• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Minimum drop out age

Sould the drop out grade be lowered

  • Yes

    Votes: 10 28.6%
  • Keep it the same

    Votes: 7 20.0%
  • the grade shouldent exist and they should stay in school till 12th grade

    Votes: 18 51.4%

  • Total voters
    35
Scientology literally has NOTHING to do with science. He made up some whack story about Aliens bringing humans here 75 million years ago and then we forgot who we were and where we came from. We are Xenu or whatever it was... nothing to do with science. Nothing. Science Fiction maybe... but not science.

Ok well that makes a bit more sense then.
 

I think the article is backwards.

IMHO: The fact of a "High Rate of Imprisonment Among Dropouts " is not CAUSED by the act of dropping out, it is because the people that are prone to dropping out have a tendency to be Anti-Authority types with no real respect for the law.

Forcing those kids to stay in school will not do a thing to effect the imprisonment rate of the type of person that they already are, anti-authority.
 
I think the article is backwards.

IMHO: The fact of a "High Rate of Imprisonment Among Dropouts " is not CAUSED by the act of dropping out, it is because the people that are prone to dropping out have a tendency to be Anti-Authority types with no real respect for the law.

Forcing those kids to stay in school will not do a thing to effect the imprisonment rate of the type of person that they already are, anti-authority.

i don't agree. i see no benefit in giving an immature minor from a less than an ideal background the choice to terminate his or her education before graduating high school.
 
i don't agree. i see no benefit in giving an immature minor from a less than an ideal background the choice to terminate his or her education before graduating high school.

I do not disagree with that... I just feel that the article has a flaw in the methodology. The causes of the incarceration run much deeper than the over-simplification of the status of being a drop-out.
 
I do not disagree with that... I just feel that the article has a flaw in the methodology. The causes of the incarceration run much deeper than the over-simplification of the status of being a drop-out.

i don't doubt that you are correct. i'm arguing that not letting kids drop out before a minimal level of education would have positive societal benefits.
 
i don't doubt that you are correct. i'm arguing that not letting kids drop out before a minimal level of education would have positive societal benefits.

So we keep kids who will not learn if you pay them in school or reform school until they reach your arbitrary date? What are the positive societal benefits of that?
 
I think the article is backwards.

IMHO: The fact of a "High Rate of Imprisonment Among Dropouts " is not CAUSED by the act of dropping out, it is because the people that are prone to dropping out have a tendency to be Anti-Authority types with no real respect for the law.

Forcing those kids to stay in school will not do a thing to effect the imprisonment rate of the type of person that they already are, anti-authority.
Personally, I think a requirement that kids reach a specific level of education before leaving school is a good idea.
Obviously with exceptions for children who cannot, for one reason or another.

I feel that being trained to a basic level of competence in various areas is an overall positive. That said, I probably wouldn't agree with some of the things being taught, and would suggest additional areas.

For example, I think kids need a decent understanding of how to run their own finances
 
Why not focus on improving the curricular content?
 
So we keep kids who will not learn if you pay them in school or reform school until they reach your arbitrary date? What are the positive societal benefits of that?

the positive benefit is that everyone has some minimal level of education. i can't see how that concept is even remotely controversial.
 
Ok so i would just like to ask something tha has been bugging me. Sould the drop our grade be lowered.I mean of course i accept that all kids should have an education, but why are we wasting money on so many kids who dont want to be there. We should have it so that say from 9th grade, if the kids want to drop out and riun their lifes, it is their choice. if the parents dont want them to, they can force them to stay in school, but you have all of these kids who are failing classes, ditching, sometimes even going to drugs, and we waste money putting them through year after years of school.

So question: should the drop out grade be lowered from 11th grade

Considering that most States have age requirements of 16-18 the grade angle is mute.
 
the positive benefit is that everyone has some minimal level of education. i can't see how that concept is even remotely controversial.

Because people who do not value education are not going to be educated. If they grow up in a world where a check arrives in the mail once a month, they might very well see no need for an education.
 
i don't doubt that you are correct. i'm arguing that not letting kids drop out before a minimal level of education would have positive societal benefits.

The issue with "not letting them drop out" is that at some point there comes a time where it is a point of diminishing return.

I was an educator in the military. I have thousands of hours teaching various sbjects. I used to have a sign over my desk that said "I can teach a frog to do a back flip... provided the frog WANTS to do a back flip"

If a person gets to the point where s/he no longer cares to learn, no amount of effort will change that. Any effort beyond that is a waste of finite resources for no appreciable gain.
Setting an arbitrary age to drag that person to school, and take time away from others that actually want to learn, is somewhat foolish, but necessary. The hard part is knowing where that line is.... 11th grade? 8th? 3rd? I think the 11th is fairly realistic.
 
Personally, I think a requirement that kids reach a specific level of education before leaving school is a good idea.
Obviously with exceptions for children who cannot, for one reason or another.

I feel that being trained to a basic level of competence in various areas is an overall positive. That said, I probably wouldn't agree with some of the things being taught, and would suggest additional areas.

For example, I think kids need a decent understanding of how to run their own finances

I agree to that to a point as well. I would like to see a more "life lesson" centered curricula.
Budgeting, loans and credit cards, nutrition, cooking… those things that were taught in the old “Home Ec” classes.

But, I also feel that an academic education is not always the way to go. A kid that has no chance or desire to ever go to college should be able to take a Vocational route instead of English Lit. In the long run, learning a trade is much more effective than learning about Beowulf or The Canterbury Tales
 
Because people who do not value education are not going to be educated. If they grow up in a world where a check arrives in the mail once a month, they might very well see no need for an education.

and letting them drop out of high school, a minimal level of education, breaks this cycle?
 
The issue with "not letting them drop out" is that at some point there comes a time where it is a point of diminishing return.

I was an educator in the military. I have thousands of hours teaching various sbjects. I used to have a sign over my desk that said "I can teach a frog to do a back flip... provided the frog WANTS to do a back flip"

If a person gets to the point where s/he no longer cares to learn, no amount of effort will change that. Any effort beyond that is a waste of finite resources for no appreciable gain.
Setting an arbitrary age to drag that person to school, and take time away from others that actually want to learn, is somewhat foolish, but necessary. The hard part is knowing where that line is.... 11th grade? 8th? 3rd? I think the 11th is fairly realistic.

and i think 12th grade is fairly realistic. we are only one year apart. what is the problem with requiring citizens to complete 12 years of school?
 
and letting them drop out of high school, a minimal level of education, breaks this cycle?

You are not going to break the cycle. The best you can do is move them out of the way of those who want to learn.
 
and i think 12th grade is fairly realistic. we are only one year apart. what is the problem with requiring citizens to complete 12 years of school?

Because of the age... In my experience, the folks that are dropping out in the 11th grade have already been set back at least once. I don't have any data n that, but I would love to see some. A person that has been set back once is 19 when they graduate.. twice 20... by that point the person is likely to be so jaded with school they just stop going.

I live in rural America. Many of my friends are HS educators. Some Administrators. That data is coming from those people. They tried quite hard to get me to come into teaching. The two Principals both offered me a job even though I do not have a teaching certificate. They feel that my military discipline would help get some of those kids that are on a dead end street, back on track before they are lost.
 
You are not going to break the cycle. The best you can do is move them out of the way of those who want to learn.

i don't agree. letting immature minors drop out of school only perpetuates the problem.
 
Because of the age... In my experience, the folks that are dropping out in the 11th grade have already been set back at least once. I don't have any data n that, but I would love to see some. A person that has been set back once is 19 when they graduate.. twice 20... by that point the person is likely to be so jaded with school they just stop going.

I live in rural America. Many of my friends are HS educators. Some Administrators. That data is coming from those people. They tried quite hard to get me to come into teaching. The two Principals both offered me a job even though I do not have a teaching certificate. They feel that my military discipline would help get some of those kids that are on a dead end street, back on track before they are lost.

i live in rural America. my parents are both educators. letting kids drop out in 11th grade rather than requiring them to complete 12th grade has no benefits.
 
i don't agree. letting immature minors drop out of school only perpetuates the problem.

forcing people to remain in institutions practicing outdated educational models perpetuates a bigger problem.
 
forcing people to remain in institutions practicing outdated educational models perpetuates a bigger problem.

then it appears that the curriculum is what needs to be addressed. i have some ideas. however, there is still no good reason to not require kids to achieve some minimal level of education.
 
Back
Top Bottom