Its a simple matter of resources if the state is paying for a childs education why put good money into students for college prep if they are unlikely to earn a degree, teach them a trade or profession over four years where itspretty much free.
Then why try at all? Any student can fail for any number of reasons. Treating education like it's not productive is...not productive. Education is vitally important. There have been a large number of articles cropping up in the news lately that high-paying jobs are going unfilled because there aren't enough qualified people.
Why aren't they qualified? They don't have an education. Relying on unskilled labor alone makes everyone's quality of life go down. The fact is, education improves life. It improves the quality of life you enjoy. You don't have health care and neither do I, but we're living far better off than the poor in other nations. If you don't have doctors, all the free health care in the world won't matter. If you don't have scientists, the range of ways you can be treated by medical staff suffers. If you don't have teachers, nothing matters period.
I'm no idealist we need every young person to be prodective asap after their educations like other nations and we are FAILING.
Being productive includes furthering your education and thinking long-term. Having a generation of kids where, by your estimate, less than thirty percent actually has a college education is damaging, plain and simple. When it comes time for you to retire, you will be relying on that generation to be taking care of you. A carpenter, a construction worker, an auto mechanic -- these are all completely valid pursuits, but the fact is, none of these people are going to be extending your lifespan, curing diseases, maintaining your food supply, innovating technology, or even running your legal system. There will always be people to do the "grunt" work. There is no shortage of people willing to shovel shit or push buttons on a cash register because there is already a natural number of people who aren't making it to college who still require employment. Those who choose not to be employed at all are the ones that worry me.
And I never said just testing teacher reports, parents input and the advice of college admissions folks should all count to decide which track a student gets. And a child can always go to college as an adult just don't waste High School by having overly lofty ambitions.
...Wasting high school by having overly lofty ambitions? People who have overly lofty ambitions are the kinds of people who go on to college to begin with. College itself is an overly lofty ambition for most people simply because it's not affordable -- My family gave me no financial support whatsoever and I just graduated with two degrees. I did fairly average in high school, but I see a lot of students who were, by all means, academically better-off than me who failed in college or never went to begin with. Conversely, I have friends who don't seem outwardly intelligent, but are very, very insightful when given the chance. Your ideas are fundamentally flawed against the very ideas that make this country in that in that you grant power to everyone but
the student to decide for them. College admissions already screens students in various ways as it is.
As for job skills when a High School graduate has a job at Burger King and think its ok to regularly show up late without calling there is need for improvement folks - and some can't even make change.
All the education in the world cannot make someone work harder or show up on time and if you can please state a little research for some of this to prove otherwise, I would be inclined to consider it. Work ethic is not equated to academia. They do not go hand in hand. If somebody is working at Burger King because they have no education, then they're getting precisely the kind of job they prepared for, and if they can't show up on time, then they deserve to be unemployed. That's a personal problem, not one that tax dollars need to go towards fixing.
Come on a year of general employability skills would not hurt.
Except, as I've pointed out, general employment skills are taught on the job and most high school students get a part-time job while they're still in high school, thus making it redundant and a waste of resources and tax dollars.
Some people are just not college material just look at how many students quit by their Junior year with lots of debt and then have no major job skills. And in this job market and society entry level training is very hard to get employers want workers ready to go pretty much.
Then isn't the issue with the cost of college? Of course some people aren't college material and drop out, so why would you limit that pool even further by narrowing down those allowed to go try anyway? You would turn out an even smaller
percentage of people actually finishing college than there already is, thus damaging your economy further by having an even tinier pool of qualified people to do high-end jobs. That makes absolutely no logical sense.
I'd also be interested in seeing any kind of research on the reasoning of your last claim, because from my experience, entry-level training is not hard to get, given every single job I've ever held has been entry-level and I have picked up my training in two weeks or less. It's unskilled labor with an emphasis on unskilled.
It's not high-end academia. It's not surgery or aviation. Running a cash register, serving food, and cleaning bathrooms are certainly legitimate ways to earn money, but they are not jobs that require huge amounts of technical proficiency or education -- most require little to none at all, which is why most of those kinds of jobs only require you to have a high school diploma, if even that.