|
More Liberal Behaviour Modification Schemes... Drop out? No driver's licence (pg. 3)
|
View this Thread in Original format
| simms327 |
I didn't do OAC (out of province) but my impression of my friends is that it was a waste of time - most of them took easy courses and had tons of free time to kill.
Kids dont need that extra year of school, and it's a waste of taxpayers money. I came from a high school in BC (no OAC) and did very well in Engineering. OAC is not neccessary. If you can't hack uni at 18, either get a job to mature, or maybe uni is not for you.
I must say, usually I find Jayx1's posts to be against my political views, however with this recent smoking ban, the threat to ban "body odor/perfumes" and now this driving liscenece, I'm starting to see what he means. The ontario gov't is getting way to controlling.
Smoking was already effectivly banned - and I liked it, I could go to clubs and not come back all smokey, but those who smoked, still could go to private clubs, or places with ventilated smoking rooms. Now, they are going to far, The dangers of smoking are well documented, and if they choose to smoke, let them do it. Previously the laws kept smokers together (in private clubs and ventilated rooms), but now they have nowhere to go.
The question remains - what will they ban next? e.g. clubs have to close at last call (this is what its like in san fransisco) - only a few of us enjoy these clubs, but the vast majority of ontario wouldnt care. It could happen.
This is another reason, among many, in August, I'm moving to Calgary. |
|
|
| nacarter |
Moral Hazard, you are correct about the exemption for economic reasons. However Jayx needs to be reminded that this is not the 1940s or 50s - VERY few drop out of high school for economic reasons - the most common instance is teenage pregnancy. Banning drop-outs from getting their licenses is simply a deterrent. Let's face it, most drop-outs are just lazy people, who'd rather be out smoking dope and partying instead of hitting the books.
As for OAC - several studies on the issue showed that it was a complete waste of time. Remember, that Ontario was the only jurisdiction in North America with a fifth year of high school. Our students never performed any better in university than other provinces or states. |
|
|
| zokissima |
| This was allready posted about a month or two ago. I never thought that this would really be implemented. Seems to be akin to hearding cows in the right direction, which is never a good way to treat people. Curbing high-school dropout rates is a great issue to tackle, but this is not the right way to go about it. As mentioned in this thread, if the standardized program taught in high schools were revamped, made more dynamic, then maybe not as many people would drop out. The value of education should be taught and pushed. This should probably start at a much earlier level of our education system. Consider, most immigrants comming into this country far exceed in math skills, and after a few years, English skills than those born and raised here. The value of education is impressed upon them at an early age. In my opinion, it seems that the Ontario government applies too many patchwork solutions. This government rarely ever has the will to commit to a long term goal, and thus slaps down useless bans and penalties on a yearly basis. |
|
|
| Jayx1 |
I personally thought it was a waste of time.
What they should do is keep high school a four year course, and then lower the drinking age to 18 like in most of the free world. |
|
|
| Jayx1 |
| quote: | Originally posted by Moral Hazard
My understanding of the legislation is that there are exceptions available if the child's withdrawl from the education system was necessary for economic reasons. |
Why not just let the parents decide? |
|
|
| Fir3start3r |
Only seems logical that they would suggest this.
I mean if there are incentives for being a graduate, why not disentives for those that aren't?
Even if there was a legitimate reason for someone not being able to graduate in their 'year' there are lots of ways to catch up; there's no excuse. |
|
|
| Moral Hazard |
| quote: | Originally posted by Jayx1
Why not just let the parents decide? |
I don't know, I'm not drafting the legislation! My guess, however, is that the instances of drop out are too high for the provinces liking. So they want to reduce this. Personally, since we all have a vested interest in educating the population I have no problem with this.
BTW, I seem to recall it also exempts people who have dropped out to enter an apprenticeship program for a skilled trade. |
|
|
| Jayx1 |
| quote: | Originally posted by Moral Hazard
I don't know, I'm not drafting the legislation! My guess, however, is that the instances of drop out are too high for the provinces liking. So they want to reduce this. Personally, since we all have a vested interest in educating the population I have no problem with this.
BTW, I seem to recall it also exempts people who have dropped out to enter an apprenticeship program for a skilled trade. |
Again, i dont have a problem with what they are trying to acheive (i rarely do). Its just how they go about trying to do it. The methods that this government takes to try and change things are very paternalistic and i feel the government has no place in trying to be everyone's nanny. |
|
|
| Moral Hazard |
| quote: | Originally posted by Jayx1
Again, i dont have a problem with what they are trying to acheive (i rarely do). Its just how they go about trying to do it. The methods that this government takes to try and change things are very paternalistic and i feel the government has no place in trying to be everyone's nanny. |
Years ago I would have agreed with you, however, given the clear lack of parenting skills that exist in this country and the detrimental effect it has had on our society I fear government intervention is necessary. Let's face it, the good parents out there are already doing, in large part, the social engineering the government is trying to implement. The bad parents are either incapable or unwilling to do the same.... thats exactly where the state needs to step in, for all our sake. |
|
|
| Misanthrope |
Interesting thread.
I almost got brainwashed into going conversative. heavenforbid.
I think getting rid of OAC was not a smart move at all. The highschool education system here is a complete joke.
It is extremely unfortunate most people in highschooldo not fully appreciate the opportunities and choices they have here. |
|
|
| Orko |
| quote: | Originally posted by simms327
I didn't do OAC (out of province) but my impression of my friends is that it was a waste of time - most of them took easy courses and had tons of free time to kill. |
Then your friends did not plan their high school careers well enough, imo. The people who just took bird courses in OAC were the same ones, if they had planned right, could have finished in 4 years anyways.
I took:
Physics
Bio
Econoics
Business Admin
Finite
English
World issues (bird course)
With the exception of the last course, none of those courses were that easy.
Yes, if you came from another province you would have been fine with their four year program, because it was properly set out. When referring to the Ontario four year system, it was not properly condensed. Things were left out, and students did not get a full plate of information. |
|
|
| Euphorica |
oac wasnt a waste of time. you know howmany kids are NOT prepared for uni in the 4 year program? tonnnnnnnes. you know howmany are having to do victory laps because of it? lots. not to mention important material that was left out. not to mention all the other money cuts. thanks mike harris.
like I said. I dont know if this is the way to solve the problem... but I dont necessarly see it as a super bad thing. if a kid drops out at 16 or 17. he doesnt have to wait that long to get to 18.
but if they want their licence sooner they gotta stay in school. |
|
|
|
|
