High School should be terminated and replaced with an alternative.

Your responses were good and I will do my best to address them. In regards to your first response, the core flaws of a classical education: 1) Education was never meant to appeal to people; it is just something you have to do. Visual learning causes nothing but distractions- the teachers at my school have to work so hard to get all the students to put down their i pads and listen to the lesson. In a world where people are connected to their phones at the hip, it would be nothing but beneficial to force students to function without them for part of their day. I am not proposing to make this a forced nationwide method like common core, just to make it a valid option for certain schools. Does education really need to be attractive to American children? I don't think it does, and the problems that come with incorporating electronics are more trouble than they are worth. 2) I find the lack of interest in the arts in America to be a problem that needs to be fixed, not something that should limit our education. As you said "America doesn't value liberal arts or classic books". We need to change that! Society has been so dumbed down to the point where we don't know anything about the arts or the classics, and everything is all about pop icons and sports. Yes, sports do have a place in society but it should not displace other important aspects like the arts. 3) I go to a Christian school so I never really took the Christian based education to be a problem. But you are right, others that follow different religions may have a problem with this. But really, how is this any different than teaching Evolution as a fact when we all know that is anti-Christian? The classical education would have to be modernized to a certain extent (I wouldn't have a problem with showing pictures or movies, just let's avoid all the students bringing their devices to school) but it is the fast paced learning style and the emphasis on classical literature that is my main concern. In regards to learning math from literature: Yes, it is best to do it that way, and that is the way it would be done. The only difference is that the lessons would have something to do with the literature. It does not even have to be the one book that is being read; the point of not separating the subjects is so students could see that when put together, basic learning is important in real life. In regards to your response about internships: The reason we need internships is so that the student will know what the job they are majoring in is like. How am I supposed to know if I want to be a doctor if I don't know what being a doctor is like? The point of the four years in internships is: a. to experience life with a career b. to learn about the job you think you want c. to learn basic knowledge of how to do the job you want The problem with simply lowering the age for internships is that a student does not have time to be a full time student, try to maintain a part time job, possibly play an oh-so-beloved-sport, AND have an internship! Of course not! My system allows a student to, instead of wasting their time on classes they do not need, learn about the job they think they want. What practical skills do you get from high school anyway? Switching is not an issue here- it's not like choosing to intern at a hospital will make you a doctor for life. Whereas switching majors can mess up your whole schedule and cause you to have taken classes you don't need. In regards to your statement about math: I'm sorry, I don't understand what you meant when you said "My opponeonts proposal would support an area that is terrible for jobs and Americans don't care about." Could you clarify? As for the rest of the response, I don't think this is a problem unique to my system. For instance, some schools will teach their students Advanced Models and Functioning, while others go to PreCalculus. Math was not a self-based activity, I was never proposing that the student teach themselves Algebra or learn new concepts; just that they ensure that they know what they already have learned. They won't even need to know Math if they choose to major in English. In regards to your statement about sports and arts: You have stated a problem with American culture that does need to be fixed- our disinterest with the arts. I believe an education incorporating the arts will help foster more interest. As for colleges finding athletes, here is how that would work: - Some side leagues would become more competitive and serious (Many schools do not have orchestras, hence the development of prestigious youth orchestras that are hard to get in to) - A student would get in to the team and practice the sport - A student would apply for a college - The student would include their sports knowledge and what team they were on. - The college now knows about the sports and can ask the student to try out if it wishes. In regards to core curriculum: I'm sorry, I forgot to address that. My question about this is what kinds of classes could possibly benefit a student more than firsthand experience on the job? We (as a country) have seem to have forgotten this, but the whole point of education is to prepare you for a job. In regards to National Curriculum: Yes, common core is making education harder, but not in the right way. A classical education is hard because it is fast paced and focuses on higher levels of literature. Common core is hard because concepts like math are taught in weird ways that are hard to understand.