Interact
Interact


School leaving age 18?

Started by: xrh59 (inactive)

How is leaving school at 18 going to benifit the country or the pupils, Is this another govt deception to keep the unemployment figures down.I realy can't see the aim of this idea it may keep the wasters of the country out of the way for a while.And i can't see the teachers being to pleased with it they have no authority to instill discipline in the kids now so how are they going to cope with an 17/18year old man/woman who doesn't want to learn or as a minority of kids today doesn't want to do anything but arse around for the rest of their days and be paid to do so or become a mugger as the pay is better aand won't be jailed if caught.May be they think it will help with teaching a skill or trade but the pupil must want to do this from a young age and realy want to do it not just because the have to go to school till they are 18,sounds a bit like the job creation thing of the Thatcher days to me and look at the results of that!.

Started: 12th Jan 2007 at 10:08

Posted by: keno (2840) 

Your right some times,school leaving age his16 years of age ,If you want to go to Uni ,you have to go till your 18 years old,thats what my Daughter his doing this year.You cannot make kids go to school till they are 18 .Kids who want to learn will,kids who don,t won,t,you can lead a horse to water but you can,t make It drink.I have had other kids that did,nt go pass 16years of age. I left school at 14 years of age look what happened to me I became a Skippy,a fate worse than death,
been trying to get back to Wigan ever since.I,m barred, what I should do his get
a false Passport I,d get In straight away,
or pretend to be a refugee,I,ll think of something.Seeya later cobber.

Replied: 12th Jan 2007 at 10:32

Posted by: billy (26053) 

i can only see this airy fairy spin idea, being a total waste of everyones time. eighteen???he,s going to spend most of his day trying to score with MISS.

Replied: 12th Jan 2007 at 10:47

Posted by: xrh59 (inactive)

Billy,I wasn't going to mention that but you are right or replace the teachers with nuns,Those were the days nuns laying down the law some of them where like Sgt Majors and you didn't want to cross an angry nun(pardone the pun).

Replied: 12th Jan 2007 at 10:56

Posted by: ozzielass (1742) 

Billy, xrh59 I am shocked but not surprised that you managed to get this serious topic of education around to trying to crack onto the teacher in just 2 hits!!

Are u giving us a flashback to your school years and mis-spent youth?

xrh59 - don't you know that some lads would have LOVED to be taught by a nun, that uniform, all that discipline.

Getting back to the initial posting - yes I agree, forced education is a waste of time. Some of them will have a couple of kids by then, so why would they want to be in school? Any exemptions for dads who want to earn a quid??

Probably another red herring to distract the voters from other more important and pressing issues like, health and decent pensions for lifetime taxpayers.

Replied: 12th Jan 2007 at 11:05

Posted by: billy (26053) 

cant argue with that point of view ozzie.
the one good point in raising the school age is this....he/she wont be claiming off the welfare state,as an unemployed and incapacitated sick young person???what say you xrh59???
why not bring back national service???we are so short of manpower in blairs small armies, that he flies out here there and every b****y where, to make his legacy look good in the history books.i watched a documentary the other night on afghan. the troops under manned, took this stronghold of the taliban. because the back up promised never arrived, they had to pull up stakes and leave???the taliban moved back in??is this musical chairs or what???where is all this equiptment blair promised them on national TV??these same brave lads had to wait two days for food rations to arrive???when it did, it amounted to a plastic bag of oranges and choc bars. ???????

Replied: 12th Jan 2007 at 11:33

Posted by: john joseph (3197)

So that would mean an extra two years "Family allowance " would be a good help for some parents , and seeing that the curiculum is changing to Vocational subjects like "atomic sciences", "Green bio chemisty" .and other planet saving subjects its a good idea,
There are some clever lads and lasses who will benefit and their efforts will save us all in the long term

Somebody needs to tell the young kids how IMPORTANT they really are for the worlds future,
Maybe more will stop being "Dipsticks" and knuckle down, its up to parents as well to to instill this kind of responsibility into their kids

JJ

Replied: 12th Jan 2007 at 17:27

Posted by: wiganite (3)

I can see it working if they make them vocational schools, where the kids can learn a skill or something. It would keep them of the dole.

Replied: 12th Jan 2007 at 18:16

Posted by: dave© (3507)

I can't see the element of compulsion working very well, at sixteen, some kids can be quite rebellious, and bigger than their parents who would be responsible for their attendance. There's no point in placing someone who doesn't want to be there, in a class were they would probably be disruptive to others who wanted to learn further.

Kids these days don't have the respect for authority that existed many years ago, from time-to-time, pupils have been known to walk out of school, on strike. You'd never hear of that in the past.

A fundamental reform would be needed. Lessons would have to be more relevant or work related.

I left school at sixteen, this was followed immediately by a couple of years at college, so in effect, I was over eighteen when I left education. On starting at college, I found a profound difference in the attitudes of the tutors there, as opposed to the teachers at school, in other words, you were treated like an adult.

Replied: 12th Jan 2007 at 19:26

Posted by: keno (2840) 

If It was voluntary It would be Ok.Children
over are on a payment here ,called Youth
Allowance ,Its till 18 ,then If they carry on at Uni,Its paid till they Finnish Uni.
Also when away from home, rent allowance.

Replied: 12th Jan 2007 at 20:20

Posted by: john joseph (3197)

This thread represent one of the more Important debates on here

It is goverment policy to change to a "work theme" in all our schools ,and its up to us to back them

Languages are a must why are we not preparing the kids for the massive imput that will come from China and other countries no wonder the world is in turmoil no one understand the other person and if our kids dont learn then im off to the moon to live there. lol thats if enough of the kids go into Space programming or building in low gravity areas

Come On theres lots of exciting projects for our youth we are just short of people to tell them .or maybe WE have all given up to the Doom and Gloom ranting on about who gets benefits or not,or how many aliens come and go each day

Life is Bigger than that dont be afraid to give your penny worth cos you could be the one with the ANSWER

JJ

Replied: 12th Jan 2007 at 21:09

Posted by: getwom (inactive)

.

Replied: 12th Jan 2007 at 21:28
Last edited by getwom: 23rd Jul 2010 at 22:28:00

Posted by: john joseph (3197)

Why Wait until the pupils are 16 to educate them to "higher standards and useful subjects" start it early start from 11 yrs old, cut out subjects that are not relevent to tomorrows world
ie: Music, Sport,Religion,art etc etc these though valuable in themselves are pastime subjects and should be followed in home time

What do you parents or pupil say should be excluded from the school day ?

How much more time would they save if all lessons were in the same classroom and move the teacher and not the pupil
give each pupil a desk of their own fitted with laptop and whatever else they need I could go on and on

Educate the sexes seperately,I bet ya that would create the biggest improvement of all .

JJ

Replied: 12th Jan 2007 at 22:04

Posted by: dave© (3507)

While I would agree with a worked based ethos during the final years at school, what would this involve?

Not all kids are destined for academia, you either work using your hands or brain.

One of the problems with working with your hands, is "hands on experience," a pre-requisite, this may well mean handling machinery considered dangerous, and, with the compensation culture in full swing, wouldn't it be an unwise school policy.

Exlude some subjects, yes

Sport or p.e. wasn't that introduced in schools after the Boer war when the army found that many were unfit, after all, they'll want their cannon fodder for the next war

Religion, the government won't hear about it, to afraid of the bishops, so, it's music and arts.

Also reduce the amount of school holidays.

Replied: 12th Jan 2007 at 22:25

Posted by: keno (2840) 

Going to school until your 18 years old
dos,nt neccesarly make every one smarter.
Gates of Micro Soft was a high school drop out,It did,nt seem to affect him.

Replied: 12th Jan 2007 at 23:38

Posted by: xrh59 (inactive)

If you had it in mind you became an apprentice if not you went into a labouring job or the forces,So why not give them two years national service both sexes and learn them a trade,self respect and disipline not to make them front line soldiers but to make them feel they are worth something to Britain,Not all would like it but they would soon see the benifits of being able to look after themselves.Then at the end of it offer them the choice to become full time soldiers/Officers or to go out in the world and follow the trade they have learned with a little bit of pride knowing that the have done it themselves without having to que up for the dole hand outs and life on benifits,Ending up with babys at 16 or on ASBOS.I don't think being at scool at 18 is a good idea if they have not bothered to learn anything by 16 what's the point,teach them properly from the age of five not when they are adults.I can tell you they will get no better teachers than the military to learn them life skills and trades and they won't be as quick to assault the teachers or each other like in school.I wouldn't like to teach a pupil who had been to the pub at dinner time and hated being at school at 18 or would they change the age for boozing and driving?

Replied: 13th Jan 2007 at 00:55
Last edited by xrh59: 13th Jan 2007 at 01:12:48

Posted by: keno (2840) 

I think national service would be great for male and female,they would learn some
discipline also self respect.Also learn a trade,It would also lead to less youth crime,and make the youth proud of who they
are.They could be encouraged to join,by promoting the benefits of learning a trade.But It would have to be voluntary.Asian children seem to do well here, they seem to realise the importance of education and are always In the top groups when the results come out.

Replied: 13th Jan 2007 at 02:16

Posted by: ozzielass (1742) 

Some good points made in this topic but if the education system in the Uk is like in Aus then it is in need of a long overdue overhaul but the wheels turn slowly for the decision makers.

The biggest changes in the last 2 decades have been in information technology and the schools are lagging behind woefully. Kids today can do more on the net than the teachers. They can virtually do their homework by 'cutting and pasting'.

The whole classroom environment should be more geared up with technology, the kids have it at home with their ipods, mp3 players, palm pcs, laptops etc then they go to school and go backwards?? The kids now do things quick and fast, 2 clicks and they have got the answers, they are not tuned into the sit and listen to me for an hour kind of teaching so we need to adjust to that for them.

That is just one part of education but it is huge. Keep the kids interested, keep up to date. Less holidays? Try telling that to the Teachers Unions.

Replied: 13th Jan 2007 at 10:21

Posted by: xrh59 (inactive)

Keno, It would be pointless being voluntary
the attitude of the kids today is if i don't have to do it i won't, and i can get the dole just for doing nothing.

Replied: 13th Jan 2007 at 12:04
Last edited by xrh59: 13th Jan 2007 at 20:08:30

Posted by: plum47 (898) 

you're right with that last bit xr.i have a granddaughter who is pain fully shy but she has said the same thing in different words.i can't understand it,her mum has always worked,never claimed a penny from anywhere or anyone,yet my g/d has this attitude.where did we go wrong?

Replied: 13th Jan 2007 at 13:05

Posted by: getwom (inactive)

.

Replied: 13th Jan 2007 at 15:40
Last edited by getwom: 23rd Jul 2010 at 22:28:57

Posted by: keno (2840) 

xrh I understand what your saying,we have a system over here for young people ,It,s called Youth Allowance ,If you don,t abide by certain rules your payment his cut off.It could still be voluntary but If you don,t carry out certain tasks all payments are cut off.Your young ones sound excecaly like ours.No play our way no pay your way.
They have to do has they are told here or else no pay,If they get their pay cut off here It takes 6 weeks to get It back.
Put the boot In ,kick them up the arse.

Replied: 13th Jan 2007 at 20:08

Posted by: xrh59 (inactive)

Hi plum i'll tell you where we went wrong it started with you can't touch me i'm a minor and i will divorce my parents if you smack me.Then it was health and safety in school if i hurt my leg doing games my dad will sue the school,then we all have human rights and you can't force me to get a job and it's all backed up by the Govt.Two years away from mum and dad and taught how to look after themselves will do them good.

Replied: 13th Jan 2007 at 20:32

Posted by: xrh59 (inactive)

Keno,Some youths in Britain would not be bothered about getting their money stopped most of them have had it stopped,So they go running to mummy for help or take up a life of crime anything but work and the attitude is they think it's owed to them or find a way to claim compensation for something or other.We have to face up to it they have it too easy in this country and something has to be done.I am not painting all of our youths with the same brush because we have some fantastic young people in Britain,But it is an easy life for them here and they expect everything on a plate without doing a tap.

Replied: 13th Jan 2007 at 20:45

Posted by: keno (2840) 

I would agree with compulsory National Service If It was approved my the people of
the country .Have a referendum on It ,every
body gets to vote,see what the country wants.I,m sure a lot of people who don,t come on to the net have the same feelings we have.
You should go Into Politics xrh59,I,d vote for you.

Replied: 13th Jan 2007 at 21:39

Posted by: xrh59 (inactive)

Sorry Keno i have to much pride and i am to honest for that game, I would cause to much trouble for the hangers on who line their pockets,Now i am not saying i am an angel by any means but i always play fair some times hard but always fair.And i don't think we would have a problem voteing for some kind of national service,i think people are at the end of their tethers with the things the youth of our country are getting away with.

Replied: 13th Jan 2007 at 23:04

Posted by: dave© (3507)

If, by meaning National Service, it means the Army, Navy or Air Force, I certainly would not want a reluctant conscriptee alongside me if I was a volunteer soldier.

Replied: 13th Jan 2007 at 23:11

Posted by: xrh59 (inactive)

Dave,Thats why i stated not to be made a front line soldier untill after two years of learning a trade then give them the choice to become a serviceman/woman or to leave and follow the trade learned.I do understand your comment and your reason,And i know that this is the same feeling soldiers have now.

Replied: 13th Jan 2007 at 23:27

Posted by: keno (2840) 

In the 2nd World war most soldiers where
conscripts,In the Vietnam war most soldiers
where conscripts, over here I mean.England
was,nt Involved In that war , Australia was,because when we have a conservative
Government ,we don,t have a Foreign Policy of our own ,ours are run from U S A.
XRH59,I can understand you not wanting to be
a Politician,neither would I,Iv,e got too much pride for that.

Replied: 14th Jan 2007 at 01:33

Posted by: ozzielass (1742) 

Getwom, I can tell you now that any parent in Aus who sends their kids to a private school pays the same tax as a kid going to a public shcool but the difference is the 'private' schools, who raise money from fees get bucketloads of money from the Govt. for alleviating some of the burden from the taxpayers!

The private schools consequently have massive sports fields, fully equipped classrooms, swimming pools, best technology, well maintained spacious buildings, classrooms etc. while the govt schools are run down, under funded, have to fight for every dollar, the P & C assoc. are raising money for basic necessities. etc. It's a disgrace.

It's another ploy to run down public education so that more parents will push their kids into private schools (even catholic schools are classed as private).

As far as unis go, they pay their fees as a 'loan' and don't start to pay it back until they work and reach a certain salary, not sure what that is. But what a way to start your working life with a $20,000 debt or more?

Replied: 14th Jan 2007 at 09:11

Posted by: xrh59 (inactive)

Sounds to me that paradise is slipping a bit in the education area, But what can i say with our education system in tatters.Just wondering ozzielass how do they class catholic schools as private that can't be through religion can it?

Replied: 14th Jan 2007 at 13:43

Posted by: getwom (inactive)

.

Replied: 14th Jan 2007 at 16:51
Last edited by getwom: 23rd Jul 2010 at 22:30:02

Posted by: coccium (2569) 

If this system comes in, then what happens to these kids under eighteen who have got babies? Who looks after the babies? Will there be a cost? and who pays the costs? Go round Wigan town center any day and you will see a small army of this type who get delibratley pregnant so as to reap the state benefits so they can have a very easy life.Its no wonder retired folk are leaving these shores in thier thousands.

Replied: 14th Jan 2007 at 17:24

Posted by: keno (2840) 

This year the public schools out shone
private schools In results In the Leaving
Certificate.The only way everybody gets a
fair go here his to get rid of George Bushes puppet at the next election.I have to pay all my Daughters Uni fees so she does,nt start life with a debt.When Brendan Nelson (former education minister) went through Uni he did,nt pay a Penney ,because Labour was In power,we have to get rid of Howard before we become another
State of U S A. WE have to have our own Foreign Policy and become an Independent
Country again.

Replied: 14th Jan 2007 at 20:13

Posted by: xrh59 (inactive)

Coccium,But if this law comes in and the state benifits are stopped they will have to think twice about getting pregnant and if they are under 16 and get themselves pregnant the parents would have to look after the babies 12 months to each of the grandparents, this again will help stop unwanted babies being born just to get a council house and benifits and the life of riley.So the mothers of the girls would soon get them on the pill if they thought they were going to get left with the baby.

Replied: 14th Jan 2007 at 20:37
Last edited by xrh59: 14th Jan 2007 at 20:43:04

Posted by: ozzielass (1742) 

xrh59 - yes, if you opt out of the state provided education system, even catholic schools are classed as private.

I think the bottom line comes down to why force anybody to stay at school if they don't want to be there? Here they are bringing in a system where kids have to either stay in education or get a job. Not just get out of school and go straight on the dole. If you don't work they cut your benefits. Hope it works. They should at least have to do some volunteer community work.

Some smart ass will probably find a way around keeping people in school until 18. Human Rights, Geneva Convention, whatever.

Replied: 15th Jan 2007 at 10:28

Posted by: xrh59 (inactive)

Sound like the right way to go ozzielass stop the dole and make them work or stay at school,We have got to break this living on benifits life style and show them that there is another way to live.

Replied: 15th Jan 2007 at 10:35

Posted by: getwom (inactive)

.

Replied: 15th Jan 2007 at 12:19
Last edited by getwom: 23rd Jul 2010 at 22:31:02

Posted by: xrh59 (inactive)

Good point getwom,but what be a better outcome for the country and the kids themselves,I would say the forces option if it means they would have learned a bit of respect for themselves and others and the place they live, And not be drawn into a life on benifits and wondering around in an aimless daze looking for trouble.

Replied: 15th Jan 2007 at 18:41

Posted by: keno (2840) 

The tax system In any Country his always geared to suit the people with the most
money,the wealthy.One year I paid more Tax
than Kerry Packer was one of Australia's
richest men,they have Accountants working
overtime to evade Taxes ,They even get an allowance for using toilet paper.
I,m on Super and small pension.
Governments of any color get more gifts from
them than they get from me.

Replied: 15th Jan 2007 at 20:07

Posted by: ozzielass (1742) 

I see the Education Secretary in the Uk has just announced 10 million pounds (can't find the damn sign on this keyboard) to fund music and singing lessons in schools. Any opinions on that then?

Replied: 16th Jan 2007 at 09:56

 

Note: You must login to use this feature.

If you haven't registered, why not join now?. Registration is free.