[Jer8m8]

First off, I am 16, and would desperately like the chance to vote in this year's presidential election-there's my bias, I'm for lowering the voting age. But anyway, why are students excluding from deciding information on their education? In my expierence, teachers are evaluated when the principle occasionally comes in, or when the stage a video shoot to send to the state. This is not a realistic way to judge a teacher. Students should also be allowed to give input as to their needs in a school, and to what the main problems are. Besides, for many of us, it is our money in taxes that goes to these schools. Why shouldn't we have a voice as to how it is spent. I for one believe that no child left behind does just the opposite by taking away funding for the other end of the spectrum, the "gifted". Why should there be a choice here? Why should sports come before funding in some schools? Why must curriculums be upgraded year after year to make a school look better? Why shouldn't we able to honestly sit down and say, "That man is not teaching correctly" without fear? Why are we censored in school? Why is there a dress code in violation of the first amendment?

[SpiderMonkey]

If you are 16, how do your taxes pay for your school? You don't pay taxes?

On to your other point - there is a downside to constantly evaluating teachers. In the UK, it is done by testing their pupils then publishing the scores. This puts immense pressure on teachers to 'teach to the test' - simply training children to answer exam questions and not actually educating them.

As for giving 16 year olds the vote - great idea. Young people tend to vote to the left anyway As a matter of fact, I think Tony Blair mentioned the possibility of sufferage age being lowered to 16 a few weeks ago.

[Maxim Litvinov]

Actually, the most favoured pedagogical methods taught in universities today emphasise that giving students the opportunity to guide and structure their learning is one of the best things you can do as a teacher...

While I'm not personally sure about giving young students the right/responsibility to veto certain teachers, I think some things - such as the right to determine available subjects or cafeteria foods or choices in sport should involve more student consultation.

Do you have some sort of student representative committee, and if so what are its functions?

[Mr. Anderson]

If you are 16, how do your taxes pay for your school? You don't pay taxes?

Sales tax. Teens pay billions of dollars in sales tax annually in the U.S. Granted, property tax is what usually funds schools. But teens are taxed. In the California state legislature, they were in committee for a bill to grant partial votes to teenagers. A student from Berkley that came to testify pointed out that it is taxation without representation. I never looked at it that way, but it is an accurate statement.

Teens also are the ones who have to take the blunt of the effects of budget cuts in education and recreation. But they cannot use voting power to prevent any of this. In this case, the people who benefit the least from a program can decide to slash it and use it to benefit themselves more. That is also a situation to worry about.

It is a much more complex issue than at first glance. I think teens would generally vote like their parents do, if they bother to vote at all. If idiocy is in that equation, it comes from the eligible voter and not the teen. This raises many questions. By nature, will only the teens who are capable of making an educated decision vote? I do not see the "cool kids" voting anytime soon. Will a bigger problem be parental influence?

This is definitely something which needs more study, but it is not completely unreasonable to give teens a vote in their community. They do pay some taxes, but are not given any formal representation.

[Fernando]

In Spain students have representatives in the "Consejo Escolar" (School Council). They are heavily outnumbered by parents and teachers representatives. We don't have your problems with allocating the taxes: publics schools and universities are funded by the government and so, sales taxes are used to pay learning bill. It is doubtful, at any rate, if taxes are actually paid by students or by their parents.

Pedantic quote: In medieval Spanish universities students chose the rector (the principal of the university).

I think students should have a voice but not having the last word. If I remember my classmates I wouldn't trust a shit they hadn't choose other subjects but football and sex.

[Boondock Saint]

This is something I dont understand ...

When I was in high school students did have some sway, they would get together and the student council would be able to persuade the school administration to do this or that.

The main reason kids dont have much power is simple, they arent organized enough to have power and influence. Your avg. teen would rather look at girls or whatever then talk about politics and naturally only the groups with numbers are counted in a democratic system.

Sales tax. Teens pay billions of dollars in sales tax annually in the U.S.

This is the second time you have used this and again, those teens are more then likely spending mommy and daddys money so really their parents are paying tax. Sure a teen might have a job and pay taxes via employment tax and sales tax but so what? We all pay that. And sales tax is not a gov't tax on the people, its a tax on the store, the store just passes said tax to the people as opposed to pay it.

And if you dont want to pay sales tax then dont buy something.

[Jer8m8]

Let's see if I can answer the issues brought up here. First, thanks for listening to my ideas at face value. Many people scoff at the idea of kids voting, and in fact feel the voting age should be raised! How "democratic"

Taxes. Besides sales tax, I earn interest on a bank account, and some tiny stock dividends. Most teenagers have bank accounts.

Testing is not the way to test teachers. I hate when teacheres teach to tests. Teacher grading should involve many factors including student opinion.

Personally, I would definitely vote left, if only for the environmentally policies. George Bush will probably not live to see the full consequences of his environmental decisions. God willing, I will.

My school does have an SGA (Student Government Association), which does very little besides fundraisers for charities. For "Spirit Week" for instance, SGA runs it, but all opinions and changes come from administration. SGA has very little power . I believe there are other groups, but I dunno what impact, if any, they have.

I probably would vote the way my parents would, I admit. But college students forget their parenting when it comes to voting? My opinions coincide in many ways with my parents.

Teen voting rates, I imaginwe would be about the same as the 18-24 group. However, in 2000, about 2/3 of registered voters actually voted. If adults have the right to waste votes, why not give us the chance to change the future?

Look, history shows that the issues of today are the problems of tomorrow. If Bush is reelcted, will I be drafted in two years? I thikn I should have the right to say no.

Any issue the involves the adult population involves teenagers, because we eventually will be considered adults. I would like to see money available for social security. I want better gun control re school shootings. I want our country to be on good international standing.

On education, the way it is now is that seniors, the greatest voting block in our country, generally come out in droves to vote against school budgets. Why are they in charge of my education?

And on censorship: My school's filter gives a warning when I visit this website. Figures. That's the same category google.com is in.

[Mr. Anderson]

Just before I begin, I would like to say I am still undecided on this one and that whether teen voting would work well or not depends on numerous variables and would require extensive testing.

When I was in high school students did have some sway, they would get together and the student council would be able to persuade the school administration to do this or that.

You could argue the same thing for elections. Ban voting altogether and let the people have sway through getting together and petitioning the government. The argument itself is irrelevant. The topic at hand it mostly if teens are capable of effectively having formal power in these matters, not the alternatives they have at their disposal if they don't.

The main reason kids dont have much power is simple, they arent organized enough to have power and influence. Your avg. teen would rather look at girls or whatever then talk about politics and naturally only the groups with numbers are counted in a democratic system.

Would they care enough to even bother to vote?

I'd just like to add, I'm not advocating that they should be given complete control of everything. I just think they are in a better position to make decisions than a bunch of random people who tour schools every now and then. They are the ones who know what it is like to be in school, and they are the ones who have to live with it.

I would also like to say, it is possible that only teens who know enough about these issues to make an informed decision would actually vote. I am not saying it is certain, but it is reason to not immediately dismiss the idea of teens voting about how their education is handled and other issues.

Sales tax. Teens pay billions of dollars in sales tax annually in the U.S.

This is the second time you have used this and again, those teens are more then likely spending mommy and daddys money so really their parents are paying tax. Sure a teen might have a job and pay taxes via employment tax and sales tax but so what? We all pay that. And sales tax is not a gov't tax on the people, its a tax on the store, the store just passes said tax to the people as opposed to pay it.

Actually, technically this is my first. This thread encouraged me to start the opinion poll. But that is irrelevant to this conversation.

Is there really any difference between spending "mommy and daddys money" when given to you as a teen than when given to you via a welfare program? Should all people on welfare be denied the right to vote because thety don't earn their own money? If anything, people on welfare should be denied the right to vote before teenagers should be denied the right to vote. They are, mostly, the people who have failed at life. Do we want these people making decisions about our community's future? Yet these people are still given the right to vote. Why?

Except in this case, it isn't a certainty that teenagers are getting hand-outs. Some teens may be working and making their own money and paying taxes on this money like you said. What about them? Shouldn't they be able to determine if their tax dollars should go to funding their education or not?

It could also be argued that getting a job adds a certain amount of maturity. If only teens with an income were allowed to vote, for example, could that mean more mature teen voters deciding to control their money?

And if you dont want to pay sales tax then dont buy something.

And if you don't want to pay income tax, then don't make any income.

= = = = =

In conclusion, I am just saying it is a complex issue and the possibility should not be immediately dismissed.