Socialized Education

[DL82]

The debate about ‘socialized’ (i.e. free at the point of need, funded through general taxation) healthcare keeps on resurfacing here. I wanted to raise and discuss another issue, one where the lines of debate are somewhat more blurred, that of state-funded general education.

In the US, education is free from K-12 and High School, though I’m aware that some states have free High Schools and fee-paying High Schools that also receive government funding. University education in the US is terrifyingly expensive, and funded through scholarships and private loans. School teachers’ salaries in the US start at around $16,000 (£8,000)

Here in the UK, the situation is similar for 4-18yr olds, though we also had free University education up until 1997, and the fees here are still highly subsidised, with students paying for their tuition through low-interest government loans. Our Universities are poorer than American ones in terms of their endowed assets, but still hold their own in international research league-tables, largely due to private and government research grants. School teachers’ salaries in the UK start at around £20,000 ($40,000)

In many parts of Europe, education is far better funded than it is in the UK or the US, and University education is also free. Few of these countries have research-active institutions in the global top 100, though they still have a highly educated workforce and produce a lot of innovative technology.

I suppose you could see it as the difference between accumulating knowledge in a few prestigious institutions, accessible only to wealthy elites and geniuses, versus distributing knowledge through a high quality of education for all. Both have their advantages and disadvantages.

I can’t think of any state in the developed world that asks parents to pay for their children’s education before the age of 16, though I do know there are some right-wing libertarians who would argue that even this would be a good idea.

I’m not starting this thread in order to trap people on the issue of healthcare (ha ha, you agree that everyone should go to school for free, so why isn’t hospital the same?) I am genuinely interested in hearing people’s views on education.

 

[JimG]

I can’t think of any state in the developed world that asks parents to pay for their children’s education before the age of 16, though I do know there are some right-wing libertarians who would argue that even this would be a good idea.

Of course, all states ask parents (and everyone else) to pay for their children’s education, through taxation. It’s not free. The problem is, that parents, who are actually paying for it, have little or no control over the content or parameters of their children’s education. The state in effect has a monopoly over the indoctrination of children in whatever is the favored ideology during their most formative years. The educational establishment comes close to becoming “an establishment of religion,” providing state sponsorship for the favored worldview.

 

[strngrnrth]

University education is responding to supply and demand. A bachelors’ degree is now required for many jobs that once were taught on-the-job. A master’s does what a HS diploma once could do, and a doctorate, that onetime sign of great wisdom and privilege, isn’t enough for most positions that challenge the mind anymore.
A high-school senior today typically can’t make change, get the point of a one-page article that contains a summary sentence, or find his/her way across town on the bus on time to an appointment in an unfamiliar place. This after dumping over a decade of his/her best learning years into an expensive and controlling system. These were once the skills we would have expected a seven-year-old to display, after just a year of part-time schooling. In the system, children are abused by children and adults, watched and prevented from exercising or earning extra money. The result is that most learn little and some learn nothing.
That is the price of an unaccountable system. The idea of privatizing education is to re-introduce ordinary market accountability to schools. Today, almost all US families can afford to homeschool or co-op school their children. Actually, it needn’t cost more than a couple of dollars a year, not counting the parents’ lost work time. If it were easier to get a private school accredited and licensed, more would open and tuition would drop. Children would learn in high school what we now expect them to learn in college, as they do in many countries. They would have their youth to discover independent living and save all their college money, for they could learn, grow and develop themselves without college and get good jobs without college too.
Conversely, if college were publicly funded, everyone would go to college. We would all pay the taxes. Colleges wouldn’t be accountable to the consumers, who make the decisions, and they would become far more wasteful, and far less useful to students. Soon college would do what high school does now, which is what junior high did a generation ago, what the middle grades did a generation before that, what the primary grades did a generation before that. Eventually, education would be so slow that the law would require four years of college. Remember junior high? In effect, it would last until you were 23 or so.

 

[surfinpure]

I do not believe in socialized or mandated public education. Some of us believe education is a “right,” but I believe it is a privilege. Furthermore, another person’s “right” to an education stops before my rights to my own earnings are infringed upon. This may sound harsh, but it is quite fundamental. Jefferson said it very well: we have inalienable rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. It is unfortunate that a growing number of people believe in rights to all sorts of other things, that really are not rights at all. Some of them are privileges, and some of them are moral abominations. Education and healthcare are just the tip of the iceberg.

There is a word for this “I have a right to ___” mentality, and that word is entitlement. Anyone who has a teenager demanding a cell phone, iPod, gaming system, private PC, brand name clothing, new car, and unlimited curfew can understand entitlement.

 

[manualman]

Much of Europe has a much better primary education policy than the US. From what I’ve heard, many of them allow PARENTS to choose which school to enroll their kids in (often subject to entrance testing) and the state provides a fixed funding level.

Sounds perilously close to ‘vouchers’ doesn’t it?

I think that is the way to go. Society at large benefits from a more educated populace. A voucher system that retained the authority of parents to choose how their kids are educated would be superior to the current sytem of one size fits all public schooling.

 

[SpiritMeadow]

The debate about ‘socialized’ (i.e. free at the point of need, funded through general taxation) healthcare keeps on resurfacing here. I wanted to raise and discuss another issue, one where the lines of debate are somewhat more blurred, that of state-funded general education.

In the US, education is free from K-12 and High School, though I’m aware that some states have free High Schools and fee-paying High Schools that also receive government funding. University education in the US is terrifyingly expensive, and funded through scholarships and private loans. School teachers’ salaries in the US start at around $16,000 (£8,000)

Here in the UK, the situation is similar for 4-18yr olds, though we also had free University education up until 1997, and the fees here are still highly subsidised, with students paying for their tuition through low-interest government loans. Our Universities are poorer than American ones in terms of their endowed assets, but still hold their own in international research league-tables, largely due to private and government research grants. School teachers’ salaries in the UK start at around £20,000 ($40,000)

In many parts of Europe, education is far better funded than it is in the UK or the US, and University education is also free. Few of these countries have research-active institutions in the global top 100, though they still have a highly educated workforce and produce a lot of innovative technology.

I suppose you could see it as the difference between accumulating knowledge in a few prestigious institutions, accessible only to wealthy elites and geniuses, versus distributing knowledge through a high quality of education for all. Both have their advantages and disadvantages.

I can’t think of any state in the developed world that asks parents to pay for their children’s education before the age of 16, though I do know there are some right-wing libertarians who would argue that even this would be a good idea.

I’m not starting this thread in order to trap people on the issue of healthcare (ha ha, you agree that everyone should go to school for free, so why isn’t hospital the same?) I am genuinely interested in hearing people’s views on education.

People in the US acknowledge that schools may receive some funding from the US government, but most funding comes from local taxes. Parents control schools in this country by way of school boards. This was how it was set up, mostly because at the time, no one had a better idea. This has raised a number of problems as you would expect. Schools are better in the Northeast than almost anywhere in the US and schools are worse in the south. You have the strange situation of curriculum decisions and textbook decisions being made largely by folks with zero expertise in the area, so we have school districts not wanting to teach real science or adding religious theories to science classes.

Health care has always been private. Up until perhaps the 1980’.s or so most people were fully covered through their jobs. The rates at which the medical community bilks everyone has now made that increasingly impossible for most companies to continue. We have 45 millions of people with no or inadequate health insurance now. Those that have it, have no desire to pay more taxes so others can. They do not agree with Jesus’ admonition, “as you do to the least of my brothers, you do to me.” They simply claim that those who are uninsured are too lazy to work to get their own, claim that it should be the province of charity (which hasn’t worked so far) or claim that it will grant care to “illegals” the new hated group in the US. We rank far down the list of industrialized, tech societies in our care of our own people. It is embarrassing, shameful, and immoral. As we are now being told constantly, “We like Americans, but when are you folks ever going to do for your own what you preach to the rest of the world?” The point is well made.

 

[SpiritMeadow]

I do not believe in socialized or mandated public education. Some of us believe education is a “right,” but I believe it is a privilege. Furthermore, another person’s “right” to an education stops before my rights to my own earnings are infringed upon. This may sound harsh, but it is quite fundamental. Jefferson said it very well: we have inalienable rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. It is unfortunate that a growing number of people believe in rights to all sorts of other things, that really are not rights at all. Some of them are privileges, and some of them are moral abominations. Education and healthcare are just the tip of the iceberg.

There is a word for this “I have a right to ___” mentality, and that word is entitlement. Anyone who has a teenager demanding a cell phone, iPod, gaming system, private PC, brand name clothing, new car, and unlimited curfew can understand entitlement.

I understand what you mean. You work hard for you money and why should you have to give it away to others who cannot do what you do. I’m sure everyone out there is just too lazy. Unfortunately the Catholic Church disagrees with you. Some things are fundamental: the right to food, clothing, housing, education, health care, decent work at at a decent wage. These are things that HUMAN beings deserve by being born.

 

[SpiritMeadow]

Much of Europe has a much better primary education policy than the US. From what I’ve heard, many of them allow PARENTS to choose which school to enroll their kids in (often subject to entrance testing) and the state provides a fixed funding level.

Sounds perilously close to ‘vouchers’ doesn’t it?

I think that is the way to go. Society at large benefits from a more educated populace. A voucher system that retained the authority of parents to choose how their kids are educated would be superior to the current sytem of one size fits all public schooling.

The voucher system is just a ruse to allow fundamentalists to send their kids to schools and avoid having them taught basic science and health care.

 

[surfinpure]

I understand what you mean. You work hard for you money and why should you have to give it away to others who cannot do what you do. I’m sure everyone out there is just too lazy. Unfortunately the Catholic Church disagrees with you. Some things are fundamental: the right to food, clothing, housing, education, health care, decent work at at a decent wage. These are things that HUMAN beings deserve by being born.

I’m sorry – would you mind pointing me to the portion of Church teaching that says 1) every person has a right to an education (since that is the subject at hand), and 2) I am required to subsidize it? Were all those poor folks who lived during thousands of years of a less “enlightened” era deprived of this basic human “right?” What an oppressive history!

 

[manualman]

The voucher system is just a ruse to allow fundamentalists to send their kids to schools and avoid having them taught basic science and health care.

I suggest some reading on the catholic concept of subsidiarity.

 

[cynic]

I’m sorry – would you mind pointing me to the portion of Church teaching that says 1) every person has a right to an education (since that is the subject at hand), and 2) I am required to subsidize it? Were all those poor folks who lived during thousands of years of a less “enlightened” era deprived of this basic human “right?” What an oppressive history!

Every *child *should have the right to an education because that enables them to be independant as adults. I’m sorry you don’t want to have to help out with that. It might come back to you though when you need employees who can read…

 

[goofyjim]

Every *child *should have the right to an education because that enables them to be independant as adults. I’m sorry you don’t want to have to help out with that. It might come back to you though when you need employees who can read…

So why can’t the same be said about quality healthcare?

 

[goofyjim]

The voucher system is just a ruse to allow fundamentalists to send their kids to schools and avoid having them taught basic science and health care.

Actually a voucher system would allow all schools to compete improving th quality of education for everyone. It might also relieve the tax burden from those who don’t have children from having to keep paying into a system for the other persons children.

 

[surfinpure]

Every *child *should have the right to an education because that enables them to be independant as adults. I’m sorry you don’t want to have to help out with that. It might come back to you though when you need employees who can read…

You mean independent? Sorry. Just couldn’t resist.

As a matter of fact, upon further reflection, I believe I can say we are closer to agreement on this matter than it at first appears. I believe every child ought to be educated. So far so good? Fine. But wait, there’s more. I also believe that this is primarily the responsibility of his parents, and partially (in the interest of charity) the responsibility of the Church. But* I absolutely do not* believe that education is in any way the responsibility of the state.

 

[surfinpure]

The voucher system is just a ruse to allow fundamentalists to send their kids to schools and avoid having them taught basic science and health care.

Malarkey!!

 

[st_lucy]

You mean independent? Sorry. Just couldn’t resist.

As a matter of fact, upon further reflection, I believe I can say we are closer to agreement on this matter than it at first appears. I believe every child ought to be educated. So far so good? Fine. But wait, there’s more. I also believe that this is primarily the responsibility of his parents, and partially (in the interest of charity) the responsibility of the Church. But* I absolutely do not* believe that education is in any way the responsibility of the state.

And to further, IMHO, what you are saying. The Parents should be able to choose what their child will be learning. And until the public school systems stops force feeding our children the ideas of main stream, Hollywood, PC society. And get back into the business of actually educating our children in math, real science, reading, phonic and english. Than maybe tax payers would be happier to pay the taxes. I know I would be. It makes me mad that I have to pay taxes for our children to be taught the PCs for today’s society will our children our constantly failing at math, science and reading.

 

[goofyjim]

And to further, IMHO, what you are saying. The Parents should be able to choose what their child will be learning. And until the public school systems stops force feeding our children the ideas of main stream, Hollywood, PC society. And get back into the business of actually educating our children in math, real science, reading, phonic and english. Than maybe tax payers would be happier to pay the taxes. I know I would be. It makes me mad that I have to pay taxes for our children to be taught the PCs for today’s society will our children our constantly failing at math, science and reading.

It makes me mad to have to pay taxes at all for someone else’ education. Why don’t parents just pay for their own children and get assistance from the government when necessary. I with no children should not be forced to pay no matter how much the quality improves anymore than someone else should have to pay for my healthcare. If we can tax to guarantee one we can tax to guarantee the other.

 

[cynic]

You mean independent?

.

yeah

As a matter of fact, upon further reflection, I believe I can say we are closer to agreement on this matter than it at first appears. I believe every child ought to be educated. So far so good? Fine. But wait, there’s more. I also believe that this is primarily the responsibility of his parents, and partially (in the interest of charity) the responsibility of the Church. But* I absolutely do not* believe that education is in any way the responsibility of the state.

So the most basic level of education for a child will be dependant (can be a or e on that one ) on their parents income. Is that fair? Is it a child’s fault that their parents are lazy slobs, or just don’t earn enough to pay the fees?

 

[BamaRider]

I suggest reading a 4th grade English textbook circa 1890 something, (days of the 1 room school house, no “free” public education) and compare it to a 4 th grade of today, and then come back and tell us how successful public education has been for America the last 100 years.

Such a text book is on display in a one room school house in Fruita, Colorado, near Captial Reef National Park. Fascinating reading.

But you don’t even have to do that, read a newspaper from that era and then read a modern version. Public education dumbs down about every 10 years, but thats just MY opinion.

Everybody back then seemed to be a good “writer,” their command of the lanquage was impecable, and none of them received a public education.

But we’re stuck with what we have, so I’d be for tweaking it with the voucher system.

 

[surfinpure]

So the most basic level of education for a child will be dependant (can be a or e on that one ) on their parents income. Is that fair? Is it a child’s fault that their parents are lazy slobs, or just don’t earn enough to pay the fees?

(When using it as an adjective, you need the “e.” The “a” form is a noun. )

No, I ought to elaborate. When I say the parents are responsible for their children’s education, I mean exactly that: if the parents cannot afford formal education, they ought to educate the children themselves. This may seem like a foreign notion to our “enlightened” modern society, but this was the model for many hundreds of years.

What is education, anyway? Fundamentally, education begins with faith and morals, then extends into literacy and mathematics, then history, science, geography, etc. So why are we sending our kids to a government-run institution in which, for 35 hours a week, they may learn about and discuss anything and everything but faith and morals?