Tuesday, February 16, 2010

Because we TOTALLY solved the high school problem...

Once all students graduate high school able to enter college without needing remedial classes, then we can talk about getting rid of senior year. But I missed the part where we educated students so well that they couldn’t possibly benefit from a fourth year of high school. If senior year is a waste of time, wouldn’t the right answer be making it better, rather than trying to save money by canning it?

Anyone reporting on such proposals should make sure to give some data on the college-readiness of students in their states—the percent of freshmen in public colleges enrolled in remedial classes, for example.


  1. Yes, that's a stupid idea. But for many students, it's true; senior year is a waste of time. Is it possible that we could meet the needs of these students better in settings other than the high school? Strengthening the high school curriculum is one option, of course. But as dumb as this idea is on its face, doesn't it behoove us to be flexible about how a student spends that senior year? What's so magical about 12 years of schooling, anyway?

    The Quizzical Teacher

  2. Isn't the purpose of high school to prepare kids for the next step, whether it's trade school, college or career? If so, why keep kids who are ready for the next step in school? Sure, the kids who aren't ready should stay, but why keep the rest down because some aren't ready?

  3. I am not talking about the students who are so well-prepared that another year of high school is a waste of time. I skipped a grade and am all for people being able to move at their own pace. I am talking about his proposal to ditch 12th grade for EVERYONE, which presumably includes plenty of kids who are not college-ready at age 16.