Slashdot Mirror


High School Students Forced To Declare A Major

i_like_spam writes "As reported in the NYTimes, high school freshmen at many high schools across the nation are now being forced to pick a major. Starting this Fall, 9th graders in Florida will have to choose to major from among a set of state-approved subjects, while some students in Mississippi will have to follow one of nine designated career paths. High school administrators hope that having students declare majors will lead to greater student interest in school until graduation. College administrators think otherwise: 'youngsters should instead concentrate on developing a broad range of critical thinking and communication skills,' says Debra Humphreys from the Association of American Colleges and Universities."

32 of 670 comments (clear)

  1. This is stupid. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    To expect a child to choose a career at that age is ridiculous

    1. Re:This is stupid. by Cassius+Corodes · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Its seems like they are doing everything they can but fix the real underlying issues with the education system. If you don't fund it properly, it just ain't going to work.

      --
      Control is an illusion, order our comforting lie. From chaos, through chaos, into chaos we fly
    2. Re:This is stupid. by YrWrstNtmr · · Score: 5, Insightful

      If you don't fund it properly, it just ain't going to work.

      Throwing more money at it isn't necessarily the fix needed. Some places with relatively high spending per child have the crappiest schools.

    3. Re:This is stupid. by XxtraLarGe · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Ah, but to corporate America, this is the ideal thing. The irony of your statement is that the place where this type of thing was most commonly practiced during the 20th century was in the Soviet Union and Eastern Bloc countries. It rings of central planning, perhaps next we'll be seeing some 5 year plans and "Great Leaps Forward"? It really isn't a surprise to see this type of thing in government run schools.
      --
      Taking guns away from the 99% gives the 1% 100% of the power.
    4. Re:This is stupid. by kimvette · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Money isn't the issue.

      Lowering the bar and worrying more about a child's "self esteem" rather than academics things things such as playing nanny to students AND wasting money on programs like sex education (sorry that is the job of the parents) AND sensitivity training are hurting academic performance. When teachers are expected to be nannies rather than teachers, do u rly expect students 2 xl @ math & science, & b able 2 sp34k in nything but aol sp35k? ZOMG LOL WTF!

      --
      The Christian Right is Neither (Christian nor right). See: Matthew 23, Matthew 25, Ezekiel 16:48-50
    5. Re:This is stupid. by Attila+Dimedici · · Score: 3, Insightful

      "That's because the money is being used to fund a war that should have never happened in the first place" Exactly how is the Washington, DC school district spending money on this "war that should never have happened"? The Washington, DC school district spends more money per student than just about any other school in the country, yet has some of the worst results. It seems obvious to me that despite what the teachers' unions say, more money isn't the answer. Personally, I think the best thing would be smaller school districts, allowing greater accountability to individual parents. Certainly, the answer is some system allowing for greater accountability to individual parents.

      --
      The truth is that all men having power ought to be mistrusted. James Madison
    6. Re:This is stupid. by walt-sjc · · Score: 5, Insightful

      High schools still do have basic career paths... You have a choice - AP and science courses that geared towards a white collar career, and shop / auto / etc. that geared you towards blue. One will get you prepared for college / business / etc. and the other won't. We need both types of people however. We need people who will physically build our homes, businesses, highways, etc. The infrastructure of our country. The bottom line is that there are many people who would rather sweat in 100 degree heat building a brick wall, pouring concrete, etc. than be a cubicle dweller.

      But back to the FA. Forcing kids to choose a major? Stupid. It should be an option that guides you into the most appropriate courses to get you where you want to go. Kids need high school to learn about careers and THEN make a decision. What does an eighth grader know about what a physician really does? Or a chemist? Or a physicist? Hell, do they have majors for "fireman?" What about the kids who just want to be a carpenter like their dad, and HIS dad, take over the company business?

      Most "educator's" are totally disconnected from reality. They surrounded themselves in school their entire lives, generally in a public servant type role. They think they know what's best for kids but really they have just overdosed on talks and reports from overpaid sociologists that pull theories out of their asses. This is why I refuse to send my kids to public school.

    7. Re:This is stupid. by Undertaker43017 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Throwing more money at the problem isn't going to fix it.

      The real problem with public education is that it has become the dumping ground for kids whose parents don't care and can't take the time to be engaged in their children's lives. Parents that care, do whatever they can to send their children to a private school or home school them. The public school system is full of kids who have no positive educational influence at home and are just a negative influence on kids that are trying to learn. Until you can get the majority of public school parents to care about their children's education and become a "champion" in their lives for an education, the system won't change and will continue to go down hill.

    8. Re:This is stupid. by 0100010001010011 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I wish that my school would have at least let others try other career paths.

      I went the AP/engineering/college bound path. My small rural highschool had a Vocational program for auto repair and an Ag path.

      I took AP Calculus my junior year. I had literally run out of classes to take, but I wasn't allowed to take any of those 'other' classes. I'm not a Mechanical Engineer that has no clue how to weld. Even my college guidance counselor told me that welding was 'a waste of time.' We have a huge disconnect between engineering and manufacturing and there's a pretty clear reason why. Force everyone to take 1 shop and 1 welding class then ask the engineer why his 1.00000000 mm tolerance is a bit strict.

      It's taken me 6+ years and lots of trial and error to learn how to fix my car. I started with oil changes and my biggest job to date was replacing the head on my car.

      It's problem enough that we pigeon hole kids in college. I'm an engineer. It's my 'only' marketable skill. C/C++, Matlab, VB, Simulink, Free body diagrams are great for bringing home money now. But they're not going to help me redo my kitchen or paint my house or fix my car. If I had to do college over again. I'd tell my counselor to shove it and take 5-6 years for a BS degree. I'd take one of those classes most engineers looked down on, like how to wire a house, how to run plumbing, etc.

      If only I went to a place where I could have learned all of this, at an early age, for free. Wait. I did.

    9. Re:This is stupid. by AndersOSU · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I know everybody thinks this idea is idiotic, and I'll admit, that was my first thought as well. But if this is done right I think it could be a good thing.

      I think the first indication that this isn't going to be done right is according to TFTitle high schoolers are going to be forced to pick a major - that is idiotic. However, if it were an option, to pick a major if you were interested, and if you were guaranteed to get a well rounded education regardless of your decision, and if there was little to no penalty for switching majors, this could be a good tool for keeping kids engaged.

      I went to a college prep high school, so I didn't have as many choices when choosing my classes as those in public schools (no shop, no home economics, and would have had to travel to a different school for art), in fact I didn't get to make any choices about my curriculum until I was a junior (aside from choosing which of 2 math courses to take at the sophomore level) but even still I conscientiously steered myself towards physics and math, and avoided classes like geography, criminal justice, and psychology. But I knew by the time I was a junior that I wanted to be an engineer, and I never did change my major in college.

      So, I essentially choose pre-engineering anyway. If this plan is a way of telling kids, "Hey, these classes are great for people with your interest!" Well then great. If it's a way to tell kids you have choose what classes you're going to be taking in four years now, or worse, you better figure out what you want to do with your life, then this is doomed to failure.

    10. Re:This is stupid. by Joe+Random · · Score: 4, Insightful

      wasting money on programs like sex education (sorry that is the job of the parents) I both agree and disagree with you there. It should be the parents' job, but many, many parents delay this out of embarrassment, and the results of that can be disastrous for the child. Basically, sex education is something that everyone needs to know, and that parents just can't be reliable counted on to deal wit.
    11. Re:This is stupid. by Opportunist · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Doesn't stop at high schools.

      Here, universities have decided it's a smart idea to narrow down your field of eduation. So if you choose your path crafty, you can circumvent all those math-heavy hardware related courses and go software-only.

      Which in turn produces people who wonder why there are side effects when they consider their hardware to work "immediately" and why an "undefined" state can even exist. With a doctorate degree, no less.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    12. Re:This is stupid. by 0100010001010011 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      That's exactly my point. We take CAD courses, we take design courses but we don't have any "tolerance common sense" courses. The only thing I remember is one teacher gave us the cost breakdown, but this was in some HS course NOT in any college engineering course.

      It went something like this:
      "If you were to ask the shop up the road to make you a cube with the following dimensions, this is what it'd cost:
      1 inch = $10
      1.0 inch = $50
      1.00 inch = $200
      1.000 inch = $500
      1.0000 inch = $1000
      1.00000 inch = $5000"

      I'd say 85% of my graduating ME class from a school that's considered a 'good' engineering college wouldn't be able to tell you the difference between the $50 and the $5000 option. "Well the numbers are all zero so they don't matter".

      Then they wonder why they get yelled at by production when some print they came up with asks for 1.0000 mm between 2 holes that are .2500 mm in diameter. Because in class the teacher just had them select the X.0000 tolerance in the dimensioning block. Then you have the people on the other side of the spectrum asking for the 0.25 mm holes 1 mm apart and they wonder why stuff doesn't fit together.

      1 shop class could have easily helped this concept, even back in HS. Let people put their hands on the metal and maybe the next time they're designing something they can remember back to that HS course.

      No, instead lets make them declare a major and keep them away from those dirty shop classes with all the potential dropouts.

      My HS shop had an *expensive* dark room. Complete with rotating door to keep out light... In me and my siblings 9 years there, no one had once used it for anything more than storage. And now I'm having to back pedal trying to figure out what the heck all these settings are on my fancy new SLR.

    13. Re:This is stupid. by TheRaven64 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      even basic reproduction facts such as whether a test-tube baby would have a soul. Last time I checked, the existence of the soul was not a fact, but a conjecture. Whether a test tube baby has one is dependent on your personal theology, not on facts.
      --
      I am TheRaven on Soylent News
    14. Re:This is stupid. by Ubergrendle · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I worked for 8 years with children, ages 4-18 at a variety of camps starting as a teenager and through my university years. Lots of hands on experience, I'm a good communicator, and generally an enthusiastic person. Without being falsely modest, I think I'd make a very good teacher. I even had a mixed undergrad degree... humanities (history major, english minor) and science (computer major) since I wanted to keep my options open. 4th year of my honours degree I audited some of the education degree course and did a couple of days job shadowing on site at elementary and high schools to see if this is what I wanted to do.

      I'd rather work retail minimum wage, was my conclusion.

      Unionised fat cat 20 year service teacher who did NOTHING, they lost the will to live practically. Arrive @ 8:55am and in the parking lot by 3:05pm each day. Teachers who actively mocked their students. Self absorbed moaning about their hard hours, when most of these teachers had been in the same education system cradle to grave, no real world experience. What I found most distressing was an active contempt for people oriented towards manual trades vs academic performance. The world can't be made up 100% of lawyers and doctors damnit!

      I came to the sad realistation that my ignorant assumptions at the ages of 6 and 8 and 10 than my teacher might be a 'stupid head' or idiot were most likely accurate at the time. The few teachers that somehow survive the byzantine bureacracy and escape the repetitive formula of class curriculum are truly blessings...who have no way of being rewarded for their higher performance or value. An elaborate system that breeds mediocrity only under the best circumstances.

      10 years in IT now, I'm a director of Q/A and am very happy with my career choices. But I have no idea what I'm doing with my kids in a few years when they enter school... I hate to be an elitist snob, but private schools might be the only realistic option available to us.

      --
      John Maynard Keynes: "When the facts change, I change my mind. What do you do?"
    15. Re:This is stupid. by antarctican · · Score: 3, Insightful

      t's problem enough that we pigeon hole kids in college. I'm an engineer. It's my 'only' marketable skill. C/C++, Matlab, VB, Simulink, Free body diagrams are great for bringing home money now. But they're not going to help me redo my kitchen or paint my house or fix my car. If I had to do college over again. I'd tell my counselor to shove it and take 5-6 years for a BS degree. I'd take one of those classes most engineers looked down on, like how to wire a house, how to run plumbing, etc.

      You're right, from a practical point of view, having people with broader knowledge is very important. In my high school career, I took 5 years of electronics, everything from the basics of resistors and capacitors to programming microcontrollers. It was one of the most valuable set of courses I took because now in my chosen career of software engineering, I have a better understanding of what's actually happening inside this equipment I write code for.

      But school should not simply be job training centres, despite what some in business would like. We also need well rounded people. Techies needs to be familiar with art and literature. And artsies needs to know how to change the oil on their car. We need more renaissance men and women, not simple robots trained to do one job. Only then can we better understand each other and think outside the box to solve problems.

      But to paraphrase a Central American dictator, we don't need educated people, we need oxen.

    16. Re:This is stupid. by rpbird · · Score: 3, Insightful

      It starts even earlier than this. If you want your little kid to be a good engineer, DO NOT buy him a virtual erector set for the PC, get him a real one. Little hands working with little tools to build real things, it matters to that young brain. It may make a mess around the house, with all those erector set pieces and Lego blocks scattered everywhere, but it'll produce a kid who can think about the real world and work in the real world.

  2. With top down decisions like this by Colin+Smith · · Score: 4, Insightful

    You can make everyone go in the wrong direction all at once. For decades.

    --
    Deleted
    1. Re:With top down decisions like this by TheSciBoy · · Score: 5, Insightful

      As I understand it, High School is part of what we in Sweden call "grundskolan", which is required here. It is illegal not to attend school up to this point. After that, everything is elective. To specialize so early reeks of desperation. Up until this point, kids are kids. They need to be told what to do and when to do it. Of course they need free time, but at this age school is for two things: learning basic "booksmart" skills to make it in life (math, reading, writing, how the government works) and human interaction. The human interaction part is recess and after school, during class they need to be told what to do and everyone needs the same stuff.

      After you've attained the minimum level (lvl 1, 10,000xp) where you're able to function in society, you can choose where you want to go in life: directly to work (McDonalds, cleaning, aso) or you can get a higher education in some area of your interest.

      Specializing earlier and earlier has become common these days. This appears when schools start competing for students. Generally I think this is a bad thing. Mostly because this means that you have to decide what you want to be/do when you really have no idea and really shouldn't be making life-altering decisions like this.

      Anyone who has chosen College (or University) programs based on "what will be in demand" when you're finished will have chosen wrong. The world changes so fast that choosing what you are going to work with in 5-10 years based on what is in demand now will almost invariably mean that things have changed and you will find yourself in tough competition. It is generally better just to choose what to do based on what you want to do and hope for the best. At least then you'll be competing with others in a field you love.

      --
      Badgers, we don't need no stinking badgers! - UHF
  3. Mixed by MyLongNickName · · Score: 5, Insightful

    On one hand, I hate the idea of anything that "pigeon holes" students.

    On the other hand, I hate the concept that all students must be prepared for college. A lot of people just aren't cut out for it. Some are looking for blue collar careers, and would be better served by programs that prepare them for this vocation.

    Combine this with kids who are at risk of dropping out of school. I see a lot of this. Some areas have a higher than 50% drop out rates. If you can take these kids and show them that when they are done with high school, they will be ready for a job as an electrician, a plumber or a mechanic, they'd be more likely to stay in. Tell them that they need to have 4 semesters of English, two of history, and they will be required to take some arts classes, and their reward will be two years of post-secondary trade school, and then they might get a job... well, some back grounds just don't value the education enough.

    I see downsides to the "track" approach, but I see upsides as well.

    --
    See my journal for slashdot ID's by year. Mine created in 2005. http://slashdot.org/journal/289875/slashdot-ids-by-year
    1. Re:Mixed by eggoeater · · Score: 4, Insightful

      No I haven't read TFA but I'm willing to bet some of the majors are the equivalent of metal shop.

      Actually I see many downsides....
      I was interested in CS all through high school and took every programming course (all 3...it was the mid-80s) that my school had to offer. But I also marched in the band.
      What if this new major program prevented (via scheduling, resource, and location conflicts) the students ability to be engaged in multiple interests?
      If I were back in high school and confronted with this, I probably would have chosen band over CS courses simply because that was where all my friends were.

  4. Maybe... by Jaqenn · · Score: 4, Insightful

    When I was in college, I had no difficulties picking a major: Computer Science. I wanted Computer Science since I played video games at the age of 3.

    I had a roommate who couldn't decide on a major, and in fact didn't have one until around his Junior Year

    Some people know what they want to do when they turn 14, some people don't. I do not see the value of making the people who don't pick one anyway.

    --
    You are awash in a sea of fiercely stated opinions. Obvious exits are: 'File->Quit', 'Reply', and 'Page Down'.
  5. Umm... by mercurium · · Score: 5, Insightful

    College students changes majors like they change their socks, what makes them think high school students can stick their guns?

  6. This. Is. So. Dumb. by dwm · · Score: 4, Insightful

    First of all, I believe you really don't know what you want to do until you get (at least) a couple of years of college under your belt. Sometimes you get lucky and guess correctly before then, but most folks just aren't mature enough or have enough life experience to be able to tell what you will enjoy doing. Yes, I understand there are exceptions to this on both ends of the spectrum; I'm talking averages here.

    Second, the college folks are right on about needing a broader focus. As it is, students are too quick to dismiss fields of learning that they don't see as relevant to their interests. Sadly, most folks realize only after they leave school that the purpose of school at nearly all levels is not so much to teach you certain subjects, but to teach you how to learn.

  7. Bad Thing by Max+Romantschuk · · Score: 4, Insightful

    My (Finnish equivalent to) high school focused all-round education. It was the best decision I ever made to study there. I've studied languages (Swedish, Finnish, English, French, German), the arts, philosophy, history, psychology, biology, math, physics, chemistry... The works.

    And guess what? After learning the basics of pretty much everything (much at least) I'm damn sure I have a good base of general knowledge for the rest of my career, and life for that matter. When I need to pick something up I always have a place to start.

    Had I been forced to focus on just a few subjects I would probably be a lot worse of in today's ever-evolving business world.

    --
    .: Max Romantschuk :: http://max.romantschuk.fi/
  8. Limited choices... by realsilly · · Score: 3, Insightful

    You've got to be kidding me! Is this an ad for the Sally Struther's college degree commercials? If a ninth grader is considered too young for sexual activity, which affects them for the rest of their lives, how in gods name can they be expected to know what major is right for them. Most students don't really find their way until they've gone through high school and teachers help inspire them to look towards a higer education.

    Isn't this similar to a communist attitude? Note I said similar, not actual communism.

    In the country where Freedom is our motto, we are starting to see less and less freedoms. /sigh GG Florida, and I went to school there, I can say this.

    --
    Life takes interesting turns, but the most interest is when you're off the beaten path.
  9. This is what we did in the UK at age 14... by spiney · · Score: 5, Insightful

    As a transplant from the UK to the US, with high school/college age kids, I think it's about time that we stopped mollycoddling and pandering to the kids here, and started getting them thinking that they cannot just drift through high school and college, they need a direction, which making a choice starts to prepare them for.

    When I was at school in the UK in the early 1980's, at age 14 we had to narrow our courses to about eight subjects in total (English, Maths and a couple of others mandatory, leaving quite a bit of choice) and we studied for national exams ("O" levels) at age 16. We then chose three or four subjects usually from the eight, to take to an advanced level ("A" level), leading to national exams at the age of 18. When it cam to university time, there was no such thing as this "undeclared major" rubbish that my son is doing at an American university starting this fall. Our university admission was into a particular course, based on prerequisite courses at "A" level at required grades. This allowed the universities to know the minimum level and rely on the expected knowledge of all the students in a given course, and there was no need for foundation years, or spending the first term or two catching everyone up. This is why we could have three year Bachelor's courses instead of the four year ones here in the US.

    Today's kids are not being properly prepared for the work environment. I've lost count of the number of confident, self assured, broadly educated US Bachelors or Masters graduates I have interviewed for jobs in electronics who don't understand Ohm's Law or basic op-amp theory after graduating from between four and six years of study. It's time to stop the madness, and start preparing the kids for the new world, where they are competing against low wage earning graduates based in India or China, and if you think the UK system was harsh in making people choose, you should see the focus and emphasis on academics and career preparation in Asia...

  10. Funny you mention Asia by Sycraft-fu · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Because in my experience, China's educational system sucks.

    Having talked to people who've gone and taught there (actual teachers, not regular Joes called in to play teacher) they say it is all route memorization. To be smart is to have a lot of facts and formulas in your head. Well as it turns out memorization and analyzation are really only useful to a point. That makes you good at taking tests, but you need to be able to synthesize that knowledge in to what else you know, and apply it to novel problems to really be useful. What more for some subjects it just totally and utterly fails. Language would be a good example. They teach foreign language the same way: memorize hundreds of phrases a week. However one needs only to examine the way you use your native language to realise that's not how we process it.

    I then get to see the results of this education where I work, which is an engineering department at a university. What I see, fails to impress. The language skills of a large number of our Chinese students are ATROCIOUS. I've no idea how they passed the entrance exam (actually I do know, it is because memorization will do good for that, just not for the real world). They have extreme difficulty expressing themselves and almost as much difficulty understanding native speakers, even for quite simple things. They get along primarily by joining labs of professors that speak their native language, and simply isolating themselves. We have students who've been here for 4 years, yet still struggle, when a year of immersion is usually enough for extreme proficiency if you apply yourself.

    Likewise I find in general they are extremely poor problem solvers. They've little trouble with book work or tests, however they are sunk when it comes to a practical problem. A lab full of people allegedly getting degrees in networking will be befuddled by a simple subnetting problem (they had their default gateway set outside of the subnet and didn't see the problem). They have knowledge, but it seems not understanding. If a problem isn't phrased in the theoretical terms and abstract equations they learned, they can't solve it.

    Based on my experiences with these students, who are supposed to be very good since they can come to a foreign university, and with students from the US and other countries, along with what I've learned of China's educational system, I don't think I'd hold it up as the model to follow. It does seem to do well at preparing people for taking standardised tests, but alas the world isn't composed of those. It's the ability to use all that information on problems in the real world that is truly useful.

    So I disagree that a better educational system is one that's more hardcore, one that forces kids to concentrate on only one thing at a very early age. I think a better educational system is one that tries to generally educate the mind, one that teaches people how to think, how to solve problems, and gives them a set of tools to do that for many different ones. Then, later, if they are interested in a field that requires more specialized knowledge, they can get that specialized training.

    One of our professors has a quote I like very much:

    BS: To learn how to think.
    MS: To think about what others have thought.
    PhD: To boldly think where none have thought before.

    I think there's some truth to that. An undergraduate degree (and ESPICALLY a high school education) shouldn't be to try an hyper focus. It should be to teach you how to be a better thinker, to give you more skills and tools to that end. Yes there should be some focus since the skills for engineering are not the same skills for linguistics, but not a hyper focused program. That comes at a masters level, should you want it, where you really focus on one area of research.

    For more on this, you might want to read Richard Feynman's biography (Surely You're Joking, Mr. Feynman). In it he talks about his experience in Brazil. He found that they really emphasised science in schools, teaching elementary kids

  11. Not going to get what they want by TomTraynor · · Score: 4, Insightful
    Keep the education as general as possible so that when the student know what they want to do after high school that they have the basic skills.

    Some of us were blessed in that we knew what we wanted to do early in high school. I was one of those, I loved computers and took business courses until grade 13. I also took welding, machine shop, shop for small engines (marine, snowmobile etc), physics, biology and chemistry, typing along with the all of the math, geography, history and english courses. I had a very well rounded education so that if I did change my mind I had the education to change careers totally. Those skills are still used today as I can weld/braze things, I can use machinery to make metal items and tools and I can strip and rebuild small engines with my eyes shut. When people ask me what I do for a living it sometimes freaks them out that a 'computer geek' can hold a welding torch without burning down the building.

    When our children leave high school they should know
    • The basics about our history.
    • The basics about our government and the role society is expected to play.
    • Be able to write an essay that is gramatically correct with little or no spelling errors.
    • Be able to handle basic math problems.
    • Know the basics about geography and the countries that are around us.
    • Know the basics about science.
    --
    Panic now, beat the rush!
  12. The majors suck by russotto · · Score: 3, Insightful
    Anyone take a look at the suggested majors?

    Michael A. Polizzi, an assistant superintendent, said the district carefully researched future demand for jobs, examined college programs and surveyed students about their interests before settling on its first six majors: sports management, fine and performing arts, health sciences, international studies and global commerce, communications and new media and or liberal arts.


    Um, where's the hard sciences? Where's the math-heavy subjects (including CS)? What is something as narrow as sports management doing in that list? WTF is "international studies" anyway?

    When I was in school I took shop one year (it was actually required for all students) What I learned was that I could solder OK with a torch (I already could solder with an iron), could do a halfway-decent welding job with acetylene, but don't let me near an arc welder unless you want metal with ragged holes in it. Certainly it was more relevant to my future than Freshman English (a class taught by an idiot, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing -- and I did not learn that line in that class), and more interesting as well. If these majors are so all-inclusive as to lock students into a single track with no opportunity to try other things, it'll make high school an even worse grind than it already is.

    Anyway, I know people about my own age (mid-thirties) who had a major in high school. It seems to be a fad some schools go through from time to time. Actual practical effect is likely negligible, at least for college-bound students.
  13. Good and Bad by Warshadow · · Score: 3, Insightful

    This can be great for some students. If they're like myself and found the general material offered in high school so incredibly boring that they couldn't be bothered to put forth any effort. I know if there had been some sort of program gearing me towards something I was interested in, say Electrical Engineering, I would have actually put some effort into high school.

    That being said as people have pointed out this can be a burden on kids who just don't know or don't have any interests compelling enough to work towards.

    I know right after I finished school, New York State started offering a program where you chose a field you were interested in and the program would prepare you better for majoring in that subject when you went to university.

    It's definitely a double edged sword. It can be great for kids who are bored and would like something interesting to work on, but terrible for those who are already struggling just to pass the general courses.

  14. another brick in the wall by moxley · · Score: 4, Insightful

    This is ridiculous; almost to the point of being criminally negligent.

    I agree and am always saying that one of the many, many major problems with education in America is that kids are not taught to think critically, to think for themselves.

    They are taught to learn by rote and not to question authority.

    With how the publication of science and textbooks has been politicized and corrupted; and then this crap and everything else that is going on with education here, it is clear that the goal is to create more cogs.

    More cogs for the the machine that will be good little citizens. More bricks in the wall; like the Pink Floyd song "Another Brick in the Wall, pt.2"

    More and more I am so sad for this country because I just don't see a way for America to survive as a free, progressive society. We were once the light of democracy for the world supposedly - and now , if we can avoid becoming a complete fascist dictatorship - we'll still have to deal with a country full of mindless cogs.