Should school attendance be voluntary?
In most of the developed world, school is not just an option for young people, but also compulsory. Parents of children who do not go to school can be fined, or even jailed. This is because governments believe that school is very important in giving children the knowledge to succeed in life.
However, for many children school is an unhappy or frustrating place, and some people believe it is possible to succeed even without normal schooling. Would it be better then, if children got to decide about going to school for themselves?
YES, it is a choice
Side Score: 40
|
NO, good for society
Side Score: 25
|
|
|
|
• School should be optional for the reason that the children who do not want to learn disrupt the children who want to learn. The children who cause trouble in the classroom cause the teacher to pay more attention to them and not the ones who do want to learn. • i think school should be optional past the age of 11 because we all know enough to look after ourselves past the age of 11 it should be optional because we all know enough maths and big enough vocabs to look after ourselves we should not waste 1 fifth of our entire lives in school a quarter of the population of England and America go to school • -At the end of the school semester, attendance should not matter, just the grades that are recieved. If the student is still able to study and pass his tests, attendance should be voluntary. -Passing grades are not correlated with perfect attendance. There are many students who attend class every day, but still manage to fail. -Nowadays, many students have responsibilties at home (helping in a single-parent home, helping ailing parents, taking care of younger siblings) and sometimes being absent from school is necessary. -Voluntary attendance should be a privilage to students who can prove the can still pass their classes. • Of course it should be voulentary earlier in our history it used to be and people were better off for it. The people in the school wanted to be there thus better education providing more one on one with kids who want to excel and make something of themselves as compared to other kids where school is just an all day babysitter for parents. Secondly i dont think the government should have the right to say who does and doesent attend school as far as i can tell our country should be free but they lock down on young people and make them go to school and arrest parents who dont make them? Does this sound right or free at all? Side: YES, it is a choice
2
points
2
points
Lokie69, As a former teacher, I can vouch for the truth of what you brought up in your first point. One student who does not want to be there can use up as much as 80 percent of the teacher's time and attention, just trying to manage behavior and keep everybody else from being disrupted. Nobody ever says it when teachers ask for raises, or when funding bills are up for a vote, or when parents are worried about the quality of their kid's schools, or when politicians criticize the quality of our schools, but the difference between a really good school and a horrible school is how many kids goof off and rob their classmates of the benefits of a functioning learning environment. I know this from personal experience. I have worked both in Blue Ribbon Schools of Excellence and in failing schools that make the inner city schools in movies like Dangerous Minds look like country clubs. The good students in both kinds of schools were the same. They were all filled with highly skilled and dedicated teachers. As often as not, the poor performing schools even had better funding for materials (computers, books, etc..) The only difference was that the crappy schools had more students who got in the way of everybody else learning. There are few things the US has to offer that are more valuable than universal free education. However, not everybody wants to take advantage of that benefit. People are only 15 once. Those who don't want to use class time to participate in learning activities and give their best effort to developing skills and understanding should not waste their time or their classmates' time. Seriously, there are more fun places to goof off than a classroom. Kids who do not want to do the work to learn should go somewhere else and do something they actually want to do. More to the point, there are better ways to squander opportunities that don't sabotage other kids' chances to build better lives for themselves. Side: YES, it is a choice
They can study by themselves with a computer or a textbook of the grade. This is a free country. You can achieve in life without education, like Harriet Tubman. She didn't get much education because she was a slave. It turns out Harriet Tubman found out "an underground railroad". Side: YES, it is a choice
I am actually yes and no on this. First of all, I don't necessarily think it was an altruistic motive behind this first government intrusion into our lives. However, most very young children don't really know what is best for themselves. Just because they'd rather eat ice cream and play Wii all day doesn't mean it is in their best interests to do so. So I believe in compulsory primary education through about grade 5 or 6. After that, it should be voluntary. Also, I believe that if school were taught properly, basic education beyond eighth or ninth grade would not be necessary. The most essential thing kids need to learn is reading and mathematics, another language, and compassion toward others. Everything else is built upon those essentials. I think art and music should be introduced to them at a young age also, because I believe they are important forms of expression both for the performer and the audience. Beyond fifth grade, introduction to science, history, geography, physics, should be provided so that those with an interest in them may pursue them. Side: YES, it is a choice
1
point
i think that children should have a choice if they want to go to school or not. If you force a child to go somewhere where they don't want to do well 1. they could grow farther apart 2. they will resist to learn and will only feel angry & 3. i think that kids can learn just as much from common sense, books and their elders. Side: YES, it is a choice
1
point
The people who don’t want to go to school are holding up the ones who do want to learn and go on. Theres people out there that get their grades low from either distractions or problems with the kids who don't care about school, why do teachers do their job if students don’t even pay attention? Also, students that skip school can graduate just like the ones that actually study and work on homework because their friends let them cheat on test, quizzes, and homework, what’s the point of doing the homework knowing that someone else didn’t even try doing it. There's kids out there that want a bright future why do we want them to stop them, this is proven by a post in debate.com that said “The problem today is that it is almost too easy to graduate and do nothing but disrupt other students, a lot of the reason people don't like school is because other students bully and annoy them causing them to do worse. The problem is students know they can ride it out and be as lazy as possible and still graduate. This is because teachers feel pressure just to push them along the system” i mean theres many teachers out there that teach students that drugs are bad for you and the first thing they do is go and do them after 4 or 3 years, Its just useless for teachers to waste their time on people that dont want to learn. Side: YES, it is a choice
I think there are many alternatives. In Britain we have several options after gaining GCSE qualifications (around age 16) including 6th form, college, apprenticeship and work. I think class attendance should not be compulsory for older students and there should be a way of attending class via the internet (webcam?) for students who are ill. There should be more freedom with subject choice for younger students also. I don't think it should be completely compulsory to stay in school until 8, as there are many other options. Level 3+ academic qualifications aren't necessary for everyone to attain. Side: YES, it is a choice
1
point
mannn i totally not agree of wht you guys believe tat living the children to dont go to school is not good. i really agree that let the children go to school because to enlarge their knowledge and also gain more wisdom if they go to school dont live them free. Side: YES, it is a choice
of course!!that school attendance that should be voluntary...Because nowadays lots of teenagers were having problems with their english subjects and others subject...like when they were finding job they must have a qualifications to help them finding their job!!! Side: YES, it is a choice
Well it is voluntary in Alaska and Indiana. If the child is not enrolled in the public school then the compulsory schooling laws do not comply so it is based on voluntary compliance in these two States. Unless you are seeking to become a medical doctor, college is a waste of time and money. Most college students end up with all kinds of student loan debt. The real issue though is with the advanced technology such as the smartphone where a person has access to billions of information right in front of them is it then really necessary to even have schools? Aren't schools outdated? Side: YES, it is a choice
1
point
Unless you are seeking to become a medical doctor, college is a waste of time and money. Most college students end up with all kinds of student loan debt. Or a lawyer. Or a medical technician. Or an engineer. Or hundreds of jobs out there... The real issue though is with the advanced technology such as the smartphone where a person has access to billions of information right in front of them is it then really necessary to even have schools? Aren't schools outdated? No. Children do not voluntarily spend time learning language, mathematics, science, etc. Nor do most adults, for that matter. Side: NO, good for society
1
point
YesYesYesYesYesYesYesYesYesYesYesYesYes Side: YES, it is a choice
as a student myself I have had a primary school education and that i think is all you need... when you hit high school the stresses of exams and tests out way the fact that your here to learn about the future, about the life you want to live. i have friends that have left for jobs and they in my eyes are actually living and not learning, tho they are learning all the same. maybe not the conventional things like how to write an essay on a book but how the afford living on the day to day basis. that is what I'll leave with you to think about Side: YES, it is a choice
1
point
I have searched about this and found stick merge that almost everyone will agree with your blog. Side: YES, it is a choice
I have just 1 thing for everyone to think about should people really ahve to be forced to go somewhere? this isnt about rather responsibilty or if youd o or dont want to go to school, this is more about whether or not you would willingly make your child hate you or never learn anything because all they can think about is how much they dont want to be there Side: YES, it is a choice
|
4
points
School attendance should remain government mandated because society benefits from formal education because those who don't even possess a high school diploma, it not only hurts them individually, but it hurts the general labor market and brings it to a lower level. Also, Milton Friedman stated that freedom doesn't pertain to children and madmen because of their lack of responsibility; thus, this mandate is not negotiable. Side: NO, good for society
What do you define as children? 16? 17? 18? I really disagree with the point about a lack of responsibility as it is a blanket generalisation, stating that no child has any recognisable responsibility. An issue that was gaining media attention last year was that of 'young carers', children as young as 11 who have to care for a mentally/physically handicapped family member. These people clearly have a lot of responsibility. Children leading normal lives also have responsibilities to society, the same as adults. In school and home there are responsibilities to work and deal with undesirable people. I think young people have enough responsibility to enter workplaces or choose a vocational degree. Side: YES, it is a choice
2
points
1
point
1
point
1
point
1
point
ok i STRONGLY disagree!!!! if you even decide to go school you couls still be lazy, spoiled and uneducated and you know why because not everyoneis perfect if children decide to not go to school well they could not listen to a single thing that anyone says and besides if they do do that then theres no piobnt in going to school. Side: YES, it is a choice
If people were able to opt out of everything that is 'unhappy' or 'frustrating', no one would go to work, pay their taxes, or raise their children. Doing things that you don't want to do is just a fact of life and those things often end up benefiting you in the long run. Personally, I find nothing wrong with giving kids an obligation like school and holding them accountable for doing what's necessary to fulfill that obligation. It's called responsibility. Side: NO, good for society
1
point
How is the government or someone forcing students to go to school be called responsibility? Responsibility would be students going to school without force and holding students accountable at their own expense. This tactic is already applied in college. If you don't go to school, you fail. Side: YES, it is a choice
1
point
voluntaryvoluntaryvoluntaryvoluntaryvol Side: NO, good for society
1
point
How it would be voluntary ? Allow the student to choose if he or she wants to go school, and then make them force the burden of future consequences. So, if they decide to skip school, and later they can't find a job because they have no high school diploma, they will suffer the consequences. Side: NO, good for society
|