Cut School Leaving Age to 14

Percy1983

Idiophreak wrote: »

Right, so it should be dropped from the curriculum because *you* can't make sense of it?

As you say, everyone has *something* they don't excel at - should we drop all of it? Just let kids turn up and learn whatever they fancy that day?

FWIW, I'm also a very "rules based" person - very good at maths and computing, not much good at anything else...If I'd have had the chance I'd have dropped French in an instant...But I got stuck in and now know enough to get by on weekend breaks...

I was talking more in general ideas, of if its not essential and doesn't work then let them do something else.

By all means if children want to leanr and can learn a subject then go for it but as I say it wasted many hours of my time (and many others) and has very little use if you do well or not.

Yes push a basic level of maths/english/science on all but past that why push subjects which somebody can't do and will never be of any use to them. There is other more useful subjects I could have done with that time. I will add they also cut IT to make me do a year of french so I missed a year of IT which would have helped.

the_flying_pig

all school [and indeed many undergraduate degree] subjects are a mix of signalling [i.e. showing that you have the intellectual capacity and diligence to understand & remember potentially difficult subject material] and learning something that you'll actually use in the future.

for nearly all UK students foreign languages are about signalling. I think they're a good signal, personally. I'd only like to see about the least able quarter or so missing out altogether.

Going4TheDream

My youngest daughter wasn't the brightest academically and she worked in a manual environment in a book binding company straight from school. She was flexible, did many hours overtime, was seen as a good worker and eventually given responsibility, she was guided and supported along the way and her wages increased in line with her responsibility. 9 years from when she started she has worked her way up to manager responsible for a budget of nearly £700k for her department. She is 25 earns a lot more than the average £25k wage. She would never have got any where if she had been forced to stay on at school till 18. She has learned more by being hands on and also from learning from the bottom up. She has learned and developed the skills that she has needed along the way, learned a lot about business and again with support of the company. I feel she is lucky in the respect that kids today are unlikely to get the same opportunity due to the economic climate, but it shows that one size doesnt fit all and that this guy suggesting kids leave at 14 etc may have a valid point

pqrdef

the_flying_pig wrote: »

for nearly all UK students foreign languages are about signalling.

The 11-plus used to do that. It only tested English and Maths, but it was a pretty good predictor for any subject that didn't harness some special talent.

jamespir

what a ridiculous idea where are the jobs gonna come from
plus that will be less time to teach them its already 90% of pupils who leave school without basic skills

Idiophreak

Percy1983 wrote: »

I was talking more in general ideas, of if its not essential and doesn't work then let them do something else.

By all means if children want to leanr and can learn a subject then go for it but as I say it wasted many hours of my time (and many others) and has very little use if you do well or not.

Yes push a basic level of maths/english/science on all but past that why push subjects which somebody can't do and will never be of any use to them. There is other more useful subjects I could have done with that time. I will add they also cut IT to make me do a year of french so I missed a year of IT which would have helped.

What's essential, though?

If you look at, say, the Germans - over half their population (and a much higher proportion of youngsters) are fluent in English - and they gain significant economic advantages as a result. I doubt there are many school children sat around saying "this is a waste of time...I can't do it". There are bound to be some that "get it" more than others, but they're all "forced" to stick with it for their own good. (actually, I think it's because they often have to choose between English and Latin )

chewmylegoff

jamespir wrote: »

what a ridiculous idea where are the jobs gonna come from
plus that will be less time to teach them its already 90% of pupils who leave school without basic skills

what is your definition of "basic skills".

jamespir

chewmylegoff wrote: »

what is your definition of "basic skills".

reading writing etc

The_White_Horse

jamespir wrote: »

reading writing etc

if they can't read or write by the time they are 14 they are defective.

Derivative

The basic issue is the lack of motivation most kids have during their school years.

Up until about 16-17 I'd had no careers guidance, no role model in the family, nothing. Jobs? How do I become a lawyer, teacher, surgeon, banker? That's for the "other half" isn't it?

I didn't see the point in learning because I could just do it later on if it was ever important, and anyway, all that I know is sub £10k jobs, why would I be the "rock star"?

Thankfully a bit later on, during my college years (and not before royally f*cking up my first year), I managed to get on my way a bit and I'm now at a good University. I now have a view on how to get into my chosen career, and even if I don't "make it" I can see the goal.

You will never get kids to learn until you show them why. Surround them with people who share a passion for learning because they realise the necessity.

Every time "what's the point of x" comes up in a lesson there should be an answer, because "x" gave us the steam engine. "x" gave us the transistor. Learning English will land you that job when you smash the cover letter.

Compulsory school leaving age is irrelevant. If you want people to stay on, show them WHY.