Alexandra Blair, Education Correspondent
Enter our Snapshots of Summer photography competition
Plans to force teenagers to stay in education or training until they are 18 could cause mass truancy and criminalise thousands of young people, a teachers’ leader claimed yesterday.
Raising the education leaving age from 16 to 18 would simply “prolong the agony” of school for many disaffected pupils, Geraldine Everett, chairman of the Professional Association of Teachers, said.
Speaking at the PAT annual conference in Harrogate, Ms Everett said that the issue was a “potential minefield” if not handled sensitively and that teenagers should be given some choice over whether they worked, stayed on at school or in training.
“Here is a Government that has toyed with the idea of lowering the voting age to 16 in order to promote a greater sense of citizenship among our young people. Yet it proposes to extend compulsory education or training to 18, to compel the already disaffected to, in their perception, prolong the agony,” she said.
Last year Alan Johnson, the former Education Secretary, who left school at 16, said it was unacceptable to see a 16-year-old working and not receiving any training or schooling. He said that the number of 17-year-olds receiving some sort of education or training should be raised from the current 75 per cent to 90 per cent by 2015.
But Ms Everett gave warning that children for whom the system had already failed were unlikely to want to be alienated further by compulsory 16-18 education or business-led training, which is designed for purely economic reasons to fill a skills gap.
“To make them conscripts is likely to reinforce failure, leading to even greater disaffection,” she said.
“Enforcement could lead to mass truancy, further disruption to other learners and staff, maybe even needless criminalisation if enforcement measures are imposed.” To make sure teenagers turn up at school, college or their work placements, the Government proposes to threaten them with possible court action and £50 fines.
Ms Everett added that providing opportunities for this age group should perhaps be compulsory, but pleaded with the Government not to turn schools into “mere exam factories”.
Gordon Brown wants to change the law to require all teenagers to stay on in education or training until their 18th birthday from 2013 in an attempt to cut the number of young people who drop out of school and struggle to find jobs. More than 200,000 under17s are estimated to be out of education, employment and training.
Ms Everett suggested that more money should be spent on early years education, which would prevent the need for catchup later on.
Jim Knight, the Schools Minister, said: “It is only right that we are looking at all options to keep young people engaged in education or training up until 18, whether at school, training or in a job. Those young people who continue in education or training for longer earn more, and are less likely to be involved in antisocial behaviour.”

Win a luxury weekend to Newcastle and its neighbour Gateshead, find out more here
Risk, resilience and embracing new technology
Industry sectors news at a glance. Interactive heatmap, video and podcast
Discover the power of collective thinking. Submit a solution and be in with a chance to win a Media Hub Home Entertainment System
The inside track on current trends in the charity, not for profit and social enterprise sectors
Everything the Business Traveller needs to know to make a better trip
Make the most of the summer and enter our fabulous photographic competition, you could win a £5000 holiday
Corsica is an island of beauty and contrast, an ideal holiday destination
Enjoy further reading from Travel to Fashion, Business to Sport, discover more
Shortcuts to help you find sections and articles
The clever way to lease a new car is with Car leasing made simple™
2009
per month on 36-month
Personal Contract Hire (PCH)
2008
42850
Car Insurance
£24,250 - £30,346
MI5
London
£60,000
The Environment Agency
Bristol
Up to £90K
Boots
Midlands
OTE £85k
Credit Protection Association
Nationwide Opportunities
Completely London
Luxury Condo's in Manhattan with NYC views
The best new homes in Wimbledon?
Nationwide
Fabulous Cruise And Cruise & Stay Offers Including Virgin Atlantic Flights Prices Start From Only £699pp!
Last Minute Cruise And Cruise & Stay Offers. Med From £499pp, Caribbean From £699pp!
5 star quality at a 3 star price.
8 fabulous Canadian cities ...you won’t find cheaper
Contact our advertising team for advertising and sponsorship in Times Online, The Times and The Sunday Times, or place your advertisement.
Times Online Services: Dating | Jobs | Property Search | Used Cars | Holidays | Births, Marriages, Deaths | Subscriptions | E-paper
News International associated websites: Globrix Property Search | Property Finder | Milkround
Copyright 2009 Times Newspapers Ltd.
This service is provided on Times Newspapers' standard Terms and Conditions. Please read our Privacy Policy.To inquire about a licence to reproduce material from Times Online, The Times or The Sunday Times, click here.This website is published by a member of the News International Group. News International Limited, 1 Virginia St, London E98 1XY, is the holding company for the News International group and is registered in England No 81701. VAT number GB 243 8054 69.
This is the stupidest idea, i've heard since drugs prohibition. The government needs to learn to respect the civil liberties of all people regardless of their age. Children are not animals for government to use as they wish. The school leaving age should be lowered to 14, not raised to 18.
Edward, London, England
As someone who was already intending to stay in school up to age 18 I think this is completely ludicrous. It is horribly unfair for Gordon Brown's government to attempt to control a decision which will affect the rest of a person's life, especially when it is only to win a game of international one-upmanship using their figures. This is a personal decision, not a problem which can be legislated away.
Having said that, people my age don't seem to listen to experience enough, so please, please, please, persuade away! Provide us with the facts on why it is better to stay in school, encourage us to stay on, but the government needs to remember that YOUNG ADULTS have the right to control their own futures, for better or for worse.
TK, London,
This is simply more legislation from a legislation-mad government. It seems odd that at a time when it is recognised that government intervention does not work, and legislative intervention (i.e. threatening to criminalise people) can be counter-productive. Stop telling children and their parents what is best for them. My children go to a Waldorf Steiner school because it doesn't aim to crush the human spirit, it doesn't force the effects of testing, exams, and other teacher supports onto the child. Nor does it impress upon the child that they must be 'successful' in life by doing training and then becoming a wage slave. This decision will leave millions of children even more traumatised: My own experience at school was hell and the day I left (my 16th birthday) was one of the happiest of my life. I didn't get 'training', I made my way in life, joined the army, and then went to uni when I was ready (I now have a masters and phd). Children go to school for education not social control!
Alex, Smith, Herefordshire
A typical politician's answer to a problem - "I'll wave my hand and legislate it away"!
Unfortunately, Gordon Brown has never lived in the real world - ever! His predecessor was just as bad with his "50% graduates" target.
You can educate all you like but you cannot legislate to educate.
KR, Stockport,
I was teaching in Coventry during the 70's, with the mass unemployment of school leavers as a result of the collapse of the motorcar industry there.
At this time when there were no jobs, most 16-19 year olds stayed on at school/college, full time/part-time.
Indeed the government of the day was touting the idea of raising the school leaving age.
But then there were more jobs...YTS, and so on , and the idea was dropped.
So if there are jobs, then raising the school leaving age ?????
J.Kelvyn Richards, Trikala, Greece
I am the mother of an intelligent 17 year old, who left school having completed his GCSE's with good grades but without a job. I tried to make him go back to school to study but he dropped out. The school could not force him to stay and neither could I.
He has spent a year dithering about not knowing what to do with himself, he is unmotivated. I have tried all sorts of things to try to inspire him. I have tried tempting him with college and apprenticeships, all to no avail.
The problem is, he knows he can't be made to do anything but his is not mature enough to realise that the longer he waits the harder it will be to get into work.
I believe the children who decide not to continue with school and do not have a job, apprenticeship or further education to fall back on should be made to carry out national service.
They would be disciplined and educated whilst seeing the world.
This would stop this flow of unmotivated young adults, who are let go by the education system to easily.
Kelly, london, uk
One can only continue to despair at the management of the education system in this country. There is always some new initiative that ignores the real problem - low standards in the classroom, and a lack of freedom for good teachers to set high standards - and will only make things worse. When will we ever learn to concentrate on just putting kids in a classroom and giving them rigorous lessons?
Oliver Chettle, Bedford,
School was bad enough with all the boneheads who stayed onto 16. Why should we waste more money on them until they're 18? The government, as per usual, thinks that if it slaps us about a bit, we'll behave and become better people. But lowering the leaving age to 14 and bringing in decent (and voluntary) apprenticeships would be a better idea. [Fades out to Pink Floyd's 'Brick In The Wall'...]
Alexander, Winchester,
"Gordon Brown wants to change the law to require all teenagers to stay on in education or training until their 18th birthday from 2013 in an attempt to cut the number of young people who drop out of school and struggle to find jobs."
No brainer: raising the leaving age will INCREASE the number of young people who drop out of school and/or training.
What's the real intent: compulsion = oppression. Under no circumstances, especially in the face of seductive political rhetoric should we believe that compulsion achieves anything but for those who would be in control to feel so.
Rob Riches, Croydon, uk
Please NO! After teaching low ability year 11 mathematics this year - the thought of having them for another 2 years will send them and me over the edge!
Education is underfunded as it is - who will pay for not only the new rooms, but where will we get the teaching staff from? There is already a shortage of core subject teachers.
To respond to C Hunt's comment about people in shops have "dead end " Jobs - My husband has a A level's , and a degree in sciences and runs a shop! be careful before you label people!
Dizz, Bognor Regis, England
Alan Johnson wants to see 16 year olds working, receiving training and schooling. Surely the simple answer is to reintroduce National Service. That way not only will 16 year olds work, learn and be schooled in many subjects including discipline and citizenship (something so important to the current Government) but they will also not be a drain on the ever increasing demands of the welfare state to which so many belong, giving up work at the first possible opportunity.
It might also help solve the problem of binge drinking and late night brawls - I am sure if a few were being shot at by Al Qaeda insurgents their blood lust would possibly diminish a little.
Nick Compton, Bude, North Cornwall
Unless the education system in England sees much improvement we will have eighteen year old illiterates to contend with.
Ivy Saville, Gravesend, England
The decision as to whether or not to continue the education of these potential dropouts seems to hinge mostly on money. If you are reading this, do you wish to make a monetary contribution for this purpose? Do these kids matter enough to you?
henry cowan, linthicum, usa/md
Any one with any sense, children of their own, or any knowledge of school will know that this is a bad idea, but when has a Government ever had any common sense? You cannot get away from it.....the youngsters need jobs and the Government and business AREN'T providing any.
Judy , Liverpool, england
If a 16 year old gets married, how can they enforce attendance at school? Who will foot the bill for childminding any children while they go to school, while they should be bonding with their babies? I know of 17 year old boys who are married and working . Would it really be better to force them out of a job and back to school to try to attain qualifications which they probably don't need ?
What we do need is the old system of apprenticeships, but not on the slave labour rates they used to be paid. We need plumbers, electricians, carpenters and bricklayers.Training on the job with day release for college worked. Time to get real. Not everyone is academically inclined. A pass mark in History and Social Studies won't help you build a brick wall, or mend a leaking pipe. For that matter I don't think it would get you into many professions.
Beryl, WINDSOR, England
I would try to get some of those prominent entrepreneurs to help the upper seventh form and help, even with training session for these future employees. This would also help them in the transformiation period from school kids to adults, which is pretty hard if you think we spend 8 hours,or more, per day at work. It could be stimulating and also take some pressure off the teachers. It´s about time companies put something back into education instead of complaining all the time at the poor quality of workers education.
Angela Rodruigez, Pettswood, Kent
Just to be clear, the government has not proposed that people should be forced to stay on at school until they are 18. The current proposal is that they should continue to get education or training until then. They would still be entitled to leave school to do an apprenticeship, get a job with some training attached to it, or go to college if they preferred it to school. Unskilled jobs are becoming rarer, and young people will have very little chance of a future unless they can be persuaded to develop an appropriate skill. School is certainly not the only way to do that.
Phil Samuels, Sheffield, UK
Time for some courage and a long term fix , rather than a "quick-fit" age raising policy so that your problems can be passed onto your future replacement in government!
This short term out look of politicians seems to be a recipe for disaster, most worryingly when its the education of the Nation's future at stake!
Johnny , Southport, England
Raising the school leaving age to 18 will also prolong the agony of teachers!!
Rod Barker, Gainsborough, Lincolnshire
I believe that further and higher education to 18 years, should remain as invidual choices with greater emphasis on training for vocationl job getting opportunies and full value skilled employment.
Esuring that youth ate able to choose enough years in vocational skilled job skilling,.stronger imprinting on apprenticeships and less promoting on media and sociology studies and moe attention to langauges from age 14 would help teenagers!
FE has been the `poor cousin' from age 16-19 and has remained at a `cut-priced' option for teenagers despite being the largest provider of vocational qualifications! In the UK there is a pressing gap in skilled workers and there is a funding gap between schools and collegesthat must be closed.
Mr Brown would do better to look again at the OFSTED appraisal that `Good leadership,consistency and apprpriate curriculum' would help restore confidence!
Teenagers require more tighter vocational `hands-On' programmes working closely with Colleges/Industry.
Cllr Patrick Smith, London E4, UK
If this plan went ahead I'd feel very sorry for all the kids who actually *want* to stay in school that long because the attention they'll get from staff (already insufficient) will be halved and grades will plummet. If you look at lists of prominent entrepreneurs you'll see scores of people who left school at 16, thus giving their creativity and thirst for learning-by-doing a free rein. Kids are smart, they know whether academia is for them or not - we must let them choose!
Friya, London,
If a student doesn't know the basics of reading, writing and arithmetic by the time they leave primary school it is very unlikely that they will succeed in secondary school and will just cause disruptiom to the rest of the students. By forcing these underachievers to stay on (why go out and get a job when they can muck about in school all day with their mates?) the students who actually want to learn will suffer.
Also, don't we need people in shop jobs and other "dead-end" jobs? At least they're working and not on state benefits.
What is the intention of this scheme? Getting more people into further and higher education? Or simply delaying the young from leaving school and contributing to the economy?
C Hunt, Glasgow, UK
Not everyone fits into the same mould so some flexibility is required. Let them leave school before 18 IF they have a guaranteed job, then if they don't keep it send them back to school. Disaffection is a state of mind, minds need to be trained, and compulsion teaches that social responsibility comes before selfish irresponsibilty.
M R, New Malden, UK
A quick glance at any County Council's list of available schools will show that there are insufficient sixth form colleges to cope with current demand.
Where are the buildings going to be found to house all the extra students without spending massive amounts of money on building new schools - a thought which probably hasn't crossed the minds of the people proposing this flawed concept?
George Brink, Hinckley, Leics, UK