3 ms·

>> "1) Education is not a good with the kinds of features which allow approximating rational choice" Sure it is, and it's well exemplified at the post-secondar

>> "1) Education is not a good with the kinds of features which allow approximating rational choice" Sure it is, and it's well exemplified at the post-secondary level. >> "advocates would instead simply reduce central control and increase local (district and even site-level) control of traditional public schools." Intellectually, sure, but pragmatically, it's a canard; big, complex systems generally do not re-organize themselves. The IRS will not 'simplify the tax code'. Bureaucracies do not trim themselves, rather, they get replaced. While I'm a big fan of public schools, the fact remains that there are legitimate 'libertarian' arguments to be made here. Decent charter schools might offer an opportunity to shake off some of the cruft and allow entrepreneurial thinking to lead the way. Almost all of the arguments on this thread ignore the libertarian arguments at face value, and instead imply some kind of nefarious 'dark motivation' behind everything. It's not entirely unreasonable to bring up such factors, but it's intellectually a little shifty. There are reasonable grounds for charter schools. Most of the 'possible dark patterns' might even be mitigated by decent regulation, for example, maybe they have to hire union teachers, or maybe schools have to have open enrolment for local kids, maybe tuition has to be graduated etc. etc..

dragonwriter 8y ago
>> "1) Education is not a good with the kinds of features which allow approximating rational choice" Sure it is, and it's well exemplified at the post-secondary level. Post-secondary education has somewhat less obscure results and at least the main participant is actually the decision maker, but even post-secondary education doesn't well approximate rational choice, which is why the private for-profit segment is rife with predatory actors. >> "advocates would instead simply reduce central control and increase local (district and even site-level) control of traditional public schools." > Intellectually, sure, but pragmatically, it's a canard; big, complex systems generally do not re-organize themselves. The IRS will not 'simplify the tax code'. Well, no, because it can't, Congress controls the tax code. But, in any cases your argument is the canard—any faction with the power to dictate policy can just as easily dictate an increased local control of traditional public education policy as one of increased centralization of traditional public education with public subsidies for private alternatives. What a bureaucracy is inclined to do for itself is irrelevant when we are talking about alternative rules that can be imposed on the bureaucracy, where either alternative requires the power to impose rules on he bureaucracy independent of what it would choose for itself.

dragonwriter 8y ago

>> "1) Education is not a good with the kinds of features which allow approximating rational choice" Sure it is, and it's well exemplified at the post-secondary level. Post-secondary education has somewhat less obscure results and at least the main participant is actually the decision maker, but even post-secondary education doesn't well approximate rational choice, which is why the private for-profit segment is rife with predatory actors. >> "advocates would instead simply reduce central control and increase local (district and even site-level) control of traditional public schools." > Intellectually, sure, but pragmatically, it's a canard; big, complex systems generally do not re-organize themselves. The IRS will not 'simplify the tax code'. Well, no, because it can't, Congress controls the tax code. But, in any cases your argument is the canard—any faction with the power to dictate policy can just as easily dictate an increased local control of traditional public education policy as one of increased centralization of traditional public education with public subsidies for private alternatives. What a bureaucracy is inclined to do for itself is irrelevant when we are talking about alternative rules that can be imposed on the bureaucracy, where either alternative requires the power to impose rules on he bureaucracy independent of what it would choose for itself.