UK School Leavers age to be 18 20 replies

Please wait...

DavetheFo

RogueDevil / Rogue Angel

50 XP

29th May 2003

0 Uploads

8,689 Posts

0 Threads

#1 13 years ago

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/education/6254833.stm

Well, its not going to affect me, and it shouldnt affect anyone born before 1997, but, is this even worth it?

I think by 16, people know wether they want to be educated or not, why force them to stay in education/ training till 18?

Also, if you are born in 1997 and are reading this, could you please let us know, you little COPPA violators.




Guest

I didn't make it!

0 XP

 
#2 13 years ago

I read this, and chortled. The government wants to take away any freedom this country had left.




Emperor Benedictine

You can't fire me, I quit

55 XP

16th April 2005

0 Uploads

2,437 Posts

0 Threads

#3 13 years ago

Naturally when given the option of improving something that needs improving or subjecting us to more of it, the government chooses the latter. The fact that many students simply don't want to be in school exerts a terribly disruptive influence already. Simply forcing them to stay in school until they reach legal adulthood is hardly going to help matters, for them or anyone else.




*Soviet.Power

Ex-MøđęRāŧǿr ø₣ Geňęrāł Gāmíňĝ

91,380 XP

31st January 2004

0 Uploads

8,283 Posts

0 Threads

#4 13 years ago
TheDarkInvader;3479807 The fact that many students simply don't want to be in school exerts a terribly disruptive influence already. Simply forcing them to stay in school until they reach legal adulthood is hardly going to help matters, for them or anyone else.

Although I dont agree with this, surely it is better to have some qualifications, even if they're not all that good, than to have none at all. But then again in about 15 years time when its the next generation who have been through school until they're 18 who are trying to get jobs, its not really going to matter that much, because everyone will have been through school until 18 :uhm:




Bs|Archaon

I would die without GF

50 XP

15th March 2006

0 Uploads

5,910 Posts

0 Threads

#5 13 years ago

This is bad IMO. I mean, I see the logic behind getting everyone up to A-level standard, but the simple fact is that the vast, vast majority of people that leave school at 16 don't want to be there.

For people at 16 who don't like school but want to learn, there's college. For people at 16 who don't like education at all, there's work. For people at 16 who like learning and don't mind school, there's A-levels.

And it's not like people get shut out of the education system if they leave school at 16. I'm doing a degree and there's a number of 'mature' students, one of whom is a very good friend of mine and I happen to know that he left school at 16. He went to college, hated that as well and as a result barely passed the course. He still ended up in a £40,000+ pa + car company car job. And now he's doing the same course as me.

I know this seems like an elitist view, but I expect most Brits here will agree with me. All this is going to do is force the chavs to go to school for longer. That means less teaching for the people that want to be there. It means higher costs for schools (and since when are the schools flush with money?). It means more effort has to be put into preventing truancy. And to be blunt it means there will be less people doing the jobs that we don't want to. The simple fact is that if you educate everyone to a high standard, they all want goood jobs and the ones that don't get those jobs will go on the dole. They won't sweep the streets or (occasionally) smile at us from behind a till.

Better education for a few chavs that suddenly have a revelation that they want to learn, or better education for the vast majority of people that already knew they wanted to? Now I know which one I'd choose, but let's face it, this government seems to love sucking up to the minorities.

The last time we had people (and I don't mean anomalies, I mean quite a lot of them) with high-level qualifications sweeping the streets was in the worst recession (to my knowledge) we've ever had where there were simply no other jobs to do. Does the government want every day to be like that or something?




Bs|Archaon

I would die without GF

50 XP

15th March 2006

0 Uploads

5,910 Posts

0 Threads

#6 13 years ago

Also, something else to add. The article says that this is meant to prevent people leaving school with no qualifications or skills. Well excuse me, but what the hell have they been doing for the 12 years they've been at school? If people are coming out of school at 16 with no skills or qualifications then that is what they need to work on, not just hope that if they bolt on two years it'll all get better.




Emperor Benedictine

You can't fire me, I quit

55 XP

16th April 2005

0 Uploads

2,437 Posts

0 Threads

#7 13 years ago
Bs|Archaon;3480123If people are coming out of school at 16 with no skills or qualifications then that is what they need to work on, not just hope that if they bolt on two years it'll all get better.

This is more or less my concern. If they failed to get qualifications by age sixteen it seems to be wishful thinking to expect two extra years in education or training to change anything. If they were prepared to put in the work required they would probably have done so of their own accord anyway.




Mr. Matt VIP Member

#BanRadioActiveLobster

357,077 XP

17th June 2002

7 Uploads

33,701 Posts

780 Threads

#8 13 years ago

With the rise of rapidly developing economies like China and India, the UK has to go high-tech in order to compete on a global scale. The only way of doing that is by having a more highly educated work force, and I'm sorry to say that GCSEs alone won't cut it for much longer. However, as our education system is routinely producing illiterate and innumerate 'graduates' with depleted motivation and minor cases of clinical depression, I think a greater overhaul is required than simply making them stay there longer, which in the case of the latter two problems at least will only make things worse. Serious reforms are necessary in the areas of discipline, curriculum and testing.




Pethegreat VIP Member

Lord of the Peach

70 XP

19th April 2004

0 Uploads

20,892 Posts

0 Threads

#9 13 years ago

Why let these people waste tax payer money? If they don't want to be there, let them leave. I don't see why I have to pay for people who don't want to be in school. If you have same or even less money available, but less kids, you are going to get a better eduction.

The only reason Europe does better than the US in test scores is the fact that they only test those who are college bound. If the US would do that, the scores would be even.

Education is a privilege, not a right.




Fear-No-Evil

Pending Further Assignment

50 XP

10th May 2005

0 Uploads

750 Posts

0 Threads

#10 13 years ago

I was lucky to get into Sixth Form. I just managed to get 4 grade C's or above, and they let me in on faith, seeing as I'm extremely quiet and boring when it comes to school (i.e. "well behaved"). Hell, I'm retaking my GCSE maths exam tommorow, which I will certainly fail again. The point is, if these people want to leave, let them, and if they don't, give them the chance to pass enough exams. I'm somewhere in the middle of those two categories :(