AIBU to think they cannot force teens to stay on at school

[Mrbojangles1]

Right been thinking about this new law to ensure teens stay on after 16, now will this work in practice ?

What about teenage mothers
Young people joing the army
Young people living on their own
Married couple between 16-18
Young people in prison

How will their enforce this or what if they simply refuse to go I think if a teen is under 15 parents have some sway about attending school but how can you force a 17 to attend school when all they want to do is work

Also what will they do with young people who are not academic and would be more suited to work.

Please help I am about this whole issue

sorry for the slightly off topic rant there

It's a ridiculous idea to force people to stay on at school until 18. It just further infantalises young adults. I firmly believe that today's 18 year olds are equivalent to 16 year olds a generation ago. The majority of 16 year olds would incapable of doing a job, whereas it was the norm when I left school.

Op... Hope this thread taught you something!

Hang on...we 'force' children to stay on until they are 16 and have done for years...why should an extra year make a difference?

In 5-10 years time (assuming the plan doesn't get shelved before then) it will be considered normal to stay in 'education or training' (which is not the same as staying at school) until 18 (which I think is part of a longer term plan).

There will be kids that kick back because 'its not fair' because it is new, but once it becomes established and normal no-one will bat an eye-lid (well not quite but you know what I am saying...)

If you think back in history (and not that far back - look at the Victorian times) there were times when kids left school way before they were 16....somehow we managed to get to a system where school to 16 was compulsory...this is (rightly or wrongly - which wasn't your question) just the next step.

Hang on...we 'force' children to stay on until they are 16 and have done for years...why should an extra year make a difference?

In 5-10 years time (assuming the plan doesn't get shelved before then) it will be considered normal to stay in 'education or training' (which is not the same as staying at school) until 18 (which I think is part of a longer term plan).

There will be kids that kick back because 'its not fair' because it is new, but once it becomes established and normal no-one will bat an eye-lid (well not quite but you know what I am saying...)

If you think back in history (and not that far back - look at the Victorian times) there were times when kids left school way before they were 16....somehow we managed to get to a system where school to 16 was compulsory...this is (rightly or wrongly - which wasn't your question) just the next step.

I hate to tell you this - but the government didn't make any changes to the Education Act - the school leaving age has never legally been changed to 17 (from 2013)

In England and Wales, this age has been raised numerous times since the introduction of compulsory education in 1870. The most recent Raising of School Leaving Age occurrence was on 1 September 1972, following preparations which began 8 years prior in 1964.[1] This increased the legal leaving age from 15 to 16, leaving a gap year of school leavers who, by law, had to complete an additional year of education from 1973 onwards.

There are several reasons why the Government may wish to increase the school leaving age, considering it has raised the age numerous times over the 19th and 20th century, with plans to do so again in 2013. With past age raisings, the reasons given have been focused mainly on generating more skilled labour by providing additional time for students to gain additional skills and qualifications. In recent years, it has become apparent that most 16-18 year olds aren't as motivated to continue their education after completion of their GCSEs, thus increasing the overall unemployment rate, as many are unable to find work.[2] The British Government is hopeful that by making education compulsory up to the age of 18 by 2013, they can change this attitude.[3]

Nope...but they did to the Eduacation and Skills act (2008).

And here is a nice definition of what is actually required.

The Education and Skills Act 2008 increased the minimum age at which young people in England can leave learning. This requires them to continue in education or training to the age of 17 from 2013 and to 18 from 2015. Young people will be able to choose whether to stay in full-time education, undertake work-based learning such as an Apprenticeship, or part-time education or training if they are employed, self-employed or volunteering for more than 20 hours per week.

I think it's a great idea but one that's going to be very hard to enforce. In Ireland you do your Junior Certificate at 16 and technically you can leave school then but very very few people do, as the JC is seen as worth nothing. As a result most teenagers stay on till 18 and I think, even if they're not very academic, it gives them a chance to mature before they're thrown into the real world. Quite a few girls in my school really turned themselves around between 16 and 18 - stopped doing drugs, stopped lazing about, heck one girl who practically failed her junior cert is now a biomedical scientist! I'm not sure that would have happened for them if they'd have gone off to find jobs or worse still gone on the dole.

I think on the whole it will be positive.

Over the past couple of years the college intake in my area has risen dramatically. It is staying in education/training/employment with training, thus avoiding young people ending up in really dead end jobs when some of them have just hit 16.

From the governments side I presume they are also thinking about the benefits system. At the moment if you are estranged from parents at 16 you can claim benefit, I have seen young people move out of home for solely this purpose. The Army provide training so this should be classed as education after 16.

It would be nice if the government replaced EMA with something else (with fairer entitlement criteria) to provide an incentive to young people and to help them realise the value of money/budgeting etc

mY Yts was positive too i went on to do social care at college I had a positive experience even if i got paid peanuts was better than sitting on at the dole , I worked at nursery school and they didnt take the piss of students or YTS ,

(feels old talking about yts )

MY dd is stil in school and is planning to stay on she won't be been ready to leave school DD1 stayed on too , dd2 isnt academic but her school offers different courses, there is a huge difference in maturing from 16 to 18 imo