Public Schools
- Thread starter Danoff
- 94 comments
- 3,050 views
- 24,344
- Midlantic Area
- GTP_Duke
Public schools... I could write volumes, based on my experience as both a private school student, and a public school parent. I will try to answer your questions.
Good education/weak education? It depends upon the district administration and the teachers at the perticular school within that district. Our kids aot to go to an excellent elementary school (one's in 5th grade and moved on, the other's wrapping up 1st right now). The teachers and parents of this school have been locked in battle with the District administration for the past 3 years. Our learning, as demonstrated by both ability and test scores, is almost the highest in the state - yet the District is forcing curriculum and teaching methods changes on the local teachers that neither they nor we as parents support. The District claims we are simply elitist and only want to pander to the high achievers/rich kids, and that our test scores are only good because the school serves a large number of university faculty kids and professionals kids who live in the area. They claim our current methods have nothing to do with the success of the school. They accuse us of being reactionary to these new methods and curricula (which truly suck, IMHO). However, they ignoring one thing: they've already saddled us with a double-sized helping of disadvantaged kids, taken from another school (which is struggling, due to the new methods adopted), yet even with an extra helping of low performers, our averages are better and our low-end is higher than the other school.
The other serious mistake that the District is making is that they are unequivocably equating low income with inability to learn. That's a subject so huge that I won't go into it further at the moment.
So, the school itself shines, in a troubled district. We've finally convinced the Board to oust the Superintendant (it was a 2-year battle, narrowly won) and we are slowly replacing the Board itself as they come up for election. But by the time that process is complete it will be nearly too late for my kids.
Necessary? My jury is out on this one. Smart people value education and want to go to school anyway. Stupid people don't. You cannot compel someone to value education, despite its obvious advantages. By the same token, by compelling them to go to school, you can't necessarily make them learn. But I guess you have to try.
Cost Effective? Not necessarily. Definitely cost effective if you feel obligated to support a lot of illiterate stooges with Welfare after they don't go to school and don't learn anything, because no one made them and they were too stupid to see the value themselves. On the other hand, the federal government spends more than enough money on education already. The problem is the way that money is spent, which can be extremely wasteful and ineffective.
Constitutional? See my second answer above. Also, there is provision for home and private schooling withing the educational system, which really helps the whole problem skirt the Constitutionality issue.
Would private schools be more competetive? I went to a very good private school from 5th to 12th grade. I got an excellent education. It was fairly expensive - the only reason I got to go was that I was the last of four kids, meaning A) there was only one of me in school at the time, and B) my parents were well established and making more money by the time it was my turn. I cannot afford to send my two daughters (ages 11 and 7) there without major privations on everybody's part.
Fortunately there is an intriguing alternative: charter schools. My elder daughter is finishing her first year (5th grade) in a brand new one. This charter school was founded by a group of active, involved parents - we were among them - who were tired of the aforementioned battle with the authoritarian District we were stuck in. The elementary school hadn't succumbed yet, but the middle schools our kids were scheduled to go to had already lost the fight. Most of the good teachers had quit and their test scores have started to slip. Rather than see that continue, a number of parents poured thousdands of hours and hundreds of thousands of dollars into founding a new public charter school from scratch.
Charter schools are free to their students: public school. In our case, the terms of admission are by lottery, with no academic requirements. We serve at-risk students as well as stars and middle-of-the-curve kids. Yet the test scores we have are absolutely among the highest in the state.
A charter school is not part of a larger district. The state provides it with the same number of operating dollars per student as it does the other public schools, so charter students are required to meet the public education standards for achievement. However, to do so, the school is free to set its own mission and goals and methods. Our school's mission is "Excellence in Academics and Decorum". Other charter schools aim towards disciplinary-problem kids, artistic kids, etc. The point is that parents and kids a free to select the program that suits them. For every student in our school (about 600), there is another kid on the waiting list who missed the lottery. That tells me we're doing something right.
That choice requires some effort on the family's part, though - a good thing. Charter schools get operating money, but not startup costs, so we've donated a fair amount of money to establishing the school. Nothing like what private tuition would cost, though. We also volunteer a lot of time. Our school is a not-for-profit, self-organized thing, though. Other charter schools are operated privately by for-profit companies, so families do not necessarily contribute to them directly.
I couldn't be happier with this setup, even though it's meant 2 years in small modular classroooms (the new permanent building opens in the fall). My daughter is learning at a phenominal pace. She's doing it in an ethnically and economically diverse school, but one that supports my values - good academic achievement and good personal behaviour. My tax dollars are helping every student at this public school, and I freely give additional time and money because I support the school. It's the best of all worlds in public education.
Good education/weak education? It depends upon the district administration and the teachers at the perticular school within that district. Our kids aot to go to an excellent elementary school (one's in 5th grade and moved on, the other's wrapping up 1st right now). The teachers and parents of this school have been locked in battle with the District administration for the past 3 years. Our learning, as demonstrated by both ability and test scores, is almost the highest in the state - yet the District is forcing curriculum and teaching methods changes on the local teachers that neither they nor we as parents support. The District claims we are simply elitist and only want to pander to the high achievers/rich kids, and that our test scores are only good because the school serves a large number of university faculty kids and professionals kids who live in the area. They claim our current methods have nothing to do with the success of the school. They accuse us of being reactionary to these new methods and curricula (which truly suck, IMHO). However, they ignoring one thing: they've already saddled us with a double-sized helping of disadvantaged kids, taken from another school (which is struggling, due to the new methods adopted), yet even with an extra helping of low performers, our averages are better and our low-end is higher than the other school.
The other serious mistake that the District is making is that they are unequivocably equating low income with inability to learn. That's a subject so huge that I won't go into it further at the moment.
So, the school itself shines, in a troubled district. We've finally convinced the Board to oust the Superintendant (it was a 2-year battle, narrowly won) and we are slowly replacing the Board itself as they come up for election. But by the time that process is complete it will be nearly too late for my kids.
Necessary? My jury is out on this one. Smart people value education and want to go to school anyway. Stupid people don't. You cannot compel someone to value education, despite its obvious advantages. By the same token, by compelling them to go to school, you can't necessarily make them learn. But I guess you have to try.
Cost Effective? Not necessarily. Definitely cost effective if you feel obligated to support a lot of illiterate stooges with Welfare after they don't go to school and don't learn anything, because no one made them and they were too stupid to see the value themselves. On the other hand, the federal government spends more than enough money on education already. The problem is the way that money is spent, which can be extremely wasteful and ineffective.
Constitutional? See my second answer above. Also, there is provision for home and private schooling withing the educational system, which really helps the whole problem skirt the Constitutionality issue.
Would private schools be more competetive? I went to a very good private school from 5th to 12th grade. I got an excellent education. It was fairly expensive - the only reason I got to go was that I was the last of four kids, meaning A) there was only one of me in school at the time, and B) my parents were well established and making more money by the time it was my turn. I cannot afford to send my two daughters (ages 11 and 7) there without major privations on everybody's part.
Fortunately there is an intriguing alternative: charter schools. My elder daughter is finishing her first year (5th grade) in a brand new one. This charter school was founded by a group of active, involved parents - we were among them - who were tired of the aforementioned battle with the authoritarian District we were stuck in. The elementary school hadn't succumbed yet, but the middle schools our kids were scheduled to go to had already lost the fight. Most of the good teachers had quit and their test scores have started to slip. Rather than see that continue, a number of parents poured thousdands of hours and hundreds of thousands of dollars into founding a new public charter school from scratch.
Charter schools are free to their students: public school. In our case, the terms of admission are by lottery, with no academic requirements. We serve at-risk students as well as stars and middle-of-the-curve kids. Yet the test scores we have are absolutely among the highest in the state.
A charter school is not part of a larger district. The state provides it with the same number of operating dollars per student as it does the other public schools, so charter students are required to meet the public education standards for achievement. However, to do so, the school is free to set its own mission and goals and methods. Our school's mission is "Excellence in Academics and Decorum". Other charter schools aim towards disciplinary-problem kids, artistic kids, etc. The point is that parents and kids a free to select the program that suits them. For every student in our school (about 600), there is another kid on the waiting list who missed the lottery. That tells me we're doing something right.
That choice requires some effort on the family's part, though - a good thing. Charter schools get operating money, but not startup costs, so we've donated a fair amount of money to establishing the school. Nothing like what private tuition would cost, though. We also volunteer a lot of time. Our school is a not-for-profit, self-organized thing, though. Other charter schools are operated privately by for-profit companies, so families do not necessarily contribute to them directly.
I couldn't be happier with this setup, even though it's meant 2 years in small modular classroooms (the new permanent building opens in the fall). My daughter is learning at a phenominal pace. She's doing it in an ethnically and economically diverse school, but one that supports my values - good academic achievement and good personal behaviour. My tax dollars are helping every student at this public school, and I freely give additional time and money because I support the school. It's the best of all worlds in public education.
- 267
Like Neon_Duke, I too have experience in both Private and Public schools.
From Kindergarten, up until last year (8th grade) I attended Private Catholic Schools. For me personally, the experience was wonderful. Although I am not Catholic (I'm non-denominational basically. I've got Apostolic, Pentacostal and Baptist shooting at me from all sides of the family) I am Christian. It was a lot of fun, educational, challenging, and family friendly. But...there was set backs.
Because I was not Catholic, the tuition was a lot more expensive than what the Catholic students had to pay. Why? Since we did not belong to that church, or another Catholic church, my tuition was higher for the fact we had not "contributed" to the church offerings and such. For one thing, I thought this was kind of ridiculous. We already attend a church of our own, and paid our offerings to that one. Sheesh.
Diversity was an issue to. When I was younger and going to the Catholic schools I was a bit confused up until around 3rd grade. I didn't understand. All I knew about was Jesus, God, Mary, Angels, Heaven, Hell, Satan...you know, the Christian typicals. Denomination was never a factor in our family so to me, attending a Catholic school was a bit of an experience. But my biggest problem was how limited I was to participate in certain things. Again, because I was not Catholic, and raised in a Catholic family, I could not participate in a lot of what the students were doing. For instance, when 4th grade rolled around I wanted to be a Server just like the other kids. For all of you who do not know, a Sever is helpers basically. They'll get the Bible for the Priest, the bread and wine, cloths, etc. So to me this was real exciting. Then I found out I couldn' t because I wasn't Catholic. Ouch. So I'm bummed. Then there's school plays and musicals...the Catholic kids ALWAYS got the parts. And I loved acting too. I was just never given a chance.
Here's the big problem that just happened last year. It's the 2nd to last day of school, a Friday. Our 8th grade graduation is coming up. We're excited. Woohoo. We had been practicing for our Graduation Mass all week. My religion teacher picked me to do a reading. It was a great reading, too. From the book of Kings. It summarized everything I felt and wanted to tell everybody. I was going a good job, too. I had never done a reading, so getting picked was special for me. Well, that Friday, the Priest confronts my religion teacher and tells her I can't do the reading. Why? I'm sure you know why by now. I was infuriated with the Priest. All I could think was "Why?" With the exception of two years (6th and 7th grade I went to a different Catholic school thanks to this Priest and his religiously segregated ways) I had gone to this school from Kindergarten all the way up to the 8th grade. And after my family spent over $2,000 in tuition, this is how you pay us back?! Needless to say, it put me in tears big time. It made my religion teacher cry, too. On a side note she quit her teaching job there early this school year because of problems like that with the Priest.
I'll give my view on Public schools on another post so I don't give you all a headache.
But education wise, Private schools are great. Family friendly? They're appropriate and sometimes too strict. But they're good for you first schooling years. After Jr. High, I suggest a taste of the real world--High School. So you're better prepared for life that way.
From Kindergarten, up until last year (8th grade) I attended Private Catholic Schools. For me personally, the experience was wonderful. Although I am not Catholic (I'm non-denominational basically. I've got Apostolic, Pentacostal and Baptist shooting at me from all sides of the family) I am Christian. It was a lot of fun, educational, challenging, and family friendly. But...there was set backs.
Because I was not Catholic, the tuition was a lot more expensive than what the Catholic students had to pay. Why? Since we did not belong to that church, or another Catholic church, my tuition was higher for the fact we had not "contributed" to the church offerings and such. For one thing, I thought this was kind of ridiculous. We already attend a church of our own, and paid our offerings to that one. Sheesh.
Diversity was an issue to. When I was younger and going to the Catholic schools I was a bit confused up until around 3rd grade. I didn't understand. All I knew about was Jesus, God, Mary, Angels, Heaven, Hell, Satan...you know, the Christian typicals. Denomination was never a factor in our family so to me, attending a Catholic school was a bit of an experience. But my biggest problem was how limited I was to participate in certain things. Again, because I was not Catholic, and raised in a Catholic family, I could not participate in a lot of what the students were doing. For instance, when 4th grade rolled around I wanted to be a Server just like the other kids. For all of you who do not know, a Sever is helpers basically. They'll get the Bible for the Priest, the bread and wine, cloths, etc. So to me this was real exciting. Then I found out I couldn' t because I wasn't Catholic. Ouch. So I'm bummed. Then there's school plays and musicals...the Catholic kids ALWAYS got the parts. And I loved acting too. I was just never given a chance.
Here's the big problem that just happened last year. It's the 2nd to last day of school, a Friday. Our 8th grade graduation is coming up. We're excited. Woohoo. We had been practicing for our Graduation Mass all week. My religion teacher picked me to do a reading. It was a great reading, too. From the book of Kings. It summarized everything I felt and wanted to tell everybody. I was going a good job, too. I had never done a reading, so getting picked was special for me. Well, that Friday, the Priest confronts my religion teacher and tells her I can't do the reading. Why? I'm sure you know why by now. I was infuriated with the Priest. All I could think was "Why?" With the exception of two years (6th and 7th grade I went to a different Catholic school thanks to this Priest and his religiously segregated ways) I had gone to this school from Kindergarten all the way up to the 8th grade. And after my family spent over $2,000 in tuition, this is how you pay us back?! Needless to say, it put me in tears big time. It made my religion teacher cry, too. On a side note she quit her teaching job there early this school year because of problems like that with the Priest.
I'll give my view on Public schools on another post so I don't give you all a headache.
But education wise, Private schools are great. Family friendly? They're appropriate and sometimes too strict. But they're good for you first schooling years. After Jr. High, I suggest a taste of the real world--High School. So you're better prepared for life that way.
- 2,732
I can't say much for private schools other than I wish I were in one. But then I look at the public school I'm in. I'm in Minnesota, and statistically, we are one of the brightests states, educationally. I'm in all of the honours classes I could want, AP European History, Honors English 10(which was taught how a college class would be run because the teacher was tough like that), Honours Biology, Enriched Algebra 2(I could be in AP Calc right now, but I didn't sign up for a full year of math this year or last year because I wanted more electives), and I'm also in German 2, and I did German 1 and Latin 1 last year. The school I go to has pretty high marks too, but there are just plenty of people I wish I didn't have to be around. But if I think about it, there will be assholes everywhere, and even in private schools, there will still be some pretty ignorant and stupid people that think they know more than they do.
My main grub against my school right now is that their priorities are wacked. We just bought TV's for all of the classrooms, have projectors as well, which defeats the purpose of the TV's because they display what a TV would display, we bought all new eMacs, when the old iMacs work just as well. And NOW they're talking about budget cuts because we're getting 3 million dollars less next year. This means no German 3, which really kills me because I wanted to take German 3 and possibly 4 next year, and then if I didn't get German 4, I'd take that and AP German senior year. The school also doesn't understand "Don't fix what isn't broken." We just adopted a new math curriculum which really sucks. The teacher doesn't teach anything, and neither do the new books that we just bough(even though the older books work just fine, with the exception that they're about 6 years old around, but math doesn't change too much in 6 years....) The books' ideas of teaching are "Consult your teams if you have any questions", and this sucks because:
a) I'm an individual worker, I don't like working in groups unless a large project.
b) I know more than any of the people that land in my group(and each group consists of 3 or 4 people)
Public schools vs. Private schools is debateable, but not nationally or globally. It all depends on where you live.
My main grub against my school right now is that their priorities are wacked. We just bought TV's for all of the classrooms, have projectors as well, which defeats the purpose of the TV's because they display what a TV would display, we bought all new eMacs, when the old iMacs work just as well. And NOW they're talking about budget cuts because we're getting 3 million dollars less next year. This means no German 3, which really kills me because I wanted to take German 3 and possibly 4 next year, and then if I didn't get German 4, I'd take that and AP German senior year. The school also doesn't understand "Don't fix what isn't broken." We just adopted a new math curriculum which really sucks. The teacher doesn't teach anything, and neither do the new books that we just bough(even though the older books work just fine, with the exception that they're about 6 years old around, but math doesn't change too much in 6 years....) The books' ideas of teaching are "Consult your teams if you have any questions", and this sucks because:
a) I'm an individual worker, I don't like working in groups unless a large project.
b) I know more than any of the people that land in my group(and each group consists of 3 or 4 people)
Public schools vs. Private schools is debateable, but not nationally or globally. It all depends on where you live.
- 9,209
- DerAlta
As a precursor to this conversation, I'll note that I design school buildings for a living. As well as a number of other related education facilities.
That being said, I'll state for the record that I attended a private school for one year, way back when I was in grade school, other than that I spent my final two years of High School in a Vocational program for drafting. I had a few friends in high school who were home schooled, as well as right now, two of my nephews are home schooled.
Good education/weak education?
As Duke noted that depends entirely on the school department. My thoughts are that schools follow a bell curve. some horrible, most good, some excellent. This may be caused by any number of variables.
For the most part the biggest downfall that I have seen in recent history is the "No child left behind" theory. Which is a piece of rubbish. This has called for Standardized testing and evaluations for the students. People use this across the board for analyzing schools. Wasn't this what "Finals" were for? Life leaves people behind on a regular basis. Nature has established survival of the fittest. This keeps the herd moving at a pace sufficient to keep it alive. My thoughts are that by stopping to pick up all of the children, the overall ability of the student body is diminshed. We all remeber that one kid who stayed back a year or two, this was life. It happened.
Do I think that Private education is the answer? Not really. While I will never have kids, I do know the kids in school today will be the work force that I have to recruit from. I want these kids to know how to function in a group and as a person. Granted they could do this in a private school, but public school brings in a wide group of backgrounds together in one space. This is key to working together.
Necessary?
Yes, see last paragraph above.
Cost Effective?
No. Too much time and money have been devoted to pulling up the slow learners. When I went through school, you either met the grade, or were held back to repeat it. No second chances, no mulligans, and no pleading. If you failed, there was sumer school. You're choice. Study and know the info that the teacher presented, and then pass the test. Simple, easy effective.
With so many different way to research and begin to understand concepts now being available I think that we've gotten too many. A rough example, but picture this: Batman's nefarious enemy Twoface. He made all his decisions based on the flip of a coin. Yes or no answer all the time. Well, we all know this a gray area, so let's give him a die to roll. Therefore he'll have 6 different answers. Hey, even most kids in grade school have a concept of shades of grey, so let's expand this a bit more, and give ole Two face a deck of cards to further explore his options. That means he has 52 different choices to ponder in making his final choice. Well, what if his choice was weather or not to go to the bathroom? Yes, or no.
This is what has happened to school systems in teh last few years. There are so many ways to teach, that we spend too much time figuring out how to teach, instead of what to teach. To conteract this the "No Child Left Behind" act came into being. Unfortunately this means that the Teachers now teach "The Standardized Test" and only the "Standardized Test". Are the students learning of memorizing?
Constitutional? (at the federal level)
In a recent presentation to a group of parents, they said "Why do we give our moeny to the government, and have them hand it back to us to build a school for ourselves?" The answer to that is "We as a group of citiznes in this state have to work together to educate the new work force that is developing in our school". The very people that will keep this running after we're gone. So yes, I do believe it is constitutional. I don't think the government should be such a heavy handed influence in how these kids get taught. A few more steps beyond that, and we could conclude that Teacers should be government workers.
Would private schools be more competetive? Yes and No. If the teachers in that school are able to teach effectively and to bright students, it would simply be a better school system. The parents are paying good money to get the best education for their children.
These are my "off the cuff" thoughts. I'll add more as these get disputed.
AO
That being said, I'll state for the record that I attended a private school for one year, way back when I was in grade school, other than that I spent my final two years of High School in a Vocational program for drafting. I had a few friends in high school who were home schooled, as well as right now, two of my nephews are home schooled.
Good education/weak education?
As Duke noted that depends entirely on the school department. My thoughts are that schools follow a bell curve. some horrible, most good, some excellent. This may be caused by any number of variables.
For the most part the biggest downfall that I have seen in recent history is the "No child left behind" theory. Which is a piece of rubbish. This has called for Standardized testing and evaluations for the students. People use this across the board for analyzing schools. Wasn't this what "Finals" were for? Life leaves people behind on a regular basis. Nature has established survival of the fittest. This keeps the herd moving at a pace sufficient to keep it alive. My thoughts are that by stopping to pick up all of the children, the overall ability of the student body is diminshed. We all remeber that one kid who stayed back a year or two, this was life. It happened.
Do I think that Private education is the answer? Not really. While I will never have kids, I do know the kids in school today will be the work force that I have to recruit from. I want these kids to know how to function in a group and as a person. Granted they could do this in a private school, but public school brings in a wide group of backgrounds together in one space. This is key to working together.
Necessary?
Yes, see last paragraph above.
Cost Effective?
No. Too much time and money have been devoted to pulling up the slow learners. When I went through school, you either met the grade, or were held back to repeat it. No second chances, no mulligans, and no pleading. If you failed, there was sumer school. You're choice. Study and know the info that the teacher presented, and then pass the test. Simple, easy effective.
With so many different way to research and begin to understand concepts now being available I think that we've gotten too many. A rough example, but picture this: Batman's nefarious enemy Twoface. He made all his decisions based on the flip of a coin. Yes or no answer all the time. Well, we all know this a gray area, so let's give him a die to roll. Therefore he'll have 6 different answers. Hey, even most kids in grade school have a concept of shades of grey, so let's expand this a bit more, and give ole Two face a deck of cards to further explore his options. That means he has 52 different choices to ponder in making his final choice. Well, what if his choice was weather or not to go to the bathroom? Yes, or no.
This is what has happened to school systems in teh last few years. There are so many ways to teach, that we spend too much time figuring out how to teach, instead of what to teach. To conteract this the "No Child Left Behind" act came into being. Unfortunately this means that the Teachers now teach "The Standardized Test" and only the "Standardized Test". Are the students learning of memorizing?
Constitutional? (at the federal level)
In a recent presentation to a group of parents, they said "Why do we give our moeny to the government, and have them hand it back to us to build a school for ourselves?" The answer to that is "We as a group of citiznes in this state have to work together to educate the new work force that is developing in our school". The very people that will keep this running after we're gone. So yes, I do believe it is constitutional. I don't think the government should be such a heavy handed influence in how these kids get taught. A few more steps beyond that, and we could conclude that Teacers should be government workers.
Would private schools be more competetive? Yes and No. If the teachers in that school are able to teach effectively and to bright students, it would simply be a better school system. The parents are paying good money to get the best education for their children.
These are my "off the cuff" thoughts. I'll add more as these get disputed.
AO
Danoff
Premium
- 34,332
- Mile High City
Great discussion! Im learning things about the school system all over the place here.
Heres my take:
Good education/weak education?
Totally weak education. I went to a public school that was considered to be so good, that other districts deserved some of my schools money. So one might think I got a fantastic education from such a fine institution . Negative. Ive been making up for the holes in my education since I got to college.
I agree that some public schools are better than others. But the private schools seem to be far better. This is as much a question of money as it is money management.
Necessary?
Probably. Im not sure on this one.
Cost Effective?
This is gonna have to be a big no.
Constitutional? (at the federal level)
As far as I know, public schools arent required by the (national) constitution or prohibited. Some state constitutions require their existence.
Would private schools be more competetive?
They already are, the real question is whether they would be numerous enough to be affordable if there were no public schools. Im leaning towards no on that question also.
The public school system is pretty crappy. But it seems like its necessary crap. We have to look out for the kids, who, afterall, cant be expected to look out for themselves. So what to do about the public school system? Like Duke was talking about, a little deregulation is in order. I like the concept of charter schools.
Heres my take:
Good education/weak education?
Totally weak education. I went to a public school that was considered to be so good, that other districts deserved some of my schools money. So one might think I got a fantastic education from such a fine institution . Negative. Ive been making up for the holes in my education since I got to college.
I agree that some public schools are better than others. But the private schools seem to be far better. This is as much a question of money as it is money management.
Necessary?
Probably. Im not sure on this one.
Cost Effective?
This is gonna have to be a big no.
Constitutional? (at the federal level)
As far as I know, public schools arent required by the (national) constitution or prohibited. Some state constitutions require their existence.
Would private schools be more competetive?
They already are, the real question is whether they would be numerous enough to be affordable if there were no public schools. Im leaning towards no on that question also.
The public school system is pretty crappy. But it seems like its necessary crap. We have to look out for the kids, who, afterall, cant be expected to look out for themselves. So what to do about the public school system? Like Duke was talking about, a little deregulation is in order. I like the concept of charter schools.
- 10,832
I went to private school from fifth through eighth grade, then again for junior and senior year. I also went to a private University. I have to say that my memories of school are from the private schools. The public schools are a blur and don't really seem relevant to who I am today. It seems as though in the public system I floated aimlessly and nobody noticed or cared, except my parents. I don't know if it was a good or bad district.
Why the switching back and forth? In elementary school it was a reaction by my parents to what they perceived as poor performance by the public school district. In high school it was a money issue. I had a younger sister and brother in private elementary school by this time and the penny pinch came out of my education. When it was affordable again they got me back in.
When I was a freshman in high school my english skills were rated at the 2nd year college level. I attribute this to the private school and the teacher who was allowed to teach. She was a total-bich-old-bag-mean-nun from the old school of Catholic education. But I owe her more than any other teacher because she gave me the capacity to use language effectively, the most important thing anybody can learn in a school, the one thing everybody needs and will benefit from. All I have to do is read through this site for one minute and see the difference it makes. Most of my peers do not even understand what constitutes a sentence, cannot identify a subject or predicate or even know what an adverb is.
Strong /Weak Education?
It depends on the school and the parents. Parents who are actively interested and participate in their kids education will see better performance. The kid will realize that it matters all the time, not just when it's time to sign the report card.
I have freinds who stayed in the public system and went on to be smart, succesful people. I would not have. My parents recognized that I was not being served and did what they had to do to get me in an environment that suited my needs. It seemed like a punishment at the time. I know better now. All parents need to do this. The percieved value of the public school system seems to isolate it and probably expects more from it than it should. As long as it is expected to be an instrument of social engineering it will be a failure, like all instruments of social engineering. Despite the school/home time ratio, where school is disproportionately skewed, the family should be where what is learned in school is filtered, put into perspective, made relevant and real... and not necessarily directly.
Necessary?
Same as every one else. See above.
Cost effective?
I don't know. I do know that I want to be able to send my kid(s) to private schools. Obviously I am willing to pay a premium for what I perceive as better in ways that are important to me.
Constitutional?
They aren't unconstitutional.
Would private schools be more competitive?
Excellence is competitive. There are simply too many dirt poor people for them to have to pay for education. The alternative would be no education at all, which is not competitive. It's an issue of the have's and have-not's. Most people want the best they have access to. If I had to send my son to school now it would be a public one. It is a goal of mine to not be limited to this in five years when he actually goes. If sacrifices have to made, then so be it. My parents did it for me. We didn't get to take extravagant vacations or go out to eat while growing up. I'll go without the 50" TV and expensive car for that. If I can do both, well, woopie for me.
Why the switching back and forth? In elementary school it was a reaction by my parents to what they perceived as poor performance by the public school district. In high school it was a money issue. I had a younger sister and brother in private elementary school by this time and the penny pinch came out of my education. When it was affordable again they got me back in.
When I was a freshman in high school my english skills were rated at the 2nd year college level. I attribute this to the private school and the teacher who was allowed to teach. She was a total-bich-old-bag-mean-nun from the old school of Catholic education. But I owe her more than any other teacher because she gave me the capacity to use language effectively, the most important thing anybody can learn in a school, the one thing everybody needs and will benefit from. All I have to do is read through this site for one minute and see the difference it makes. Most of my peers do not even understand what constitutes a sentence, cannot identify a subject or predicate or even know what an adverb is.
Strong /Weak Education?
It depends on the school and the parents. Parents who are actively interested and participate in their kids education will see better performance. The kid will realize that it matters all the time, not just when it's time to sign the report card.
I have freinds who stayed in the public system and went on to be smart, succesful people. I would not have. My parents recognized that I was not being served and did what they had to do to get me in an environment that suited my needs. It seemed like a punishment at the time. I know better now. All parents need to do this. The percieved value of the public school system seems to isolate it and probably expects more from it than it should. As long as it is expected to be an instrument of social engineering it will be a failure, like all instruments of social engineering. Despite the school/home time ratio, where school is disproportionately skewed, the family should be where what is learned in school is filtered, put into perspective, made relevant and real... and not necessarily directly.
Necessary?
Same as every one else. See above.
Cost effective?
I don't know. I do know that I want to be able to send my kid(s) to private schools. Obviously I am willing to pay a premium for what I perceive as better in ways that are important to me.
Constitutional?
They aren't unconstitutional.
Would private schools be more competitive?
Excellence is competitive. There are simply too many dirt poor people for them to have to pay for education. The alternative would be no education at all, which is not competitive. It's an issue of the have's and have-not's. Most people want the best they have access to. If I had to send my son to school now it would be a public one. It is a goal of mine to not be limited to this in five years when he actually goes. If sacrifices have to made, then so be it. My parents did it for me. We didn't get to take extravagant vacations or go out to eat while growing up. I'll go without the 50" TV and expensive car for that. If I can do both, well, woopie for me.
Danoff
Premium
- 34,332
- Mile High City
Should citizens be required to provide their children with an education? If so, does that mean that the governmnet must provide a means to that education?
The answer to the first question is probably yes - citizens should be required to provide their children with an education. Kids are highly dependent on their parents to do a few basic things for them. Give them food, give them some kind of clothing, and give them some kind of education.
I think that the answer to the second question is no (even though this conflicts with my earlier post). The government does not need to provide its citizens with a means to an education (public school) just because it requires them to get one. The government requires you to feed your children, but it does not have to provide you with the means to feed your children. The implementation would be simple, actually. Kids have to take a government mandated test at regular intervals. If your child does not test positive for retardation and repeatedly fails the regular tests, you must prove that you have sent your child to a government acredited institution - the schools could even administer the tests. If you could not prove it, you might be facing child neglect charges from the state.
The answer to the first question is probably yes - citizens should be required to provide their children with an education. Kids are highly dependent on their parents to do a few basic things for them. Give them food, give them some kind of clothing, and give them some kind of education.
I think that the answer to the second question is no (even though this conflicts with my earlier post). The government does not need to provide its citizens with a means to an education (public school) just because it requires them to get one. The government requires you to feed your children, but it does not have to provide you with the means to feed your children. The implementation would be simple, actually. Kids have to take a government mandated test at regular intervals. If your child does not test positive for retardation and repeatedly fails the regular tests, you must prove that you have sent your child to a government acredited institution - the schools could even administer the tests. If you could not prove it, you might be facing child neglect charges from the state.
- 10,832
I've been thinking about this a lot lately because my son is starting to show more and more that he is a boy and not just a baby. It makes me think more about his future. I have friends with kids in public schools, and my wife and I are good friends with a public school teacher. Based on my interpretations of what I hear, I will not be sending my kid to any public school. It amounts to turning your child over the to state, which, in my opinion is ludicrous. Public schools are state run institutions. They are subject to the ebb and flow of everything offensive in liberal society to what seems to be a higher degree than other state institutions. When the state is in the business of deciding what is good and bad I am suspicious at best. Of course this is not to say that private schools don't make the same evaluations and and attempts at enforcing them. They do. But there is a difference. The parents have chosen to have their children educated by a particular institution after reviewing their options, evaluating what they want for their kids, and making an informed decision. I understand not all parents are as concerned, and I think most parents take public schools for granted, maybe never having considered alternatives.
I started school in public schools, and my parents took me out and sent me to private school because they didn't approve of the Montessorian techniques being eployed (and I can't say I blame them). They made huge sacrifices to be able to pay tuition for me, my sister, and later my brother. Of course we never appreciated this at the time. And many of our classmates were much wealthier; we didn't comprehend that much at the time either. As an adult I can fully appreciate the advantage and benefit of what they sacrificed for us, and plan to do the same. In fact, just the other night I faceciously said to my wife regarding sending our son to a public school: "why don't we just go on welfare, too?"
It's expensive, but one's child's future is not the place to skimp and cut corners.
I started school in public schools, and my parents took me out and sent me to private school because they didn't approve of the Montessorian techniques being eployed (and I can't say I blame them). They made huge sacrifices to be able to pay tuition for me, my sister, and later my brother. Of course we never appreciated this at the time. And many of our classmates were much wealthier; we didn't comprehend that much at the time either. As an adult I can fully appreciate the advantage and benefit of what they sacrificed for us, and plan to do the same. In fact, just the other night I faceciously said to my wife regarding sending our son to a public school: "why don't we just go on welfare, too?"
It's expensive, but one's child's future is not the place to skimp and cut corners.
- 8,128
- 2 smacks past uranus
- Somebodyshootme
Originally posted by danoff
What's everyone's take on public schools? Ok I am going to speak from a personal opinion here because I have had experience in both fields here
Good education/weak education? Dpends on location in America. . . I have went to a public school in both Connecticut and Florida. I also attended a private school in Florida for my last two years in high school. My education in Connecticut blew away any formal education I recieved in Florida. I went from working my butt off in Connecticut to get A - and A grades and felt that I was learning on a daily basis. But I did suffer a ton in the socail aspect of my life while attending that school. I was an outcast and a social void in that high school. I ended up moving to Florida and attended half a year of public school and then attended a private school. My public school experience was farking outrageous. I would party all night and go to school drunk or stoned and still sit in class make no effort, no homework and blow the teacher away with my work and get straight A's. I was very disappointed with the actual lack of education. On the flipside of that I learned to be socail in that school. I actually made "friends" and started to build a self-esteem that I constantly beat on beforehand. Finally to come to the end of my "formal" education in high school I attended a Private school in Florida. It was a little more uptight at rules then the public school, but had small classes with the same lack of education.
Necessary? Hmmm. . . Education is necessary no matter what. Going back to the Government thing, I would be happy to pay more money in taxes for bettering the education system here in Florida! When you find out that they use a significant cut of that money to create a central building for the school board over better facilities or more facilities and jobs for teachers, it is outraging. Necessary though, Children in Florida need better education and resources to pick them out of middle and lower class situations.
Cost Effective? Go back to my reference of the school board building, now do you think I feel it is cost effective? It can be with the money placed in the proper place, but when money is outlandishly used towards new builds for school boards I feel the money is not being effective at all.
What's everyone's take on public schools? Ok I am going to speak from a personal opinion here because I have had experience in both fields here
Good education/weak education? Dpends on location in America. . . I have went to a public school in both Connecticut and Florida. I also attended a private school in Florida for my last two years in high school. My education in Connecticut blew away any formal education I recieved in Florida. I went from working my butt off in Connecticut to get A - and A grades and felt that I was learning on a daily basis. But I did suffer a ton in the socail aspect of my life while attending that school. I was an outcast and a social void in that high school. I ended up moving to Florida and attended half a year of public school and then attended a private school. My public school experience was farking outrageous. I would party all night and go to school drunk or stoned and still sit in class make no effort, no homework and blow the teacher away with my work and get straight A's. I was very disappointed with the actual lack of education. On the flipside of that I learned to be socail in that school. I actually made "friends" and started to build a self-esteem that I constantly beat on beforehand. Finally to come to the end of my "formal" education in high school I attended a Private school in Florida. It was a little more uptight at rules then the public school, but had small classes with the same lack of education.
Necessary? Hmmm. . . Education is necessary no matter what. Going back to the Government thing, I would be happy to pay more money in taxes for bettering the education system here in Florida! When you find out that they use a significant cut of that money to create a central building for the school board over better facilities or more facilities and jobs for teachers, it is outraging. Necessary though, Children in Florida need better education and resources to pick them out of middle and lower class situations.
Cost Effective? Go back to my reference of the school board building, now do you think I feel it is cost effective? It can be with the money placed in the proper place, but when money is outlandishly used towards new builds for school boards I feel the money is not being effective at all.
Danoff
Premium
- 34,332
- Mile High City
But you would pay more in taxes to the already inefficient non-competetive school system that would just blow your additional tax dollars even faster than the ones you already pay.
The best way to fix the poor education level is not to feed money into a failing system, but to privatize it, make it compete, make it possible to hold the school system accountable by taking your child and money somewhere else.
Why should a public school perform well? They get paid the same whether your child does well, poorly, or goes somewhere else (as long as you don't move).
- 8,128
- 2 smacks past uranus
- Somebodyshootme
I forgot to put in where the money goes though. . . I was going to put in putting money into proper resources such as learning equipment, better salaries for teachers with better credentials and such.
My problem with the privatization is the fact that with the payment towards education, I have seen in some cases people graduating just from the amount donated towards the School. That happened with two friends that actually graduated that way. There is a mild degree of corruption in Private schools, but in everything monatarially based there is some corruption.
It might actually be a case that public school teachers need some incentive or motivation to actually teach. My brother and his wife teached for an elementary school. They loved it at first, but eventually it was not making them a lot of money to survive on. They loved it, but without paying the bills they can't continue with it. - - - more to come.
- 4,680
I'm currently in a Grade 11 student attending an Ontario High School and have been in public schools my entire life.
The public school system, like almost every other government program in Ontario is in ruins. Thanks to years of funding cuts by ex-premier Mike Harris, Ontario public schools are just afwul. Class sizes are just mind boggling (35 students per class is about the average in my 4 courses this semester), the new curriculum is afwul, and the good teachers are rare.
The school system in Ontario is just pitiful right now. I am fortunate enough to be in a very highly rated school but the school still has many problems. For example, many of the teachers are very poor at their jobs. My math and science teachers for Grade 10 did not know how to teach at all. My mark for Grade 9 science was 86% and for math 85%. In grade 10 those marks plummeted to 68% for science and 67% for math due to bad teaching. The way students are "distributed" to teachers is also unfair too. My school wins many math awards despite having only 1 good math teacher in the school (based on talking to other students). ALL the kids who win the math awards get the good math teacher while everyone else is hung out to dry.
I feel many of the things I'm learning in school right now are useless wastes of time. Why does a person going into construction for example, need to take 4 years of English? And much of what is taught is way beyond most 16 year olds. My friend's dad who used to be a rocket engineer for the Soviet space program took the math I'm learning right now in university! And to boot, he said he never used any of it once he got out of university (What he needed for the job was in physics).
But public schools aren't all bad. The diversity of people in the schools teaches us how to work with people from all different backgrounds. And some of the courses offered at my school are great. I've never felt better physically since I've taken a weight lifting course this semester, and tech design is fun, educational, and practical (It's a course where everyone builds projects such as catapults, C02 dragsters, bottle rockets, etc).
Unfortunately I've never gone to private schools since my parents won't spend the money, but I can't picture them as being much worse than public schools in Ontario since they get more funding than public schools in Ontario (they get tuition AND government funding).
The public school system, like almost every other government program in Ontario is in ruins. Thanks to years of funding cuts by ex-premier Mike Harris, Ontario public schools are just afwul. Class sizes are just mind boggling (35 students per class is about the average in my 4 courses this semester), the new curriculum is afwul, and the good teachers are rare.
The school system in Ontario is just pitiful right now. I am fortunate enough to be in a very highly rated school but the school still has many problems. For example, many of the teachers are very poor at their jobs. My math and science teachers for Grade 10 did not know how to teach at all. My mark for Grade 9 science was 86% and for math 85%. In grade 10 those marks plummeted to 68% for science and 67% for math due to bad teaching. The way students are "distributed" to teachers is also unfair too. My school wins many math awards despite having only 1 good math teacher in the school (based on talking to other students). ALL the kids who win the math awards get the good math teacher while everyone else is hung out to dry.
I feel many of the things I'm learning in school right now are useless wastes of time. Why does a person going into construction for example, need to take 4 years of English? And much of what is taught is way beyond most 16 year olds. My friend's dad who used to be a rocket engineer for the Soviet space program took the math I'm learning right now in university! And to boot, he said he never used any of it once he got out of university (What he needed for the job was in physics).
But public schools aren't all bad. The diversity of people in the schools teaches us how to work with people from all different backgrounds. And some of the courses offered at my school are great. I've never felt better physically since I've taken a weight lifting course this semester, and tech design is fun, educational, and practical (It's a course where everyone builds projects such as catapults, C02 dragsters, bottle rockets, etc).
Unfortunately I've never gone to private schools since my parents won't spend the money, but I can't picture them as being much worse than public schools in Ontario since they get more funding than public schools in Ontario (they get tuition AND government funding).
public schools are more fun. 
i dont know. theyre just as good as far as education compared to private i think. its just whether the student is willing to learn or not. i see a lot of slackers and dumbasses in public schools and it makes me wonder what this country will be like in 10-15-or 21 years. and they may be cheaper than private but whether you have a kid or not in thier schools you still have to pay which in my opinion is a ripoff because a person with 1 or no kids still has to pay the same rate as one with 5.
i dont know. theyre just as good as far as education compared to private i think. its just whether the student is willing to learn or not. i see a lot of slackers and dumbasses in public schools and it makes me wonder what this country will be like in 10-15-or 21 years. and they may be cheaper than private but whether you have a kid or not in thier schools you still have to pay which in my opinion is a ripoff because a person with 1 or no kids still has to pay the same rate as one with 5.
Danoff
Premium
- 34,332
- Mile High City
Which of course is the point of school isnt it?
Brilliant. You dont know but you figure its the same. Private schools generally kick public schools all over the place in education. I suppose I should go dig up the statistics, but I dont think I should need to, its pretty clear.
Im sure there were no slackers or dumbasses 10-15-or 21 years ago.
Yup! That is exactly right. Why force people to put money into the school systems when they may never even have a kid? Is it the entire villages responsibility to educate everyone elses child? I think not. I think it was Hillary Clinton who was touting that It takes a village to raise a child line and Im sure people loved to hear it. Theyre all thinking about how theyre failures as parents and how they shouldnt have to do it alone. Its everyones responsibility to teach, feed, clothe, and discipline my child. I guess nobody has ever heard of responsibility. The sad part is that people should be upset when they hear that village crap. They should be saying I can raise my kid without you. Im competent as a parent.
That line about the village is so dangerous because it feels good to so many people. The parental failures love it because its no longer their fault. The school teachers love it because they love to take responsibility for every success story that walks through their class and pawn every failure off on genetics. It makes the local store owner feel good, thinking that he is an integral part of the community, without which everything would fall apart (never once thinking about how he would be replaced if he closed shop). It makes the blue collar worker feel good because he now feels less of a burden from his children, I dont have to provide all that money to feed and clothe them on my own, the community has a responsibility to my child. The line sends a clear ringing signal to poor America saying Its ok if you cant afford you children or if you dont parent well its the rest of the communitys fault as much as yours. I think we all know that thats not true.
- 8,128
- 2 smacks past uranus
- Somebodyshootme
I have to vouche for you here. In my experience in FLorida with a private school the system work a lot better for those willing to learn. Remember it is us geeks in high school that make the money in the future.
Well, in my situation it has not quite gotten there yet 
.
- 1,198
school sux.
- 8,128
- 2 smacks past uranus
- Somebodyshootme
And now we have our lovely teenage rebel. This I think would be a prime specimen for one of those labeled as "not caring to learn". "School sux" considering that he can't even spell sucks properly shows he wasn't one to pay attention in english class. As for math skills, we will conduct an experiement sometime soon. . .
Now don't post this nonsense in a thread to simple say two freaking words stating school sucks without going into the reasoning behind it!
- 1,785
As far as what the two schools teach (public, Privite) in terms of curriculum, i think they are pretty close. I have 2 sisters who go/went to Private schools, and i currently am in Public school sytem. Ultimatly how well a student does or learns depends on that person alone. If someone does not want to work and learn it is their loss in that end. There are people in both types of schools with people who want to learn and dont. So it comes down to Funding, teachers, and school community, that makes these schools different.
GilesGuthrie
Staff Emeritus
- 11,038
- Edinburgh, UK
- CMDRTheDarkLord
It's a very emotive point, and there is little in the way of clear distinction in results. Take my household for example:
I was privately educated my whole life in one of the best schools in the country. My parents paid a fortune for my education, and on the back of it, I went to university, and got a degree, and from there went into a career and am now earning reasonable wage.
My wife, on the other hand, was publicly educated her whole life, and ended up in the same university, doing the same course, with the same marks, and is also in a career earning a respectable wage.
Fact is though that I was lazy at school, and my parents couldn't be bothered bringing me up, so they outsourced my education. Suz's parents on the other hand, cared deeply about her upbringing, and that she should make the best of the opportunities she had. Also, her school was one of the best public schools in Edinburgh.
On a philosophical level, I think that private schools, by being clear of state funding, are able to steer their own course, sticking with the national curriculum, but supplanting it in ways that they see fit. Public schools are riven with mismanagement, and burdened by the effects of political expediency and lack of direction. This means that there is no cohesion to the child's education, and the educators themselves are too streesed trying to meet irrelevant targets and complete layers and layers of management reporting that have nothing to do with the lessons or curriculum. The flip side to this is that private schools use the national curriculum as a basis for the education, but use their financial clout to recruit better teachers and have better facilities. This leads to an increase in the speed of teaching that allows for a broader education and also for those pupils who are left behind to have their individual needs assessed. I think also that the continual re-streaming of children year-on-year allows the private schools to adjust each child's learning to their own pace of development.
In my mind, there is no decision to be made. Our children (if/when they appear) will be privately educated. It's just irritating that we will not be able to claim any tax credits, for we will be paying twice for our children's education, in exactly the same way that we pay twice for healthcare, since that's another public body paralysed by bureaucracy and mismanagement.
I was privately educated my whole life in one of the best schools in the country. My parents paid a fortune for my education, and on the back of it, I went to university, and got a degree, and from there went into a career and am now earning reasonable wage.
My wife, on the other hand, was publicly educated her whole life, and ended up in the same university, doing the same course, with the same marks, and is also in a career earning a respectable wage.
Fact is though that I was lazy at school, and my parents couldn't be bothered bringing me up, so they outsourced my education. Suz's parents on the other hand, cared deeply about her upbringing, and that she should make the best of the opportunities she had. Also, her school was one of the best public schools in Edinburgh.
On a philosophical level, I think that private schools, by being clear of state funding, are able to steer their own course, sticking with the national curriculum, but supplanting it in ways that they see fit. Public schools are riven with mismanagement, and burdened by the effects of political expediency and lack of direction. This means that there is no cohesion to the child's education, and the educators themselves are too streesed trying to meet irrelevant targets and complete layers and layers of management reporting that have nothing to do with the lessons or curriculum. The flip side to this is that private schools use the national curriculum as a basis for the education, but use their financial clout to recruit better teachers and have better facilities. This leads to an increase in the speed of teaching that allows for a broader education and also for those pupils who are left behind to have their individual needs assessed. I think also that the continual re-streaming of children year-on-year allows the private schools to adjust each child's learning to their own pace of development.
In my mind, there is no decision to be made. Our children (if/when they appear) will be privately educated. It's just irritating that we will not be able to claim any tax credits, for we will be paying twice for our children's education, in exactly the same way that we pay twice for healthcare, since that's another public body paralysed by bureaucracy and mismanagement.
- 10,832
That's an interesting point, and made me realize in a new way that work and money are not all there is to consider about education, especially elementary education. My wife attended public school and university, and she makes more money than me. She's also more, shall we say, "professional", than me, by far.
- 267
This one is great, first off school blows unless you can sit in a computer class all day and just play on a computer, although the Macs most school keep are s*** since they are too poor to get good computers. Second, public teachers suck, they are foriegn, dumbasses, or people straight out of college that just sit around hitting on the students in Highschool. But you know what I don't know why all of us are complaining, we don't want to pay for a private school so our kids are going to a public school. 
God we are all so evil!
- 1,785
Originally posted by TSi_Shiftz
These words sound like they are coming from a person, who could care less about their future, you honestly have to at some point realize that school is a good thing, unless your content on making minimum wage for the rest of your life.
In NSW (a state in OZ for the geographically unaware) we just had the HSC results released. The HSC is the final exam of your schooling career. Both public and private schools participate and it is the primary way of getting into a university.
In the results, public schools performed better than private schools. So in my location, there is no educational advantage in sending my kids to a private school. (I realise that some of the results may be skewed by selective public schools, but by and large the public schools do better).
In Oz, the government also provides funding for private schools, so my tax is going to both systems, anyway.
so purely from an education perspective I see no incentive to go private. Maybe if I wanted my kids in a religious school or something.
Anyway I wanted to raise the problem of opportunity. In western cultures to make good money (enough to set up for your family in the future) you need a decent education. So if your parents don't have the money to provide that education because in your system a private school is required, then you don't have opportunity to make enough money to properly sustain a family.
Then you can't provide your kids with an education, who can't provide their kids with an education, etc. etc. etc.
So if you have a cycle of poverty (and this does happen, a recent study over here showed that the standard of education that a child receives is very much based on the socio-economic status of it's parents) you need to answer two questions:
1. should everyone get the some opportunity?
2. If so, who's responsibility is it to ensure that they receive opportunity?
My take on these is:
1. yes.
2. every citizen's. My basis for this is that a capitalist economy runs by having consumers spend money. The more money being spent, the more income for business, the more jobs they can create, the more people who can spend money...
So to maximise the amount of viable consumers, you need to have good education for everyone.
In the results, public schools performed better than private schools. So in my location, there is no educational advantage in sending my kids to a private school. (I realise that some of the results may be skewed by selective public schools, but by and large the public schools do better).
In Oz, the government also provides funding for private schools, so my tax is going to both systems, anyway.
so purely from an education perspective I see no incentive to go private. Maybe if I wanted my kids in a religious school or something.Anyway I wanted to raise the problem of opportunity. In western cultures to make good money (enough to set up for your family in the future) you need a decent education. So if your parents don't have the money to provide that education because in your system a private school is required, then you don't have opportunity to make enough money to properly sustain a family.
Then you can't provide your kids with an education, who can't provide their kids with an education, etc. etc. etc.
So if you have a cycle of poverty (and this does happen, a recent study over here showed that the standard of education that a child receives is very much based on the socio-economic status of it's parents) you need to answer two questions:
1. should everyone get the some opportunity?
2. If so, who's responsibility is it to ensure that they receive opportunity?
My take on these is:
1. yes.
2. every citizen's. My basis for this is that a capitalist economy runs by having consumers spend money. The more money being spent, the more income for business, the more jobs they can create, the more people who can spend money...
So to maximise the amount of viable consumers, you need to have good education for everyone.
- 10,832
Actually, if you want to invoke capitalism to support your answer, you'd have to say that it is the individual who is responsible for educating one's self or children. What you propose is, in fact, socialism a la Hillary Clinton: "It Takes a Villiage."
So if you truly believe that it is "every citizen's" responsibility to see to it that every other citizen is educated, you must also believe that individuals are not totally responsible for taking care of themselves (and are not to be trusted with the task). You must also beleive that the social welfare state is the great equalizer, that if an individual has some kind of shortcoming it must be "every citizen's" fault, not the fault of the individual who made his own decisions.
Who will pay for this education-for-all-so-they-can-become-good-consumers-and-feed-the-capitalist-machine? Every citizen? Wouldnt it serve these citizens, and capitalism, better to let them keep their money and spend it on their own education and the educations of their families in a competitive marketplace where the value of ones character can be accurately surmised by the decisions they have made, the effort they have put forth, and the benefits they have earned for themselves, all the while supporting the capitalist economy in dollars and principle?
Why?
err... Not familar with Hillary Clinton so I'll plead ignorance.
Yes, if only to keep the system running at its best.
Responsible, yes, to the extent that you can make some decisions - others are forced upon you, for instance your family of birth. It'd be nice to say that everything that happens in life you are responsible for, but it simply isn't true.
It can be, if applied correctly.
Not every citizen's fault, nor the fault of the person in the situtation. Accident of birth, act of God, many random events occur in life that no-one is responsible for.
However, to keep a capitalist system running, I argue that the greatest amount of consumers is needed and it is the responsibility of every citizen to keep the system up.
yes. What they're paying for is the upkeep for the system.
no.
Starting with competition - just because there is publically funded education, this doesn't mean there can't be competition. A way of doing is this is only funding the schools that students choose to go to.
The problem I'm giving you is that not everything about a person is a sum of effort, character, etc. other factors come into it, which is why GW Bush can go to a great college (sp) while students that have 'earned' their place through hard work miss out.
So while GW is earning fairly large dollars, other more intelligent, harder working people without an education have very little income.
You could say that the principle of capitalism is that people do the best with what they have and it's all just luck driven by markets. But then that principle includes monopolies and can also include slavery, two things that are bad for a capitalist society. My point being that the principle of capitalism often works against its own existance in pure form. And I think that pure private education is one of those things.
Edited for formatting.
- 267
Actually it depends, if you have talent in sports, then school is 2nd to them. And second of all if you want to sit and study all day where as if you just pay attention to the luctures school is a breeze. Seriously easy and nobody should have a problem with it at all, unless they have a disability or something.
-Just don't be stupid and pay some attention, school isn't hard.
-Just don't be stupid and pay some attention, school isn't hard.
