<p>Should the U.S. consider a two tier high school diploma, like some other countries do (e.g., Germany). Maybe secondary school education up to 11th grade is just fine for most people. If a kid wants to be a plumber or beautician, then why force him/her to factor polynomials and study French. He/she is losing a year of income by being forced to stay in high school thru grade 12.</p>
<p>Wouldn't it be better that the non-academically inclined kid graduate with an 11-year diploma than drop out of school entirely and have no credential at all. Without a diploma, the kid is SOL for employment opportunities. </p>
<p>The finances of public school districts everywhere are in dire straits. Are taxpayers throwing money down a rathole to provide education for kids who possibly don't need as much as they are being forced to take.</p>
<p>Such a proposal would need to figure out the details like:</p>
<p>At what grade levels are tracking decisions made?</p>
<p>Can a student change tracks, or do the curricula of the different tracks diverge so much that changing is not realistically possible?</p>
<p>There are plenty of kids who have no idea what to major in when entering college and plenty more HS kids who have no idea what they’ll do when they’re done with HS. It’s not like they magically know when in 9th grade exactly how their life will map out. There are also a lot of ‘late bloomers’ who aren’t so academically inclined in 9th, 10th, 11th, or even 12th grade yet when they graduate HS and reality starts to hit home that they now need to figure out what to do with their lives since the preordained part of their life that required no decision on their part is done and now it’s on them to determine their own path. When faced with this reality a lot of those non-academically inclined students switch gears and now want to go to college, buckle down, and can do well.</p>
<p>I think HS shouldn’t be determining their lives but rather, enabling them to move ahead, much like what parents should be doing - enabling. When one decides to inhibit that by selecting a particular track too early in a person’s life, they’re not enabling but rather disabling.</p>
<p>I know several people that graduated after 11th grade and went to a trade school! They finished all of their credits quickly and moved on, because they knew that college wasn’t the right choice for them :)</p>
<p>Looking at the graduation requirements for my old (public) high school, the number of courses required can just barely fit in three years of fully booked schedules (maximum normal class periods plus one year with optional “zero period”). The math requirement for graduating high school appears to be just two years (e.g. algebra 1 and geometry). Four years of English could be a gating factor, but there appear to be some non-sequential options available. A decent number of non-college-prep electives like auto shop, culinary arts, construction, etc. do exist. So a student who knows that s/he is not heading off to college for a bachelor’s degree could already do as you suggest.</p>
<p>I do think that many school systems need to offer more alternatives to the college bound diploma. Although some schools do have some more job-related course available, some of the students who might benefit most from them, may have less access to them because, due to the requirement to pass standardized tests, those students have to use the time allowed for an elective course to take remedial reading and/or other remedial courses, depending on requirements. While certainly all students do need to be able to read before they graduate, the reading level required might be something to review and adjust for a non-college bound diploma so that those students who have struggled in that area all through elementary and middle school, do not have to continue struggling through it in high school, when they could be better served with other training. Some of these requirements seem to create a system that those students are more likely to drop out of. To best serve all students, I believe schools need to have programs designed to make students job ready when they leave school system.</p>
<p>Most 17 year olds aren’t going to be able to find a job that justifies one less year of high school. Every application my son filled out asked if he was 18. And most high school curiculums aren’t so rigorous as to be considered pointless if college isn’t the college. How many high school grads take a math higher than alg2 or more than 2 years of a foreign language? And what if a person changes their mind later in life? How will a 3 year grad then get to college? If fear a bigger gap will result between the haves and have nots with that plan.</p>
<p>Virginia already has 2 levels. The standard diploma and the advanced studies diploma, which as more math, science, social studies and adds foreign language. <a href=“http://www.cps.k12.va.us/student/graduation_revised_08.pdf[/url]”>http://www.cps.k12.va.us/student/graduation_revised_08.pdf</a> The standard diploma has more room for electives (6 vs 2) which can be career focused electives in the programs that are geared for such jobs after HS.</p>
<p>YES!!!</p>
<p>There are far too many kids sitting in school with NO desire to be there and a LOT of desire to be out working. Some of them even work over the summer in their desired jobs. They tend to have no interest in higher level math (and for many, the capability is not there either, but it wouldn’t matter if it were).</p>
<p>As long as the student has a desire and a plan that would work, YES, YES, YES.</p>
<p>It would be a win-win for both the school and the student.</p>
<p>OP - If you’re asking whether a two-tier system would benefit the kids who are mature enough to make good decisions, then the answer is “Yes.” Unfortunately, the high school population is made up of kids in their early and middle teens … not exactly a population lauded for its maturity.</p>
<p>I think the most important thing is for family, schools and employers, not to mention society as a whole, to show respect for choices that don’t involve college.</p>
<p>In my experience, it is often the gifted students who drop out, either during high school or between high school and college. So not going to college doesn’t necessarily relate to ability. And sometimes they are independent and autonomous kids.</p>
<p>Our school has always honored kids going to work, or the military, right up there with college. However, we have a new principal and new guidance counselors, and the culture has changed quite a bit. Now the school has as much stress as other communities. Too bad.</p>
<p>Every time our president makes his speech about how everyone should have a chance to go to college, I cringe. Everyone should also have a chance not to go to college, and still hold his or her head up high.</p>
<p>One final point: all these college loans are making money for the feds and the banks, while basically making graduates into indentured serfs. I think some families should just say no, if their kids don’t want to go to college and have some other plans that are constructive.</p>
<p>With the two tier system in Virginia I have seen both advanced and career oriented students take advantage of the ‘standard’ diploma and finish in three years. This requires taking English 12 online through the county over the summer, or on the AP/college entry level at your local CC over the summer after Jr year. They also have to have thought ahead to take US Government their Jr year in place of an elective, online as an additional class, or in the summer however they choose to take English 12. </p>
<p>Students either move on to career/vocational training, directly to the workforce, or early college admits in what would have been their Sr year.</p>
<p>I have long thought that we do not have enough quality vocational educational options. There are some kids who simply are never going to be interested in or capable of excelling in a traditional college curriculum or traditional college prep curriculum.</p>
<p>In our state, they have established regional vocational HSs. The problem is that kids cannot start taking classes there until 11th grade, and even then it is only some of their classes. There are kids who are barely hanging on until they can escape to PATHS.</p>
<p>I’d like to see something that included apprenticeship for some trades at least, solid basic math through geometry, the ability to read a contract and complex instructions, write a good, clear business letter, keep basic books for a small business, computer literacy…the sort of thing that would give a person the skills to run their own business down the line.</p>
<p>This doesn’t mean that the kids would not also study history, literature, music, art, and other things that enrich one’s life. But some of that takes place in middle school.</p>
<p>Things like this sound like a good idea to me in theory, but then I think of how nobody thought I was going to be a college kid until I actually had the chance to go to college, and then I did really well. And at the same time, my younger sister is the opposite-- we all assumed she’d go to college, she made great grades, and now she’s probably not going to go. I think high school is too early an age to box yourself in on one track or another… and I feel like suggesting to a 15 or 16 year old that maybe they’re just not college material is not only premature but dangerous, because they’re likely to believe what they’re told and that may not be true.</p>
<p>Wouldn’t expanding the vocational and technical school programs provide a place for kids who want this tract?</p>
<p>I know what you mean, Ema, and that is a huge consideration. On the other hand, what does “college” mean? I think that what we have done is redefine “college” to include training for fields that do not need to be bachelor’s degrees: namely, vocational pursuits.</p>
<p>In additional to restructuring HS, I envision restructuring college/university too. There is no reason why a person who wants to study marketing, for example, should not do something like an excellent and intensive 2-year “technical college” course that would include internships, rather than paying for 2 years worth of what are usually referred to here as “general ed” requirements in order to get a BA (especially a BA that doesn’t mean what a BA used to mean). </p>
<p>On the other hand one of the great virtues of the US educational system is that there are second, third, fourth chances. A person’s lot in life is not determined by a test at age 12.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>What if the system was designed to enable students to do additional schooling later to enable them to be ready to start college?</p>
<p>I think the current system is flexible enough. Every kid should have 4 years of english, 4 years of math, and 3 years of science (biology, chemistry, and physics).</p>
<p>After that, I think HS should beef up the vocational training, or let Seniors transfer to tech schools for their final year, and the tech school (or prior HS) grant the diploma.</p>
<p>The issue is making the Sr year productive for the child not going on to college. Teach them a trade. Or, give them a head start to learning a trade.</p>
<p>I think the idea is worth exploring as long as the student gets to make the decision (though I’m afraid that wouldn’t happen). I would not like to see kids tracked into either option by the school system based on standardized testing in the lower grades. If there’s an open door policy into either track, students can learn for themselves whether they’re capable of or suited for the work. If they can’t manage passing grades in the preferred track, that’s different from being barred entry.</p>