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

[Eoin247]

[B]

That's most likely due to the fact he doesn't try/can't be bothered. If you test them when they don't understand why they will do their best because children are very competitive. Then you can maximise their potential. Just because some kids don't try hard doesn't mean they couldn't do better. I've seen kids be incredibly clever but dropped down several sets because they just can't be bothered. Doesn't mean their abilities have changed, personally I don't think it's possible to lose a natural talent.

I don't know what he does at home with regards to study, however i can tell you that he does try in class. He never messes around and always does his work. People if they aren't bothered will end up doing worse, however it doesn't mean peoples ability cannot change over time. It most certainly can as i've experienced it too myself over the years.

I remember when i first began primary school there were people who tried in class, and there were people who didn't try just like there are in my classes today. So this statement cannot be true, some might try their best but some might also take the easy option out.

[Wig44.]

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.

One day you will look back and realise how stupid some of the things you say are, ever heard of emotional intelligence, social aptitude, common sense? Things that a 16 year old will have more of than a 12 year old. If you let all academically intelligent 13 year olds out of school at 13 you realise that they won't have been educated to the same level as someone who stayed on until 16, they won't have developed the same social skills or maturity and will have few options available to them.

You're 14 aren't you? And I'm sure you think you're very intelligent. I only need to read 3 of your posts to realise you definitely aren't fit to leave education.

[Syphon]

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.

In the UK, you finish school at 16, it isn't compulsary after that, I have a friend who is 16, she is an accountant now.

[Eoin247]

In the UK, you finish school at 16, it isn't compulsary after that, I have a friend who is 16, she is an accountant now.

Personally, i think this should be raised. It would contribute to making a smarter more high paid economy.

[luce]

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.

That is hilarious. let me make this clear you would defiantly not be passing that "test".

There is no WAY ever on earth that a 12 year old would be of the same ability of the GCSE student. Have you even taken your GCSEs? If you're 14 (previous post) then no you haven't. Let me put it this way, i am intelligent there is no two ways about it i have book smarts however when i was 12 i would have been eaten alive by the GCSE system because brains are not everything. You need a catalogue of different things to be able to leave school not just being able to use the sine and cosine rules to work out the length of the hypotenuse.

as you put it "stupid" 16 year olds are aloud to leave because they can now get a job and if they wish to "fend for themselves" when you're 12 do you honestly mean to say you expect someone to start working 9-5. THEY HAVEN'T EVEN HIT PUBERTY! School is just about maturing your mind it's about teaching you social skills and transferable knowledge which can be taken into the world of work.

Also the whole ability not age defining your school is also ridiculous because you need to be with people around your age to develop properly. Trust me if you're that intelligent you will get a scholarship to a private school and "fast tacked".

One final note on this you will never see the government lowering the school leaving age because education is basically programming the work force of the future and the government wants to make sure it's next set of doctor, lawyers, plumbers and bank managers all have the top education to enable them to do their jobs to the best of their ability, at the end of the day your Sky TV sales man may only need that one GCSE. who is to criticize him for that? he's getting what he needs for his job as the Lawyer is getting the 3 As at a level they need. If eduction is compromised it's basically the efficiency of the economy of the future which is being compromised.

that last para is rambley and i don't even expect you to have got that far but your argument justified a reply because it is so funny.

[Richie]

No it shouldn't, kids are dumb, parents are dumb. Everyone does stupid things, they should keep pestering students until they get their asses into school. Why would someone even ask should it be voluntary, it's just asking for trouble. It would give students the opportunity to skive off school to do idiotic things. I've learned from experience, my school doesn't really do much, they give you a few phone calls and that's that. I've skived school in the past to do stupid things like lay in bed until later hours or just do **** all basically. Why give the youth of today the option of being the bums of yesterday?

[Alkaz]

Some people just don't belong in school though. Because the people in my class - most of them have the IQ of a...well lets not go there, and they hate school. All they do is disrupt it. I'd rather have peaceful classes where only those that WANT to learn, can.

Then to be honest that is down to your school which if they're allowing that to go on sounds extremely poor. All schools that I have heard about through friends have at least 8 seperate classes differing in ability per year group in the school and my school was no different. Obviously in the higher ability groups you will have those who disrupt but its not going to upset the balance like it seems it is at your school.

Regardless if you're not going to need a GCSE is textiles or science, it is all stuff that's going in your head which will give you more common sense for the future. Often on things like The Apprentice you see people who've got all the talk and know everything as they've read the book but have no real idea what they're saying as they don't live in a common real world. Education should be compulsory up until the age of 16. Those who wish to succeed will go on to higher and further education or take an alternate route, those who don't will simply do as they wish which won't (hopefully) interfere with your plans.

[..ValOwnsYou..]

I think it shouldn't because if this was the case, thousands of people would be living on the streets due to no education.. no education means to future. School is probablly one of the most important things in life because it builds up your whole future. Teenagers tend to think that school is the worse thing in their life and they want to quit highschool so badly.. well the day you get that diploma in your hand you wont regret not leaving.
I don't know what goes through some kids minds today but some people think its 'cool' to not be interested in school and not go to school when really its just being stupid. People should be educated so they have no regrets in the future.

[Kronics]

I think people should have the right to go to school or not. Just depend's if they want an education, then again if you have the money you can alway's get a private home tutor.

[Eoin247]

No it shouldn't, kids are dumb, parents are dumb. Everyone does stupid things, they should keep pestering students until they get their asses into school. Why would someone even ask should it be voluntary, it's just asking for trouble. It would give students the opportunity to skive off school to do idiotic things. I've learned from experience, my school doesn't really do much, they give you a few phone calls and that's that. I've skived school in the past to do stupid things like lay in bed until later hours or just do **** all basically. Why give the youth of today the option of being the bums of yesterday?

This is a good point that Richie puts out.

Most young kids and a lot of older ones wouldn't choose school simply because they are too lazy/ don't know what's good for them. Likewise there are some stupid parents that don't know how to parent properly