Tim Daneliuk wrote:
wrote:
SNIP


The problem is that public education is the worst of all possible
worlds.


How does it compare to a world with no schools, or don't you
consider that possible?


How on earth did you get to "no schools" from no *public* schools?

What you actually wrote was "...public education is the worst of
all possible worlds." 'Worst' is a superlative. In order for
your statement to be true it must be the case that no worst
worlds are possible. If you were toagree that a world with
no schools would be worst, and that such a world is possible,
then you would be admitting that you were wrong. So instead,
you responded with a rhetorical question of your own. Since I
realize that you posed yours in order to avoid having to
admit that you were wrong, I decline to answer yours.

Care to answer mine now?

The
majority of us have the means and willingness to educate our children
(and the parents who do not have children who are lost no matter what we
do).

Not clear on the meaning of that parenthetical remark.

The significant reduction in local taxation engendered by ending
the public school system would provide more than enough funding for
individuals to band together to create quality private education of
their own choosing with an appropriate level of accountability. So much
so, that - based on historical behavior - there would be plenty left
over to offer "free" education as a matter of charity to the genuinely
underprivileged.

I suspect you overestimate the generosity of those parents.



You would have us believe that ALL of the public schools, or
at least so many of them, are so bad as to be a complete
or nearly complete failure.

I don't believe that. But, I do believe that public education is a bad
deal. It costs too much, has insufficient accountability to those who
pick up the tab, cannot refuse access to even the biggest troublemakers,
cannot force parents to pay attention, and worst of all, opens up the
curriculum to debates about what should- and should not be taught a la
this very thread.

I challenge the comment about not being able to keep out the
biggest troublemakers. There is considerable geographical
variation and has been considerable historical variation over
the 20th century as to whom the public schools may or may not
exclude for any simple blanket statement on the matter to
be correct.


...
Why not just admit that some percentage will always be lost and optimize
the system for the majority - i.e., Privately run and funded schools that
can enforce order and make education a priority...



Obviously:

Many of those who will always be lost have parents who can
afford to send them to private schools even if they fail all
their courses. While the management of all of those private
schools would rather not have students that fail many will
consider the receipt of tuition payment from the parents
to be more important than the success of the students.

Ah, but the money they waste so profligately is *private*.

Non sequitor in regard to the point above but FWIW relevent
to your remarks below.

It has not been extracted from the hands of the good citizens
of that community by threat of government force.

That is what you say about nearly all taxation. I allow as
it as valid a remark here as whenever else you say it.

The voluntary
misuse of funds - however stupid - is none of my concern so long
as those funds are not mine in any way, shape, or form (unless the
use of such funds harms in some way).


Meanwhile, many of that majority who would do well, or at
least acceptably in school will NOT have parents who can
afford to send them to private schools.

I disagree. We managed to educate a considerable portion
of the population - most of it less than middle class -
more-or-less privately up through something like the end
of the 19th Century.

It might be instructive to compare some idicia of education,
like literacy rates, over the last two hundred years or so.
I would be very much surprised if the peak literacy rate
was achieved prior to the advent of public education. I'd
also be surprised if you care.

There is plenty of eleemosynary
spirit left in this country for people who absolutely
could not afford to take care of their children. Perhaps
too, this would serve as a future incentive for people in
these circumstances to only have the children they can afford.

Again, I think you overetimate human generosity.



I agree that public schools CAN be terribly inadequate, in-
efficient, and dangerous. Rather than looking at the
best of the public schools and trying to appy that to the
others, you propose a 'social Darwinism' of the worse sort.

Feh!


No, I propose we stop using the force of government (or the threat
of it)

By which you mean, again, taxation. See above.

to make most of us (who *do* pay attention and care for
our offspring) pick up the tab for the irresponsible minority
of people who have children they either cannot afford or cannot
be bothered to raise responsibly. I also am tired up picking up
the tab for a system that systematically indocrinates children
with collectivist political ideology, offensive (to many) moral
values, and a lousy perspective about their nation and its place
in the world.

As you know, a example does not prove a trend and a trend is
not the same as ubiquitousness. While there may be some
students and schools consistent with your complaints not
all are, nor I daresay are a majority. Complainst about
the quality of public education should be addressed by
improving that quality, not by throwing away the baby
with the bath. OTOH, tha targument would not apply
if you would remain opposed to public schools regardless
of the quality.

Also as you know, a single counterexample does prove a
possibility. That there are good public school students
and good public schools proves that the system can
work. It is not inevitably doomed to degrade to
what you describe.


P.S. By any reasonable definition, I grew up "poor", and English
was my second written/read language. I also attended nothing
but private universities and did so without
a dime of long-term collegiate debt. The secret? Get a job
(or two, three...) and pay your own way. I had the other
piece of magic on my side - a family that paid attention and
made education a priority. *No* amount of tax money will buy
that if it is not already extant in a family, so why bother
even trying?

The public school system does not have to duplicate your experiences
in order to achieve similar results. It does not even have to
achieve similar results in order to achieve acceptable results.

--

FF