Some students do not do well with the school scene.If the parents sign the 18 YR OLD OUT BUT OTHER EDUCATION SERVICES SHOULD BE SUPPLYED

Thanks MagnetMom,

I understand those parents who do not want to steer people in one track or another early.

A lot of people consider that not succeeding in these college prep classes is a failure, and other tracks are just a place to put those kids who do not succeed.

As long as this feeling will not change, and that people will consider those kids who do well in AP classes and Honor classes as vastly superior or more intelligent than other people, people will not go willingly and happily in vocational tracks, whose history has been to be the place where "less intelligent" kids (as defined by a standardized test) go.

The system needs a serious restructuring and all kids should be asked to take hands on classes, whether they go to college or not. We need to extend the basis of our school system for ALL, and then may be, we can decide honestly what is good for each kid, not because they fail in something and we need to keep them busy, but because they excel in something.

nelle,

College like it is these days is not for all, I agree, but all kids should be offered an opportunity to higher education in a domain they excel in. That our school system does not offer each kid the chance to excel in something and continue to consider only some tracks as valuable is a failure for all. I recently saw a philosophy PHD explaining how he was doing auto mechanics and how it was a highly intellectual task why most of the jobs his PhD was giving him were highly repetitive jobs. I would like this to be understood in all schools in this country, and that these kids who excel in these activities are celebrated, not rejected as failure, as they are too often.

I agree with those who say that there is not "magic" age and that students who don't want to be in school will only cause problems for the teacher and those who want to be there. However, we do need to provide students with alternatives if they aren't going to finish--such as alternative schools and GEDs. I also like the comment about incorporating things other than college track courses as college isn't for everybody.

Yes. In my opinion, school should be mandatory until the child is mature enough to become an adult to make their own choice in continuing education. Perhaps that age is about 18 years old. Of course, people learn differently and "school" for some may not be what we believe is the traditional sit down at the desk and take notes.

My opinion on this is that if the child is smart enough to get through school at any age then they should be able to. Say like Doogie Houser ya know that show right well he was a young kid that got through school at an early age and went onto college and became a doctor there are real prople and stories out there like that so i think if your child is like that its wonderful but if not then no they should go through school like most everyone else and learn as much as they possibly can. I was 18 when I graduated from high school but i also got held back a year in kindergarten so if i hadn't gotten held back i would of been 17 when i graduated high school. It's no big deal to me that it happened that way cause i think it worked out better. I made alot of good friends and had a decent life. I just don't see age having anything really to do with it i guess it just depends on how mature you are and your growth.

Yes! Some at eighteen still need parents' help in preparing food, doing laundry, waking them up to attend 7Am class, and making vital life decision .

Also, I think any child who can pay bills, contribute to the society, and take care of him or herself can drop out of school.

A good question!

Hi MomfromMA and welcome back!

I totally agree with you. What's missing from this push to make everyone ready for college is the loss of Vo-Tech training. Plenty of great careers go wanting. I know what I pay my certified mechanic, and I know what it costs for a plumber, and most construction jobs.

While I know many are concerned about "steering" students to one track or another in certain communities, I don't see anything wrong with kids (and their families) choosing what will work best for them.

I'm sorry I misundeerstood the question, I only think kids shouldn't be making a life long decision on quitting school at a young age like 16.
But other people are right, if the kid doesn't want to be there, and there are other alternatives , such as GED, and trade learning, or train on the job type deal. they are still doing something, but then again there are others who don't realize at the time what a big and imprtant decision this is, and if no one is there to guide them, there might not be anything for them in the future.
I just think if they do quit and have no alternative plans, then they should wait to get thier licenses till 18.
Maybe this will motivate them to make some choices and realize they need to do or pick something with thier lifes for the future.At least this will give them an aim for the future, a direction instead of just quitting and doing nothing,some kids do this, and end up in trouble.

This is a hard and complex question.

No child should stop its education at 15 or 16. Even 18 is too soon.

However, we live in a system which expects kids to learn in only one way: books and written tests. Many kids, including those who graduate from HS, do not learn well this way.

So, before we ask every single kid to stay in school until 18, it would be good to make sure that the system teaches each student, whatever its learning style, and does not continue to consider as second zone students those who learn differently and have different skills. (How many students are oriented toward vocational schools if they do well in Middle school, even if they would learn better this way).

A good plumber will learn more than somebody most people who will graduate from college with a bachelor degree. Create the systems of alternate apprenticeships and vocational teaching that teach them both academics and practical skills and even send them to college to improve these skills. Then, we can speak about keeping kids in school longer.

I think your right,but I think every job has its purpose. I don't like to put any job down. If its going to help put food on the table, and pay bills, I think all jobs are important.
Now a days with lay offs, every one is taking what they can, so I don't like to put any employment down, and another thing, I'm not in thier shoes. But for the most part I do think your right,but if you can do better, go further why not. Kids shouldn't be making a decision to quit school at sixteen, thats to young, and yes, if they graduated then they can get thier license, I feel at the age of sixteen, they are young to be driving. thats just me.

It should be mandatory until you can pass the tests.

In countries such as Germany and others, in order for a person to get their driver's license, they must graduate high school. I think this should be how it is here. Not a magic age, but a motivational factor like driving. Plus, that way, we'd have less youth drivers being reckless on the road and more responsible adults.

These countries also provide free college or trade school education so that people CAN get a good job.

I think that goes a long way. I don't much like government hand outs, but when it comes to education, I think the government should be paying through the nose to ensure that everyone has an excellent education and great jobs. The only people who should be working at fast food and gas stations are the derelicts of society and teenagers (but in reverse order because I don't want a derelict making my food).

Something that we as Americans used to know is that free labor beats forced labor everytime. Youngster who now drop out at 16 are not suddenly going to do better because the mandatory age is raised to 18 or 19.
One of the greatest handicaps a teacher can have is students who do not want to be in class and dedicate their efforts to disruption.

It's interesting that this subject has recently come up again, because of an Op-Ed piece in the New York Times. Here's a snippet:

"Simply completing high school no longer provides students with an education sufficient for them to compete in the 21st-century economy. So every child should receive a year of post-secondary education. The benefits of an extra year of schooling are beyond question: high school graduates can earn more than dropouts, have better health, more stable lives and a longer life expectancy. College graduates do even better."

What do you think? Like MagnetMom and Healthy11, I wonder if it's possible for self-motivation to develop in just an extra year's worth of schooling.

I don't believe that the age of 18 should be the "magic" number. Just generally, there are students who graduate high school at 17 (me included). Having a cut-off age, such as 18, would put financial pressure on schools to keep kids in school until their 18th birthday.

I can also understand the comments made by MagnetMom and healthy11. There are kids who don't want to be in school, most likely because they were bored and "get it." Others just don't have adult supervision and cause problems for the remainder of kids who do want and need to be in school. What's needed is the availability of schools that support the needs of kids individually.

I had gotten great advice from a counselor at a small charter school. This gentleman ran 2 successful businesses and was quite in touch with what the REAL world and what is required to succeed. His advice was this not ALL Kids need a Diploma to be successful in life. A GED and some training in a vocational school, apprentice, or community college can give the child what their looking for and succeed. Does your employer ever ask you what you did in High School? Really be honest, probably not but it matters what you did out of high school. Did you better yourself, did you go to school or training? There are very bright kids in school that might have a different direction in their life then college and we need to honor that. Not enforce laws that are not useful and can be costly.

In general, I do think requiring kids to be in school until they reach the "age of majority" is a good idea, but I also understand the situation that Magnetmom mentioned, where kids who don't have adequate parental guidance/supervision/support may simply "go through the motions" and cause greater problems for students who really do want to learn. I think requiring students to attend school through age 18 would require a significant financial committment and better teacher training so more smaller, "alternative" school settings for troubled teens could be established.

Hi Kelsey,

This is a tough question for me. I believe every kid should have the opportunity to graduate--assuming they want to be there and are making adequate progress.

Unfortunately, I personally experienced and my son much more recently experienced kids being forced to sit there and take up a space, when it was clear they didn't want to be there.

With opportunities like GED, adult night school, or even junior colleges accepting students w/o a diploma, the last thing I want to see is kids warehoused and misbehaving while the kids who want to be there can't even get through a lesson.

I know some states it's 16, and some it's 18. For a complete list of compulsory school attendance age requirements, visit www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0112617.html