Compulsory Education Restricts Whose Freedom
Compulsory Education Restricts Whose Freedom,
Source: https://ricochet.com/220357/compulsory-education-an-idea-whose-time-has-gone/
Posted by: veazeyshavoind.blogspot.com
Home
› Compulsory Education Restricts Whose Freedom
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
@PonyConvertible
v:54 AM PDT ⋅ Aug 6, 2014
I agree. Well said.
@genferei
Mail service writer
half-dozen:22 AM PDT ⋅ Aug 6, 2014
Information technology'due south not primal to my post, but it is interesting where the concept of compulsory education leads.
One direction is the need for a definition of what an instruction is, which ramifies out into a 'one-size-fits-none' centralized and generalized set of criteria.
Another management is the 'rubber net' of government-supplied education for those who cannot otherwise afford this compulsory purchase.
Since government is involved in both setting criteria and supplying the product, the criteria and the product stop upwardly partaking of government-approved virtues. And both the criteria and the product end up existence captured by the technocracy established to administer it.
@skipsul
6:36 AM PDT ⋅ Aug 6, 2014
Wow, just wow. I've been arguing this very thing with friends for years. I presented this concept in my coursework in Secondary Ed back in the 90s and my classmates (though notably not my professor, burned as she was by public school bureaucracy) idea I was basics. We only take is as granted that education exist mandator for "the greater adept" without looking at the historical underpinnings of the Compulsory Ed movement.
Its proponents were jingoist socialists who had a burning hatred of private educational activity as existence "unfair" and "separatist". Compulsory Ed was promoted equally a fashion of leveling, of not merely bringing upwards the poor simply bringing down the "unfairly advantaged" and putting the Catholics in their place. Information technology's results have been what you always eventually get with socialism.
@rayconandlindacon
seven:05 AM PDT ⋅ Aug 6, 2014
You accept nailed it. Compulsory instruction in America is a rousing success. It has socialized our youth to compliance towards the land, transferred taxpayer funds to a reliable constituency, the teachers unions, and reduced the pupil knowledge level of subjects similar history, to the point that they are unable to independently challenge the authority of the state.
Don't mess with success. You lot volition take few allies.
@KCMulville
seven:17 AM PDT ⋅ Aug half dozen, 2014
I empathise with the goals, but I doubt information technology will work. The kids who are currently being harmed past going to the public school building will just stay home. Instead of being socialized and trained by one Leftist breastwork, i.e., public school teachers, they'll be socialized and instructed by the other Leftist bastion, the media.
Besides, if they don't get to school, who's going to babysit them? In the inner city, more half of the kids are born out of marriage, which means single mothers, which means if the female parent is watching her kids she isn't working, and if she's working she isn't watching her kids. At least sending them off to school means that someone is watching the kids while giving the female parent a risk to piece of work. (Fathers going off to work while mothers stay home? Don't exist so old-fashioned.) Taking the compulsory out of pedagogy means putting compulsory into welfare.
@Misthiocracy
7:46 AM PDT ⋅ Aug half-dozen, 2014
If we give up on compulsory education, information technology will take meant that Bismarck's dream was all for zilch!
@TheMugwump
7:48 AM PDT ⋅ Aug 6, 2014
The primary purpose of public teaching is to keep a legion of bureaucrats employed. We stand in the absurd situation today where administrators at the federal, state and local level nearly equal the number of teachers in the classroom. The needs of teachers come 2nd, and students a distant third. Public educational activity is merely another bulwark of the authoritative country. Ultimately, any institution dominated by government is expensive to run, arbitrary in its demands, and counter-productive in pursuit of its stated goals. If you don't mind driving a Yugo, put your kid in public instruction. If you lot want a Cadillac, plow loose the power of the marketplace.
@
7:l AM PDT ⋅ Aug 6, 2014
Well, I've worked in those poor rural schools, and will be returning to my classroom in a week. I empathise with the idea, and as someone who wants to somewhen start a private school I'd be thrilled if you ideas would work.
Yet, with the current welfare regime nosotros have in place, those kids would exist even worse off, without our welfare organisation, I'd agree with you 100%.
A instance in point, several of my friends and one colleague at my current school teach or take previously taught in some of the worse inner-urban center public and in innovative private charter schools in Philadelphia and Pittsburgh.
While schooling is often minimal, for many of these poor kids, school is i of the few places they are even marginally safe, have anyone that seems to care about them, and they have a hot meal.
Likewise, as a conservative-Christian-reformist public school educator, I go a petty tired of the whole "all public schools are bastions of socialist, progressive indoctrination" from my beau conservatives. Aye, some of that goes on, but far less than you'd like to believe, and it makes reform harder when y'all do information technology.
@genferei
Post author
7:51 AM PDT ⋅ Aug 6, 2014
Anyone!
Nether compulsory instruction laws, if you want to provide something to occupy the time of children and teens during the week for most of the year you have to be a government accredited schoolhouse staffed by government accredited teachers doling out government accredited propaganda.
In the absence of such laws y'all could be anything. Let your imagination run wild! (OK, some of it could exist quite bad, if you have an imagination like mine…)
@
vii:55 AM PDT ⋅ Aug 6, 2014
I agree, but simply catastrophe compulsory schooling first won't get us there.
Opening up as many opportunities to the poor now – giving them the economical tools, or the educational to compete with the public schools is what we should focus on…in time and so compulsory education can get abroad. In the meantime we need to be decorated reforming welfare, and so killing off the public schools that don't succeed. As well every bit simultaneously killing the bureaucratic creature that helps bulldoze this nightmare past devolving power.
@WesternChauvinist
8:04 AM PDT ⋅ Aug 6, 2014
One reason to undo the mandatory education laws is they've proven to be unenforceable. Given the graduation rates and full general inability to either make change at the checkout or pass a naturalization test (by natural born citizens, no less), it seems the land can mandate until it's blue in the confront, just very few are actually "educated" in whatever meaningful sense of the word. And those are the "students" who testify up!
Disallowment repeal of the laws, we might arouse to rename them: Mandatory Indoctrination.
@ZinMT
viii:05 AM PDT ⋅ Aug 6, 2014
I am in favor of eliminating compulsory didactics across the 8th grade. Additionally, it is non simply inner city and rural schools that are doing a poor job. They all are. A big problem was the cocky-esteem movement which led to lower standards and a bimodal distribution in grading (i.e. A's and B'due south for every kid that genuinely attempted the work, D'southward and F's for the kids that do not. No more bell bend centered on C.
@Juliana
viii:07 AM PDT ⋅ Aug 6, 2014
I judge I'thou questioning the 'harm' that is being done to the children in public schools. The quality varies and then much from school to schoolhouse and from classroom to classroom that it's non helpful to paint with such a wide brush.
I work in the public schools (non a teacher). And yes, one of the schools is an environmental magnet school – put in place in order to re-integrate white students of the commune into what was fast becoming a minority-simply school. While I don't agree with tree-hugging environmentalism, and in that location is some of that among the teachers, I do come across the benefits of the focus on science and the partnership with the nature preserve across the street.
That particular schoolhouse is well-nigh 75% free and reduced tiffin – very low socioeconomic status. Would the students come up if not required? Maybe, perhaps non, depends on their parent'due south view of the value of whatever education. We accept a loftier illegal alien population, very transient. Requiring omnipresence at to the lowest degree gets the kids some basic education – hopefully they volition take the opportunity to acquire enough to become productive members of society.
@Misthiocracy
eight:18 AM PDT ⋅ Aug 6, 2014
@BrianClendinen
8:28 AM PDT ⋅ Aug 6, 2014
Also yous accept perverted laws because of Compulsory Didactics such as not being able to accept your GED until yous are 17 or 18. So if you are an above average eighth grader, sorry you can't skip loftier-school fifty-fifty though you lot can pass the GED. Forget vocational preparation for a 13 or 14 year sometime who does not desire to go to higher, sorry y'all get to waste your fourth dimension for another 4 years.
In other words, liberals have replaced education with schooling and certification via legal code.
@genferei
Post author
8:35 AM PDT ⋅ Aug vi, 2014
And I would call up their parents'/'s view is a pretty stiff determinant of what, if annihilation, they learn whether they come or non.
Teachers are wonderful. Having them effort to teach a room total of people who are there because the alternative is fines or imprisonment for their parents seems a less than ideal set up for all involved.
Over again, I'm not making schooling illegal, only not compulsory. Many not-compulsory things in this world are very popular – even some which are good for you.
@AaronMiller
viii:54 AM PDT ⋅ Aug half dozen, 2014
Republicans won't go for it. But if it was going to be washed, it would have to exist done suddenly and non gradually. Otherwise, it would exist juggled every term like revenue enhancement cuts and hikes.
Parents and kids would adjust. Was mandatory education introduced gradually? Were students only required to show upwardly in one case per calendar week? I doubt information technology. If it could be introduced of a sudden, information technology could exist abolished suddenly.
@tommeyer
eleven:eighteen AM PDT ⋅ Aug 6, 2014
For description'south sake, would yous repeal all compulsory education, or just — for example — loftier school.
Excellent postal service, BTW.
@FloppyDisk90
1:12 PM PDT ⋅ Aug half dozen, 2014
Those people are already on welfare. The short to mid term impact on welfare roles of genferei's proposal would be minuscule. And in the long run perhaps a few people manage to escape the roughshod bicycle due to the boosted choices.
Ultimately, your objection rests on the same thinking that animates the Left: people are too stupid, ignorant, lazy, self-interested, etc….to brand good choices.
@Stad
2:14 PM PDT ⋅ Aug 6, 2014
This may be a side word, but I've learned significantly more than nearly history, grammer, rhetoric, and literature from Educational activity Company/Great Courses CDs than all of my classes in Chiliad through 12 and college combined. It would be a lot cheaper to just buy these CDs (or download digital files online), and make kids mind to them (with no exams) than to perpetuate this massive public instruction infrastructure.
@DrewInWisconsin
3:02 PM PDT ⋅ Aug 6, 2014
I wrote nigh this idea way back on Ricochet 1.0, and I'1000 sure that post is long gone to the Cyberspace Gremlins.
@Arahant
10:30 PM PDT ⋅ Aug half-dozen, 2014
There are at least three different issues here that practice not demand to be directly intertwined: compulsory omnipresence, government schools, and governmental control of curriculum. These are three dissimilar things, and ane does not mandate the other ii, nor does its elimination obviate the other two. We could have a wholly individual educational marketplace while still having compulsory attendance and minimal curriculum standards by land or local governments.
However, nowhere in the U.s. Constitution do I find any authorization for involvement in teaching.
@genferei
Post author
1:34 AM PDT ⋅ Aug 7, 2014
All compulsory education.
@Manny
5:09 AM PDT ⋅ Aug 8, 2014
Interesting, simply I will have to disagree. A population of consummate illiterates volition cost the nation dearly in the long run with who knows how many dysfunctionalities. School, while not perfect, at to the lowest degree socializes them better than the parents of those who would drop out. You would be pushing the problem along, and probably magnifying it. I want to eliminate government educational activity, just not dissolve information technology entirely. Privatize education and provide school choice stipends that have to exist spent.
@DrewInWisconsin
2:47 PM PDT ⋅ Aug 9, 2014
Very few would drop out. Parents who valued education would go along to send their kids to school. Parents who didn't would keep them home . . . for virtually three days before they got so tired of them they sent them back. There would not be mass dropping-out, and those who do may exist better off for it. (Especially if we likewise end pretending that four-yr college is necessary for everyone.)
The deal is, putting the responsibility for educational activity on the parents ways that schools have a lot more freedom to place expectations on attendance. Because schools crave attendance, they act in loco parentis whether they want to or not. And a educatee (or parent) can say that since attendance is compulsory, the school will only take to bargain with bad behavior.
When school isn't compulsory, the school tin can say "Become that kid out of hither until he shapes up." Responsibility returns to the parents and student where information technology belongs.