Posted on 12/04/2016 7:36:12 AM PST by wintertime
Proposal:
Award any child ( regardless of age) an official high school diploma from his local high school if they score above a certain level on the SAT, ACT, or GED exams.
Why?
1) If the purpose of compulsory education laws is to produce literate and numerate citizens then scoring above a certain level on the SAT, ACT, or GED is proof of that.
2) Fewer students in school will reduce the number of teachers needed. This means fewer salaries, pensions, and benefits that must be paid by the taxpayers. It may even mean closing down and selling some schools and property.
3) It reduces the amount of time the student spends being influenced and indoctrinated by Marxist trained teachers.
4) The young person can start post-high school training and/or college and begin his career years sooner. Increasing the years working can literally mean hundreds of thousands or even millions of dollars more earned over a lifetime. The state certainly will benefit from the tax dollars collected and the young person can benefit from a better standard of living and a more secure retirement.
4)) There are advantages to having an official high school diploma when applying for college loans and scholarships, or when applying to enlist in the military.
5) The more time a person spends working in the real world of a free economy the more likely his is to understand and appreciate conservative principles.
I’m struggling to understand why you seem so aggressive and negative toward wintertime’s idea. Their suggestion simply offers more freedom of choice for academically motivated students and parents, not a mandate for all. My guess is that those who hate school would not be able to pass the test, and therefore would not be “free-ranging” in the streets.
Also, as a former “non-traditional” graduate student (and a former middle school teacher) I find many points of disagreement with the conjecture in your second paragraph.
Personally my only major concern would be IF a 13 yr. old student would choose to attend a brick & mortar classroom (vs. a virtual one), that they may be vulnerable to “predatory” situations.
The bottom line is, parents and students deserve more freedom of choice in deciding how to craft an education plan that best suits their child’s individual needs.
1.) The expense of administering and scoring those tests is considerable. It is best to limit the opportunity to those who
...a) stand a good chance of passing, and
...b) have the maturity level to handle college or trade school.
2.) Bear in mind the impact this could have on the colleges. As I have said, at the college level, people are paying to be there. You dump a bunch of 13-14 year olds in there, no matter how bright they are, it's going to change the tenor of the classroom, and people who are paying for their seat aren't likely to appreciate that. We don't go to college to hang out with kids that young. I really do recommend that 15 be the youngest.
You have to think of the possible unintended consequences.
Actually, it would apply to homeschoolers. If they could pass the SAT, ACT, or GED with a high enough score to prove literacy and numeracy they would be given an official high school diploma from their local high school.
1) They would be completely freed from truancy laws and government oversight.
2) The homeschoolers would be eligible to apply for college scholarships and loans. ( My kids were barred due to not having a high school diploma.)
3) Enlisting in the military would be more straight forward. It is my understanding that there are restrictions now for those who do not have a high school diploma.
I spent 14 years teaching on a college level, have a masters and credits toward my doctorate, yet I am “unqualified” to teach at a high school level for lack of “educational” certification. I would have to spend nearly two years taking nearly worthless classes in secondary education teaching, plus hours of “practice” teaching to become certified to teach at a high school level. I could get an undergraduate degree in teaching taking only the most rudimentary classes in science and be able to teach high school physics or chemistry in most states.
“Socialized” is a euphemism for adequately trained as socialist gibsmedats and to be reliable atheists. The reason for and goal of Common Core is to make the student competent enough and no more to fill out the welfare applications that will provide their meager livings. No dreams or ambitions allowed, peasant!
“I bet the outcome will be regarded as racist”
Well, that’s a problem, all right.
Do you have a solution? Ending compulsory education at age 12 would help some.
1) My kids were 13 ( one was 12) when they started college. Kids that young need to be driven to the college by their parent. Essentially, I waited for them in the library while they took their classes. If a sibling was taking a class the other children and I would read and study in library while we waited.
For us it was a very safe environment.
Any child who could take public transportation to a college would first have the danger of riding the public transport, ...so,... even there it would be better for the parent to drive them to the school.
2) The typical high school has plenty of opportunity for “predatory situations” .
My daughter was homeschooled from age 13 on due to Lyme disease. Once she was better the school wanted us to repeat a year.
Instead we continued homeschool but added community college English, history and Spanish, plus a few fun things like Photography & Acting. She did excellent on the SAT and was offered a 50% scholarship at her first choice college in Manhattan. They required the GED before admission so she took & aced that as well. Her brother also took college courses senior year.
My daughter started college with her age cohort and with 36 transferable credits from community college, which saved us 6 months tuition at 4 year college prices, could have finished earlier but she took extra courses. I think it was great for her. High school years are the pits, kids are bored and there are a lots of drugs around. She was so much more prepared for college than the other freshman and much more independent.
So you would omit homeschooled kids under your plan?
Even 100 years ago an 8th grade education was comparable to a 12th grade education today. My great grandfather graduated from 8th grade and he had read all the classics, could do advanced math, could speak and write English better than most college graduates today.
There is no reason to prolong childhood as long as we do today. At age 16 you should either be in college or in a trade school or apprenticeship in a trade.
You are right. High school is largely babysitting plus teaching things that should already have been learned by Grade 8.
They learn many things in school I for one wish they wouldn’t. There is no problem getting kids into gifted & talented programs in most communities where they work with other kids in a variety of settings. There are lots of after school & sports activities that they are eligible for, and schools in many states must admit homeschool children to those activities.
That is because of the bigotry of soft expectation on the part of parents & teachers.
Most 13-14 year olds would still be in school if we made the requirement to end compulsory education after passing a qualifying test.
However, compulsory education should end at age 16 whether or not one has passed a basic test for competency in reading, writing and math. At age 16 kids should either be headed to college or to a trade school. This is the standard expectation in most other Western countries.
That's a problem that's easily solved. Federal funds for education go to the parents, not the school. Parents can decide where to send their kids. Competition ensues. Teachers unions very sad.
A way to get around that is to have an essay requirement for reading/writing and having to show actual math problems solved rather than choosing A,B,C or D on a test.
Some parts of the test could be standardized. Say for example basic vocabulary.
You have very strong opinions but that does not make them facts. My daughter was in community college at 13 and was a bit intimidated being with older kids at first. She made friends she has stayed in contact with 10 years later. She was well loved by her professors, especially English, History & acting, all of whom wrote her stellar recommendations for college. She was uniformly praised for being forthright, responsible and thorough in her presentations & reports.
Where is she in your universe of higgldey, piggildy, rambunctious teenagers?
People make those ageist generalizations all the time. My kids went to Shakespeare plays from age 4 or 5, to concerts, NY theatre, dance performances, anything we could find to broaden their experience. Frequently we were stopped leaving the shows to be complemented on their perfect behavior. My children in private commented on the bad behavior of the adults who whispered, opened candy etc. Its all a matter of explanation, expectations and setting an example.
Perfect plan!
But what about “acculturation”, socialization, football games, proms, PE...
No, not at all. In fact, they are the most likely to be able to pass. I'd just recommend that they be 15 and have a previous body of academic work to qualify.
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.