Should public high schools start to focus more on teaching practical skill sets, such as balancing checkbooks and investing, versus subjects such as American history and art?

Topic:
Education Debates

18 Contributors
in this discussion.

Yes
56% of users

  • I think it is important for students to learn practical skills before they leave school.

    High school students are on the verge of entering the adult world. It is important that they know how to manage their resources, including balancing a checkbook and filling out tax forms. Adults who do not have these skills are at a disadvantage and at risk of being preyed upon by unscrupulous businesses.

    Yes FairMckinley99

  • Yes, because these real-world skills are very important, and sorely lacking in school.

    Let me qualify my opinion by saying that the subjects that are already being taught need to continue being taught. I am not an advocate of doing away with History, Math, Science, Art, and PE. What I am an advocate of is including real-world skills in the requirements for high school graduation. Students these days need to be taught how to live in the real world, and not just some ridiculous virtual world with no strings attached.

    Yes MariaR

  • I support the teaching of practical skills in high school because this is an important part of education.

    Public schools should teach students practical skills such as how to balance a checkbook as opposed to subjects like Art or Communications. Students should not be allowed to graduate without understanding basic skills required to function and prosper in our society. Without these basic skills many students have difficulty adjusting to life on their own as adults. Bypassing subjects such as art would allow for these life skills to be taught to students.

    Yes VampireShu

  • Public high schools should not start focusing on practical skills sets over history and art because without knowledge of our past, we are doomed to repeat our mistakes.

    George Washington once said in a letter to Fielding Lewis, "To rectify past blunders is impossible, but we might profit by the experience of them." If our youth isn't taught about the mistakes we have made, they are doomed to repeat them. Although balancing checkbooks and investing are important stepping stones to building a booming economy, they are worthless if we have no economy to build upon. If our youth isn't taught how we got through and thrived following the Great Depression, how will they succeed without the knowledge of how our forefathers succeeded.

    Yes 54r3nGris

  • Public high schools should teach practical financial information such as balancing checkbooks and investing so future generations know how to retire early.

    Skills that are taught right now are taught to teach kids to work. This is important, but the key financial skill sets needed to face the world are generally unheard of when kids leave high school or college. If finances are taught, this will better prepare future adults for life changing decisions such as buying a house and financing a car.

    Yes 5h4bbyIamo

  • Practical experience is more than the bookish knowledge.

    Yes, I totally agree that the public high schools should start to focus more on teaching practical skill sets such as balancing checkbooks and investing versus subjects such as American history and art. Because in the current world more practical skill sets are required rather than any bookish knowledge. I don't say that there should not be any exposure to the areas of American history and art, but I would feel that the teaching practical skill sets would surely help in the better development of kid.

    Yes I0rFashion

  • Practical skills are more important to a child rather than knowing theories and histories.

    I strictly support the debate question because a child with no practical knowledge who knows history is worthless. Most high schools are not focusing on practical skills. Practical skills make a child to learn concepts more easily, so the high schools should focus on practical skills more.

    Yes badaddicts

  • I agree that public high schools should start to focus more on practical skills because children should leave high school with skills they can use in the real world.

    Public high schools need to teach practical skill sets. Students are leaving high school without the ability to live on their own, if need be. Even college graduates aren't able to do simple things such as file their own taxes and read their credit card statements. Many high schools also fail to account that some high schools students can't afford attending a post-secondary institution right away or will not be attending one at all. Those students need transferable skills that they can take to the workplace and allow them to create a life for themselves as independent adults.

    Yes toastedstandard

  • I think that teaching practical skill sets is more desirable because it will help students to become successful later in their lives.

    Practical skills like balancing checkbooks and investing are a lot more useful in real life than subjects like American History and Art. Students can always read up on American History. If they are taught other skill sets it will stand them in good stead in future. So I think that public high schools must focus more on teaching them these subjects.

    Yes danoneeno

  • School is supposed to prepare you for the future and learning how to work with your finances should be incorporated into the curriculum.

    I have taken several years of school and learned a lot of great things but not all of them were helpful. Learning about art and history is important, but it is not going to help you be successful in life. So many young people are clueless about finances and if they started to learn it early, they would be much better off when they got older.

    Yes Tr0yKentros
Voice Your Opinion
No
44% of users

  • Education should be broad and include all subjects including classes on investing if desired.

    Some people have aptitudes for different skills and appreciate them more than others. Classes should be available in investing, art, American history and balancing checkbooks among many other skills; this should be made available in the later years after the basics are mastered. Some skills are good for everyone and should be taught like auto mechanics, sewing, checkbook balancing, investing, and a person should be able to choose in high school depending on their aptitude.

    No DisillusionedGilberto67

  • Just another unnecessary class

    There's a name that should be used for classes like P.E., Art, Choir, Band, and practical skills. They should be called electives. They are obviously useful skills, but you don't NEED to take a class on it to graduate. People don't realize that the main goal of high school is to prepare students for college. American History is important because it educates you on politics. Math and science are important, and foreign languages can be important. Art serves no advantage for college. Neither does balancing checkbooks and investing (but they can). That's why they should be electives.

    No Anonymous

  • Academics form the foundation of higher education, while practical skills ought to be taught outside of school.

    Academic pursuits, such as history or art, often form the basis for a lifelong career. Without exposure to these subjects, the high school student may never have cause to utilize the other proposed subjects. Additionally, many students will ignore such subjects, because of the automatic nature of these endeavors through banking websites.

    No LivingRoosevelt78

  • No

    Of course not. Middle and high schools should absolutely be sure to teach major real world skills, such as relationship building skills (required, not elective), parenting skills (required, not elective), money-management (required, not elective), and critical thinking skills through researching, understanding and debating different historical issues such as prohibition, states rights, immigration policies in different eras, the death penalty, animal rights, Native American policies, as well as global issues, etc.. There are hundreds to choose from and each year approximately 8 could be chosen as most likely to engage that age group with the 9th chosen by the students themselves. I can imagine the debates being videotaped to be shown to the student body. Students would certainly learn how powerful one person or one group can be in guiding the issue of the time period, as well as all about unintended consequences of decisions, etc., etc. We are now making sure that we start up Technology High Schools but how about starting a History Academy within each high school to really show students the value of learning how people feel, and think, which leads to how they behave and why they make the decisions they do, which leads to why certain laws are passed which we all have to abide by. It would cover economics, government, geography, details of human psychology, sociology and culture and religion (god forbid!), etc., and perhaps our citizens would eventually grow more likely to reject the buffoonery of the likes of Donald Trump, etc..... JustOneWoman'sOpinion

    No Anonymous

  • No and Yes, The question is not presented properly.

    The question should really be asked in a different way. Why is there no second option or a combination of the two? You are given a one or the other scenario. The world doesn’t work this way. I won't suggest a proper way to phrase the question, but I hope you can see why I have come to this conclusion. Personally, I really think we have our teaching curriculum way out of sync. Why are we teaching children who have little concept of government or care for American history at the ages we do? Why have accounting classes gone out of existence? If the schools can’t teach our children these basic things, or figure out a way to evolve with them… i.e. Digital technology. What use are they? Now they want mandatory pre-school, give me a break, seriously. Children have access to more knowledge that any school can ever dream of offering, the internet. If the education system doesn’t eventually catch up with the 21st century, it may find itself extinct. Remember is started with a book, blackboard and chalk over 100 years ago… It’s greatest innovation to date is the change to a whiteboard and marker. If a family has access to all of the world’s knowledge through a practically free system (cost of a PC and internet) Ask yourself this question, what stops them from just abandoning the public education system all together? I’d imagine only specialty schools would survive.

    No Anonymous

  • No, because there is no excuse for not teaching all of it, with an equal focus on all of it.

    There is no reason why the schools cannot teach all of these subjects. For one, American history should be one of the first things to be taught. Every kid in this country needs to know the history of where this great nation got its start. We always should teach our heritage. It just gets under my skin to think that people are actually thinking about not teaching our children about the history of this country. And we wonder why we have children acting out and doing dumb things, like bringing guns and knifes to school. Maybe because they do not have any sense of well-being or any type of American pride.

    No SlipArnal

  • Balancing checkbooks and investing are important skills that should be taught alongside other important subjects like history and art.

    Balancing checkbooks and investing are important skills that should be taught alongside other important subjects like history and art. These skills complement knowledge students acquire in fundamental classes like American History and Art. We cannot sacrifice a child's education by cutting programs that provide students vital knowledge and skills. Children who cannot converse about history become uninformed and apathetic adult voters.

    No NatBIab

  • I do not think that practical skill sets should replace subjects such as art and history in schools, because our country has too little "cultural capital" as it is.

    I read an article recently which spoke of "cultural capital," or a wealth of knowledge and appreciation for things which are not practical life skills, but encourage imagination. I teach theater, and I am appalled at my students' fixation on verisimilitude. They equate "non-realism" in film or theater with looking "fake." Artistic choices on the part of the playwright or director are criticized as not being an accurate presentation of reality. To me, this points to a dismissal of any art that does not duplicate the world around them-- an excessively pragmatist outlook like one sees in novels like "Fahrenheit 451." I think that our students do need to learn practical skills, but not at the expense of their already dwindling imaginations -- our "cultural capital."

    No Shim2free
Voice Your Opinion

Related Debates

Debate Topics

 
 
Should public high schools start to focus more on teaching practical skill sets, such as balancing checkbooks and investing, versus subjects such as American history and art?
Top of Page
© 2010 Juggle, LLC
All Rights Reserved
Encyclopedia & Reference Resource