Why have socialized education?

[Jotto999]

Let's discuss the schooling system. My question is: why have it socialized? It seems apparent that private schools offer a far better education than public schools, so why have standardized, government run schools dominate?

 

[Case]

What do you mean by socialized and standardized? And in what universe way are public schools dominating? (And where? The US?)

 

[ImprobableJoe]

Let's discuss the schooling system. My question is: why have it socialized? It seems apparent that private schools offer a far better education than public schools, so why have standardized, government run schools dominate?

I don't see how that's "apparent" at all... evidence?

Here's a link that refutes your "apparent" claim: http://www.epi.org/publications/entry/books_privatepublic/

Two things to remember. One, academic success is often based more of socioeconomic issues than anything else. RIch kids simply do better on average than poor kids, no matter what sort of school they are in. Two, if private schools get to pick and choose their students, then of course they pick the ones who are most likely to succeed, which are the same kids who would probably do just as well in a private school.

I mean, you wouldn't say that pro basketball players are better than amateurs because they are professionals. You would say that they are professionals because they are better. Private schools don't produce better outcomes for students because they are private, the better outcomes are because they get to pick their students and generally don't accept kids with learning or behavioral difficulties. The kids that are harder to teach get stuck in public schools, where they skew the numbers downward. You've got the cause and effect backwards.

Really, saying "why not get rid of all public schools, if private schools are better?" is like saying "why not just send everyone to Harvard?" Is that a solution that would work, do you think?

 

[ArthurWilborn]

Let's discuss the schooling system. My question is: why have it socialized? It seems apparent that private schools offer a far better education than public schools, so why have standardized, government run schools dominate?

History, mainly. Once government has taken over a function it very rarely relinquishes that function. This goes back to when the original schools were founded largely as a social engineering project to create a common national culture.

And Joe: Charter schools work with low SES people too!

http://www.usatoday.com/news/education/2010-01-04-yes-prep-college_N.htm

 

[Jotto999]

Ah, I'm sorry. I didn't check my facts. I had based it on some anecdotes.

What do you mean by socialized and standardized? And in what universe way are public schools dominating? (And where? The US?)

I meant as percent of students who are in public schools vs in private schools.
http://www.capenet.org/facts.html

Let's discuss the schooling system. My question is: why have it socialized? It seems apparent that private schools offer a far better education than public schools, so why have standardized, government run schools dominate?

I don't see how that's "apparent" at all... evidence?

Here's a link that refutes your "apparent" claim: http://www.epi.org/publications/entry/books_privatepublic/

Two things to remember. One, academic success is often based more of socioeconomic issues than anything else. RIch kids simply do better on average than poor kids, no matter what sort of school they are in. Two, if private schools get to pick and choose their students, then of course they pick the ones who are most likely to succeed, which are the same kids who would probably do just as well in a private school.

I mean, you wouldn't say that pro basketball players are better than amateurs because they are professionals. You would say that they are professionals because they are better. Private schools don't produce better outcomes for students because they are private, the better outcomes are because they get to pick their students and generally don't accept kids with learning or behavioral difficulties. The kids that are harder to teach get stuck in public schools, where they skew the numbers downward. You've got the cause and effect backwards.

Really, saying "why not get rid of all public schools, if private schools are better?" is like saying "why not just send everyone to Harvard?" Is that a solution that would work, do you think?

This is very helpful and informing. I had some incorrect information in mind about the subject.


I am going to have to entirely reconsider my position on the topic. I'm going to post again when I've cleared a few things up.

 

[MRaverz]

I just finished going to an independent school for sixth form.

It was crap.

 

[Baranduin]

And Joe: Charter schools work with low SES people too!

http://www.usatoday.com/news/education/2010-01-04-yes-prep-college_N.htm

The plural of anecdote is not data. Specially in propaganda.

I meant as percent of students who are in public schools vs in private schools.
http://www.capenet.org/facts.html

Why are they using projected data instead of actual numbers (or at least, not 5 years old projections; or at least alert that it's just a projection)? (the link is the one they claim as a source; if the round numbers don't make your skeptic bells ring...)

And indeed that data would show a steady decrement on the enrollment of the percentage of students in private schools over the total of students (from a 11,7% in 1992 to a 11% in 2005, and a projected 10,78% in 2009)... [so the 25% of the schools is getting the 11% of the students... hmmm, something doesn't work very well there].

Sorry guy, I'm calling shenanigans on your source too.

 

[Master_Ghost_Knight]

Private schools get to pick the kids they admit and the basic criteria is based on how smart you are before you even get in, so one would think tht it would skew the statisticsa litle bit. But they are also descriminated on how much you can pay, and if you are poor then likely you are not a descent of a smart person either (and intelegence has also alot to due with genetics to).
I happen to be in part of a combination to be born on a family not rich to be able to send me into a private school and also do very well aboverage in a public school even for square private school kid, and from that prespective I can say that some people are just thick! Some people are just lacking in the inteligence department that they wouldn't move on above shit even if they had the best tutors in the world.
But I can't really tell exactly what was going on with everyone elsesmind, but a factor that became quite aparent was motivation. While the rich kids passed their day times "fantasising with the takeover of their dads multinational company" and couldn't whait for "the first time they sue someone out of their launch money" the poor countarpart top of aspirations were "to wear baggy trousers and narrate nonsense in atempt someone would call it music get a million dollar contract so they can change the status quo of their life and be able to buy their own playstation" or to try and be a football player and do the same thing.
The mere mentioning of something that made sense or was a be smarter than usual would socialy label you a nerd, a great deal mutivated by an anti-intelectual culture greatly influenced by the smartass kind of parent and his stories on how he outwited the local engineer (from the construction site for which he works on the cement mixer) or scientists in general (mainly motivated by the frustration and lack of realisation in a poor job) and thus giving the impression that scientist in general are the smartass good for nothing stupid. This will have the consequence that they wiil not develop a great interest in working to educate themselves, ending out having their fathers job and doing exactly the samething their fathers did when they have kids of their own and thus completing the vicious cicle. We have a good paralel with religion how a particularly negative mindset can be contagious producing in geneal negative effects.

But bottom line is, the statistics that private schools do better than public ones are just circumstancial, relating more the social status rather than superior education, if you randomize the distribution of kids into schools then statisticaly private schools wouldn't do any better in fact I'm convinced that private schools would do worst for the simple reson that public schools have imposed standards equal for everyone while private schools standards are wavy and stuff like creationism are allowed to creep in better.
And public schools are fundamental in order to allow the acess to education for everyone instead of just a few either they are abble to take adantage of it or not, frankly speaking I wouldn't be able to afford the education that I have in a private school and if there isn't anything else at least it was worth for that. (And now I am here telling in the face rich kids from private school that they are stupid and backing it all up with scientific facts).

 

[kenandkids]

The most important reason is a nations knowledge base. If schools were all privatised, they could teach whatever nonsense they chose. Some schools would crank out flat-earthers while another would promote yecs and others would have students graduate believing that microbes are myths. These are simply the common and current desires btw. Many organisations are wishing for the ability to teach far more dangerous and damaging material, completely ignoring science and knowledge while desiring racism, war, destruction, and dominance. As long as there is a centralised and standardised public school system, these loons aren't able to reach the desired extremes.

 

[Master_Ghost_Knight]

Let's not forget tht the first instances of government supported education on the modern world was to avoid to have to deal with crap of the religious domination in public literacy and education, not that it justifies the current situation we live today but it is something to chew uppon.

 

[Case]

The most important reason is a nations knowledge base. If schools were all privatised, they could teach whatever nonsense they chose.

Not so, at least not in Germany and The Netherlands (the two countries whose school system I know a bit about), where there are 'nationwide' curricula. Private schools are simply more prone to having additional subjects to those on the curriculum.

 

[Ibis3]

Another thing to consider. It is in the best interest of society that the populace have a minimum level of standardised education. Private schools, like private health care, can only serve those who can afford it, making the cycle of poverty even more difficult to break. All this does is create a class system: the literate rich and the illiterate poor. To make private schools more accessible to the lower class, you would need to have it subsidised. The only three available major sponsors left once you eliminate government would be religion, political organisations, and corporations. I don't think we want a monopoly of religious schools, political schools, or corporate schools (or even a combination of them)--they obviously would have their own propaganda to push. The public school system grew alongside with the franchise, and that is not an accident. We want voting citizens to be informed and able to think critically. The situation isn't ideal, but the answer is to have better standardised curricula, teacher standards, and funding for the public system, not to leach off to private schools so the richest can have the best resources.

 

[JustBusiness17]

The situation isn't ideal, but the answer is to have better standardised curricula, teacher standards, and funding for the public system, not to leach off to private schools so the richest can have the best resources.

I partially disagree and here's why:

JTG is a highly regarded expert on educational reform. He believes a more free-form and customized teaching approach is the best way to help the highly individualistic students to reach their potential and find their own path in life... This is a far departure from the overly rigid, one size fits all system that currently dominates the world. Balance is key of course!

More Info


Sir Ken Robinson says a little more of the same with some added wit.

 

[Case]

The situation isn't ideal, but the answer is to have better standardised curricula, teacher standards, and funding for the public system, not to leach off to private schools so the richest can have the best resources.

I partially disagree and here's why: [...]
Sir Ken Robinson says a little more of the same with some added wit. [...]

Actually, Kenny argues not for deviant curricula but for better curricula which do not focus so heavily on the 'exact' subjects (as they're called in NL). He wants these better curricula to become the new standard. This means he's actually arguing for standardization. An 'against' notion would be "Let everyone do as they please", and that's not what he's saying.

 

[Jotto999]

I know I kind of threw this thread up and then abandoned, sorry about that, some IRL stuff came up. Still though, this thread brought forth some incorrect information I had, thank you for helping me refine my opinion.

 

[Amerist]

Let's discuss the schooling system. My question is: why have it socialized? It seems apparent that private schools offer a far better education than public schools, so why have standardized, government run schools dominate?

I don't believe it's the case that private schools are in fact better except that they artificially select for people who can pay them for the investment of making sure their children have a better education and therefore more opportunities.

The outcome of not having socialized public education, therefore, would produce a population where the have-nots are also not-educated wouldn't it?

I see it like public vaccination. The socialized public education makes certain that all segments of society receive at basis the education necessary to function on a minimal level with everyone else. Herd immunity in the form of basic literacy and ability to arithmetic (even though there will be stragglers who are incapable of basic functioning the rest of us should be able to pool our resources to give them a niche.)