics on a daily basis. Would I have pursued my career choice if I hadn't been exposed to those subjects in my mandatory schooling? Absolutely not. General education is just that: general. They are subjects which can be learned by any willing student and they can be applied to most anyone's life at some point or another.
[/QUOTE]
I think the whole "I won't use this in the real world" is a case-by-case problem. There are cases where, yes, you will use it. And there are cases where you won't.
[QUOTE=Zuimzado;43467455]I think the whole "I won't use this in the real world" is a case-by-case problem. There are cases where, yes, you will use it. And there are cases where you won't.[/QUOTE]
A lot of the things you are taught in later years are quite case-by-case. For example I won't be using the skills taught in English Literature to write stories. I've got no need for that with the education path I'm continuing down. However, I do need the maths skills taught (which I did terribly at anyway).
Giving students the ability to choose subjects to replace certain subjects in their later years should be a mandatory part of any education system I think. I really, really enjoyed the last two years of my high school life because I was able to do things I actually liked (IT, Design/ Woodwork, extended science). Maybe introducing this kind of thing earlier into the curriculum would help with students who don't want to be at school right now. Rather than doing subjects that aren't examined in out standardised tests (Music, Drama, Art, PE, Religious Studies, etc.) let the students choose things that seem interesting to them instead.
Mandatory education to a certain degree (I'm quite partial to the age limit at 16, it seems quite reasonable) should really be a thing. Having people dropping out with only the basic skills in maths and language is not beneficial to them, or society at large. One of the biggest reasons a lot of history is so awful is due to average people not being educated, leading to superstition, bigotry and general awfulness.
We are the smartest fuckers on the planet, why squander that and be content with basic skills just because the current school system made your life harder? If anything that tells us the school system needs things in place to support people having hard times, rather than brushing it under the table and plugging their ears to student welfare issues.
[QUOTE=hexpunK;43467731]We are the smartest fuckers on the planet, why squander that and be content with basic skills just because the current school system made your life harder? If anything that tells us the school system needs things in place to support people having hard times, rather than brushing it under the table and plugging their ears to student welfare issues.[/QUOTE]
This argument assumes that school actually makes us smarter. Read the journals of civil war soldiers, who had much less school than people today, then read english papers by high school graduates and tell me which is better written.
Did high school ever feel somewhat like a prison? Did it ever feel like being in a machine that had its own purposes and goals separate from yours? This feeling is not uncommon, and an examination of the development of the school explains why. Rather than being a tool to educate, the school as we know it today started as a way to produce obedient and loyal subjects, soldiers, and workers. It was never intended to develop the mind in any meaningful way. Education and schooling are often conflated, but there are many important distinctions between the two. Schools are not suited for educating and it is high time we move away from the idea of the school as the only option for delivering education.
The modern school was invented by the Prussians, after 1806. Before then, education was delivered in many different ways. Like stated previously, the purpose of modern schooling was originally to produce obedient and productive workers and soldiers for the state. This explains why school is designed in ridged, time structured blocks, much like a factory. This explains why school is hierarchical, and highly structure. From student, to teacher, to assistant principal, to principal, much like ranks in the military. It explains why people are taught with people of their same age, rather than level of interest or ability. Moreover, the schooling system works to sort people out into different live paths once they reach adulthood, typically into either college prep or vocational lifestyles.
If any real education does take place in schools, it’s a happy accident or a byproduct of the system, and is not intended. There are, however, many people who work in schools who believe they were developed with the express purpose of education. Alas, the way school is structured is actually more hostile to education than many alternatives. It is like pushing water up hill, and not even as effective.
Because we believe schooling is education, we are very impoverished on what education is and could be. Why, for instance, do we assume that education has too take place at one person’s early stages in life? It can take place at any stage in one’s life, and often should. Why does education have to take place only in groups that are the same age? Why does it have to be so formal and ridged, rather than open? Clearly there is little educational reasoning behind this, and has more to do with its original design.
Education should be central to everyone’s lives, and we need to step away from idea that schools are the only way in which to educate.
[QUOTE=sgman91;43467998]This argument assumes that school actually makes us smarter. It seems to me that kids who are already smart do well in school and take things from it while those who aren't get pushed through and end up just as bad as they were at the beginning.[/QUOTE]
Depends on the school and school system used. Some kids are just never going to excel in school, they are still going to come out with more knowledge than they started with at least. There's two ends to the spectrum of "who won't go to school", the kids who just won't pay attention don't want to be there, and the kids that are too smart for their current level won't want to be there, both from boredom. Though if you were to ask most students in high schools if they want to be there, they'd likely say no.
Which is one of the reason I don't think optional high school education is a great idea. Giving kids the chance to just say "fuck it" and never actually try and learn anything is not going to help them, or us as a whole. It just increases the number of ignorant people who have caused problems in the past and will continue to whilst the educational systems of many countries are so awful.
[QUOTE=StickyWicket;43468041]Did high school ever feel somewhat like a prison?[/Quote]
No. Relationships with teachers during senior school were informal, I could leave the school during study periods, and aside from compulsory English I could study what I wanted. Don't be so dramatic.
[Quote]The modern school was invented by the Prussians, after 1806. Before then, education was delivered in many different ways. Like stated previously, the purpose of modern schooling was originally to produce obedient and productive workers and soldiers for the state.[/quote]
Are you seriously suggesting we revert to a [i]pre-nineteenth century[/i] system where the average man or woman lacked the ability to read or write?
[Quote]Education should be central to everyone’s lives, and we need to step away from idea that schools are the only way in which to educate.[/QUOTE]
Schools aren't the only way. When you enter the workplace you learn more skills. When you go to a trade college to study as part of your apprenticeship or traineeship, you learn. When you go to university so you can follow your ideal academic career, you learn. Education doesn't stop at school.
[QUOTE=sgman91;43467998]This argument assumes that school actually makes us smarter. Read the journals of civil war soldiers, who had much less school than people today, then read english papers by high school graduates and tell me which is better written.[/QUOTE]
I'd say that this doesn't really work at all.
How english was written and spoken changed and the patterns and styles are different. Saying you prefer one over the other is as far as that really goes to be honest.
[QUOTE=Antdawg;43468243]
Are you seriously suggesting we revert to a [i]pre-nineteenth century[/i] system where the average man or woman lacked the ability to read or write?
Schools aren't the only way. When you enter the workplace you learn more skills. When you go to a trade college to study as part of your apprenticeship or traineeship, you learn. When you go to university so you can follow your ideal academic career, you learn. Education doesn't stop at school.[/QUOTE]
Most people could read and write decently well before the 19th century. The important thing is that schooling was voluntary, functioned well for its time and was not the authoritarian prison-like environment of some public schools. And to answer yout question more directly - no, noone ever implied that we should return to a pre 19th century model. But homeschooling is still a prefered method imo.
This is the last time i use à smartpgone to type on dacepunch how the fick Dora anyone manage??
[QUOTE=HumanAbyss;43468286]I'd say that this doesn't really work at all.
How english was written and spoken changed and the patterns and styles are different. Saying you prefer one over the other is as far as that really goes to be honest.[/QUOTE]
Take basic grammar and content quality then (depth of thought). Or even the ability to clearly express one's thoughts when written.
[QUOTE=Antdawg;43468243]No. Relationships with teachers during senior school were informal, I could leave the school during study periods, and aside from compulsory English I could study what I wanted. Don't be so dramatic.
Are you seriously suggesting we revert to a [i]pre-nineteenth century[/i] system where the average man or woman lacked the ability to read or write?
Schools aren't the only way. When you enter the workplace you learn more skills. When you go to a trade college to study as part of your apprenticeship or traineeship, you learn. When you go to university so you can follow your ideal academic career, you learn. Education doesn't stop at school.[/QUOTE]
Besides you anecdote, you imply that the only reason people are on average literate in the Americas/Europe (I don't think most people world wide are actually literate, could be corrected) was because of the 1806 Prussian reforms in schooling that led to what we now see today in public schools. This does not account for the fact that since, we have had the industrial revolution, the internet, and the great economic growth since then and how higher education and literacy is needed now more than any other time in history.
I don't see what exactly you're trying to argue by saying higher education exists out of school. Rather than touch up on the points I actually made, you simply looked at my conclusion and stated whatever came to mind, it seems.
We agree that schooling is not the only way, but the argument is that schooling is unpreferable and in fact worse than most forms of education. I should really be pointing out that when I say "schooling", I refer to how it's carried out in the US public education system and in many other countries, which is based on Prussian reforms. Schooling could be much radically different than what it is today, which is why it is possible that your experience in schooling differs from what others have experienced.
Education is compulsory in NZ until 16 which by then you should have your NCEA qualification. If you choose not to go to school, it's your loss and you only realise that when your life goes to shit and you think "Fuck I should have stayed at school".
I think school should be compulsory, and 16 is a good age for leaving school because most people with plans manage to pick up a job by that age anyway.
[QUOTE=sgman91;43467998]This argument assumes that school actually makes us smarter. Read the journals of civil war soldiers, who had much less school than people today, then read english papers by high school graduates and tell me which is better written.[/QUOTE]
Maybe because only the good ones are the most preserved and well known?
Im an independent learner myself but I somewhat regret being such an ass in highschool and not taking it seriously. I don't think most of the information is useful but I'm finding more and more that things I was taught would have been useul to pay attention too.
Not with our current system of teaching.
We line up a monkey, a crocodile, a chicken and a dog and give them a standardized test of climbing a tree.
Seriously, do what you love so that you love what you do. Today's school has a tendency to funnel people into DOSH careers with no care for whether it's actually something they like.
As some one with a nice history of the school system and has gotten by with a lot of favours, I'd have to say that education should be compulsory, and students should have the ability to do education from home.
the argument "it worked for me, therefore everyone must do it" isn't a very good one
[QUOTE=Kentz;43486939]the argument "it worked for me, therefore everyone must do it" isn't a very good one[/QUOTE]
And the argument 'it didn't work for me, therefore everyone must NOT do it' isn't a very good one either.
[QUOTE=Kentz;43486939]the argument "it worked for me, therefore everyone must do it" isn't a very good one[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=Antdawg;43492707]And the argument 'it didn't work for me, therefore everyone must NOT do it' isn't a very good one either.[/QUOTE]
I'd suggest that the use of a strawman in this setting is inadvisable.
[QUOTE=Antdawg;43492707]And the argument 'it didn't work for me, therefore everyone must NOT do it' isn't a very good one either.[/QUOTE]
nobody ever said that though
the closest thing you get is people being against compulsory education but those are still not statements actively advocating the absence of every education form
just because education isn't forced doesn't mean people won't educate themselves. education remains beneficiary even in a society without it being compulsory. im not in any shape or form forced through coercion to exercise, but since i personally understand the benefits of doing said exercise i do it.
you have been doing very badly in answering my previous questions but ill give it another try, briefly and concise,
why is it important that the government decides that you must learn and also what you learn
&
how do you [I]ethically[/I] defend that you somehow have the right to decide the faiths - again, through coercion - of other peoples lives by using the government as a tool to make others obey?
Primary school as default.
Secondary school consists of Base English, Base Mathematics, Base Science and IT. Students can opt into additional subjects (which in turn would require additional time schooling) or into more advanced versions of the main subjects (i.e. English Literature, Advanced Mathematics, etc)
Would be taught college style. Effectively teaching people the skills they need, but allowing them more time to themselves if they work hard.
Thus someone could fully complete the basics and leave school at 14 with the bare bones or remain up to the age of 18 in secondary school and learn more.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.