Quote:I couldn't disagree more.

 

For one thing, many sophomores (year 10) are 15 years old.  Which means that they aren't even able to drive yet at that point in most states.


My wife is a teacher, and she sees many students who struggle.  In part because of their parents disregard for their education.  Some of the kids who you'd think wouldn't go to college, end up going off to college because of good teachers at the later years.  We have plenty of people who go to school for 12 years, and don't learn enough grammar, history, etc... as it is.  

 

16 is not a good age to start college.  I don't think 16 year olds have the maturity to understand the importance.  Some 20 year old's don't even have the maturity to understand the importance.  Kids need to have time to develop their minds.  Especially before they go into a program that's likely going to put them in debt for the next 15+ years.  We don't need our college graduates to get younger.   Lowering the number of years in primary school will only do more damage than good.


 

 

I don't like the idea of school vouchers.  Bad schools need to become good schools.  It's easy to say 'parents should be given a choice.'  It makes sense in theory.  But that's before you actually know how some parents are.  My wife has had to deal with over the years some of the worst parents.  Parents who were holocaust deniers.  Parents who didn't like how she taught someone favorably, or someone unfavorably (when she was trying to teach a balanced approach).  Giving parents choice sounds like a good idea.  Until you realize that it gives them control over the teaching staff.  You know, the people trained to actually teach our children.  You'd have schools split by political ideology more than anything else.  

 

Let me preface this all by saying I'm not and education expert I'm speaking strictly from my experience in public education and the difference I've seen sending my kids to private school and just reading different opinions on what to do with education. 

 

I wish I could remember where I first heard or read about the idea of ending high school earlier before kids reach legal adulthood, the example was 16 or the Sophmore year of traditional high school, but I can't so I'll fill in the blanks best I can.

 

Anyways the argument or the idea was to revamp the entire education system from the bottom up. Kids started younger I think it was 4 and they "finished" basic education by 16 (so that's still 12 years in basic education). They had studies and such saying kids could handle basically doing everything 2 years earlier ( this is where I'm not an expert going off what I read). But the key point was giving Pre-Adults (16-18) a buffer zone to either learn a trade or get a start on post basic education. The first 2 years of college would essentially take place at community colleges, these schools are close to home very basics are established and most of the time students don't even declare a degree in community colleges. The kids that don't opt to continue education still have the equivalent of a high school diploma but now their young enough to enter apprenticeships ( it's a big deal we don't have kids going into apprenticeships these days, a big reason why there's a lack of skilled labor and a huge dependency on unskilled labor) and since their still not legal adults they don't have the pressure of trying to financially support themselves while learning a trade. 

 

This would accomplish so much in the skilled labor area, we would have more carpenters, brick masons, mechanics, plumbers, hvac techs, ad so on. Fields that can give decent wages they can support families on once they've gained experience. These fields are vital to society but take time to learn and often the entry level pay is next to nothing. 

---