3 ms·

There's a lot of valid arguments for a single school system - better teachers from private, people with private wealth and influence pushing the public sector f

There's a lot of valid arguments for a single school system - better teachers from private, people with private wealth and influence pushing the public sector forward, etc. But the title is naive. This will do nothing for the class divide. Wealthy parents will still hire private tutors for their children for 1 on 1 time and expose them to a wider variety of extra curricular activities. It's the concept of schooling itself that's the problem. You can't absentmindedly send your kids off to school to be taught how to be a drone. IMO the parents attitude and nurturing at home is 2x as important, and this is especially problematic for either too-young parent or low income families that don't have the time to nurture their kids because they're working 12 hour days with 3 hours of commuting.

api 8y ago
It will also do nothing for the elite university system, which is a major system of noble title and privilege networks.
rm_-rf_slash 8y ago
Doubly right. Parents who read to children and nurture a love of learning are multitudes more effective than expecting the best teachers and tutors that money can buy to encourage kids of any socioeconomic status to care about their education.
trukterious 8y ago
>IMO the parents attitude and nurturing at home is 2x as important Agreed. And since education is inseparable from a child's well-being and general development, it remains the responsibility of parents. They must choose according to their children's interests, wishes and aptitudes, and according to the family situation. Try to take that away and you're putting the State in loco parentis -- a role beyond its bureaucratic capacity to manage.
rbanffy 8y ago
It doesn't remove it completely, but it goes a long way towards removing incentives to deplete the public schooling system from resources. As more and more people in position to support campaign donations have no (perceived) stake in public school, there is less incentive to adequately fund it. What you create is schools for a minority of the poor that are left with whatever is left when everything the people politicians hear care about is funded.

api 8y ago

It will also do nothing for the elite university system, which is a major system of noble title and privilege networks.

rm_-rf_slash 8y ago

Doubly right. Parents who read to children and nurture a love of learning are multitudes more effective than expecting the best teachers and tutors that money can buy to encourage kids of any socioeconomic status to care about their education.

trukterious 8y ago

>IMO the parents attitude and nurturing at home is 2x as important Agreed. And since education is inseparable from a child's well-being and general development, it remains the responsibility of parents. They must choose according to their children's interests, wishes and aptitudes, and according to the family situation. Try to take that away and you're putting the State in loco parentis -- a role beyond its bureaucratic capacity to manage.

rbanffy 8y ago

It doesn't remove it completely, but it goes a long way towards removing incentives to deplete the public schooling system from resources. As more and more people in position to support campaign donations have no (perceived) stake in public school, there is less incentive to adequately fund it. What you create is schools for a minority of the poor that are left with whatever is left when everything the people politicians hear care about is funded.