

Should Kids Be Able to Graduate After 10th Grade? - gscott
http://news.yahoo.com/s/time/20081107/us_time/shouldkidsbeabletograduateafter10thgrade

======
Xichekolas
The whole idea of basing education on age is ridiculous to begin with.

Kids should be able to advance once they demonstrate they have the knowledge
to advance. Each level should have an optional test that allows one to advance
to the next level, and that test should be available whenever the pupil wants
to take it. Combine their performance on the test with observations from
teachers of class performance and move the pupil up accordingly.

If this results in some precocious seven year-old graduating, more power to
her.

Being 16 doesn't mean you have a 10th grade level of knowledge any more than
being 40 means you are responsible. Everyone is different.

The same problems can be found in undergrad education. Degrees are earned by
putting in four years. Why are all degrees four years long? Do all fields have
exactly four years worth of knowledge to impart? Degrees should be based on
demonstrable knowledge of the subject, however long (or short) that takes.

~~~
nsrivast
Your comment assumes the only purpose of any school is to impart knowledge.

~~~
pfedor
You can also view it as a proof that imparting knowledge is not the purpose of
the schools that presently exist, contrary to how they're advertised. Because
if they had anything to do with education, they would look like what
Xichekolas postulates.

------
trickjarrett
Our education system is horribly out of date, any option which allows them to
exit the system or progress to the next stage quicker is great in my book.

I'll save a rant on the current public education system in America for another
time, but the Internet has changed everything and the school system needs to
adapt and change quickly or it's going to begin doing more harm than good.

------
tjic
I left high school after three years and went to an Ivy League college.

I regret only two things:

1) that I wasted as much time as I did in high school. 2) that I started in a
degree program at a college.

Never confuse education with mere "schooling".

Schooling is an industry, and it's designed to separate consumers from their
money.

Education is the important thing, and it may (or may not) overlap with
schooling.

~~~
Hexstream
"I never let my schooling interfere with my education."

\- Mark Twain

------
petercooper
I left school at age 16 and have been self employed since age 17. If I'd had
to stay until 18 (as they are now doing here in the UK) I doubt I'd have been
involved in the startup scene and had as much success as I have, because I
would have gone on to become a lawyer or a member of some other "profession."

Locking up free spirits for another couple of years might not look like a bad
thing, but at that age you're very impressionable, and if you're always being
told that getting a degree and a "career" is the best thing, those two years
could be the death of your creativity.

~~~
DTrejo
This makes me worry that I might not get involved soon enough...

~~~
petercooper
Whenever you get involved, there's always something new under the sun. There
was in 96, there was in 98, there was in 2004 and there will be time and time
again :)

------
ideamonk
OFFTOPIC : (about CS & India)

Yes they should be allowed to. I always wanted to be free from studying
general subjects common to all and wanted to specialize into my own interests
as soon as possible. But the education system (as in India) doesn't allow to
start doing that unless I have completed 12 years of schooling. Over that, to
get into good institutions we have to compete on Physics, Chemistry & Maths,
and not in the areas we are interested and have developed great skills at
early ages. This system of education is really missing on students who tend to
develop interests in particular field at early ages. And leaves such students
(as in India) to third grade institutions with lack of infrastructure. Such
students have learnt and played with things on their own eversince they got
interest in their field. But this style of separation by competition in India
won't help it in any ways. I find people in IITs who realize that they weren't
meant to be there and they don't like computer science... after 2 years of
college. And on other hand we got people in low ranking colleges with good
skills but restricted due to their college's capabilities and lack of
opportunities around their college. I think its clear from my loosely planned
thoughts that in India money doesn't exist equally among people... same is the
case with education. Apart from a few good universities and colleges, the rest
of the majority still lies in gloominess of poor quality. The goal should be
education for everyone and not just for the ones who rank high in competition.
Education for those who deserve and not for those who could change morph
themselves into high scoring machines... not for those who cleared exams
because of familial pressures... for those who like doing what is done in
engineering.

------
ciscoriordan
I went to a public high school in New Hampshire and graduated two years ago,
and find these tests intriguing.

So much of what was taught in my school was a waste of time, so I'm really
happy to see the education officials actively trying to solve that problem.

However, I'm skeptical about how useful these tests will actually be. The
article says: "Or those who want to go to a prestigious university may stay
and finish the final two years, taking a second, more difficult set of exams
senior year." If students who do well on the test still have to stick around
for two years more years, what was the point in taking the tests?

To me it seems like the tests are a way to give diplomas to capable students
who otherwise would have dropped out. That might work out really well -- all
of my friends who dropped out of high school were perfectly capable of
graduating, but they wouldn't have learned anything more and they didn't feel
like putting up with the education system any longer.

------
markbao
Please. I'm currently a junior in high school and I am a "founder" (can't
really _officially_ call myself one without being on my own) of a few
startups.

High school really doesn't seem to be worth my time.

------
vlad
Few degree programs are tailored to an individual. School is a place of
babysitting of students, giving them time to figure out how to learn and work
with others. And it's designed so that if a student hands in assignments and
shows up to class, they will finish with some kind of a degree. Otherwise, or
in conjunction with this effort, students are free to do as they please--they
may try to start a business, join the honors program, start a club, join a
sport, and/or do anything else. This means that a degree and grades are not
necessarily proof of competence or a judgement of one's skill, but show the
degree holder has been exposed to an environment where they had to learn and
get along with others. The piece of paper after four to five years is just the
minimum notification they have to give to kick a student out into the real
world--it is up to the student himself to have become functional enough in
that time to know to avoid a mind-sucking career.

------
steveplace
The comments so far seem to be analyzing the rule as it pertains to themselves
(I'm smart and don't need HS to be successful!). We need to take a step back
and look at the larger demographic set.

My wife and I have been advocating this for several years now, but graduation
would not be the only option. The emphasis here is on choice. Once they turn
16 (the magical arbitrary number) they have a choice: stay, test out, go get
your AA at a comm college, go to a trade school, peace corps, military, or
apprentice somewhere. Needless to say the entrenched educators we've talked to
about this hate it, but I'm still behind it.

------
Prrometheus
They would almost certainly learn more from age 16-18 if they graduated early
than if they stayed in the government education sector for 2 more years. Of
course, the same case could be made for any earlier grade as well.

------
mleonhard
You can already do this: quit highschool, take the GED, go to a community
college, and transfer to a university. The only problem is that the school
switch can have a bad effect on your social life. Hopefully the New Hampshire
test will help students to skip community college and get directly into
university.

------
lsc
I waited to graduate highschool... I had an equivalency in 10th grade, though.
I regret not leaving highschool as soon as possible. I would have had another
year working during the .com boom. as it is, I only got in on the tail end.

------
geuis
No. We already have a testable case in the US, which is a large percentage of
kids drop out in the 10th grade. We increasingly are losing kids to low-
skilled service jobs.

~~~
unalone
We don't just have drop-outs because of that.

In my sophomore year in high school, I wanted to drop out. Things are taught
too slowly, and 12 years of learning is far too much with the present system.
If there were more acclaimed systems for graduating early, I'd have jumped at
it. That's what this article is about.

~~~
tjic
It's not 12 years of learning.

It's 12 years of attending a jobs-creation project for education majors (i.e.
teachers).

~~~
unalone
Bleh, cynicism.

I had teachers who were easily good enough to teach for private schools, who
chose public service instead. I believe that teachers are good people stuck in
a bad system.

~~~
Prrometheus
Some teachers are good people, stuck in a system that does nothing to reward
them for it.

~~~
unalone
Yeah. The system is at fault. But don't go around suggesting that the system
only exists to give hand-outs to teachers. Teachers are worth _much_ more than
schools pay them.

