4 ms·

Yes, that is a beautiful example of freedom... It presupposes that some bureaucrat in Berlin should be entrusted with the educational decisions has the kids be

by dapf 5y ago

Yes, that is a beautiful example of freedom... It presupposes that some bureaucrat in Berlin should be entrusted with the educational decisions has the kids best interest at heart. The bureaucrat cares more about a child than the child's parents.

oaiey 5y ago
He is definitely more qualified than most parents. Like are the teachers. And actually most likely this state (not country) level officer is a career teacher who is no longer teaching. And yes, they are doing their share of stupid things. But that is the 1% everyone does wrong
- dapf 5y ago
  My question is who cares more, which you didn't answer. Also, more qualified? What makes the bureaucrat more qualified? Does the bureaucrat know the child better? Is the bureaucrat better equipped to make decisions about the child future having limited to none information about the particular child? Doesn't the caring part have a huge impact on how carefully the decisions are made? I see the rightful role of the bureaucrat only as one more source of information for the parent, to supplement any lack of knowledge the parents may have. But, the decisions, an ultimate responsibility, lies with the parents. I sense a certain underestimation on your part towards non-college educated people, or maybe an overestimation of what college educated people can do. Correct me if I'm wrong.
  - oaiey 5y ago
    Well, for individual kids the answer is yes and no. 2% of kids have terrible parents, 97% have parents agreeing and 1% of the parents think/are making better calls on kids education than the school. Numbers are made up. Sure is, the middle section is way bigger than 50%, the bad parents percentage number is higher than the better-decision-than-school parents. In summary, society is right when making the decision that everyone has to attend school and make the call what is schooled. The school system has an evolution of hundreds if not thousands of years. No colleague or not educated Administrator of that will be able to ruin it that much :) ... That quickly :). Kids belong in a (public) school.

by dapf 5y ago

oaiey 5y ago

He is definitely more qualified than most parents. Like are the teachers. And actually most likely this state (not country) level officer is a career teacher who is no longer teaching. And yes, they are doing their share of stupid things. But that is the 1% everyone does wrong

dapf 5y ago
My question is who cares more, which you didn't answer. Also, more qualified? What makes the bureaucrat more qualified? Does the bureaucrat know the child better? Is the bureaucrat better equipped to make decisions about the child future having limited to none information about the particular child? Doesn't the caring part have a huge impact on how carefully the decisions are made? I see the rightful role of the bureaucrat only as one more source of information for the parent, to supplement any lack of knowledge the parents may have. But, the decisions, an ultimate responsibility, lies with the parents. I sense a certain underestimation on your part towards non-college educated people, or maybe an overestimation of what college educated people can do. Correct me if I'm wrong.
- oaiey 5y ago
  Well, for individual kids the answer is yes and no. 2% of kids have terrible parents, 97% have parents agreeing and 1% of the parents think/are making better calls on kids education than the school. Numbers are made up. Sure is, the middle section is way bigger than 50%, the bad parents percentage number is higher than the better-decision-than-school parents. In summary, society is right when making the decision that everyone has to attend school and make the call what is schooled. The school system has an evolution of hundreds if not thousands of years. No colleague or not educated Administrator of that will be able to ruin it that much :) ... That quickly :). Kids belong in a (public) school.