5 ms·

Its not the stated function, but does appear to be the primary function.

s1artibartfast 3y ago
I think that is a cynical and incorrect take. If babysitting was the primary function, there are much cheaper and easier ways to achieve it. Given that the vast majority of cost and effort is spent on the educational aspect, I would argue that is indeed the primary function. Additionally, if you look to history, schooling originated long before the need for babysitting.
- whythre 3y ago
  Baby-sitting has always existed as a need; in the past it may have been done by various family members, but the modern ‘daycare’ model has its roots in the Industrial Revolution: as long as there have been machines for both parents to work, there has been someone offering to watch their kids for Money. Industrializing England had ‘baby mills’ where working class mothers could leave their kids (often in appalling conditions). The initial argument for public education was civics- if you want a nation of competent and driven citizens, they need to be armed with a good, comprehensive education. A lot changed in the Post-War era. Women entered the workforce, and the role of the public school has mutated to the point that many families depend upon it as the primary caregiver for non infant children (hence the complaints when the school week gets shortened from 5 days to 4). Also you seem to believe that school being expensive somehow guarantees it’s primary purpose is education. Many districts spend that money incredibly inefficiently. We have lots of touchscreen devices and giant stadiums. And yet teachers are forced to provide their own basic school supplies for the kids every year. Ancient musical instruments failing in kids hands due to rot. It’s really not good out there.
  - s1artibartfast 3y ago
    >Also you seem to believe that school being expensive somehow guarantees it’s primary purpose is education. Many districts spend that money incredibly inefficiently. We have lots of touchscreen devices and giant stadiums. And yet teachers are forced to provide their own basic school supplies for the kids every year. Ancient musical instruments failing in kids hands due to rot. It’s really not good out there. Indeed, I am making a cost based case to define the ordering of goals. Education, or even the wasteful pretext of education, is the primary driver of cost. Therefore, it is clearly the focus of our spending. Education is also the primary driver of the structure and form of our schools. If the primary goal was just daycare, they would look very different. California, for example, spent ~$24k/student in 2023. For that cost, you could pay for a home babysitter.
    - panzagl 3y ago
      For that cost you could get a highly qualified elementary school teacher for every 3-4 kids. But instead you get 1 per 25-30. Schools would be structured very differently if the primary focus was education.
      - s1artibartfast 3y ago
        Those are real costs. If it isn't babysitting and isn't education, then what is it?
        whythre 3y ago
        In the majority of cases it’s a shitty ineffective compromise that does neither well.

I think that is a cynical and incorrect take. If babysitting was the primary function, there are much cheaper and easier ways to achieve it. Given that the vast majority of cost and effort is spent on the educational aspect, I would argue that is indeed the primary function. Additionally, if you look to history, schooling originated long before the need for babysitting.

whythre 3y ago
Baby-sitting has always existed as a need; in the past it may have been done by various family members, but the modern ‘daycare’ model has its roots in the Industrial Revolution: as long as there have been machines for both parents to work, there has been someone offering to watch their kids for Money. Industrializing England had ‘baby mills’ where working class mothers could leave their kids (often in appalling conditions). The initial argument for public education was civics- if you want a nation of competent and driven citizens, they need to be armed with a good, comprehensive education. A lot changed in the Post-War era. Women entered the workforce, and the role of the public school has mutated to the point that many families depend upon it as the primary caregiver for non infant children (hence the complaints when the school week gets shortened from 5 days to 4). Also you seem to believe that school being expensive somehow guarantees it’s primary purpose is education. Many districts spend that money incredibly inefficiently. We have lots of touchscreen devices and giant stadiums. And yet teachers are forced to provide their own basic school supplies for the kids every year. Ancient musical instruments failing in kids hands due to rot. It’s really not good out there.
- s1artibartfast 3y ago
  >Also you seem to believe that school being expensive somehow guarantees it’s primary purpose is education. Many districts spend that money incredibly inefficiently. We have lots of touchscreen devices and giant stadiums. And yet teachers are forced to provide their own basic school supplies for the kids every year. Ancient musical instruments failing in kids hands due to rot. It’s really not good out there. Indeed, I am making a cost based case to define the ordering of goals. Education, or even the wasteful pretext of education, is the primary driver of cost. Therefore, it is clearly the focus of our spending. Education is also the primary driver of the structure and form of our schools. If the primary goal was just daycare, they would look very different. California, for example, spent ~$24k/student in 2023. For that cost, you could pay for a home babysitter.
  - panzagl 3y ago
    For that cost you could get a highly qualified elementary school teacher for every 3-4 kids. But instead you get 1 per 25-30. Schools would be structured very differently if the primary focus was education.
    - s1artibartfast 3y ago
      Those are real costs. If it isn't babysitting and isn't education, then what is it?
      - whythre 3y ago
        In the majority of cases it’s a shitty ineffective compromise that does neither well.