politics
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
view the rest of the comments
My school had us all take it at 16.
If you refused you had to go sit in the cafeteria by yourself and weren't allowed to even study. Just sit there with your eyes open not doing anything for like 4 hours.
Fuck that’s awful. Were you in Idaho or something equally awful?
Pretty much, we're also talking about right after 9/11.
We had people signing delayed papers as soon as they turned 17 so they'd go to boot immediately after HS graduation.
It was a wild time.
They had us take it in the 90s in my high school but we quickly knew it was worth nothing so everyone tanked it on purpose. We were already weary of standardized testing and knew just what to ask the teachers.
Malicious compliance is always fun but way better in groups.
A bunch of us picked the same letter for every answer so we could compare our scores and test probability.
I went to high school during peace time — that used to be a thing way back when — and I think my school required it for ROTC but maybe it was more of a strong suggestion rather than a requirement.
We also had possibly the worst possible system for military recruiters. You had to choose between the regular P.E. class, weight lifting (if you played a sport), and ROTC. The end result was that ROTC was always like 2% committed future service members (who would have joined the military with or without high school ROTC) and 98% awkward people avoiding sports at all cost. (Or the worst fate of all, 1st hour PE so you were the person who smelled like stanky teen gym clothes in every one of your classes.)
Every time I hear stories like this, it reminds me of my old high school. As it was the only public school in the city and there were no alternatives, it was damn near impossible to actually get expelled unless you were physically threatening or dealing cocaine in the halls.
They tried punishments like this too for a variety of reasons. Not being ready for gym class, or some hands-on class that requires a uniform. In-school suspension for minor infractions. Dress code violations. Stuff like that. They were happy that most of the kids bothered to show up and not cause problems at all. Kids were gonna sit there with their headphones on, head on a desk, and probably taking a nap. Attempting to tell the kids they couldn't do that was probably going to be met with a middle finger. What were you gonna do, suspend them? That's what they wanted in the first place. It was a 3 day vacation to them.
Our school offered it, and you got out of your other classes to take it. I’m still in the military, some 18 years later, and I’d still suggest it for everyone as an option like mine was. I wouldn’t even feel too badly about schools requiring it. It’s just another test, without any obligation after. But, for a lot of lower income families, and for students who don’t perform too well, this opens another option for them after they graduate. Especially one that, with some potential risks to your body or life… could absolutely pay for your college.
People here don’t want a real tangible way out of their money problems.
It was a good start for me as well but people on Lemmy really don’t want to hear it.
I fucked my way through HS, and graduated with a 2.7 something. I fought hard at college to get a 3.2 by graduation. And I didn’t even go STEM. I wouldn’t have ever had scholarships or been able to be a traditional student without the military. I’m not making too much, but the opportunities I’ve had have come from this option, and that test. For some people a career and opportunity can be found here. Especially those poorer or lower income individuals I work with, people who were set up for failure or had it worse than I did.