• 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!

High Schools to Offer Plan to Graduate 2 Years Early

Slartibartfast

Jesus loves you.
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Monthly Donator
Joined
Jan 8, 2010
Messages
71,674
Reaction score
58,052
Location
NE Ohio
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
New Plan Will Let High Schoolers Graduate Early - NYTimes.com

Dozens of public high schools in eight states will introduce a program next year allowing 10th graders who pass a battery of tests to get a diploma two years early and immediately enroll in community college.

If it were up to me. I would expand this to allow students to enroll in college if they can pass the graduation exams. The point of education is to learn stuff, not sit in a classroom for a certain period of time and, honestly, if I had the possibility of graduating early in highschool, I would have taken it a lot more seriously.

Overall though, I see this as a good thing. The goal of primary school should be to prepare students for a job or college and how to be good citizens. But some students are better (or worse) than others and any program that helps let the student work at his or her own pace will enhance education through the simple function of relieving boredom. One of the biggest mistakes we make in educating our children (at least in this area) is that we group the smart kids with the not so smart kids, causing us to educate our kids at the pace of the slowest student. Any program that helps track students and helps us to get away from our current setups will let those who are able and willing excel so that they can go on to be better contributors to our society.

The project’s backers hope it will eventually spread to all schools in those states, and inspire other states to follow suit. Supporters include the National Association of Manufacturers and the National Education Association, the nation’s largest teachers’ union.

Teacher's unions are often accused to slowing or stopping educational progress, but it looks like they are on board.
 
Last edited:
My high school allowed graduation early if the req. were met. I don't have a problem with it, although I do think there is some merit in Kids being 18 before they go to college.

I was immature enough at 18 while in college, let alone 16.
 
Washington state has had a similar program for several years, it's called 'head start'.....;)
It helps the smart kids by separating them from the dummies....
 
Last edited:
It's a great idea. I don't think many colleges would (or should) be eager to take 16 year olds, but anything that gives students the opportunity to move into their preferred trade sooner is fine by me.
 
Washington state has had a similar program for several years, it's called 'head start'.....;)
It helps the smart kids by separating them from the dummies....

Then that doesn't sound anything like this program. Reread the article.
 
School systems might objective if their budgets are cut.
 
School systems might objective if their budgets are cut.

Random comment is random.

My daughter is 16 and already taking college classes at her high school. There would be zero advantage to me for her to test out of high school and start attending college at this point in time. First, I don't believe she is mature enough (yet) to be living on a university campus. Second, she's attending college RIGHT NOW, in essence, on her high school campus, and it is costing us ZERO DOLLARS. This will allow us to save thousands when she does start attending college full-time.

I have no problems with allowing students to test out of school, but I don't see how the U.S. is well-served by having a less educated workforce. Nor, in my experience, are most 16-year-olds mature enough to be out in the workforce full-time. For most of those who will opt out, it may well mean lower earnings over their lifetime.
 
New Plan Will Let High Schoolers Graduate Early - NYTimes.com



If it were up to me. I would expand this to allow students to enroll in college if they can pass the graduation exams. The point of education is to learn stuff, not sit in a classroom for a certain period of time and, honestly, if I had the possibility of graduating early in highschool, I would have taken it a lot more seriously.

Overall though, I see this as a good thing. The goal of primary school should be to prepare students for a job or college and how to be good citizens. But some students are better (or worse) than others and any program that helps let the student work at his or her own pace will enhance education through the simple function of relieving boredom. One of the biggest mistakes we make in educating our children (at least in this area) is that we group the smart kids with the not so smart kids, causing us to educate our kids at the pace of the slowest student. Any program that helps track students and helps us to get away from our current setups will let those who are able and willing excel so that they can go on to be better contributors to our society.



Teacher's unions are often accused to slowing or stopping educational progress, but it looks like they are on board.

Geesh, why couldn't they have done this 10 years ago.

I would of taken advantage of this.
 
Random comment is random.

My daughter is 16 and already taking college classes at her high school. There would be zero advantage to me for her to test out of high school and start attending college at this point in time. First, I don't believe she is mature enough (yet) to be living on a university campus. Second, she's attending college RIGHT NOW, in essence, on her high school campus, and it is costing us ZERO DOLLARS. This will allow us to save thousands when she does start attending college full-time.

I have no problems with allowing students to test out of school, but I don't see how the U.S. is well-served by having a less educated workforce. Nor, in my experience, are most 16-year-olds mature enough to be out in the workforce full-time. For most of those who will opt out, it may well mean lower earnings over their lifetime.

It doesn't mean we'll have a less-educated workforce, as the typical person this is targeted at is not going to have any less education. This is not designed for overachievers who are trying to get a leg up on their admission to Yale, it's designed for kids who know that they want to pursue a trade or similar career and don't feel it's a good use of their time to spend two more years learning irrelevant **** when they could be learning more useful and hands-on things.

Most colleges take kids starting at 15 or 16 if I'm not mistaken.

Most colleges will take a few individual students who have completed all of their high school classes by 15 or 16 and who are at the top of their class. I doubt they'll be as eager to take a huge number of kids who have only completed two years of high school and who are not necessarily at the top of their class. I'm sure that they'll take some, but not all.
 
Most colleges will take a few individual students who have completed all of their high school classes by 15 or 16 and who are at the top of their class. I doubt they'll be as eager to take a huge number of kids who have only completed two years of high school and who are not necessarily at the top of their class. I'm sure that they'll take some, but not all.

I have to disagree as far as state schools go.

They all have remedial classes for people who don't meat the minimum requirements.
It's pretty easy to get into a state college.
 
Random comment is random.

My daughter is 16 and already taking college classes at her high school. There would be zero advantage to me for her to test out of high school and start attending college at this point in time. First, I don't believe she is mature enough (yet) to be living on a university campus. Second, she's attending college RIGHT NOW, in essence, on her high school campus, and it is costing us ZERO DOLLARS. This will allow us to save thousands when she does start attending college full-time.

I have no problems with allowing students to test out of school, but I don't see how the U.S. is well-served by having a less educated workforce. Nor, in my experience, are most 16-year-olds mature enough to be out in the workforce full-time. For most of those who will opt out, it may well mean lower earnings over their lifetime.
Don't preach to me woman, I have to boys in high school who are seniors and a daughter graduating from college this year. I am in a position to comment on this all I want, so buzz off.
 
I am somewhat torn on this issue. If I had the option of getting out of high school fast enough I probably would have jumped on it, but that was because my first three years in high school were pretty bad and I hated them. Then when I switched schools senior year I loved it and had an amazing senior year. Plus there is just something about senior year that makes it special. You are the head of the school, you get a senior trip, you get to pull a senior prank, prom is for you.

Then college is hard enough to enter at 18 as is. I think if I or majority of my friends were to have entered at 16 it would have ended very badly with this new freedom and a lot of ignorance that went with being 16. I know there are some kids that should enter college early and for them I say go for it, but for the majority of us I think it really is a bad idea. I mean just make it so senior year isn't such a joke and you actually learn things. At least until like March when you let seniors be seniors.
 
The only way this would be a good idea is if it were made illegal to teach one word of any political ideology.

Too many teachers and college professors are Leftist and it bad for the Nation.

History has shown that Leftist destroy nations as they trying hard to do now with Obama leading the way.

The bad choices by the Left and Right in the past two Administrations of Clinton and Bush have put us in the mess we are in and Obama is making it worse and killing the economy so that having a good or longer education is going to train you do do nothing because there won't be any jobs outside of the corrupt Government and since the Government jobs pay almost twice a much as the private jobs being killed by higher taxes, it won't take long before the whole system collapses.

This is what happens when people liten to false promises made by amateurs like Obama and everyone in his administration.

If the crazy spending isn't stopped along with the idiotic Tax hikes all the school in the world isn't going to help.

The drop out rate is what 50% in some states and those kids don't have any education when they quit.

This is just another feel good nonsensical measure to hide what is really needed and that is less Liberal BS and strict discipline and no more everybody passes and no bidy gets an F crap.

They can start with no phone use on school. I picked up a child at a local Jr High School and saw two girls walking next to each other talking on the phone to each other. I asked Richard about it when he came out and he said some of them spend most of there time in class texting

The system is broken and the way to fix it is get rid of the teachers unions not the last two years.
 
The only way this would be a good idea is if it were made illegal to teach one word of any political ideology.

Too many teachers and college professors are Leftist and it bad for the Nation.

History has shown that Leftist destroy nations as they trying hard to do now with Obama leading the way.

The bad choices by the Left and Right in the past two Administrations of Clinton and Bush have put us in the mess we are in and Obama is making it worse and killing the economy so that having a good or longer education is going to train you do do nothing because there won't be any jobs outside of the corrupt Government and since the Government jobs pay almost twice a much as the private jobs being killed by higher taxes, it won't take long before the whole system collapses.

This is what happens when people liten to false promises made by amateurs like Obama and everyone in his administration.

If the crazy spending isn't stopped along with the idiotic Tax hikes all the school in the world isn't going to help.

The drop out rate is what 50% in some states and those kids don't have any education when they quit.

This is just another feel good nonsensical measure to hide what is really needed and that is less Liberal BS and strict discipline and no more everybody passes and no bidy gets an F crap.

They can start with no phone use on school. I picked up a child at a local Jr High School and saw two girls walking next to each other talking on the phone to each other. I asked Richard about it when he came out and he said some of them spend most of there time in class texting

The system is broken and the way to fix it is get rid of the teachers unions not the last two years.

I made a serious attempt to find something to talk about that would be hard to tie into national politics and people trading talking points. Yet you managed to do it. Good job!
 
I made a serious attempt to find something to talk about that would be hard to tie into national politics and people trading talking points. Yet you managed to do it. Good job!

My favorite part is he assumes that all professors that are left use their personal view in class. I only know of one professor at BU that uses her personal view in class, all the others just teach. Now outside of class is a different story, but during class it is actually pretty fair.
 
This is a step backwards. High Schools keep kids out of the job market.
 
My favorite part is he assumes that all professors that are left use their personal view in class. I only know of one professor at BU that uses her personal view in class, all the others just teach. Now outside of class is a different story, but during class it is actually pretty fair.

Thinking back to highschool and college, I only had two teachers who would inject their views into the classroom and both were hardcore conservative.

I wonder if it had to do with the fast that I was in the district that sent Newt Gingrich Washington during the whole contract with america thing.
 
Last edited:
Thinking back to highschool and college, I only had two teachers who would inject their views into the classroom and both were hardcore conservative.

I wonder if it had to do with the fast that I was in the district that sent Newt Gingrich Washington during the whole contract with america thing.

Oh in high school we had to watch only Fox News programs as homework and you ever said anything bad against President Bush and teachers and students would get pretty defensive. I am sure there are schools like that with President Obama, but it is honestly stupid and is not a very friendly learning environment.
 
I have mixed feelings. In one way it's fine to let people exit early if that's what they want to do, but 16 year olds are still kids in a lot of ways. This is just another method of preparing them for the job market faster. I don't see how any 16 year old can know what it is they want to do for the rest of their lives.

The other problem is that if the universities and colleges in these states lower the entrance age, then there will be more 16 year olds with a lot of time on their hands, and the devil makes work of idle hands.
 
Last edited:
It doesn't mean we'll have a less-educated workforce, as the typical person this is targeted at is not going to have any less education. This is not designed for overachievers who are trying to get a leg up on their admission to Yale, it's designed for kids who know that they want to pursue a trade or similar career and don't feel it's a good use of their time to spend two more years learning irrelevant **** when they could be learning more useful and hands-on things.

Because, lord knows, one problem we really have in the U.S. is that people are just TOO educated when they finish high school...
 
Because, lord knows, one problem we really have in the U.S. is that people are just TOO educated when they finish high school...

How is this a response to anything I posted?

One problem that we have is that students are being forced to waste their time on things that are not relevant to them, which can lead to students dropping out before graduation or going straight from high school to their jobs. By allowing students who know what they want to do to go directly into job-specific training at age 16 rather than 18, they will be less likely to drop out and more likely to follow through with their trade-specific education. We had a quasi-version of this at my high school, and it worked quite well for those who chose to participate in it.
 
I am always amazed at the number of people who refuse to face the facts regardless of the consequences even when what is at risk is our children's future and the eventually the Nation it's self.

To think teachers and professors don't allow there political leanings into the clas room is like trying to claim that Chris Mathews and Obermann treat both parties equally.

And yes this idea is politically motivated as I said it's feel good measure not a viable serious proposal that addresses the real issues as most of what either bureaucrats and politicians come up with.
 
The only place I've ever had a politically charged teacher was that one semester I did at a community college for the hell of it, and it was an economics class

I've taken a few political science classes and am in some now, I haven't detected a hint of political bias in my professors, all they teach is theory.
 
I have mixed feelings. In one way it's fine to let people exit early if that's what they want to do, but 16 year olds are still kids in a lot of ways. This is just another method of preparing them for the job market faster. I don't see how any 16 year old can know what it is they want to do for the rest of their lives.

You have just described many 17,18,19,20 and 21+ years olds.
You want to see a bunch of people act like kids go to any college party.

Why don't we stop treating people like infants for a change?

The other problem is that if the universities and colleges in these states lower the entrance age, then there will be more 16 year olds with a lot of time on their hands, and the devil makes work of idle hands.

Most, if not all, public universities already take people at those ages.
They can get jobs in their off time.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom