Kids starting school this week have to stay till they are 17

scorza · 3 Sep 2008 at 08:28

Heard this on the radio this morning - that the kids who start school this weekend will be legally required to stay in education until they were 17. Anyone know what the point of this is? So presumably they'll do their GCSE's at 16, then what? Just doss around for a year unless they actually want to do A-Levels?

Edit: Oops found link now that answers my own questions /blush.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7595155.stm

rayer · 3 Sep 2008 at 08:30

At least they can drive to school then, they better expand their car parks. ( imagine, multistory car parks at schools )

Richdog · 3 Sep 2008 at 08:33

They should have made it 18 and thrown in a mandatory A/AS/NVQ or whatever study period if anything.

HEADRAT · 3 Sep 2008 at 08:34

Yup keep them at school but provide many more vocational courses for those that don't like "school".

starfighter · 3 Sep 2008 at 08:35

I would welcome an American style system where they can't leave until they pass. and an E isn't a pass.

Raymond Lin · 3 Sep 2008 at 08:40

The solution isn't keeping them at school longer, if they don't want to learn, it makes no difference if they stay til they are 80, it'll be just a waste of money.

Adsta · 3 Sep 2008 at 08:40

Maybe they will actually learn something now

HEADRAT · 3 Sep 2008 at 08:40

Raymond Lin said:
The solution isn't keeping them at school longer, if they don't want to learn, it makes no difference if they stay til they are 80, it'll be just a waste of money.

That's why they need to provide "other" courses, not just academic ones.

West · 3 Sep 2008 at 08:42

It's 18 in most places now.. about time we followed suite.

Raymond Lin · 3 Sep 2008 at 08:42

I think Battle Royal is a better solution

int · 3 Sep 2008 at 08:43

starfighter said:
I would welcome an American style system where they can't leave until they pass. and an E isn't a pass.

This. Sending a kid out into the world with a handful of E's doesn't count.

scorza · 3 Sep 2008 at 08:44

starfighter said:
I would welcome an American style system where they can't leave until they pass. and an E isn't a pass.

They can leave at quite an early age can't they in America? They just can't "graduate" ( :rolleyes:

) which is why every prison in America dishes out loads of high school diplomas.

scorza · 3 Sep 2008 at 08:45

Raymond Lin said:
I think Battle Royal is a better solution

Makes me LOL every time I see the so called, out of control Japanese school kids at the beginning of that film. I wonder what the Japanese would make of our high schools.

semi-pro waster · 3 Sep 2008 at 08:48

A more cynical man than I might suspect this has something to do with massaging unemployment figures.

Some people aren't cut out for academic studies, no shame or stigma in that, they might be brilliant at practical tasks or a great entrepreneur. Forcing people to stay in education/training longer doesn't address that, it just creates more issues since you either need to create more training schemes or occupy them with further studies which they may not want to do.

Vixen · 3 Sep 2008 at 08:51

I've never been a fan of keeping people in education when they clearly don't want to be there. When I was at school, the kids who didn't want to be there just became very disruptive and caused problems for the ones who actually wanted to work. The people who left early at my school were the type who didn't care about qualifications, so they just did what they wanted for most of their time there.

I lost out on a lot at school because teachers had to spend their time with kids who didn't want to be there anyway and my school wasn't big enough to have streamed classes beyond Maths and English. In my opinion, it's just a waste of teachers resources.

EDIT: Of course, it depends on the school. My boyfriends sister works in a school that has some college style classes, such as hairdressing and car workshop iirc. It's in a rough area though, and very few of their students go on to do highers anyway.

do_ron_ron · 3 Sep 2008 at 08:52

IIRC it was to start them on some training course or college course.

daz · 3 Sep 2008 at 09:06

Vixen said:
I've never been a fan of keeping people in education when they clearly don't want to be there.

Most kids don't want to be at school when they're 13, should we allow them to drop out?

The mandatory leaving age (or the age up to which all children must receive an education) is set so that we can set up our children with the skills they need to succeed in life and go out and get a job. I would say that at age 16, most people really aren't ready for the real world.

Sone · 3 Sep 2008 at 09:16

i hated school and barely went from 14 onwards.

Keeping me there would have done nothing, when i was 18 i went back to college part time, paying for yourself (Although the company did eventually pay me back) made me much more focused and i did really well.

Working at 16 when non of my friends did was hard though. Most are only just starting work now and they have had 6 much better years than me

TrUz · 3 Sep 2008 at 09:19

In 2015 it will be raised from 17 to 18.

TrUz

Dolph · 3 Sep 2008 at 09:27

The problem with modern schooling is and has been for a while the belief that grading and seperating people on ability and teaching them to their strengths is a bad thing. Without correcting this huge mistake, other efforts at trying to improve education are destined to fail.