Should school attendance be voluntary? [ENDS 03/04/2011]

[Grig]

Should school attendance be voluntary?

ENDS: 03/04/2011

In one view, some may say why is this question even posed and that of course children should have schooling at least until the age of 16, if not until University level. It should be the right of the parent and teacher to decide, for they have more life experience and generally know what could succeed more. Jobs look for people with qualifications and without them, it would be close to impossible to find one.

On the other hand some say it is useless. For example, some will never again need things such as the sciences or mathematics in their whole life, if they say go for an acting career- so what is the point in wasting precious time learning it. For some it may be a unhappy and unsuccessful place and it has been proved by a few unique cases in the past of people succeeding without any thorough schooling. Also, learning may not fit the interests of everyone and why should the government be telling people what to do.

At first it may seem like a one-sided debate, but it will generate many interesting views.

[sophiethenerd]

It is impossible to get on in life without being able to read write and add ( I mean very basically. As in adding 5 and 12). They will always help you.
I want to act. But at school it teaches you far more than facts.It teaches you how to share (when your a lil baby!), It teaches you how to make friends, it teaches you the importance of respect, it toughens you up and it helps you do something productive with your time. If I didn't go to school, I would not do anything with my time. Just sit here and go on habbox.But school helps me do something challenging and sometimes fun.

[Jessicrawrr]

I think it should, but you should have to go a certain amount of days compulsory.
Some things in maths and science are just pointless for me to know, I will not need to know why x = 4 I mean cmon im going to need to go to asda and buy x amount of potatos.
School itself isn't pointless, it gives you skills you'll need for life, but only a certain amount of it should be compulsory.

[Conservative,]

Up to a certain age or ability, yes. However I think it's stupid to keep people on (as the previous Government decided) until they're 18, when some people clearly HATE school.

Education is obviously a necessity and people in some countries would DIE for education. However, it is not worth the money or time or effort if someone is being forced to go there and just disrupt it.

My view is, school should be compulsory up to a certain standard - ie; you are tested yearly with a few exams that are the minimum standard (so you're fluent in english, can solve basic mathematics problems etc.) then you can leave - for some people that may be 12, for some that may be 18. However there should also be an age limit, ie; if you don't pass the test by age 16, you can go anyway.

To me, that seems fair. It's hardly fair to let a kid with 1 GCSE leave at 16, and a 12 year old of the same standard be forced to go to school for another 4 years.

Also, I think schools should be ability classed, not age, that way those who constantly fail "the test" could be helped while those who pass it can extend their knowledge.

My opinion is probably controversial but I hate the fact that stupid (sorry couldn't think of a better word) 16 year olds are allowed to leave when very intelligent 12/13/14 year olds aren't.

[Inseriousity.]

Sure some people may never need algebra or GCSE French in their life but you also learn beyond the knowledge. You learn more life skills like meeting deadlines (homework/coursework) etc that will always be useful for life regardless of what job you do so this is why it should be compulsory.

Also, I'd be a bit worried about what voluntary attendance would result in. It could be used as an excuse by parents to keep their children, particularly women, at home doing the housework cos they have more traditional values. It could be used by pupils to never go to school. My brother wouldn't go to school if he had the choice. I think this would result in widening the gap between the rich and the poor. While that's capitalism which needs inequality to function properly I don't dispute that, it goes against 21st Century thinking to make education voluntary.

[Conservative,]

Sure some people may never need algebra or GCSE French in their life but you also learn beyond the knowledge. You learn more life skills like meeting deadlines (homework/coursework) etc that will always be useful for life regardless of what job you do so this is why it should be compulsory.

Also, I'd be a bit worried about what voluntary attendance would result in. It could be used as an excuse by parents to keep their children, particularly women, at home doing the housework cos they have more traditional values. It could be used by pupils to never go to school. My brother wouldn't go to school if he had the choice. I think this would result in widening the gap between the rich and the poor. While that's capitalism which needs inequality to function properly I don't dispute that, it goes against 21st Century thinking to make education voluntary.

Uhm...what? How could it do that. It'd simply be - those determined to succeed vs. those who couldn't give a ****. I know several "poor" people who would go to school regardless because they want a better future, and I know rich ***** who would leave school ASAP if they could.

[Inseriousity.]

Sure there'll be exceptions to the rule but the general rule will be those who have family pressure to succeed placed on them (more likely to be rich according to Douglas' study) will stay in education while those who don't (more likely to be poor) won't. That's not to say that ALL poor people will drop out and ALL rich people will stay in but as a general rule it'll definitely increase the gap.

[Camy]

I don't think it should be voluntary, what else are they going to do? You're not allowed a job until you're 16(?) and you can't go on jobseekers, at least at school you have somewhere to go instead of just hanging about doing nothing until you're 16.

[Conservative,]

I don't think it should be voluntary, what else are they going to do? You're not allowed a job until you're 16(?) and you can't go on jobseekers, at least at school you have somewhere to go instead of just hanging about doing nothing until you're 16.

You can get a paper round at 14. You can get a special license to work if you're under 16 if you're performing or playing national sport etc.

[GommeInc]

I think it should be compulsory to a certain age. At the moment, if the education system changes to make it voluntary for, lets say 16+, it would be difficult as that 16 year old would need to find a job of some sort to keep them occupied (not everyone has a farm or family run business to keep them occupied ) and many businesses refuse to take on 16 year olds as it is at the moment due to the financial costs and the Government cannot be expected to fork out for each 16 year old going into apprenticeships and work experience. I know of some people who hated education, but in some cases forcing education upon children is a good thing because not all children know what they want or like in life until they begin to see the bigger picture, and learning about certain things like science, english and maths is a good thing - of course, some children do know what they want to be but you have to blanket cover everyone to insure yourself. I don't think everyone should have to go to college unless they feel they need to, but at the moment the college education system seems to cater for everyone - academic or practical. The only problem is that some practical courses tend to ask for a bit of theory, which some people may despise.