general Is the K-12 Education Program Still Viable?

[Glacies Frost 428]

In the "lower taxes" thread, someone brought up that there are people around the world stressed out and burnt out on education by the time they graduate high school. Many of them need additional tutoring to maintain their high grades or bring them into passing territory. I graduated nine years ago, and even this short a time after graduating, I still think that too much has been piled on children from word go.

 

Let's face it, not all of us are going to grow up to be or enjoy being writers, or scientists, or mathematicians/engineers. 

 

I argue that we can actually make things better by altering curriculum to fit a student's interests starting around age 16, when they're old enough to at least have some idea what they find interesting in terms of potential areas of study and what they don't. I'm also now of the opinion that schooling should not end at the 12 Grade, the high school Senior in America. 

 

I believe it might be better to space out the education a little more, drag it out to 14 grades, so there's more time to learn the more intensive courses that seem now to be a part of children's lives, like what would have been considered college level math just ten years ago.

 

By allowing a slimmer course load determined by a student's skills and interests, and by extending the "learning years" by two, I believe that some major benefits could be seen starting in as little as five years. 

I'm interested to hear everypony's thoughts on the matter, however. 

Edited December 20, 2016 by GlaciesFrost

[BlueStreak98 828]

I think it's salvageable, if we get away from the notion that the failures of a program aren't merely because we're not trying hard enough.

 

It's a classic American problem, really. There's the idea that if we just go whole hog at something we can eventually get it to work, and we've applied that to our schooling system with ridiculous results. Standardized testing wasn't giving us quite what we were hoping for, so instead of looking for a different solution we just added more standardized tests, and then more on top of that. During my senior year of high school (2011), I took over 30 tests that were standardized at a district level or higher. Did most students learn anything outside of what appeared on those tests? No, not at all. Sure, the really dedicated ones looked outside of the classroom to learn about new things, but the average schmuck regurgitated the information on the tests every couple of weeks and forgot about it. We can't figure out why kids are getting burned out from high school? Sit through a few weeks of classes and you'll see why. Long hours full of busywork with nothing to show for it at the end, and no chance to really stretch the curriculum or make it interesting. They've even phased out recess from elementary schools to focus more on studying for tests. It's insane.

 

I'm not opposed to standardizing the system. I think it's equally ridiculous that a kid in Missouri can get an entirely different education than a kid in New York when they all end up in the same workforce or going to the same college. But over-emphasizing test results, and basing school funding on those results, just creates an environment where school becomes so methodical and robotic that even the most interested and dedicated students just want to get the hell out.