• 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!

Rahm Emanuel to require post-high school plan to get diploma.

justabubba said:
the cite indicates rahm is training the counselors to assist the seniors to fulfill this new life-planning pre-requisite
Click to expand...

With that I agree. I might even agree with a general overall plan. What I fear is government involvement (other than guidance) in how to best achieve that plan or what that plan should be.
 
TurtleDude said:
Rahm's a ever=widening rectum. what stupid crap you get when you put scum into office
Click to expand...


Typical of a socialist based totalitarian-like plan, this addresses a very serious need....in the completely wrong way.

You cannot force people into careers, etc., the great soviet states proved that. However, with the state of the US educational system the way it is, something needs to be changed as the US is falling behind even third world countries in developing people for jobs that go beyond basic high school training. Both Canada have job openings in the tech sector that go unfilled or are filled by "temporary foreign workers".
Forcing students to choose a career path is ludicrous. I am not that old I forget high school and we all know what will happen is that kids will chose something to just get bay so they can get out.

That's all high school is anymore...something teens need to get out of
 
Henrin said:
What is stopping them from changing plans right after they get the diploma?
Click to expand...

My post-graduation plans are as follows:
1. Enter Harvard Law School after skipping all the prerequisite studies due to my obvious briliance.
2. Marry a billionaire super-model.
3. Spend my weekends playing unicorn polo.
 
Lord Tammerlain said:
Do employers actually check to see if someone has a High School diploma?
Click to expand...

As a supervisor, I sure did. No diploma, no job (with certain extenuating circumstances). I wanted people who knew how to follow through, who wanted to succeed and not just get by. If an employer doesn't require a diploma, IMO, they are looking for grunt labor and little else.
 
faithful_servant said:
My post-graduation plans are as follows:
1. Enter Harvard Law School after skipping all the prerequisite studies due to my obvious briliance.
2. Marry a billionaire super-model.
3. Spend my weekends playing unicorn polo.
Click to expand...

It is both heart warming and encouraging to see a young person who has thought this out and made such a detailed plan for success.

Good luck.
 
faithful_servant said:
My post-graduation plans are as follows:
1. Enter Harvard Law School after skipping all the prerequisite studies due to my obvious briliance.
2. Marry a billionaire super-model.
3. Spend my weekends playing unicorn polo.
Click to expand...

You forgot get a small loan of $1,000,000.
 
justabubba said:
but let's follow this logically

we both agree that it is good for students to try to plan their futures after high school

your objection is that it is not government's role to push such an agenda

i believe we both recognize that the parents in the home are often not prodding their kids to do such planning

then we have to contemplate two results:

1. not being required to plan, the student is more likely to drift into an unplanned future when his/her prospects for success are diminished by that failure to take planning steps; or

2. the school compels the student to engage in such life planning, enhancing their prospects for success

i believe the outcome of option two is worthy of the state's interjection in this matter. school is for teaching students. everything they are taught does not have to be part of the academic curriculum

we see that already by the imposed requirement on the same students that they must partake in community outreach/volunteer activities as a pre-requisite to attain their high school diploma
Click to expand...

In my opinion, educated kids don't drift. To actually learn something, succeed in something, accomplish something in high school is the best motivation you can give any young person. Any educated person who drifts after high school is going to drift no matter what artificial requirements are tacked on at the end.

But let the kids graduate who are barely literate and who really have not been required to learn much of anything of value to earn that diploma are almost certain to drift after high school no matter what they come up with to meet Rahm's requirements to get that diploma. Further they graduate having been trained that they don't have to work for what they get.
 
jimbo said:
Good job.:applaud:

Back in the day, when I was in high school, we had guidance counselors. They counseled, guided, and assisted you in your future plans.
Click to expand...

And I suppose some of those people did that competently. I was never blessed with one that didn't suck. :) But I was also blessed to go to public school at a time that students were not allowed to disrupt the class and were required to earn the grades they made. And we ALL worked to make those grades because that was the cultural expectation. Once my ninth grade science teacher--Mr. Wagnon who was GORGEOUS and all the girls were just a flutter flitter over--noticed I was doodling in his class. And at one point he stopped and came to my desk and informed me that I would have an hour's detention after school for every horse I had drawn in my notebook that day. There were seven.

Since I didn't have anything else to do other than homework during that hour of detention, that was one of the easiest week and a couple of days I ever spent in school. Most especially since my algebra teacher supervised detention that week so I got some extra tutoring. :)
 
faithful_servant said:
As a supervisor, I sure did. No diploma, no job (with certain extenuating circumstances). I wanted people who knew how to follow through, who wanted to succeed and not just get by. If an employer doesn't require a diploma, IMO, they are looking for grunt labor and little else.
Click to expand...

Stating a requirement is different than actually requesting proof of the diploma.

The main point I am getting at, unless a background check is being done, does anyone actually request to see the diploma or call the school to see if the person graduated?
 
faithful_servant said:
As a supervisor, I sure did. No diploma, no job (with certain extenuating circumstances). I wanted people who knew how to follow through, who wanted to succeed and not just get by. If an employer doesn't require a diploma, IMO, they are looking for grunt labor and little else.
Click to expand...

I never did

It was a requirement for the positions I hired to be at least a college or Uni grad. Given the technical nature of the jobs I never bothered to check if they actually graduated I just looked at past job experience. (chemical laboratory)
 
justabubba said:
or we could teach the students how to behave
and how to plan for their futures
Click to expand...

You obviously haven't been in a public school classroom for awhile. In far too many schools kids don't do what they are instructed to do anymore and unfortunately too often their parents or their lawyer back the kids up and not the school.

This I suppose was supposed to be funny. Instead, I think it really reflects the realty far too often:

teachersnow_590_332.jpg
 
AlbqOwl said:
You are correct in theory but IMO wrong in how to accomplish it. I do believe students should have objectives and goals in where they go from high school.

But it is NOT the job of government, or at least it shouldn't be, to parent kids. It is the job of government via public schooling to ensure that the diploma indicates the student has demonstrated competence in reading and writing and a basic minimum of competence in English, history, geography, and basic math. It is the student's responsibility or the parents' responsibility to guide the person into a productive future.
Click to expand...

It only a requirement, it's to the student/parents to formulate the plan. You got this wrong like most others.
 
Fishking said:
Look at you replacing the role that should be played by parents with the government.
Click to expand...

No I'm not, I'm only supporting a requirement. It's up to the students/parents to come up with a plan.
 
American said:
It only a requirement, it's to the student/parents to formulate the plan. You got this wrong like most others.
Click to expand...

I don't think so American. When the public school can demand something in a person's future in return for a diploma, that's over the line of what government can require. Government should not be able to require anything from us that is outside the control and authority of government.

The purpose of the school is to educate and prepare the students for a post school life. What have we gained by requiring a student to have a job or be accepted into the military or college or whatever before the student can receive a diploma if that diploma does not represent a truth that the student is ready for that job or the military or college?

The school should be doing the preparation part meaning they educate the kids and prepare them to leave school equipped to survive outside of school wherever or whatever the student chooses. Leave the social engineering to the parents and the students.
 
Reading this thread, it's hysterical to read the overblown drama about this. Socialism! Replacing parents! Big Gubbmint!

This is a fairly innocuous requirement that is designed to get students to think about what they want to do after graduation.

Most people here who are against it seem to be under the impression that these students are all coming from two parent households with stable lives and strong role models that are helping guide these kids.

In reality, many come from poor single parent families and have never given serious thought to continuing school, considering a career, or even discovering what their options are.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Threegoofs said:
Reading this thread, it's hysterical to read the overblown drama about this. Socialism! Replacing parents! Big Gubbmint!

This is a fairly innocuous requirement that is designed to get students to think about what they want to do after graduation.

Most people here who are against it seem to be under the impression that these students are all coming from two parent households with stable lives and strong role models that are helping guide these kids.

In reality, many come from poor single parent families and have never given serious thought to continuing school, considering a career, or even discovering what their options are.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

Many kids from stable homes from all economic classes haven't put too much thought into what they want to do with their life. Forcing them to pick isn't going to make things any better as all it will do is force them into something they don't really like and don't want to do.

The truth is kids don't spend a lot of time gathering up skills and interests that could be used later in life while growing up, so picking what they want to do in their life when the time comes is nearly impossible since they have no basis to form a decision. What needs to happen is that efforts need to be taken to get kids interested in things that are useful for them later in life, so they have some kind of direction to go later on.
 
Last edited:
Henrin said:
Many kids from stable homes from all economic classes haven't put too much thought into what they want to do with their life. Forcing them to pick isn't going to make things any better as all it will do is force them into something they don't really like and don't want to do.

The truth is kids don't spend a lot of time gathering up skills and interests that could be used later in life while growing up, so picking what they want to do in their life when the time comes is nearly impossible since they have no basis to form a decision. What needs to happen is that efforts need to be taken to get kids interested in things that are useful for them later in life, so they have some kind of direction to go later on.
Click to expand...

No one is being 'forced' to do something they dont want to do. They are just getting a structured path to help them understand what they want to do after high school.

And part of getting kids interested in things is to have them clearly visualize where that interest will lead, rather than having a bunch of high school graduates who never played organized basketball having a goal of getting to the NBA.

This program is addressing a need that had been identified, and the detractors seem to refuse to recognize that need because of their politics or prejudice or whatever.
 
Threegoofs said:
No one is being 'forced' to do something they dont want to do. They are just getting a structured path to help them understand what they want to do after high school.
Click to expand...

Yes, they actually are being forced to pick what they want to do in their life.

And part of getting kids interested in things is to have them clearly visualize where that interest will lead, rather than having a bunch of high school graduates who never played organized basketball having a goal of getting to the NBA.

This program is addressing a need that had been identified, and the detractors seem to refuse to recognize that need because of their politics or prejudice or whatever.
Click to expand...

So the question is how do you get kids interested in things. One way is to latch onto already established interests to turn them into something they can make money off of. For example, a kid that loves to draw and play video games might be interested in 3D modeling, which can of course lead to them having a career in the video game industry.

If parents spent more time with their children providing them access to subjects and activities their kids will have a better foundation to launch their life from.
 
Last edited:
Henrin said:
Yes, they actually are being forced to pick what they want to do in their life.



So the question is how do you get kids interested in things. One way is to latch onto already established interests to turn them into something they can make money off of. For example, a kid that loves to draw and play video games might be interested in 3D modeling, which can of course lead to them having a career in the video game industry.

If parents spent more time with their children providing them access to subjects and activities their kids will have a better foundation to launch their life from.
Click to expand...

No. They're being forced to think about what they'll do and have a plan.
 
Threegoofs said:
No. They're being forced to think about what they'll do and have a plan.
Click to expand...

Which is force that you denied existed just a post ago. Regardless, forcing a kid to have a plan isn't going to establish a sound plan.
 
Insight into the police state. This is where liberals want to take us. Well, we're just about there.

I think a high school student should have a post graduation plan. It just shouldn't be government mandated and tied to getting that diploma. Is there no limit to government intrusion into private lives?
 
Waddy said:
Insight into the police state. This is where liberals want to take us. Well, we're just about there.

I think a high school student should have a post graduation plan. It just shouldn't be government mandated and tied to getting that diploma. Is there no limit to government intrusion into private lives?
Click to expand...

the public is educating that young person
you admit that young person needs to have a post graduation plan
then why is it inappropriate to compel them to prepare one
requiring such a plan is smart public policy
 
justabubba said:
the public is educating that young person
you admit that young person needs to have a post graduation plan
then why is it inappropriate to compel them to prepare one
requiring such a plan is smart public policy
Click to expand...

The government has every right, even a duty, to promote and encourage a post high plan. It doesn't have the right to force the student, and withhold that diploma as a punishment for non-compliance. If he/she earned the diploma, it should be theirs, no strings attached.
 
Waddy said:
The government has every right, even a duty, to promote and encourage a post high plan. It doesn't have the right to force the student, and withhold that diploma as a punishment for non-compliance. If he/she earned the diploma, it should be theirs, no strings attached.
Click to expand...

they did NOT earn their diploma
because they failed to fulfill the school's requirement to create a post graduation plan
it's not punishment
it is no different than had they not passed the number of credits required to graduate
 
justabubba said:
they did NOT earn their diploma
because they failed to fulfill the school's requirement to create a post graduation plan
it's not punishment
it is no different than had they not passed the number of credits required to graduate
Click to expand...

They passed the required courses. They earned a diploma. Simple as that. Any requirement beyond passing the courses is government intrusion.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom