Compulsory subjects at school > your thoughts?

[thrash-boy]

ok well i just started reading that is grammer important topic, and it raised something in my head.

 

 

 

im not sure about other country's but here in Australia English is the only compulsory subject in years 11 and 12.

 

that kind of [cabbage]s me because i hate English, im no good at it, i don't try very hard at it, and i haven't tried very hard since about year 7. i dont see it as any benefit to me at all, especially for the career im planning to take. (would you seriously expect your local auto mechanic, electrician or any hands on trade for that matter know about romeo and juliet before you hired them? i would much prefer to think they had spent that time in school learning there trade, not english)

 

 

 

last semester was the first time i have ever failed a subject (im in year 10 btw), and guess what it was, english!

 

there were 2 main reasons for this:

 

1. because im a shy person and i utterly refused to prepare a talk/review thing i had to read to the class.

 

2. i only handed in about 1 of 8 worksheets on the stupidest topic of all, romeo and juliet.

 

that brings me to a whole different topic. why would they try and teach romeo and juliet in school? it isnt even written in english. its written by some stupid [bleep] that no one in my class cared about from back in about the year 1500 or something. this is meant to be an english class, not a history class.

 

 

 

anyway back on topic, im also quite sure im going to fail English this semester also, we have to do another talk which im not doing, and guess what topic where on now. what topic would you expect your local sparky to know all about. no its not how to wire up your house, its poetry. :roll:

 

 

 

personally i find this kind of thing really stupid. i could be better spending those valuble 4 periods a week i have to sit in a class with a stupid teacher and listen to [bleep]ers read out poetry and there amazingly exciting talk on champagne bottle caps (no joke, we had a talk on his collection of rare champagne bottle caps which "can sell for thousands in years to come if there rare ones").

 

im sure i would benefit alot from several other classes, but english isnt going to benefit me one bit.

 

 

 

subject selections for next year are coming up in the next few months i think, and apparently the only compulsory subject i must pick is something English. when i first heard that i almost punched the wall. they are trying to encourage people to complete year 12 and they are forcing them to do English in year 11 & 12? the education system is really screwed up.

 

and to think maths isn't compulsory anymore. i honestly cant think of any career where maths is of lesser importance than english (name it if you know of one). if anything i would think its more important. i would want my builder to build my house square rather then writing me a poem and telling me the story of Romeo and Juliet after all.

 

 

 

what are your thoughts on this whole compulsory English thing?

[Zonorhc]

So basically, you're blaming the system because of your own laziness and unwillingness to apply yourself.

 

 

 

English isn't about learning about poetry or literature - sure, those are incidentals of the curriculum, but what the subject is really about is teaching students to be independent, critical thinkers who don't just take everything they see in the Real World at face value. Ideally, a student learns to question the ideas and motivations of others, and develop their own perspectives on issues. The Preliminary and HSC Advanced English courses, for example, give you a decent grounding in the ideas behind the great social experiments of our time, such as Darwinism, socialism, totalitarianism and democracy.

 

 

 

The very fact that you equate English solely with the texts you study rather than the ideas and concepts behind them is indicative of the shallow approach you take to the subject. Willful ignorance is one of those things you should try to avoid.

 

 

 

And what's wrong with having a bit of sociocultural awareness that stretches beyond the rubbish you see in pop culture?

 

 

 

I can very well think of a career where mathematics is far less important than the things I learned and am learning in English courses - I'm studying to become an English teacher. For other examples, see: journalism, politics, and virtually every other field which requires communicative skills.

 

 

 

It's not the subject's fault that you have an absurdly negative approach to it. Maybe if you stopped acting like it's beneath you, you might actually be able to find something to interest you in it, or god forbid, at least not fail high school English, which, by the way, is one of the simplest subjects the DET offers to senior students. And if you're managing to screw up year 10 English, the issue is not with the subject, but with your own attitude as a student, and the potentially epic amounts of fail you possess.

 

 

 

Don't blame our system, because it's one of the best in the world.

 

 

 

Also, Romeo and Juliet is written in English, and if you didn't pick that up, then maybe you should pay more attention in class instead of failing so hard.

[thrash-boy]

i suppose you have a good point there.

 

but i still don't think it should be a compulsory subject. sure there are a few careers requiring english and not maths, but there are also alot requiring maths and no english. why isnt maths compulsory?

 

even if it is compulsory they should give us a choice to do something interesting, not romeo and juliet or poetry, which is irrelevant and extremely boring, instead of forcing us to do those things.

[Zonorhc]

English is compulsory because frankly, the disciplines you learn as part of the subject are virtually essentially in everything else. Also, because we are, first and foremost, a Western nation, and thus should have at least a basic understanding of the ideas and discourses that characterise Western culture. Avoiding the subject is akin to having, say, the Chinese or the Germans not teaching their children about their nation's values and the ideas that have shaped their culture.

 

 

 

You do have choice in senior English as to supplementary texts that you study in tandem with the compulsory ones set by your school.

 

 

 

Maths is not compulsory because some wise person in the DET understands that while everyone can get something out of English, whether they know it or not, not everyone can get something out of Prelim. and HSC maths. I know I wouldn't have found any value whatsoever in learning integration and imaginary numbers.

[Tim]

was going to make an exact topic, both starting off with req' english in australia.

 

 

 

personally English shouldnt be required, not only do i NOT get to pick the topic i can do better in, but i get stuck with the lamest class and with the HSC right on the doorstep, changing isnt an option. i mean im not going to be doing critical responses in photography dammit, i check my artwork with my eyes not letters and numbers. as for speeches they do suck harder then a black hole but the only use i can think of for them is to break shy kids like you and myself out of that shyness and be more open to others. in a way english is both good for social skills but sucks that we can't choose our material that still fits in with the requirement. -.-

[dragoonson]

I failed a few subjects (okay,one) because of compulsory subjects...Just be glad 10 years of subjects aren't compulsory like ours.I think more...Not srue,never cared much about schooling,was naturally smart in everything except MT...

[Ginger_Warrior]

I hated doing Shakespeare (the guy who wrote Romeo and Juliet, he's really quite famous you know) back in high school, but looking back on it, I see how necessary it was. It's about interpretation and being able to pick up plot lines and stuff from the words the characters are saying. Reading plays like Shakespeare is also important in developing an emotional awareness of other people. Shakespeare's works, Twelfth Night in particular, are still relevant to modern day life.

 

 

 

I realise as a mechanic, you feel you only need to know about engineering and mechanics. That's simply not the case though. When a mechanic comes to fix my car, or a plumber comes to fix my pipes, or a builder comes to repair my house, I expect them to be able to write a letter. I also expect them to be able to do basic maths. Language and arithmetic are the two main ways we, as humans, communicate with each other.

 

 

 

That's why doing Maths and English should be compulsory (and is compulsory over here). It's ridiculous only around a quarter of people in my high school left with the ability to read, write and perform basic arithmetic (Grade C in both or above at GCSE level), yet over a half of them went into further education.

 

 

 

The role of a school is not to equip you with a career - that's what a college or an apprenticeship is for. The role of a school is to equip you with the basics to get along in life.

[____]

To be honest, you seem to do okay in English considering you've managed to grasp the concepts critical to success in the subject, you just seem unwilling to apply them; which is more than can be said for the majority of people on this forum. I never enjoyed peotry either but you have to take the pro's with the cons in school. Suck it up and deal with the parts of a subject you don't like. Of five years of schooling, about 5 months of that will be spent spent on poetry. Actually probably less, around 3 months since you don't have English every day.

 

 

 

 

 

Zonorhc brings up a good point though about Maths, just when I was finishing High School they brought in a policy change regarding maths... and there was the most basic of maths (the kind you use in day-to-day living and nothing more), then your standard maths which you would've normally had to do.. and then the advanced maths stuff which would help you more if you were heading into uni (but not required for uni). If you weren't doing the basic maths (maths for living) it was the second (uni requirement) so *shrug*

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Without either, English or Maths, a person will struggle in the commercial world. To think otherwise is to kid yourself.

[monkeyboo2]

I think Englishn and Maths should be compulsary ...

 

 

 

But at my school, all the 'high flyers' were forced to take a language despite the fact that almost all of us were underachieving in our languages- due to bad teaching and group complacency.

 

Most people (including me) took French and Tbh I would be very lucky to achieve a B. I'll probably get a C.

 

This looks terrible on my CV (so I may not even include it).

 

 

 

If i had been given the option to take Geography instead I would have no doubt got atleast a B- if not an A/A* but no- the school knew that barely anyone would take a language by free will (because everybody knew the teaching was poor), but to keep the teachers in work, they forced a language upon us.

[assassin_696]

I think if I was in charge, I'd make quite a few subjects compulsory up to the age of 16. Probably english, maths, science, religious studies, history, geography and IT. In my mind, all these subjects encompass and teach either knowledge or skills which people should have when going out into the world. Of course this would have to be accompanied by a radical shake-up of the actual curriculum to make the subjects interesting and relevant but I don't think in principle this is undoable.

 

 

 

Maybe it's too demanding of me, but I think all kids should have a thorough grounding in the basics before they apply themselves. Sure, you might be able to find a specific course at a younger level which is directly "relevant" to the job you want, but the subjects mentioned all contain skills which can easily be applied to any job.

[Roseiah]

In my school for compulsory subjects we have English, Maths, Science, Re and basic Pe. I agree with all of them except for Re, I find it to be one of the most boring subjects possible, and I don't think I will use anything I have used in the past five years for anything, but I am still expected to get a grade B because even though I found the subject pointless I still applied myself. You never know what you will need when you are older and if the knowledge is available for you to learn then you might as well do it now rather than later.

[Kiriyama]

Assassin, while I agree on some of the course choices you would make compulsary, I disagree on a few.

 

 

 

Religious stuides, I for one, hated this. I didn't see much point in it either, sure it teaches some morals, but you can pick those up anywhere. I really see no point in learning about other religions, when I honestly, could not give a crap, it won't help me much, if it all.

 

 

 

History, I guess I see your point here. Here in Scotland this is compulsary (like all off the subjects you pretty much put there) until our 3rd Year in High School. However, what can it really teach us about life today? Sure, we learn about the mistakes of the past, but thats that, their in the past. And like I really will need to know alot of the stuff they teach us.

 

 

 

Geography, to be fair, I choose this as one of my course choices. But I still do not think its is all that needed. Theres hardly anything in it that I can apply to life normally.

 

 

 

IT, now really, I could learn more by myself than half the crap they taught us. They never taught me how to touch type, rather, it was more typing the words up from a sheet. Big freaking help that was. Maybe if they taught us more, like how a computer actually worked, then I'd agree.

 

 

 

All the subject you put there, are compulsary up to a point where the basics have been taught. I myself am in my 6th year of High School, and I am 16. I turned 16 when I was in 5th year. Are you trying to imply that I should have been doing subjects I hated, for most of my School years?

 

 

 

Maybe you need to think that through more. Do not judge by age, as we can all be in different stages of High School at different ages.

 

 

 

Infact, in order for what you said to effectively work, you'd need to make all years of High School compulsary, as many leave school when they turn 16. We should have some skills that we need for our dream job, before we leave High School, at least then we have some knowledge for what we are in for.

 

 

 

Anyway, as for the OP...

 

 

 

Believe it or not, English is needed for every job in English speaking countries.

 

 

 

Without it, would any employer take your C.V. seriously if it is badly written?

 

 

 

Any subjects you do will have a small effect on your job.

 

 

 

If you go in for a job, and so does another person. Say you have the same qualifications that he has for the required skills for the job. Now say that he has some other ones which don't relate to it, which you don't. Overall, they are more likely to choose him because his C.V. is more impressive. So don't think that just because its not a major skill in your dream job, that it won't help at all, because it might just give you the edge over others.

[Furah]

I don't think english should be compulsary either, I mean what I am doing now is rediculous, mainly because of the was they expect us to think, yet I seem to think things differently, so I fail with creative thinking, yet excell at problem solving

[Koo]

English, Maths and Science should be the only compulsary subjects tbh. Everything else including R.E should be optional.

 

 

 

Imo : )

[ThurinEthir]

I've been having similar thoughts. Where I live, the only two subjects needed to graduate (As in you need to take them and pass all four years) are PE and English. In America, I understand PE, I guess. English, on the other hand, is debatable. The thing I always say to my friends is "What if I'm going to move to Taiwan when I'm older? Will I need really good English then?" Answer...Should be no. But most people won't. So I suppose it's important. Maybe not to the extent where you need to know every single grammar and spelling rule, and know the definition of hundreds of thousands of words, and have read hundreds/thousands of books, but being able to speak it properly is.

 

I personally would say math should be compulsory, but I'm kind of biased. I'm a math geek, I find math to be a huge part of my life. Though I agree with what people have said, knowing only the simple stuff can suffice. It depends on what you wish to become though, if you're going to be an architect or something, yeah, you'll want to know things like trig. If you're going to become an author, nah, you'll probably only need to know how to count your money. Some of the stuff learned in math is useless anyway, like when will you actually have to do a geometric proof...?

 

History is kind of important, as it can lead into politics. However, knowing the names of battles and famous documents...Want to tell me how that's going to really help in life?

 

Science depends on what you want to become. And it depends on if the school offers bio, physics and chem at once, as different courses. Some jobs will require one or the other, some will require none.

 

I sort of agree with Assassin. Up to 16 or so, most subjects should mandatory. As a sophomore, will you really know what you'll want to become? Maybe you will, and maybe you won't. Chances are your interests are still likely to change, and not taking a year of math because you think you'll become an athlete, then deciding you'd rather not can really hurt.

 

In my opinion though, if anything, English and math are the most important. They are (Or at least were) the only two MCAS tests you have to pass to graduate in Massachusetts. (MCAS is the state-wide standardized test)

[assassin_696]

Religious stuides, I for one, hated this. I didn't see much point in it either, sure it teaches some morals, but you can pick those up anywhere. I really see no point in learning about other religions, when I honestly, could not give a crap, it won't help me much, if it all.

 

 

 

No no, i'd never use R.S. to teach morality. But I think it's important that no matter what your faith (or lack of in my case) you should learn about other people's. Like it or not, we live in a multifaith society and there are a lot of myths out there about various religions that should not be allowed to spread if the religions were studied. I think it's also important that R.S. lessons should be a vehicle for debating your religion (or lack of) with other people, and having your beliefs questioned and tested.

 

 

 

History, I guess I see your point here. Here in Scotland this is compulsary (like all off the subjects you pretty much put there) until our 3rd Year in High School. However, what can it really teach us about life today? Sure, we learn about the mistakes of the past, but thats that, their in the past. And like I really will need to know alot of the stuff they teach us.

 

 

 

Learning about mistakes made in the past is exceptionally important. History also teaches source based analysis, balanced arguments and weighing up the credibility of evidence. All these skills are essential.

 

 

 

Geography, to be fair, I choose this as one of my course choices. But I still do not think its is all that needed. Theres hardly anything in it that I can apply to life normally.

 

 

 

Geography seems like an excellent subject for touching on modern issues such as globalisation, third world development and climate change. But I agree I wouldn't consider it one of the more important subjects.

 

 

 

IT, now really, I could learn more by myself than half the crap they taught us. They never taught me how to touch type, rather, it was more typing the words up from a sheet. Big freaking help that was. Maybe if they taught us more, like how a computer actually worked, then I'd agree.

 

 

 

Which is why I'd change the curriculum. You can't deny that IT skills are almost essential to most careers nowadays, the skills should be taught early and rigorously.

 

 

 

All the subject you put there, are compulsary up to a point where the basics have been taught. I myself am in my 6th year of High School, and I am 16. I turned 16 when I was in 5th year. Are you trying to imply that I should have been doing subjects I hated, for most of my School years?

 

 

 

Maybe you need to think that through more. Do not judge by age, as we can all be in different stages of High School at different ages.

 

 

 

Infact, in order for what you said to effectively work, you'd need to make all years of High School compulsary, as many leave school when they turn 16. We should have some skills that we need for our dream job, before we leave High School, at least then we have some knowledge for what we are in for.

 

 

 

I don't quite see your point here. Inevitably not everyone will enjoy every subject if they were made compulsory. But school isn't primarily about enjoyment, it's about learning and gaining the necessary skills. The subjects can be made interesting with a good curriculum and good teachers. In fact, i'd probably throw a basic economics course in there as well.

[scootlaboot]

The only class at my school that made go "why the heck do I have to do this" was Study Skills. Which was literally a class where you took notes on how to take notes.

[Nadril]

Classes such as Math and English teach you how to think critically, which is much needed really in any job or field.

 

 

 

 

 

The only class at my school that made go "why the heck do I have to do this" was Study Skills. Which was literally a class where you took notes on how to take notes.

 

 

 

In all honesty a lot of students could use this. Many people just have really poor study habits (such as I do, when I ever do study that is) which contributes to poor grades.

 

 

 

And if all else fails its an easy A class, right?

[Kenshinjapan]

God forbid your vocabulary improves and you read a book :roll: .

[Zierro]

The only problem I have with English is their boring curriculum. If they've chosen more interesting stories rather than The Scarlet Letter - stories that kids our age will actually get into - then I think most kids would do much better. It's up for the teachers to be able to ask good questions to allow kids to think critically - hell, it just takes a little creativity. You could do a lesson on Harry Potter, and if you had an intelligent enough teacher who can quiz you on the right things, then the kids could actually learn tons.

[Satenza]

 

2. i only handed in about 1 of 8 worksheets on the stupidest topic of all, romeo and juliet.

 

that brings me to a whole different topic. why would they try and teach romeo and juliet in school? it isnt even written in english.

 

 

 

So what language did Shakespeare write Romeo & Juliet in? Chinese?

[kickbuta]

 

2. i only handed in about 1 of 8 worksheets on the stupidest topic of all, romeo and juliet.

 

that brings me to a whole different topic. why would they try and teach romeo and juliet in school? it isnt even written in english.

 

 

 

So what language did Shakespeare write Romeo & Juliet in? Chinese?

 

 

 

I think he might have thought it was writen in italian, seeing as its based in vienna. but thats still a pretty stupid comment...

 

 

 

And on topic, the compulsory classes are to make sure kids get a rounder education, because once people get out of highschool they go to work, collage, and university and in all of those places you learn a very specific skill set. By making some classes compulsory it helps people be a bit more self reliant, say if for some reason theres a job shortage in a certain sector. With a more rounded education its easier to learn a new skill set and adapt to changes better. Theres so many people who know everything about one topic and nothing about others, like a scientist who cant fix their car or has terrible interpersonal skills (which I'v found english helps with).

[scootlaboot]

Classes such as Math and English teach you how to think critically, which is much needed really in any job or field.

 

 

 

 

 

The only class at my school that made go "why the heck do I have to do this" was Study Skills. Which was literally a class where you took notes on how to take notes.

 

 

 

In all honesty a lot of students could use this. Many people just have really poor study habits (such as I do, when I ever do study that is) which contributes to poor grades.

 

 

 

And if all else fails its an easy A class, right?

 

I didn't say it wasn't neccessary, but why did have to be a separate class and not like a unit in an english course. Sure it was an easy class, but notes and me just don't get along.....at all. I actually do better if I just pay attention rather than take notes.

 

 

 

 

 

On topic:I think schools need to start making band, chorus, drama, and art courses mandatory. Just one of them that the student selects. I mean if only facts get shoved down their throats eventually they'll snap. It's either that or make marijuana mandatory. I think I'll go with the former for 500, Alex.

[das1330]

I see no problem with having mandatory classes in school, at least for the basic subjects. At my school, you need to take a full four years of Math, Science, Social Studies, and English as well as some health, gym and other classes. If classes are not mandated, then it's just too easy to have students taking nothing but worthless classes, and not learning anything at all while using up tax dollars. With no mandatory classes, its just too easy to have someone take nothing but art classes or something else that does not teach anything useful.

[____]

The only problem I have with English is their boring curriculum. If they've chosen more interesting stories rather than The Scarlet Letter - stories that kids our age will actually get into - then I think most kids would do much better. It's up for the teachers to be able to ask good questions to allow kids to think critically - hell, it just takes a little creativity. You could do a lesson on Harry Potter, and if you had an intelligent enough teacher who can quiz you on the right things, then the kids could actually learn tons.

 

When I was in grade 10, or was it grade 9... I don't remember, we were assigned 'Tomorrow, When the War Began' by John Marsden. It was the first book which wasn't over 100 years old (or even 50 years old) any teacher in the history of my school had set to study. And even the students who were failing the subject actually took an interest in English because the content was more geared towards the age group. More teachers, and schools in general, need to understand that giving students a book from the 1800's and expecting us to enjoy it enough to break it down is thin. And in defence of 'The Scarlet Letter', it's a good read. Bit of an accquired taste but there's worse, like Wuthering Heights for example. If I had to chose between the two, I know it wouldn't be the latter.