Laws concerning High School drop outs

[jnettie]

I'm watching Oprah right now, and it's about the High School drop out rates as well as conditions in schools and resources available. She said something interesting. From Oprah's Website (http://www2.oprah.com/tows/slide/200604/20060411/slide_20060411_284_107.jhtml):
According to our Oprah Winfrey Show-Time magazine poll, 62 percent of respondents said the government should forbid students who are under 18 from dropping out of school. In most states, 16-year-olds are legally permitted to drop out of school.

In Scott and Grace's home state of Indiana, a tough new law seeks to limit dropout rates. Children under 18 who drop out can be stripped of driver's licenses and work permits unless they have legitimate health, financial or legal reasons for leaving school.

What do you think? Half of me says this is a good idea, while the other half says it's treating the symptoms (drop out rates) but not the desiese (lack of resources in many schools).

Discuss!

[Julss05]

It could be a good law, but I don't think it's treating the root of the problem which should be answering why so many teenagers drop out, and what can be done to prevent it. I'm sure some drop out because of poor grades, but I think it goes beyond that starting with problems in their personal lives. Who would be held responsible if this law was passed?

I dropped out of high school at 17. I didn't plan to. I had good grades and friends. I was a rebellious teenager and my dad decided he wasn't going to put up with it so he kicked me out. I do think it is WAY too easy for kids to drop out. In my case I simply told the counselor that I was moving out of state. It didn't require any parental signature before signing myself out of school with transcripts. I had a friend take me to the train station and was out of town that easily. My plan was to move back to my hometown and go to school there but that never happened. I needed a guardian to enroll me and my dad refused to transfer guardianship. I even had my aunt who works as a teacher try to get me back in school but could not. So I gave up and had to work full time to support myself. It shouldn't be easy to drop out and almost impossible to re-enroll before 18!

The law might lower drop out rates, but it might do more harm than good. I could see the law promoting more runaways and most certaintly prevent ones from re-enrolling for fear of punishment. An alternative might be for the government to set standard procedures in place making it impossible for students to disenroll without approval by their guardian. If anything the government should make it easier for students to re-enroll if they do drop out. I think many drop-outs realize the mistake they made but feel like it is impossible to go back because of all the hoops they must jump through.

[Asha]

i believe that one way to decrease drop out rates is more early childhood intervention. it is very clear before 3rd grade which students are struggling academically and behaviorally but very little is done to get those students the extra help they need. all the focus is put on the older, testing grades. it is sad to say but by the time the children reach the testing grades and if they don't have a good grasp of reading they are already disillusioned with school. then they are only taught test taking strategies and not really fundamentals of learning how to actually read. by the time the kids have reached high school and they don't know how to read, they have checked out. its very sad.

i am basing what i said on 6 years of teaching in the inner city.

[SingleWhiteFemale]

Who the heck is going to decide what "legitimate health, financial or legal reasons" are? That's where I think there will be a problem... it may not be fairly applied across the board.

I hate to sound as if a kid doesn't deserve an education, but why force a 16 yr old to be there if they're going to be a disruption and make it impossible for others (who want to be there) to learn?

If a kid who drops out is working, and then under this stripped of a work permit/drivers license, what the heck are they going to do all day? Cause trouble all over the neighborhood, turn to drugs/crime, something to fill that waste of time?

And the kids who are dropping out by just plain not showing up, are we going to go after their behinds to drag them into a classroom? Or start fining/jailing parents?

[Asha]

I hate to sound as if a kid doesn't deserve an education, but why force a 16 yr old to be there if they're going to be a disruption and make it impossible for others (who want to be there) to learn?

i have heard teachers in the inner city say that teaching h.s. is not as bad as junior high school bc they don't force kids to come. so most of the kids who attend class really want to be there and behavior problems are less. i taught one summer in junior high and i had some kids who were 15. the older kids literally sat in the class and did nothing the whole time. the principals were happy that at least those kids weren't causing a huge disruption with me bc two of the summer school teachers before me quit bc the kids were so disruptive.

just making a law won't solve the real problems. they need to have more extensive psychological services. at my old school, there was only one psychologist who came three times a week for a student population of 1,000. the guidance counselors were a joke bc we only had two and one counselor's job was just to take care of attendance issues. the counselors would get mad at me when i referred kids to them. they also need more extensive tutoring services as well.

[jnettie]

That was my gut feeling, too. It certainly seems like a good idea on paper...and Oprah sure thought it was a good idea. But there are just so many other issues to deal with first.

[roadrunner]

My experience with dropouts (I'm a HS teacher) is that the problem begins LONG before they get to high school. Home environmental issues seem to play the largest role.

Maybe the parents should be the ones to face consequences if the kids drop out?

[Asha]

Maybe the parents should be the ones to face consequences if the kids drop out?

they already do. many of them probably end up supporting their kids long after they have become adults bc they can't get a good job bc of being a drop out. also, i am sure they face enough emotional consequences knowing that they should have done more to help their kids. also, some of them don't even realize they had a negative impact on the education of their children, and punishing them won't help them realize that.

Home environmental issues seem to play the largest role.

ita with this.

[Asha]

Oprah sure thought it was a good idea. But there are just so many other issues to deal with first.

i am sure she means well. she's like most people who don't know much about education - they don't have a clue of what to do to really help children learn, but they sure do have ideas that are appealing to others but don't really work just like "no child left behind."

[roadrunner]

they already do. many of them probably end up supporting their kids long after they have become adults bc they can't get a good job bc of being a drop out. also, i am sure they face enough emotional consequences knowing that they should have done more to help their kids. also, some of them don't even realize they had a negative impact on the education of their children, and punishing them won't help them realize that.


Actually, my experience has been the opposite. The dropouts that I've dealt with have been raised by deadbeat parents who barely supported them while they were growing up, let alone after they dropout. Most of the ones I know end up on Social Assistance. :( And, very few of these parents seemed to give a hoot whether or not the kid wanted to stay in school.

I do think that more accountibility should be placed on the parents, as opposed to entirely on these 'children'.

But, my experience is likely different, as I live in a fairly small town on the East coast of Canada.

[Asha]

I do think that more accountibility should be placed on the parents, as opposed to entirely on these 'children'.

i completely agree, but i like you said it should be started much earlier in their education. i think its too late to try to change a person's parenting style when their kids are already in high school.

[lawyerlee]

I would support the change, but only as a larger package of educational reforms. I would also be in favor of an exception to the rule for those who complete the GED, but only once they've done it, not in anticipation of them doing it.

[artist]

Sorry, I don't support a law like that.

-Pay teachers enough
-Properly fund schools
-Have enough desks, books, chairs, computers, lockers, etc.
-Fix broken ceilings, bathrooms, etc.
-Make "no child left behind" more than just some stupid phony half-assed political progranda
-Don't make teachers and students waste so much of their precious time on things like standardized tests. Let the teachers teach for God's sake!
-Don't put ALL the emphasis on math and the football team. Encourage and fund things like drama, music, art, spelling bees, Humanities, etc.
-Have enough adults in schools so that all students are well known by 1 or more adults
-Don't cut programs like VISTA and AmeriCorps as we often provide a lot of excellent educational programs for students in poverty...and get paid poverty wages to provide those services. It really doesn't cost a lot to pay a VISTA worker, but cutting funding for such programs does so much damange in the long run
-Many of these programs are dirt cheap to run. For example, the program I coordinate (College for Kids) is very cheap. The costs are things like a bus for the kids for a day, a few folders, name tags, photocopies, pencils, maybe a couple of other supplies (art supplies, etc.), and having someone coordinate it (such as a VISTA who is paid hardly anything)
-Realize that living in a safe little bubble of affluence and "good schools" doesn't make problems go away. You can't really escape problems, so why not pay taxes to make society a better place?
-It makes no sense for such a wealthy nation to NOT be able to adequately fund and provide decent education
-Don't make a person's entire education come down to some stupid tests when all tests really test is a person's ability to pass a test. Assess students on a variety of factors. Encourage creative thinking as opposed to drones who fill in blanks and bubbles and parrot back when they heard earlier.
-Think outside the box
-Give young people some credit. They really ARE capable. Just because a student is poor for example doesn't mean he/she is not just as smart or capable as a rich student. (One K-6 school I work with gets the kindergarteners reading rather than waiting a year just because that's the standard thing to do. Many of the students at this school are poor and many of them are minorities. They are VERY bright students capable of a lot.)
-Be an adult who cares about a child whether or not you are the parent or even the teacher of that child. Make a point to care and give a damn.
-Give positive feedback and encourage students
-Don't only teach to one learning style
-Don't ignore students with disabilities; including learning disabilties, math phobias, test anxiety, ADD, etc. Take the time to accomodate such students. Often they are extremely smart people, they just need teachers with a little bit of patience.
-Don't only have strict acadamia. Offer some practical life skills (ie: budget skills, auto repair, career skills, etc.) Not only does this seem like common sense to prepare young people for the real world, but also offering some "hands on" trade/skills types of classes can be a nice alternative or addition to tradition college or college prep so that people are not limited to McDonald's god forbid they don't go on to college
-Politicians ought to actually pay attention to young people and young voters. They might actually learn something.