Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Why is he taking calculus? Is it required for graduation?
Most high school classes are passable by just about any student who tries. I'd pull physics and calculus out (and if he's being made to take them, I'd be arguing with the school on that) but I don't know a single school that requires them for graduation. We require chemistry (or physics) for graduation and a college prep chemistry course is a stretch for many students which is why the school offers a lower level chemistry course.
He's not taking calculus. I was using that as an example.
I'm not making excuses. I'm just saying not every kid is going to college. That was the point of this thread and I was using my son as an example of a non-college bound child. Not every child SHOULD go to college. It's not for everyone. I'm just frustrated with the lack of options for students. They are trying to make all kids fit into the same mold. You teach chemistry, why would I need chemistry if I'm not going to college? That's my point.
I did go to college and I still never needed chemistry.
Why would social anxiety prevent someone from seeing a tutor? I would think a classroom full of people would be more daunting to a person with social anxiety than a one-on-one situation with a tutor. If the anxiety is that much of an obstacle, he needs professional help. The earlier the help the better.
I didn't know if this should go here or in the parenting forum but since it has more to do with school I figured it might be better here.
Not all kids are college bound so why are the high schools making it more difficult for kids to graduate? Why are there no options for the kids who aren't going to college and want to learn a trade? The school my son attends used to have a trade program and a college program. They have eliminated the trade program so the college prep one is the only option.
?
I agree... Not only are some students not college bound but there are a lot of students who are smart and are ABLE to get into college but simply don't have the money, and don't want to take out loans they'll never be able to pay. This is one reason why i think the programs at my school are amazing... In my school there are academies and houses; the break down is like this:
Aarts Academy and Humanity house are just there lol.
Liberal Arts Academy: here you can
~ Graduate as a chef's assistant
~Graduate with a automotive technician assistance degree
~ Graduate with a degree in construction (assistant)
~ Welding degrees (idk about the rest of these)
~Cabinet making
~ Fashion Design (many internships)
~ Cosmeotology (degree)
~ 180 hour nursing internship which qualifies you as an assitant nurse.
In addition to this,the school has a daycare for the community run by the seniors and a teacher, a salon on campus open to the students during free period, and to the community at a discounted rate, an auto body shop run by the seniors and a teacher for fix ups on student cars and community cars and it is free for in district employees.
I thinkall the school should offer programs like these, my school is the only school in a few districts with these programs.
I just thought I'd chime in to say that my father attended a vocational high school in the '50s and worked as a draftsman/tool designer for the first few years of his career.* He knows trigonometry inside and out, much better, in fact, than his college-educated daughter. I think we do our kids a disservice when we imply that they don't need to challenge themselves because "they're not college material."
*He went back to earn his Bachelor's degree and a couple of Master's degrees over the subsequent decade.
I just thought I'd chime in to say that my father attended a vocational high school in the '50s and worked as a draftsman/tool designer for the first few years of his career.* He knows trigonometry inside and out, much better, in fact, than his college-educated daughter. I think we do our kids a disservice when we imply that they don't need to challenge themselves because "they're not college material."
*He went back to earn his Bachelor's degree and a couple of Master's degrees over the subsequent decade.
This is exactly why I don't worry about kids learning a trade when they're only 14 or 15. They can start working when they are 16 and start earning money for college. By the time they've matured enough to benefit from college, they could have a decade of experience and the money to avoid student loans. It's almost never too late to go to college in America.
He's not taking calculus. I was using that as an example.
I'm not making excuses. I'm just saying not every kid is going to college. That was the point of this thread and I was using my son as an example of a non-college bound child. Not every child SHOULD go to college. It's not for everyone. I'm just frustrated with the lack of options for students. They are trying to make all kids fit into the same mold. You teach chemistry, why would I need chemistry if I'm not going to college? That's my point.
I did go to college and I still never needed chemistry.
Not planning on going to college doesn't mean you shouldn't be trying to graduate from high school. There is a world of difference between what it takes to graduate and a college prep program. Students who are not college bound are free to choose classes on lower levels. The minimum for high school graduation isn't rocket science.
Just because you didn't use a subject doesn't mean you didn't use the brain you developed learning that subject. Every time we learn something new, we train our brains to think in different ways. It is the brian we develop learning what we do that we benefit most from. The fact is, we forget something like 95% of what we learn. As to chemistry, our world is chemical in nature. I don't consider that bad to learn about.
Personally, I prefer texts like Chemistry in the Community that take a consumer approach to the subject for the non college bound set. The error I see is too many students choosing the upper track when they don't intend on putting in the work to succeed.
And you are making excuses. Seriously, I have never failed a student who actually tried. They've all managed to pass. Not with flying colors but they passed. It's the ones who don't try who fail. Seriously, we're only asking that a student learn 60% of the material to pass.
I do think there should be a basic curriculum you must pass to graduate and it should build and diverge from there. I have nothing against voc-ed programs but students should still learn the basics. Again, we're talking learning 60% of the material to pass. No one is expecting everyone to take calculus or to get all A's.
One thing to keep in mind is we don't know who is and who is not college material until later. Everyone, including me, would have told you I was not college material when I was in high school. I graduated from college #1 in my chemical engineering major.
It does not hurt to ask students to take classes they may struggle with. They might learn something in the process.
I just thought I'd chime in to say that my father attended a vocational high school in the '50s and worked as a draftsman/tool designer for the first few years of his career.* He knows trigonometry inside and out, much better, in fact, than his college-educated daughter. I think we do our kids a disservice when we imply that they don't need to challenge themselves because "they're not college material."
*He went back to earn his Bachelor's degree and a couple of Master's degrees over the subsequent decade.
And, for whatever reason, vocational schools and trades were relegated to second-class status. And now, as a country, we are paying for it, literally.
OP: I completely empathize; I can only imagine how frustrating it must be for you and your DS. If I were you, I would hire the tutors necessary to get him to finish high school; much as college is not a necessity, a high school diploma is, he at least needs that, no matter what he does. I would also try to get him involved in an apprenticeship with someone who working in a trade: carpentry, painting, mechanics, or maybe even computers, depending on his interests and abilities. Everyone is good at something.
A good vocational program is worth its weight in gold. Unfortunately educational programs are being decided at federal levels by highly educated people who never had any vocational exposure or interest. They are overly reliant on "research" that is often self-serving.
IMHO that this misguided narrow focus is one of the prime reasons we are looking at high unemployment. Vocational training is needed in many specific skill areas to meet the technological and infrastructure needs of the 21st Century.
There is a need for more math and science but college isn't the only way to meet that need. Many of the needed areas have very specific applications and could be taught in other ways than the traditional college path that turns off too many.
A good vocational program is worth its weight in gold. Unfortunately educational programs are being decided at federal levels by highly educated people who never had any vocational exposure or interest. They are overly reliant on "research" that is often self-serving.
IMHO that this misguided narrow focus is one of the prime reasons we are looking at high unemployment. Vocational training is needed in many specific skill areas to meet the technological and infrastructure needs of the 21st Century.
There is a need for more math and science but college isn't the only way to meet that need. Many of the needed areas have very specific applications and could be taught in other ways than the traditional college path that turns off too many.
I agree that there is more than one way to teach math and science and that we should be offering more than one way. What we shouldn't be doing is excusing kids from taking classes that might challenge them. You never know where that might lead.
Unfortunately, it is parents who want THEIR child on the college bound track until it turns out their child can't handle the college bound track and then they cry foul. Just try telling a parent of a 9th grader that their child belongs on the voc-ed track. That same parent would be furious by 12th grade that their child was FORCED onto a college bound track.
Every year I have parents who insist their child belongs in college prep chemistry instead of consumer chemistry who, later, throw a fit to get their child moved down into consumer chemistry. These same parents balk at entrance exams to get into the higher classes.
But sometimes kids just dont get something or it is not at all interesting to them.
I believe the bolded above is the KEY to the comparatively mediocre American k-12 educational system when compared to what is done in other countries.
America is trying too hard to make school pleasurable. Easy. Colorful. hands-on and game-like - all while introducing an enormous amount of information FAST and SUPERFICIALLY.
It is what, in my opinion, distinguishes the system from that of other countries where teaching is done more rigorously but with fewer bells and whistles and where students are expected to "'suffer" even through tedious, pains-taking or difficult levels of work.
The vast majority of children are naturally NOT interested in difficult school work. Only born-geniuses are and Lord knows those are very few and far between. The child who will just not give up until he solves I don't know what kind of crazy math equation - all without being expected to! - is a very rare child.
But that doesn't mean children should not be expected to "suffer" through it until they reach the other side where mastery gives that happy sense of accomplishment. Then children say "oh, this is really easy!" just to congratulate themselves - when it actually was not all that easy in the first place; but the habit of putting up with the effort and the discomfort associated with rigorous academics eventually MADE IT easy.
Although I DO see the good intentions associated with the American approach to education, the effort of trying to make any learning process fun and entertaining is not doing any favors to the quality of schooling in America. It tends to teach students some skills without a solid theoretical foundation.
This is where I think the failure resides.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lincolnian
Vocational training is needed in many specific skill areas to meet the technological and infrastructure needs of the 21st Century.
There is a need for more math and science but college isn't the only way to meet that need. Many of the needed areas have very specific applications and could be taught in other ways than the traditional college path that turns off too many.
And this is also very, very true for those who are not college material but are rather the applied, skilled type. Too many students who are CLEARLY not college-material enter colleges today.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
That same parent would be furious by 12th grade that their child was FORCED onto a college bound track. 
These same parents balk at entrance exams to get into the higher classes.
