School Leaving Age to Change from 16 to 18 in UK

[Lambert Simnel]

I'm at this move. This means that now, the age of the workforce starts at 18. This means that when the next unemployment figures are calculated, there is going to be a significant drop, because of the exclusion of this part of the workforce. So the government can claim credit for reducing unemployment AND it gets to boast of a better-trained workforce.

Nice political trick, isn't it?

You're being a bit desperate to be cynical about this.

But where is the best place; an extra two years in school
or by starting off in the work force two years younger?

Actually, this isn't about forcing people into school for an additional two years.

The intention of this proposal is to ensure there aren't 16 and 17 year olds sitting around with no jobs, no apprenticeships, no school, no nothing - it's saying that we in the UK, as a society, can afford economically to (and can't afford socially not to) ensure that everyone up to age 18 is at least learning, if not already in employment. It's trying to address the fact that the UK has many teenagers who are sitting around idle and unvalued, when they are still at a point when they could and should learn, when they could still be educated or trained to be able to get a decent job.

Occasionally mischief, this forum comes over like an incessant bunch of student and twenty-something whingers. (No offense meant. Well, not much, at least not specifically to EtK and anneshm ...)

OK, then. Given the obvious and clear aim, of trying to avoid society giving up on the less able when they're still just 16 & 17 years old, what do you suggest ? And then find a way of enacting it fairly, practically, and in a way which is with adequate funding ? And then reflect on the fact that this is a case of a government pushing something out publicly as something they'd like to do, but which is far from finalised, and which the teaching unions, business, hell, all of us, can react to and suggest issues with, or better ways of achieving the aim.

Cyncism is decidely useful when viewing politicians and their statements, but you're more likely to understand what they're saying and why they're saying it if you try to understand their actions and speeches with a view that maybe, just maybe, they actually mean well.

What are we expecting ? Politicians as perfect gods, who can come offering perfect solutions, which don't need feeedback from people outside government ?

 

[-0blivion-]

The intention of this proposal is to ensure there aren't 16 and 17 year olds sitting around with no jobs, no apprenticeships, no school, no nothing - it's saying that we in the UK, as a society, can afford economically to (and can't afford socially not to) ensure that everyone up to age 18 is at least learning, if not already in employment. It's trying to address the fact that the UK has many teenagers who are sitting around idle and unvalued, when they are still at a point when they could and should learn, when they could still be educated or trained to be able to get a decent job.

Aye, Im in Upper Sixth now and I know dozens of people who were with me at school from Year 7 to Year 11, and some from Year 1 through to Year 11, that sit at home doing nothing - the occasional one is a paperboy. They generally clog up the village centre, drive loud mopeds around on the pavement, joyride and commit other minor offences, eat too much KFC and litter excessively. Really is a drain on society.

 

[Ansar]

Well, here in the US you finish High School when you are 18...

Do you guys like have less grades in the UK?

 

[Lambert Simnel]

Aye, Im in Upper Sixth now and I know dozens of people who were with me at school from Year 7 to Year 11, and some from Year 1 through to Year 11, that sit at home doing nothing - the occasional one is a paperboy. They generally clog up the village centre, drive loud mopeds around on the pavement, joyride and commit other minor offences, eat too much KFC and litter excessively. Really is a drain on society.

I know what you mean. I'm going to sound like a cross between the worst sort of patriarchal Tory MP and the most condescending liberal/Labour/Guardian reading Social Worker, but (a) this is a waste of the kids, and (b) this is teaching some young people that it's OK to be anti-social, as, after all, apparently there's nothing else for them anyway.

 

[Leonel]

So what did you do in years 12 and 13? Because the whole point of them is to do A levels.

I don't know. I was pulled out and put in another school after bombing my A levels.

 

[Golden Touch]

nononono everyones taken this the wrong way. You do GCSEs at 16 which are the basic requirement to get most jobs. Ususally expect to have A-Cin english and maths and a few more subjects. Smart kids then go to college to do ALevels which can then lead on to university. With the new scheme you dont HAVE to do Alevels, you just have to carry on with some form of formal training. This can be NVQs ie vocational training, apprenticeships etc.
Apparently 11% of people ages 16-18 aren't in education or work. Thats why they're hoping to bring it in.

 

[mdwh]

So basically what they're doing is making staying on for 6th form mandatory/compulsory?

And it will cause big trouble in schools
with pupils who just don't want to be there.

No, and not necessarily. From the article:

John Dunford, head of the Association for School and College and Leaders, cautioned that "we need to be clear that this is not strictly about raising the 'school' leaving age, but about keeping young people in some kind of education or training until they are 18, most of them full-time, including apprenticeships and work-based training".

One of the things I liked about the sixth form was that it was optional - people were there because they wanted to be there, all the annoying idiots were gone, and teachers treated you like adults rather than kids. But this move probably won't change that, since it's not making staying in the same school compulsory, just that they must be in some kind of education or training.

 

[puglover]

I'm at this move. This means that now, the age of the workforce starts at 18. This means that when the next unemployment figures are calculated, there is going to be a significant drop, because of the exclusion of this part of the workforce. So the government can claim credit for reducing unemployment AND it gets to boast of a better-trained workforce.

Nice political trick, isn't it?

Excellent point. I knew the move wasn't for training well-educated individuals.

 

[Chukchi Husky]

all the annoying idiots were gone

Not at the one I went to.

 

[Abaddon]

Waste of time, why must we pay to drag the idiots through education.

Some people are dumb, the dross of society.

Just let the wallow in their own filth.

If they dont choose it, you can't teach them anyway.

 

[Urederra]

I really liked the Spanish old system, which I think they also demolished:

At the age of 13-14, you take exams, If you pass the exams you can go to middle school, if you don't you have to choose a trade school and learn plumbing, mechanics, and that stuff, with lower levels of hard subjects like Maths, physics and so on. How hard they are depends on what you are learning, If you are learning to become an electrician, expect some derivatives and integrals.

If you pass the 8th grade exams, (age 13-14) you can go to middle school, or to a trade school too. That way you remove the dumb/lazy people from middle school. People who pass middle school can go to the university, (college for USians), also people who pass the trade school can join the university if they attend a link course and pass the exams, but usually people who went to trade school seek for jobs after finishing their trade.

I always liked that system.

 

[History_Buff]

Does sound like a good system.

I really do think people should be required to know High School level stuff before they are allowed to work though. It's a damn shame to see so many people lacking in basic Math and Science knowledge these days. I wouldn't mind a system where you can't collect government benifits unless you've achieved a minimum of education. Trade schools are good and useful, but you should still be able to learn grade 12 Science, Math, Social Studies and English (or language of your country/region).

 

[Xanikk999]

Children should be forced to continue school until 18 anyway so this is a good thing.

16 year olds do not understand the magnitude of dropping out of school at thier age usually.

 

[Abaddon]

But some people simply don't want to learn, why should they be forced to? They will only disrupt the classes for those who want to learn

 

[GinandTonic]

Note to non-uk -

Despite now refering to educational years as years 1-11 we still call years 12-13 6th form (upper and lower 6th) because it used to be the 6th and 7th years of secondary school, and it confuses jonny forigners.

OT -

If they are going to force the 10% who are not in education or employment to apprentice or whatever they will have to address their situation. They will need to have positions to join. Those who are chucked out of home are going to need assistance to find somewhere to live if they are forced to attend colledge.

It's a laudable aim to boot the malcontent yoot up the bum but it has to be sure to be coherent and not leave people hanging in the wind.

 

[sysyphus]

I'm pretty sure that this is just a scheme to ensure that the majority of Scousers finish primary school.

 

[Bamspeedy]

Differences between universities, colleges, and community colleges:

http://wiki.answers.com/Q/What_is_the_difference_between_a_college_and_a_university

I went to a community college, or more often called a 'tech' school, but it was certainly not up to par with Virginia Tech, so the name doesn't necessarily mean anything.

Here in the US, High school is 4 years (grades 9-12) and most are 18 when they graduate (a few are still 17, but will be 18 soon). Middle school before that is typically grades 6-8 and before that is elementary which is grades 1-5. Even before that is kindergarten and preschool, but that mostly consists of being babysat and taking naps.

Who knows, maybe letting kids drop out and start working is a good thing. There are many 17-18 year olds who don't want to be there, don't contribute anything to the classes, and in fact makes the teaching process more difficult (they are nothing but a distraction or nuisance). Could be one (of several) reasons for some of America's faults.

 

[bhsup]

Who knows, maybe letting kids drop out and start working is a good thing. There are many 17-18 year olds who don't want to be there, don't contribute anything to the classes, and in fact makes the teaching process more difficult (they are nothing but a distraction or nuisance). Could be one (of several) reasons for some of America's faults.

Meh. Give the teachers the ability to dish out corporal punishment again and I guarantee a big chunk of those troublemakers would straighten right up. Whiny nancy boys (aka the ACLU) cry to the public and all of a sudden teachers can't paddle kids anymore, that's part of what is wrong with our schools. If that doesn't straighten them up, give them the choice of straightening up or joining the Marines. Either way, they'll eventually behave.

 

[luiz]

I guess that'll be the only place I'll ever be able to get a job, if I ever can.

I stayed on until I was eighteen, but I failed all my exams. At the school I went to many left at the age of 14.

The president of Brazil, who is currently making millions with corruptions schemes, never finished High School. So there you go, you have enough education to be a powerful millionaire and ruin an entire country!

 

[shortguy]

16 year olds do not understand the magnitude of dropping out of school at thier age usually.

And when they learn it, they can get their GED and work their way up. It's a tougher road than just getting your diploma in the normal fashion, but if you don't understand the importance of school at 16 then your road to success is bound to be bumpier anyway. In the meantime, letting them drop out saves the state, the faculty, and fellow students a whole lot of trouble.