Highschool drop out wannabes.

[Cainkane1]

When I was in school there were a number of kids who had flunked every class. They had flunked in grammar school and were put in highschool to get rid of them. Once in highschool they did nothing. They got into trouble and were unconcerned with being kicked out of school. Given the choice of being paddled or leaving school for a few days they were happy to leave the school. These unfortunants contributed nothing to the school so why have them there in the first place?

How do schools handle this these days?

 

[C_Felix]

This answer might be slightly off topic, but, here's my $.02.

The short answer is this: They don't do anything different. In the US, anyways.

In the US, we've bull-pooped ourselves into believing that everyone can go to college, everyone is smart, everyone can be a doctor and a lawyer (Notice how I didn't type "or a lawyer." I'm talking about being both at the same time!)

I started a paper about the edcuation system in Denmark with the following line from Caddyshack, "The world needs ditch diggers too."

Point is this. In Denmark they've figured out that there is no shame associated with being a mechanic. There's no shame associated with being a plumber. In the US, to some extent, there is a stigma attached to being "just a mechanic."

I'm one-third done with my thrid college degree. I still need someone to rebuild my transmission when it dies. I'm sure Bill Gates has someone to fix his tranny as well.

So...what happens to them? Not the right thing. Not everyone is cut out for college. They need to be sent to trade schools and pushed in a different direction than what a "traditional" high school can offer.

 

[Fnord]

Promote them up and out. Maybe they can enlist, maybe they go to prison. Maybe they turn themselves around and get a G.E.D. (and maybe Bigfoot rides an invisible flying donkey).

 

[slingblade]

Handle what? How do you make a child learn when the child doesn't want to learn, doesn't find school important, doesn't want to be there?

There's only so much anyone has ever been able to do. You can't force learning on anyone.

How it's "handled" depends on the individual case, of course. Do I need to go into all the various reasons why any given individual might have difficulties in any particular environment? So, you figure out what the difficulties are for that individual, and you do your best to address them if you can.

"Why have them there in the first place" is easily solved: in most states, school attendance is compulsory until age 16. After that point, if you don't want to be in school, no one can make you be there.

Alternatives today include in-school mentoring programs, alternative schools, homeschooling, long-distance education, and the usual suspension/expulsion.

But there will always be mere seat-warmers in any school, just as there are mere seat-warmers at work, trying to do the least they can do for the most they can get. That's just part of human nature.

 

[Cainkane1]

I like C Felixes idea the best but there is one problem. Many of these kids can't even read. I don't know if they are retarded or what. Some of them obviously were retarded but during my lifetime I have known retarded people who can read and write a bit. These kids can't even do that. I was in art class once and some poor kid was trying to imitate my horrible drawings ie I can't draw and the poor soul was actually copying my garbage.

Maybe these kids could be trained to changed tires under close supervision but be a mechanic? Nope. I think most of these unfortunants go on welfare.

 

[TragicMonkey]

Let us harvest their organs for our own use! Just because Johnny can't read good doesn't mean his kidneys wouldn't be useful to somebody else.

 

[blutoski]

When I was in school there were a number of kids who had flunked every class. They had flunked in grammar school and were put in highschool to get rid of them. Once in highschool they did nothing. They got into trouble and were unconcerned with being kicked out of school. Given the choice of being paddled or leaving school for a few days they were happy to leave the school. These unfortunants contributed nothing to the school so why have them there in the first place?

How do schools handle this these days?

I think the answer would depend on the district, or even the school.
It usually involves dealing with the parents and their expectations, too.

This thread relates to another one in this section: [Is Free Thinking a Mental Illness?]

 

[slingblade]

I like C Felixes idea the best but there is one problem. Many of these kids can't even read. I don't know if they are retarded or what. Some of them obviously were retarded but during my lifetime I have known retarded people who can read and write a bit. These kids can't even do that. I was in art class once and some poor kid was trying to imitate my horrible drawings ie I can't draw and the poor soul was actually copying my garbage.

Maybe these kids could be trained to changed tires under close supervision but be a mechanic? Nope. I think most of these unfortunants go on welfare.

Which are you talking about, here? Kids who cannot learn, due to some disability, or kids who will not learn, for whatever reason?

They are two different things.

 

[Checkmite]

When I was in school there were a number of kids who had flunked every class. They had flunked in grammar school and were put in highschool to get rid of them. Once in highschool they did nothing. They got into trouble and were unconcerned with being kicked out of school. Given the choice of being paddled or leaving school for a few days they were happy to leave the school. These unfortunants contributed nothing to the school so why have them there in the first place?

How do schools handle this these days?

Once they're 18, they're informed that they're old enough to withdraw without parental permission.

That's pretty much the end of the high school's dealing with the situation.

 

[†= Crap!]

I was one of those "bench warmers" who eventually dropped out of high school. There were plenty of reasons for this. Because I came from a fairly poor family I was subject to some of the worst schools the LAUSD had to offer. From Junior High onward school felt more like being in a juvenile detention facility than a learning institution. They were dreary concrete buildings with cages over the windows surrounded by 10 foot chain-link fences and you were treated more like an inmate than a pupil.

Violence was high. I got into fights on a weekly basis. This was a predominately black and hispanic school, and me being one of the few white kids made me a target. Sorry if that's not PC but that's how it was. I'm not a particularly violent person as I haven't gotten even close to being in any kind of fight since I've been out of school.

Kids don't inherently grasp the value of a formal education especially in regards to the advantages that come with it in adulthood. They need adults to instill that into them, but many kids just don't get that. I didn't. My parents strategy with my educations was to just threaten punishment if I did bad. That kind of worked through elementary and junior high, but by the time I got to high school I wasn't at all scared of my parents or any punishment they could dish out. So after 3 semesters of high school I was done with all the horrendous BS I associated with school and there was nothing anyone could do to get me to go back.

The shame of this is that from a very young age I was immensely interested in science and history. My favorite thing to watch on TV were science documentaries. I loved going to museums. I read Carl Sagan's Cosmos in the 6th grade. But none of this interest translated into school. Science was fun, interesting, and challenging. School was none of those.

I did eventually get my diploma through continuation school right before I turned 18, but every thing I know is self taught. I learned nothing in school.

 

[Wolrab]

I'm sure Bill Gates has someone to fix his tranny as well.

I would imagine he uses a surgeon for that. I can't figure out why though, Bill Gates can't get pregnant, even by accident.

 

[Jim_MDP]

Let us harvest their organs for our own use! Just because Johnny can't read good doesn't mean his kidneys wouldn't be useful to somebody else.

Even fewer miles on his eyes... good value.

 

[Mark R]

How do schools handle this these days?

Unfortunately, still poorly.

I teach at a school with a high percentage of at-risk students at the high school level (by they way, being labeled at risk does not help a student's confidence; the ones that care to succeed, anyways).

Compulsory education is one of those ideas that looks good on paper, but when you see what it looks like in realitym it is a mess. End result is kids forced to school who only want to socialize, cause distractions and enjoy preventing other kids from learning. This type of student is not too frequent (in my experience), but it only takes one to cause serious problems in a classroom.

The United States really does have a one-size-fits-all mentality when it comes to education. We have this high ideal to prepare everybody for college, except only a minority of students will graduate from college. The majority of students will not even attend or drop out before completing a degree. The education system is letting these students down by not informing them of options that may better fit their abilities and goals. For example trade schools. And in a time when some unscrupulous trade schools are ripping students off with wild promises, it would be great if these options could be further explored and help students differentiate between the good and the bad.

Countries like Japan and Germany do a much better job of tracking students into the areas the kids prefer (academic or trade skill). Of course these countries also have downsides to their education systems.

I do not think we should get rid of compulsory education, but we really should invest in nonacademic opportunities for kids who do not think college is for them. There are many skilled jobs out there that require training or certification as opposed to a degree. But as a tell my students, once you go down that path and find you do not like it, you are up the proverbial creek without a paddle because you are not trained to do anything else.

Anyway, that is my 2 cents.

 

[Mark R]

I did eventually get my diploma through continuation school right before I turned 18, but every thing I know is self taught. I learned nothing in school.

Are you saying you did not learn anything in school? Or do you mean that school did not offer anything substantial that would have benefited you in any way?

Or do you mean both?

 

[†= Crap!]

Are you saying you did not learn anything in school? Or do you mean that school did not offer anything substantial that would have benefited you in any way?

Or do you mean both?

I'm saying I learned nothing in school. Almost everything I know is from reading on my own. I taught myself basic algebra in my early twenties.

I'm sure there is plenty substantial stuff I could have benefited from in a better school, and if I was less concerned with being assaulted or having my stuff stolen.

 

[Cainkane1]

Which are you talking about, here? Kids who cannot learn, due to some disability, or kids who will not learn, for whatever reason?

They are two different things.

For whatever reason they didn't learn. The end result was the same. I didn't have a reason to check their abilities and it wasn't my problem.

 

[ddt]

When I was in school there were a number of kids who had flunked every class. They had flunked in grammar school and were put in highschool to get rid of them. Once in highschool they did nothing. They got into trouble and were unconcerned with being kicked out of school. Given the choice of being paddled or leaving school for a few days they were happy to leave the school. These unfortunants contributed nothing to the school so why have them there in the first place?

How do schools handle this these days?

I never understood the idea of having a single-tracked secondary education system either, as the US has. By comparison, the Netherlands has a three/four track system from the age of 12 (wiki link), ranging from a combination of trade school and general education (VMBO) to a general education preparing for university (VWO).

I do understand the need for compulsory education. Some basic skills are simply needed in this society. Virtually nobody "makes" it in society without, e.g., being able to read. The car mechanic has to read the instruction manuals from the manufacturer, the cleaning lady must be able to read the label of the detergent she uses, etc; not to speak of the things you have to read to just be a citizen. Of course, those basic skills go further than just being able to read and write.

Many kids don't see that need when they're in school themselves - who'd have thought that high school kids would not have the judgement to see how the knowledge they can gain at that moment would be beneficial 5, 10, 20 years down the line? Unfortunately, some of their parents, especially from socially poor backgrounds themselves, don't see that need either.

As a society, you can make a choice. Either let the kids drop out prematurely and have little chance to contribute to society by a honest-to-god career, and high chance to either live on welfare, to beg in the streets or to become a (petty) criminal. Or go to pains to keep the kids in the system and give them a decent starting point for a professional career.

I know what my choice is.

 

[Fnord]

Some of those chavs (high school drop out wannabes)were also bullies. Many of those who bullied me now work for other nerds that they used to bully, if they can find a job at all.

 

[drkitten]

I never understood the idea of having a single-tracked secondary education system either, as the US has.

It's fairer to the students. And by "fairer" I mean in the traditional "anyone can grow up to be President if he just pulls himself up by his bootstraps" American definition of "fair"; unlimited social mobility if you happen to be bright, ambitious, and totally sociopathic.

Almost every culture has its myths of the poor-but-bright student who can't afford to attend school but gets a job sweeping floors at night and reading the chalkboards after the "real" students leave and by the third reel is leaving all the rich kids in the dust. Most European school systems, perhaps especially in the UK, were very strongly class-based, where "his name has been down for this school since before he was born," because every Riddle of Riddleham has always gone to King's College, Riddleham. And, of course, KCR also had much better facilities than the local chapel school precisely because the Dukes of Riddleshire had been funding it for six hundred years, while the chapel had to make do with what they could.

Putting all students into the same system and even the same school avoids this problem; everyone has the same opportunity and the bright/motivated/sociopathic ones will be able to take appropriate advantage of that opportunity.

By comparison, the Netherlands has a three/four track system from the age of 12 (wiki link), ranging from a combination of trade school and general education (VMBO) to a general education preparing for university (VWO).

And what happens if someone reads Cosmos their first year of VMBO and decides that they really want to become a cosmologist?

Many kids don't see that need when they're in school themselves - who'd have thought that high school kids would not have the judgement to see how the knowledge they can gain at that moment would be beneficial 5, 10, 20 years down the line?

Which is why American schools try to give everyone the knowledge they could need/want later, even if they just want to be janitors and mechanics.

 

[ZirconBlue]

I never understood the idea of having a single-tracked secondary education system either, as the US has.

I'm not sure it's (universally) true that we have a "single-tracked" system. I went to a "county" high school in Kentucky. It was "single-tracked" in that the end goal for everyone was a high school diploma, but there were several routes to that goal. The school offered 4 diplomas, depending on the coursework taken ("General", "Pre-College", "Advanced", and "Commonwealth"). The school partnered with another nearby school to offer vocational schooling options, which applied toward the students' diploma.