K-12th grade education is overrated???

Question

Were supposed to spend 12 yrs in school then after graduation we have to go apply at minimim wage paying jobs.. I think those 12 yrs should be used to focus on only one educational discipline because the way it is formatted now it is just a waste of time???

Answer 1

That would be learning to do a craft, which means you wouldn't know anything about anything other than that craft. You'd be stuck in that job so would your kids. You'd go back to medieval times of apprenticship. This way, you get a basic understanding of most things, are a well balanced person, and know what you want to do.  

Answer 2

It's not overrated.  It is what it is.  It is a way to separate the classes.  If you just get a diploma, then you are better off than those without one, usually.  If you get a 2 year degree in college, it looks better than someone with a HS diploma, but not as good as a 4 year.  This was an economics explanation.  As far as what you learn, you learn a lot.  You learn how to learn.  I learned a lot of "stuff" in HS.  In college I learned how to learn and how to think.

Answer 3

Sorry you feel that a K-12 system is overrated, I personally feel it offers a thorough and diverse curriculum that allows the students to decide what field of study they are most interested in. It produces  more well rounded individuals with usually some idea of what their strengths and weaknesses are. If you don't like going to work for minimum wage, I recommend you further your education in a trade school, instead of a four year university.

Answer 4

In some ways, I agree.  150 years ago, high school didn't exist - kids received a pretty thorough general education through grade 8 or so and went to college at 14 or 16.  (Their grade 8 work was as challenging, or more so, than most grade 12 work today.)  They graduated college within 2-3 years and went on to study under an experienced professional for another 2-3 years.  After that time, they were licensed as a lawyer, a doctor, whatever.

If they didn't go to college, they took over the family business or studied as an apprentice.  Whatever they did, they studied in a specialized manner for whatever they were going to do.  (If you think about it, that's what college is today - specialized education.  Why is that ok the moment you graduate, but not until then?)

High school became a popular institution about 100-125 years ago with the rise of the Industrial Revolution in the US.  If you look into the history of it, it was meant as sort of a tech school-type thing to train factory workers and manual laborers so that they would have a passable education, but not enough to rise above their "station".  It was free, and it was passable.  It's changed and evolved since then, but not into the college and mentorship of ages past.

Honestly, that's more of what I want for my son.  I do require him to learn what he would in school, but I let him learn it at his pace and in ways that interest him.  When he's in high school (currently 6th grade), he'll have the opportunity to take college level work and study with mentors.  Much of the work that is presented in middle and high school, IF students will apply themselves, can be learned in a much more condensed manner than it is often taught.

Problem is, the majority of students aren't willing to apply themselves and are willing to settle for drawing it out, and that's fine...but for those that are, other options ought to be available for them to do so.

JMHO...