Public Education cannot be fixed/reformed - Discuss

[A2K78]

Why is what? Well after 50 years of failed attempts and nearly $1 trillion taken from taxpayers(see chart) its quite amazing how our socialist education have succeeded in dumding down kids and for this reason why big government solutions such as NCLB and "Race to the top" would continue that legacy of failure.

Speaking of, this is the chart in question:

http://perotcharts.com/category/charts/education-charts/

 

[the Interceptor]

If the problem of a youth dumbing down is anything like in Germany, the causes are not so much with the schools rather than the weak or even completely missing "purposeful upbringing" of children by their parents.

 

[DK]

Maybe it's the increased amount of kids being sent to schools were creationism is taught as fact (instead of absolute bullcrap).

 

[Northstar]

Why is what? Well after 50 years of failed attempts and nearly $1 trillion taken from taxpayers(see chart) its quite amazing how our socialist education have succeeded in dumding down kids and for this reason why big government solutions such as NCLB and "Race to the top" would continue that legacy of failure.

Speaking of, this is the chart in question:

http://perotcharts.com/category/charts/education-charts/

Translation:

Here is my opinion on why the government is horrible, but I'm passing it off as fact(against the AUP by the way).

Now here is a chart, which isn't even right.

 

[Scaff]

Translation:

Here is my opinion on why the government is horrible, but I'm passing it off as fact(against the AUP by the way).

This.

A2K78 - We are all for informed and educated debate here at GT Planet, however what you will not do (and notice this is not a request) is pass off opinion as fact.

I have amended the thread title to one more suitable (rather than locking it), but please take more care in the future.

The threads you have created clearly show you have political leaning, however that does not automatically make everything you post fact and in all honesty, neither side of a debate can ever claim to have the monopoly on being correct.


Now lets get to the argument you put forward. That US government expenditure on education has increased overall is clear to see from the graph you posted, that its has increased as a % of GDP is also roughly true (however a fall in that final metric has occurred between 2002 and 2006).

However to then claim that proves that public education has failed is not so much a leap and a parachute jump without a parachute. Why have you not provided evidence to show how education results have changed over the same time frame?

Without this you have no basis in your claimed 'fact'.

I could for example counter with this graph....

...and argue that the money was well spent, or use this graph...

....and agree with you.


Now even with these I have not proven anything other that a general linked series of trends. No you would then need to show causality between the two trends (whatever they are).

Honestly I think that you need to rethink how you approach debate here at GT Planet, as so far its not been a good start.


Scaff

 

[ROAD_DOGG33J]

Now here is a chart, which isn't even right.

The chart seems correct, but it doesn't really prove anything except that spending as a percentage of GDP has went up. The range is a bit less than 1%.

 

[GT_Prologue5]

Don't change public education. I'm in 9th Grade (yeah, public education) and I don't see a problem with the plans behind the schools for our nation. No system, no matter what, is foolproof. There will be someone that fails. No matter what you do. Most of the reasons we have failed kids is because of the kids decision, not a school/government program. Kids do stupid stuff, they get high, go to parties, have kids at like 16, but that's because of the child. Not the school. This may not be a valid argument against the rest of what anyones said here, but I just felt like throwing in my pennies.

 

[A2K78]

Scaff's, the graduation rate have very little to do with the success of public schools but everything to do with the fact these kids aren't learning a thing thus making them unprepared to compete in the market. Even a high school valedictorian was quick to sum-up public education in a nutshell:

http://www.lewrockwell.com/pr/valedictorian-against-schooling.html

 

[Scaff]

Scaff's, the graduation rate have very little to do with the success of public schools but everything to do with the fact these kids aren't learning a thing thus making them unprepared to compete in the market. Even a high school valedictorian was quick to sum-up public education in a nutshell:

http://www.lewrockwell.com/pr/valedictorian-against-schooling.html

I don't think you will find that I claimed graduation rate did have anything to do with the success of schools. If you believe I did then you missed the entire point of my post.

Simply put you claimed that you had factually shown that public schooling was failing and that the graph you posted proved it.

You have not done so at all, your graph proved nothing of the sort and so far you have posted rhetoric or opinion pieces and presented them as fact.

I have simply pointed out that presenting opinion as fact is not permitted here at GT Planet and that to prove you point you will first have to prove that public schooling has failed (and an opinion piece will not manage that) and if you plan to use a graph showing expenditure as proof you will also have to show causality and not just a connection.


Scaff

 

[Northstar]

Scaff's, the graduation rate have very little to do with the success of public schools but everything to do with the fact these kids aren't learning a thing thus making them unprepared to compete in the market. Even a high school valedictorian was quick to sum-up public education in a nutshell:

http://www.lewrockwell.com/pr/valedictorian-against-schooling.html

So your counter argument is an opinion from a person who has very little real life experience? It also seems like they were more saying schooling in general is bad, not just public schooling.

And graduation rate actually plays a fairly large role, although I would say dropout rate is more significant but that isn't really going to help your case as there are fewer people dropping out than ever.

 

[Joey D]

So what is is that you propose if we take away public schooling. I mean you think people are dumb now, let's take away the main means of education in this country and see what happens.

I know many Libertarian idealist will say that have school a pay program by those using the system but I can almost assure you that would only work in theory and not in practice. Sure taxes would be lower so in theory people would have more money, but I highly doubt you would see everyone send their kids to school. So you would have just as many, if not more, uneducated people in this country and we'd have to prop them up any how because they would become a drain on society.

I am all for public school reform, but I think it needs to be a reform that will work. So I'm just curious, if public schools fail, what should we do?

 

[Famine]

So you would have just as many, if not more, uneducated people in this country and we'd have to prop them up any how because they would become a drain on society.

Society needs "uneducated" people - and they aren't necessarily a drain. They do the jobs that "educated" people refuse to lower themselves to.

This is a bit of an issue in the UK at the moment. Many of the "educated" people refuse to do jobs they see as beneath them while we receive economic migrants from Eastern European countries who are happy to do any job (and since they get a guaranteed minimum wage, why wouldn't they be), the same "educated" people are also against immigrants coming over here and stealing our jobs - the jobs they refuse to do.


One of the problems with public schooling is that it's generally compulsory and there are people for whom schooling just isn't appropriate. They spend the first 13 years of their life (well, after 3 years of age) crammed into a system they can't cope with being made to feel stupid (and, while they may be educationally "stupid", they have abilities and talents that school cannot culture) and spat out the other end with no qualifications, work experience or confidence.

However, I'm firmly on the fence with regards to schooling and public funding thereof.

 

[Joey D]

Society needs "uneducated" people - and they aren't necessarily a drain. They do the jobs that "educated" people refuse to lower themselves to.

In the US I can't think of many jobs one can do without at least high school education. And even the ones that don't require it are taken up by kids in high school (fast food jobs and the like).

Having an uneducated population is bad, having a population with varying levels of education however, is not. You need people to have at least a high school education, past that go for as much as you can afford/desire.

 

[Famine]

In the US I can't think of many jobs one can do without at least high school education. And even the ones that don't require it are taken up by kids in high school (fast food jobs and the like).

Street-sweeper, bin man (trash collector?), bus driver, factory line-worker (food, sportswear, not cars), cafeteria worker - there's a list as long as your arm.

I've known several kids in full-time, public (and a couple in private) education for whom education was a waste of their time - never mind that of their teachers and, most important of all, their classmates.

Having an uneducated population is bad, having a population with varying levels of education however, is not.

And some of that variety can be the "uneducated".

You need people to have at least a high school education, past that go for as much as you can afford/desire.

I'm not convinced that the entire population of the United States needs to know everything they learn in 12th Grade. I'm not even convinced that the entire population of the United States needs to know everything they learn in 4th Grade. Sure, they should be given the opportunity to learn the state capital of Vermont, but as a requirement I see limited value.

 

[Joey D]

Street-sweeper, bin man (trash collector?), bus driver, factory line-worker (food, sportswear, not cars), cafeteria worker - there's a list as long as your arm.

I've known several kids in full-time, public (and a couple in private) education for whom education was a waste of their time - never mind that of their teachers and, most important of all, their classmates.

In the UK maybe, here in the US I can't think of many job descriptions I've seen that don't at least require a GED or a high school diploma. Yes there are some for sure, but they are definitely the minority. And really there is no excuse no to have a high school education now days.

And some of that variety can be the "uneducated".

I'm not convinced that the entire population of the United States needs to know everything they learn in 12th Grade. I'm not even convinced that the entire population of the United States needs to know everything they learn in 4th Grade. Sure, they should be given the opportunity to learn the state capital of Vermont, but as a requirement I see limited value.

I disagree. You should have at minimum a high school education because it does teach you the basics on a lot of things. Even if it's time management, social skills, or how to look busy. You learn things in high school...and not all of them, in fact most of them, are not academic.

 

[Famine]

In the UK maybe, here in the US I can't think of many job descriptions I've seen that don't at least require a GED or a high school diploma. Yes there are some for sure, but they are definitely the minority. And really there is no excuse no to have a high school education now days.

People for whom school is not appropriate is also a minority, so it rather seems like the jobs are suitable for them. Does a bricklayer in the US seriously need to prove he was in school for long enough to achieve the least expected of him - or can he just prove that he can lay bricks well?

I can think of very many "excuses" not to have a high school education. Not everyone is equipped with fully functioning bodies and brains as we are.

I disagree. You should have at minimum a high school education because it does teach you the basics on a lot of things. Even if it's time management, social skills, or how to look busy. You learn things in high school...and not all of them, in fact most of them, are not academic.

My parents taught me many of these things. But then they were my parents and not just people to whom I owed biological origins.

If your school system is filling in for shortcomings in parenting then I disagree with the OP - it's not the education system that is broken but the reproduction system.

 

[Joey D]

Not everyone is equipped with fully functioning bodies and brains as we are.

Even the most mentally disable people go through an educational program here in the states. We had a whole program at my high school where they taught these folks all sorts of things.

My parents taught me many of these things. But then they were my parents and not just people to whom I owed biological origins.

If your school system is filling in for shortcomings in parenting then I disagree with the OP - it's not the education system that is broken but the reproduction system.

I agree your parents should teach you a lot of these things, but quite often that's not the case. I agree parenting is what is screwed up in this country and probably throughout the world, but what's easier to fix? The school system or the entire population?

 

[Omnis]

Didn't we already have a public schools thread?

Scaff's, the graduation rate have very little to do with the success of public schools but everything to do with the fact these kids aren't learning a thing thus making them unprepared to compete in the market. Even a high school valedictorian was quick to sum-up public education in a nutshell:

http://www.lewrockwell.com/pr/valedictorian-against-schooling.html

Seems like what you're doing is pulling points off LRC and just plastering them all over this board.

Forget the valedictorian. Have you read John Taylor Gatto, or anyone else who has already written extensively on this subject? They have already organized their points and summarized their arguments. It would better serve you and your persuasive efforts to at least reference the work that they've done for you.

I am on the same side as you for many of these threads you've started, but you don't do a very good job of presenting and supporting an argument. Study danoff and those who have written on the subjects.

 

[Ardius]

One of the problems with public schooling is that it's generally compulsory and there are people for whom schooling just isn't appropriate. They spend the first 13 years of their life (well, after 3 years of age) crammed into a system they can't cope with being made to feel stupid (and, while they may be educationally "stupid", they have abilities and talents that school cannot culture) and spat out the other end with no qualifications, work experience or confidence.

However, I'm firmly on the fence with regards to schooling and public funding thereof.

I agree though I feel those people wouldn't find that out without going to school in the first place.
I certainly think that there should be less emphasis on progressing through to university level education. It feels more like a status and a statistic rather than a meaningful career choice.
I also feel that school has benefits outside academic achievement, as such, I feel its correct to make school compulsory at the very least till the age of 10.

School is not just about marks and grades. The social side of school I feel is very important, probably the most character-building part of life at that age.

I think the "old" way of school, where people could choose to leave at 14 (I think? I can't remember) seemed to work well, judging by the generations above me and their comments of the time (though obviously some rose-tinted glasses comes into it).

Certainly there needs to be a change in the way people think about schooling and academic achievements.

 

[A2K78]

I am all for public school reform, but I think it needs to be a reform that will work. So I'm just curious, if public schools fail, what should we do?

When it come to government run programs(such as public schools), no amount of reform or funding is going to fix the problem. As I said at the start of the thread, this country had over 50 years and every program thrown at the situation have amounted to nothing but failure, NCLB being the most recent.

In the end what we need is a free market education system and one free from the hand and interference of government. Not only that, but we to put an end to the whole idea of compulsory education because its isn't working as noted by serval individuals:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compulsory_education#Criticism

 

[Famine]

Even the most mentally disable people go through an educational program here in the states. We had a whole program at my high school where they taught these folks all sorts of things.

Would it be appropriate to do so - if one requires a high school diploma just to get a job and these are individuals so compromised they cannot hold down a job, what would the point of teaching them? Did they want it or, because it's a public schooling system, was it compulsory?

That's one of the problems with compulsory schooling - it's one-size fits none. Everyone's taught the same things at the same rate and, unless you are that average pupil, it's not going to be appropriate for you.

I agree your parents should teach you a lot of these things, but quite often that's not the case. I agree parenting is what is screwed up in this country and probably throughout the world, but what's easier to fix? The school system or the entire population?

Come on now. You know full well that what's easiest isn't always - and in fact commonly isn't at all - what is right and what is best. I can't believe you'd suggest doing what's easiest with a wholly straight face.

And that's without getting into the quagmire of schools teaching societal skills to the next generation of parents, having done the same for the previous generation which failed to pass on those skills to their offspring - preferring the schools do it instead...

 

[Northstar]

When it come to government run programs(such as public schools), no amount of reform or funding is going to fix the problem. As I said at the start of the thread, this country had over 50 years and every program thrown at the situation have amounted to nothing but failure, NCLB being the most recent.

Do you have anything to support your cause?

Granted I will admit that NCLB is a complete failure, but so far I've not seen you post anything in any threads that really support what you are claiming.

In the end what we need is a free market education system and one free from the hand and interference of government. Not only that, but we to put an end to the whole idea of compulsory education because its isn't working as noted by serval individuals:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compulsory_education#Criticism

And how do you think that will wind up working?

Look at the college level where it's near impossible to graduate without being in debt for a good chunk of time. Imagine how bad it would be if it were that way for all levels.

I am with you on the fact that the governments programs to boost education are failures, but it seems you really fail to think some of these things through.

 

[A2K78]

Didn't we already have a public schools thread?



Seems like what you're doing is pulling points off LRC and just plastering them all over this board.

Forget the valedictorian. Have you read John Taylor Gatto, or anyone else who has already written extensively on this subject? They have already organized their points and summarized their arguments. It would better serve you and your persuasive efforts to at least reference the work that they've done for you.

I am on the same side as you for many of these threads you've started, but you don't do a very good job of presenting and supporting an argument. Study danoff and those who have written on the subjects.

One issue of public school, I tend to make my argument from the writings of Murray Rothbard and Ivan Illich. As for that link, I merely posted it because its basically sum-up everything by both Rothbard and Illich.

 

[A2K78]

Do you have anything to support your cause?

Granted I will admit that NCLB is a complete failure, but so far I've not seen you post anything in any threads that really support what you are claiming.



And how do you think that will wind up working?

Look at the college level where it's near impossible to graduate without being in debt for a good chunk of time. Imagine how bad it would be if it were that way for all levels.

I am with you on the fact that the governments programs to boost education are failures, but it seems you really fail to think some of these things through.

Justin, we already do have a free market solutions and its called private institutions e.g. private schools and home schooling. Sadly though the hand of government have been trying undermine these two, home schooling in particular.

 

[Northstar]

Justin, we already do have a free market solutions and its called private institutions e.g. private schools and home schooling. Sadly though the hand of government have been trying undermine these two, home schooling in particular.

Private schools get government subsidies and there are tax breaks for home schooling. This is nothing new, it has been going on for a good amount of time. Although I feel home schooling is bad for children as it takes away from their ability to learn how to socialize, which is probably the most important thing kids learn in school.

I still don't get why you have such a dislike for anything government, yes they make tons of stupid choices, but I would hate to imagine what it would be like with no government.