Printable View
I meant to come back to this and write my thoughts but have had a busy day and forgot....
Anyway, without having read previous relpies (which I will go back and read in a few mins) here's briefly what I think:
I think it's a great idea provided the kids who aren't as academic are given an alternative education like a trade course or similar. I know these are being offered now at some schools but hope they will be offered by all secondary schools seeing as the leaving age has been raised.
But that's the entire point. Why keep kids at school when they don't want to be there -it's a waste of everyones time.:
I'm not sure what is being down in relation to Career Guidance atm, but I'm of the opinion it's pretty bloody useless. My daughter did it recently and it was a joke.
There is not much point giving a student a list of "things they like to do", getting them to tick a box and spitting out the result (cos mine would have been lying on the beach back then) based on that. OR like DD - given a book containing all the courses and told to pick a few :rolleyes:
Proper personality/aptitude testing would go a long long way. My father approached a few schools when he was first looking at retirement and none of them were interested. I can't tell you how many people we saw over the years that would rather be doing the exact opposite of the jobs they were doing at the time, and all the time wasting as a result.
Lulu .......... i would have explained myself but my local is wearing off from the stitches at both ends of my arm that i had done today !!
......... too keep it very short (due to some slight pain here) i would be swinging in favour to keeping students in longer to encourage those that need to be there not cause they think it's a better option to leave early ... My sister is a secondary schoolteacher and i have heard first hand over the past 15years of her teaching at different schools the WHY's of why some leave as soon as they can ... I'm putting my hand up for those that would have potential to stay in school longer (little hard to explain right now, will come back when i can) ;) ... lets's just say many of my sister's students over the years and at various schools think leaving school to have a baby at 15 is a better career option then being in school (one of my reasons) ... ooooh, PAIN kicking in now, ouchhy must GO :o
I don't see how raising the leaving age is going to stop the have a baby route out of school. It's been going on for a long, long time... Unless you have a lot of schools like Sydney's Plumpton High, then you're going to have a lot of kids still use the baby exit path. Do you really think the government won't pay benefits to parents under the age of 17?
I have to say from the perspective of a secondary teacher, the sooner some kids are out, the better. Some kids just aren't built for a classroom and will never thrive in that environment. Keeping them at school is hard on them, hard on the teachers and hard on the other students. If they raise the leaving age, then they damned well better back it up with alternative paths out of the education system that don't force kids to sit through another two years of irrelevant (to them) schooling. More vocational education is needed if they are going to do this.
BW
........... but at least they will be a couple of years older with a baby !!!!!!!!!!!
(my own Mum was pregnant at 17) ... this is not my sole reason as it looks to be taken & i did mention that it's not.
Tinks ... wanna say great thread (thanks for letting us know as i wouldn't have) :thumbsup:
.... To put it kindly i like for my own personal opinion to be voiced like everyone else but i'm not a person that debates on a topic (no offense to anyone) so i will nicely leave now ... smiles now leaving the building ;)
but again, that's something that needs to be addressed with vocational stuff or decent career guidance. If they think dropping out to have a baby is a better option - where is the failure?
There's a heck of a lot in terms of maturity, confidence, ability, understanding of how life works, street knowledge, responsibility. (Not that either age group should be unsupported).:
I think it's a great idea, provided that there are plenty of options that fit the variety of needs. VCAL has been a great move for the youngsters who aren't geared towards reading textbooks and sitting in a traditional classroom. Kids who come out of VCAL in my experience are quite a lot more worldy and well equipped for the workplace and to stand on their own two feet, than a 15 year old who leaves school in year 10.
I have a 16 year old who finished yr10 last year...and doesnt want to be at school.
He wanted to travel (by long distance public transport)doing casual work such as farmhand (which in isolated rural communities licences arent needed)...but work has to be fulltime...this is completely unrealistic for both employers and school leavers. He wanted to do this until he was of eligible age to join the armed forces been a cadet for 3 years.
The course he wanted to do at TAFE now requires a HSC.
His other option for work was rouseabouting for a year (they travel as a team daily) but this employment is casual only.
At first I thought this law was the greatest thing since sliced bread ...now im completely opposed.
We live in a rural area (and we cannot relocate), kids at that age do not have a licence to drive, there is minimal employment in this town, our main town is half an hour away. we have other children in school and my husband and I both work, there is no public transport to the other town.
Might be ok for the big cities.
So now we have a rebelling little s%&t on our hands (yay for us) who is apparently now going to rebel against the system by deliberaltly failing (yay for us). This law is delaying the inevitable and keeping time wasters at school who are ruining for all the other kids who are serious about their HSC, ticking off the kids who had a plan which no longer is now valid and creating rebellers, and wasting school resources, teachers time....it goes on and on.
Im not happy about it all, once again dumbass decision by the goverment:wall::wall:
.[/QUOTE]The majority of kids that age live with their parents anyway, it's not like they're *that* expensive when it comes to things like Youth Allowance, so why not let them just bum around for a couple of years and get their heads straight, figure out where they want to go with their lives? .[/QUOTE]
Agree completely our 16yr old is not eligible for youth allowance, we apparently earn too much. so its not costing anyone a damn thing but us.
Just making a hard time even harder
Make it our (the parents) responsibilty to get them into the workforce....or whatever
and not at the expense of teachers, willing HSC students... etc
Would save a whole lot of rebellion and crap that noone needs.