middleagedgamer
DP Veteran
- Joined
- Jan 22, 2008
- Messages
- 1,363
- Reaction score
- 72
- Location
- Earth
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Other
That is wrong on two different levels.If high school was shortened, the students wouldn't reach a level of maturity that they would need to enter college.
Ok, you're right. When I actually check my math, I find that I get age 13.I don't exactly see how a student could graduate high school at the age of 12
I'm talking about taking summer courses to expedite the process.So unless you are talking about changing the set up of every grade,
That is wrong on two different levels.
1. The last thing I think of when I think "mature" is college.
2. Kids can gain the maturity they need a lot easier if they are shoved into adulthood at an early age. For example, when Abraham Lincoln's mother died when he was nine years old, Abe had to step up to the plate and fulfill all her duties. When he was 18, he had been living as a man for nine years, and he was used to it.
Are you starting to see where I'm going with this?
No, I do not agree to that.Do you agree that an 18 year old is more mature than a 13 year old?
Yes, but that only works when you don't have Mommy and Daddy to bail you out of everything. That begins at eightte... no wait, it begins when you become of age, whether "of age" is 18, 13, or, in Harry Potter's case, when he was just a baby.Of course there are cases where a 16 year old is more mature than a 30 year old, but generally speaking, the older you are the more mature you are and that is because you have time to adjust to new life experiences.
You can still do that.High school isn't just about education, socializing is a huge aspect of it too.
Yeah, you can't tell them anything because they won't listen. Best get them out of your hair quickly, and let them know that you aren't bluffing.Think about how teenagers are between the ages 14 and 16, they are brutal
They would if the humbling experience of adulthood had forced them to think in a mature manner.there is no way they would be mature enough to handle college level courses.
That's why I wanted to give them the OPTION of taking summer courses.Also, think of the mindset of high school students, not all are on a path to succeed at that age.
There's something that happened in between.I wasn't thinking clear in high school, I didn't care about getting great grades, but then once I went to college I had matured. If you stick a student in college who isn't mature enough to realize that they need to do good, then they will most likely fail miserably.
Schools are already doing summer semesters for flunked students.What about the extra funding for this?
It won't.And how would this interfere with students who fall behind?
I'm not sure I follow you.What if student X moved ahead, but then he reached a level where he couldn't move forward, what would happen to him?
Sure there is.There is no way funding would be able to accommodate this system.
Many teachers already do.Also, who would want to teach year round for grade 2nd for example?
Have I ever denied that?Teachers put in a lot more work than people think.
...generally speaking, the older you are the more mature you are and that is because you have time to adjust to new life experiences. High school isn't just about education, socializing is a huge aspect of it too. Think about how teenagers are between the ages 14 and 16, they are brutal...there is no way they would be mature enough to handle college level courses. Also, think of the mindset of high school students, not all are on a path to succeed at that age. I wasn't thinking clear in high school, I didn't care about getting great grades, but then once I went to college I had matured. If you stick a student in college who isn't mature enough to realize that they need to do good, then they will most likely fail miserably.
who would want to teach year round for grade 2nd for example? Teachers put in a lot more work than people think. Teachers spend time during the summer preparing for the following year. I just don't see how this could realistically work. Besides, what's the rush?
13 is the age where teenagers start to turn rebelious against society. Making them actually take responsibility for their actions, like they have to do at 18 years old, is a good way to make them mature.
Adulthood is a humbling experience. No matter what you say to your adolescent children, they are never prepared for the other side of their 18th birthday. When it finally comes, it hits them like a freight train and catches them completely off guard.
How will taking courses at a quicker pace force this upon them?(there is no way they would be mature enough to handle college level courses.)
They would if the humbling experience of adulthood had forced them to think in a mature manner.
Summer semesters? Where I'm from it's summer classes, as in if you fail 2 you take 2, but not a full quarters worth which amounts to 6 or 7 classes.Schools are already doing summer semesters for flunked students.
Who would want to do anything year round? Being a second grade teacher is no tougher than being anything else. Teachers work very short hours compared to a lot of occupations, including mine.
My mom's a preschool teacher and she works during the summer preparing for the following year. She also spends the summer taking the courses that are required by teachers in order to keep your certification. They would need to get paid more in the year, funding is tight already for schools so how exactly will they cough up the money to increase their salaries? There's no way teachers would be on board with this without an increase in salary, and there's no way teachers would be on board with this period.
Ya, there's no way that garbage collectors would be on board with picking up our garbage during the summer either. No way.
Most of the time when someone says "they want stand for that", someone is wrong. I am involved with a charity that sells annoucements (like "shout outs") at certain events. We used to charge $1 each and we would typically sell about 300 per event. Two years ago we raised the price to $2, other charity volunteers said "the crowd won't stand for that", we sold the same 300. Last year we raised the price to $3, I was told that "the crowd want stand for that" we sold 300 again. Our admission price used to be $6, I suggested going up to $8 but I was told that "people wont stand for that", we comprised at $7 and had about the same number of people complaining as normal (about 10 people out of 6,000). I only regret we didn' go to $8 or more, you can bet we will this year.
Air travelers used to not have to pay for checked luggage. Customers said that they wouldn't stand for that, but they have.
People will stand for anything that is reasonable, whether it is their first choice or not. Working 40+ hrs a week 50 or so weeks a year is very reasonable. Teachers will stand for it.
Hey, if they want to work less I don't have any problem with that and if they want to work more I wouldn't have a problem with that either. They can be paid according to what they do. It's pretty much like that anyway, in our school district teachers who teach summer school get paid to do that, just like coaches, band directors, and other teachers who supervise after school programs get paid extra. Some district employees are 9 mth employees, some are 10 mth employees, some are year round employees, and they get paid accordingly. I am sure that there are a lot of teachers who would love the opportunity to work year round and be paid for it.
I have no suggestions as to how to pay for this - except for the possibility that it may actually pay for itself. If more parents are freed up to work full time jobs, they will make more money, our economy would be larger with more products being produced. The government would collect more tax revenue without having to increase taxes, and maybe this extra revenue can be used to pay for year round teachers.
You're not taking into consideration everything a teacher is required to do. For example, with this new system they would be teaching year round, when would they prepare for the material each year, when now it is done over the summer? Secondly, students are out of focus by the time summer comes around, my mom said by the end of May almost everything is useless to teach because her kids are too unfocused due to summer. Thirdly, when would teachers be able to take the courses they need in order to keep their certifications? My mom has taken an online class before, but once you reach a certain age the classes that you haven't already taken become limited, so you pretty much get stuck with whatever is available, which may not be online. Fourthly, in order for this to work you would need every teacher in every school district across the country to be on board...that seems pretty impossible. One of the reasons people want to become teachers is the time off they have in the summer. Lastly, the funding is the big issue. Schools are already cutting teachers left and right, there is no way funding would be available to implement this.
I am sure that teachers could manage to find time to prepare. Most of them use the same materials over and over again. I do agree that it is piss poor that materials arn't provided to them by the school. Could it be that students are out of focus because they know that they are going to be getting a 10 week break from school? Could it be that with year round school our students would remain focused year round? Just how many 2 day seminars are required each year to remain certified. My mother always took classes during the summer, but not to remain certified, she did it to earn her Masters so that she could make more money. Maybe should could have made more money by getting paid to teach during the summer instead of having to pay to take classes. Not every teacher would have to be on board, I already suggested an option for them to not have to work year round, regardless, if they were told that they have to work year round just like almost every other profession, I am quite sure that they would come aboard. The workplace is not a democracy, and it shouldn't be. Like you, I think the value of taking classes every year is somewhat dubious. Just how many classes does a 9th grade algebra teacher have to take? Did the teacher not learn 9th grade algebra in the ninth grade? One of the reasons that people want to become teachers is to teach, if you let them decide how much they would teach each year, some of them would decide to teach year round, others would only want to teach one day a year - between 10am and 10:15am. It's not up to them. If they want a part time job they can try their luck in another career field. Maybe instead of cutting teachers they should save cost by eleminating the insain benefits that they get, that should save a fortune.
You seem to be putting the preferance of the teacher (to work as little as possible) above the importance of the job that they are hired to do (educate our brats, um I mean children). Hey, what if we were talking about farmers here, you you be all for farmers taking the summer off, after all, it is really hot during the summer and they do have to work outside. We wouldn't want to inconvieniance the farmers just because we want to eat!
If you can afford it out of pocket, or get a private loan, it's a great way to expedite your degree, and your loans won't build as much interest.
No such thing as a private school loan anymore.
No, I do not agree to that.
13 is the age where teenagers start to turn rebelious against society. Making them actually take responsibility for their actions, like they have to do at 18 years old, is a good way to make them mature.
The REASON that they are more mature is because they are less sheltered.You don't agree that an 18 year-old is more mature than a 13 year-old? Woah! Seriously?
He has more education.They are on one fact alone. An 18 year-old has is more mature physically due to growing up and intellectually since the brain is more fully developed.
It is not unheard of for kids to have to grow up fast.This might be the first time that I have ever heard a person make the claim that you did. Seriously... whoa.
The REASON that they are more mature is because they are less sheltered.
He has more education.
It is not unheard of for kids to have to grow up fast.
In fact, Abe Lincoln's mother died when he was nine years old, and he had to spend the other half of what was supposed to be his childhood acting as an adult. He grew up to be one of the best presidents this country has ever had.
In fact, Abe Lincoln's mother died when he was nine years old, and he had to spend the other half of what was supposed to be his childhood acting as an adult. He grew up to be one of the best presidents this country has ever had.
He wasn't an orphan. He had a father who remarried. He had a pretty normal childhood.
He and his father didn't really get along well. They were very different people. He and his stepmother were close.
That is what I love about these debates... I didn't really know anything of Lincoln's childhood. I just read up on what you are stating there. Interesting stuff. Thanks.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?