I think the much better idea is to get rid of the Indoctrinators
Problem solved
I think that is a good, single-point proposal which would never be accepted by any district.
I graduate my students when they can pass the placement test for (non-remedial) admission to our community college.
I took the CA proficiency test to graduate at 16 and went to college. It was the equiv of a HS diploma and after 1 semester at college I never needed to show/prove I had a diploma other than to get into my transfer school. After that, the fact I had a college degree trumped the need to prove I had a HS diploma or equiv.
With a plan like this I could have been in college at 12.
Yeah....a plan with merit: early graduation for meeting standards...
and already an option. Don’t think there’s any opposition: parental control.
Many kids begin college in their teens. If the college wants the student:
the schools are thrilled to claim the kid’s success.
But allowing a student to graduate to go to work (?):
they will likely withhold a diploma. Too much risk involved for the kid; bad
rep for the school. Kid would have to quit...and get a GED.
So it is already available. And homeschooling is always an option.
So you essentially want a kid to be able to “test out” of High School? As long as the criteria (tests, scores, etc) are properly chosen I have no problem with that.
In fact I think a person should be able to test out of college, anything. I once wanted to promote a technician to the engineering grade level but HR wouldn’t let me because he didn’t have the degree. I claimed he could do the work and should be promoted. They finally agreed that if he could pass two professional certifications that were designed for engineers, I could promote him. He did and I did.
If you can do the work as determined by objective professional standards, you ought to get the degree, job, whatever.
YES!
I’ve been proposing this for years.
End compulsory school attendance at age 12 if the student can pass basic literacy, math, history and science tests. End it at age 16 regardless.
AFTER PASSING THE BASIC TEST, if the student wants to continue with his/her education, taxpayers will pay for up to 4 more years of advanced education (above the basics) or for vocational education.
I think that is overly simplistic. My son took the ACT last year in 7th grade as part of Duke TIPS and scored higher than seniors I coach who are going to Georgia Tech.
That suggests he could graduate based on your criteria.
But what this skips is general knowledge that I don’t think is tested as part of the ACTs like history, biology, chemistry, higher math (pre calf and calc), etc.
Maybe kids could be eligible for taking the GED tests (is that a thing?) if they score over a certain level.
I’ll bet the outcome would be viewed as racist.
Administering and scoring the tests will also be expensive, especially if you include a writing sample (which you should). You’d also have to conduct it under very strict guidelines to avoid cheating, and change it up regularly. Therefore, to keep expenses under control, I’d recommend a minimum age of 15, and a certain GPA from the two years previous. It would ensure that kids don’t just take it over and over until they pass (this would be expensive) and those who really want out will do well in the years leading up to it.
Well, here’s the thing:
Whatever one wants for their child in education, there is a way to obtain it.
Merit makes it possible.
My homeschool daughters started college at 16. And their were many times before and after that, where we asked for opportunities and services from the public educational authorities which were granted with aplomb, because the girls had merit and a dossier.
Not every institution or system is a closed shop...and there are administrators and boards of trustees who delight at students who break molds and pursue excellence. Good people.
No, because then everyone here will do like the Chinese and spend their entire childhoods mindlessly memorizing the answers to standardized tests. We need less Asian education, not more of it.
I say no.
Some people freeze when test taking so SAT type testing can not be used to gage everyone accurately.
I cannot see how a school could implement what you suggest without problems.
Also kids going to a school do learn things other than book knowledge. The proper classroom setting (which most schools no longer have because the kids are more incontrol of things than the teacher) is valuable to children. Authority outside of home, participation, sharing, working out differences, etc.
Kids I know who were home schooled have to find groups and such some what near by to fulfill this aspect of “education”.
Maybe a good first baby step! But your plan simple means that the student moves from one indoctrination camp to a more aggressive one faster! Time to break up the monopoly that universities have on learning and credentialing. In most fields, universities are no longer the only option for learning. However, employers still mostly rely on formal credentials from approved institutions of higher education. This can and hopeful will change over time with some creative thinking from employers.
Our entire state has significantly fewer students than ten years ago, but more ‘educators’. We’re seeing an explosion of special ed educators, para educators, facilitators and other associated hand-holders. The average student cost for a year of indoctrination is $18k (more than most universities) and the average special ed student is over $55k. That’s where the money is.
One of the problems my homeschoolers had with entering college at young ages was the lack of a high school diploma. Without that diploma they were ineligible for scholarships. Thankfully, we did not need loans.
A discussion of possible interest to homeschoolers.
Although it wouldn’t apply to homeschoolers.
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.
But what about “acculturation”, socialization, football games, proms, PE...
You are forgetting that many parents use the public schools as subsidized babysitting to have a place to warehouse the kiddies while they are at work. Graduating the kids early would not be of interest.