CreateDebate


Debate Info

0
8
Yes, it's taken too seriously Its not taken too seriously
Debate Score:8
Arguments:6
Total Votes:8
More Stats

Argument Ratio

side graph
 
 Its not taken too seriously (5)

Debate Creator

World(5) pic



Should High School Completion be taken as serious as it is?

My question is, should a high school diploma be as serious and impact a persons chances of jobs as it does? Meaning that, people who don't complete every grade of high school but completed, lets say, 9th and 10th grade should be eligible for some jobs that they wouldn't get if they was to have a high school diploma? On the other hand, do you still believe that students in order to get current opportunities, need to finish all 4 grades of high school?

Yes, it's taken too seriously

Side Score: 0
VS.

Its not taken too seriously

Side Score: 8
No arguments found. Add one!
3 points

I don't like being overly critical of writing on this site, but in this case, it serves to make my point.

You wrote: Should High School Completion be taken as serious as it is?

when the correct way to write it is Should high school completion be taken as seriously as it is?

This basic level of mastery of the English language is one of the things that is expected of every high school graduate. Mistakes like those in the question indicate one or more of the following problems for an employer:

- Laziness

- Sloppiness

- Indifference to accepted standards

- Insufficient skill in one of the primary tools of the modern American workplace: Written English.

Moreover, completing high school is a basic achievement, and demonstrates the minimum level of dedication, and ability to complete an extended task of nominal complexity and moderate difficulty.

As such, employers use it as in indicator of whether a job candidate has the foundational character to be worth the investment of trust and training.

Thirteen years of free and appropriate education, culminating in a high school diploma is the most valuable capital the government extends to all people in the US. It is a way to prepare people to take advantage of the opportunity this country holds for everybody.

True, it is not the highest quality for all, and it is too focused on college preparation (as opposed to vocational training) to meet everyone's needs. However, it is valuable. Only a fool would throw away even a year of free education.

Side: Its not taken too seriously
1 point

I agree with you entirely. I think that employers should take high school completion quite seriously because it shows that the candidate has some competence. That being said, I think employers might do well not to dismiss people immediately only because of a lack of high school completion (though it depends on the job to a degree) since there have been people who have done great things in intellectual fields without having finished school, Einstein being an example (I think he went to college, but you get my point).

Side: Its not taken too seriously
2 points

...I think employers might do well not to dismiss people immediately only because of a lack of high school completion (though it depends on the job to a degree)...

I agree that there are things which demonstrate valuable abilities that people can achieve in place of earning a diploma. People can test for certifications, work up from very basic jobs, and so forth.

The problem is that these sorts of accomplishments depend on the same character traits as do earning a high school diploma or a GED. (Frankly, the GED is in some ways more difficult than the diploma.) Outliers like Einstein and Edison are not very good indicators.

Even a nominal survey of the modern economic landscape indicates that the jobs that require only nominal academic skills are on steep decline. For example,if self-driving vehicles actually become safe, secure, and viable, then driving jobs (which is the largest sector of jobs that both pay a decent wage and require little formal education or training) will decline.

As the economy becomes increasingly based in technical skills, understanding math and science at more than a basic level becomes increasingly necessary. The standard high school curriculum includes the baseline skills and knowledge required for entry level jobs and technical training.

As the pace of technological change accelerates, the ability to read and comprehend technical literature will become increasingly necessary.

I do not mean to imply that college is a necessity. According to Mike Rowe (of the Dirty Jobs TV show) there are 5.6 million American jobs that do not have qualified applicants. Most of these are blue collar (voc/tech) jobs that require no college, but do require specialized skills, which are built on the abilities indicated by a high school diploma.

Mike Row is part of an organization, Skills & Work Ethic Aren't Taboo (SWEAT) that is dedicated to filling these needs for skilled manual labor. The organization partners with business to provide scholarships and training to candidates who sign the SWEAT pledge at http://profoundlydisconnected.com/skill-work-ethic-arent-taboo (It is worth reading; it is a manifesto of the attitudes that built America.)

One of the requirements for most of the opportunities is a high school diploma.

Side: Its not taken too seriously
1 point

High School is the place where we begin to shed the juvenile outlook we develop in middle schools .. the schoolyard bully, the class differences, things Trump obviously missed. It's the time when we are SUPPOSED to grow up enough for college ... some do, some don't. It "weeds out" many who are not fit for college because they are NOT "serious" enough.

My Grandson is teaching science in a Connecticut high school that is as expensive as many colleges .. I hope , for their parents sake, THEY are serious about it. We don't complete our growth in grade school and it seems to take Americans more years TO grow up ... as the scores of other countries in American Colleges show U.S.! WE need to take high school MORE serious ... to keep up!

Side: Its not taken too seriously
marcusmoon(576) Clarified
2 points

AlofRI,

You wrote, It "weeds out" many who are not fit for college because they are NOT "serious" enough.

and

We don't complete our growth in grade school and it seems to take Americans more years TO grow up ... as the scores of other countries in American Colleges show U.S.!

I agree that it takes American kids longer to grow up. Part of what contributes to this problem is that US high schools have thrown all their energy into college prep curricula.

The assumption is that none of our students are meant to leave high school and immediately start adult life. The assumption is that they are not going to pick up adult responsibilities until after four to six years of living in the dorms or in their parents homes.

I taught in American public high schools and middle schools for years, and the official policies in both California and Texas (and it appears in every other state) was to impress on students that they were going to need to go to college (or if they were not good enough or ambitious enough) to a technical school.

- 1 - If after thirteen years of "free and appropriate" education, all our students are qualified for is more education, then we wasted everybody's time. Most kids figure this out.

- 2 -Kids also notice that there is no impetus to start taking anything in high school seriously because the "real" education won't start until they get to a university or voc/tech school.

Only about half of people who start college never get a degree. This means that at least a third of those who go to college should never have started. Some of the attrition is because life happens (parenthood, loss of funding, a good enough job, etc.). Some attrition is because too many students are either not ready for the rigors of college, or lack the required maturity.

Most of it, however, is because they are just plain not college material. They either do not have the right type of mental hardware, or they are not interested in any of what college offers (other than partying).

About a quarter of my students (mostly boys) were not made for sit down jobs. These kids needed to be mechanics, or plumbers, or industrial machinery repairmen, or crab fishermen, or construction workers. They were perfectly adapted to tasks Mike Rowe featured on Dirty Jobs.

Had they been learning how to do concrete tasks associated with identifiable jobs, they would have taken school a lot more seriously. What possible valid reason could I give them to take literature analysis seriously?

We need to train ALL of our students to do something immediately useful and marketable. Even the ones who plan to go to college need to be able to earn enough to pay for it.

Side: Yes, it's taken too seriously