Raising the school leaving age. . .


War Hero
to 18. Should it be done?

Personally I don't think so. For some people til 16 is enough (or too much sometimes) and they'd much rather go out and earn money.

Keeping people in education when they don't want to be will just put unnessescary strain on the education system, and they will just underperform.
Doesn't it all depend on what is being taught? As far as I see it, young people today don't have have enough respect for anybody, be that themselves, or others. Why don't they bin GCSEs, and replace 6 months of the course with a residential, full time weekday course fun by a group seperate form the military but in a military fashion, ie national service, without the conscription?

For example, those people who think it is acceptable to steal would steal once, be found out, be punished and wouldn't want to steal again.

Of course this would cost a lot and it would be unpopular with the liberals, but isnt' this what the country needs?

Aslo, bring back the cane, all the way up to 18! And further. That and public stocks...


War Hero
you'd be surprised at how many students would like to see a reintroduction of national service (not to be confused with military service). It would solve an vast number of problems in todays society.

I do hope your joking in your last sentance though.
The whole point of the exercise is not to give them more education but to take them off the unemployed statistics. It would also mean putting more money into education which would have to be found by either raising taxes or cutting other budgets . Luckily there seems to be no shortage of money to throw in that direction, much better than "wasting" it on defence .
Keeping them in school until 18 i dont think would fix things. Vast majority of cases are that they just plain and simply dont like school, they want to learn but not in that fashion/enviroment. Increasing the ability to transfer over to training programs for jobs such as mechanics, joiners and whatever but still classing it as education and keeping them there until 18 yes.

As for the National Service, it is an idea. But thing that would have to change is that its completely separate from the regular army, but the option at the end to transfer over, similar to the AFC (Army Foundation College). Could tie it into the education front similar to what they do in Russia, if you insist in leaving at 16 then off to National Service you go. But stay in formal training/education until 18 and you dont need to do it unless you want to. And again with how they do it in Germany, no previous police record (including juvenile) or history of trouble then options such as social care and other civil servant options open up for those looking for careers in those areas.
Depends, of course, by what is meant by "being in school"! Seems pretty pointless insisting everyone remain at school until 18 if it means just more of the same required pre 16, but if it means properly funded, appropriately focused vocational training with plenty of "hands on" real workplace experience, pay, rigorous testing of competencies etc etc, then it may have some value. Unfortunately, however, as others have noted, this is more likely to be yet another headline grabbing exercise designed to keep unemployment stats "favourable"!

In truth, at present, we already have too many youngsters in the 14-16 age group kept in schools when being there serves no real purpose: IMO, "letting go" of about 10-20% of this age group would solve a helluva lot of problems in the educational system.

What we should do is introduce rigorous tests in basic competencies - English/ literacy, maths/ numeracy, "civics", communication & life skills - and allow anyone aged 14-16 who has passed these to leave school if they wish. If, however, you can't pass by 16, then you have to stay on in school in a remedial unit until you can!

Forcing everyone to stay in education until 18 will, if implemented, have disasterous effects on our schools, esp those currently struggling to cope with large numbers of disaffected youngsters in economically/ socially "disadvantaged" areas, and even more so those trying to cope with large numbers of pupils whose first language is not English! IMO, yet another brilliant idea from the educated idiots currently running the country who simply have no idea of how things really work "on the ground".

A former pupil of mine works as a "policy adviser" at the DFES: very clever academically (3 degrees from top notch universities etc), but he has NEVER HAD ANY JOB apart from the current one! He was one of those rare youngsters (these days) who never had even a part-time job in 6th form or at uni! He has never trained, let alone worked, as a teacher - his only "educational experience" was as a pupil in a grammar school & as a student at "elite" universities. I cannot for the life of me think how he is remotely qualified to advise on educational policy, but there he is - sitting pretty, and on a larger salary than most classroom teachers earn. Fu*!in' ridiculous - but very revealing about how/ why we're in the state we're in.

Similar threads