Darkeforce is correct, since it is almost always cheaper to provide less, and that improves profit margins. (Note how China has had so many scandals in terms of poor-quality goods to increase profits. Not to mention US banks.)Furthermore, unlike other products, education cannot be Balkanized or segmented at primary and secondary school levels effectively: all knowledge is not created equal. Some broad qualifications and curriculum requirements are necessary. This has been pointed up by the Creation “science” advocates who, if left to their own desires, would replace Geology, Biology, and Genetics with Genesis.
I recall reading a study done some years ago that showed students in private schools general performed better than public school. The same study found that parents that sent their children to private school were more likely to be involved in their children’s education. That is the key: parental involvement.
Darheforce’s premise is that people will choose expensive and inferior private schools over public schools. Really? Like competition for students will result in offering bad education and people will choose that?
hotdogger, private schools as they are today do not correspond to what Darkeforce is describing, which would be competitive for-profit schools for the public. In practice, I suspect that schools which are cheapest (and therefore cost the state less) will tend to win government contracts and dominate in a region, rather than having true competition – that it will become like the insurance industry. A totally free-enterprise system would have no government influence at all, in which case only those with the education or money or both would be able to determine and select the best schools for their child. One can go back to the earliest days of public education to get a better sense of its intent, which was to create good citizens and educated voters. Later it shifted to creating a competitive nation (as in the 1950s). Other nations continue to use public education as a tool to drive competition, for example China. Not all of these approaches are those I approve of for various pedagogical reasons, but they are better than either the free-for-all or the “Christian madrassas” people seem to be proposing from the right.And yes, my kids go to Catholic school for two reasons: competitive academics (in Boston we have a choice – we went to the tougher ones) and ethical (not dogmatic) grounding. If our public schools were better, they would go there, but we don’t live in the right suburb for that.
@Jase99: You are correct that parental involvement is key to improving education. With respect to the performance gap, consider that the average public school spends far less on a per-student basis than the average private school. Resources matter, too.
Yes, I should restate that parental involvement is “a major key,” not “the key.” Funding is also important. As an employee of a major publisher specializing in education, I implore you all to demand more, More, MORE funding for text books, tests, answer sheets, and assorted personality assessments. Oh, and standardized state testing 5 times a year!! All subjects!
Actually, towerwarlock, there is no evidence that a voucher system would have provided enough money for a poorer family to attend a better school, and once a voucher is supplied, it then becomes another political football, and another “entitlement” that can be cut at will.1opinion, DrCanuck, you’re in my zone now! There are indeed different learning preferences; David Kolb’s research suggested that in fact you learn best by going through multiple learning methods within a short (say 2 hour) cycle of time. He identified four styles of learning, for the record, and his research is the basis for a lot of corporate instructional design and elementary schools in the UK. Sadly, not enough of that being used in schools here.Having said that, some respond better or learn quicker using certain kinds of content, e.g., visual versus verbal, which means you also want to address multiple sensory channels if you want maximized learning.So the answer to your last question, DrCanuck, which is a very good one, is based on what your learning objectives are. If it is to master an array of facts, e.g., historical events, then I would say you try to appeal to whatever works, and don’t worry if they don’t learn by all of them. If you are teaching them to learn, on the other hand, that’s a different ball game. And in fact this is part of what liberal arts does very well.
The way they designed the voucher system is to deceive the public. They make it seem like everyone’s kids who attend a “failing” school can attend a prestigious prepratory school when in fact the only schools they can afford to go are Catholic schools and the like. I remember seeing one of the young students from a failing school saying she learns a lot about God but not enough about everything else. Its a real tragedy.
kirbyrankin almost 13 years ago
Sounds like it’s time for choice and competition in the education market place…
Motivemagus almost 13 years ago
Darkeforce is correct, since it is almost always cheaper to provide less, and that improves profit margins. (Note how China has had so many scandals in terms of poor-quality goods to increase profits. Not to mention US banks.)Furthermore, unlike other products, education cannot be Balkanized or segmented at primary and secondary school levels effectively: all knowledge is not created equal. Some broad qualifications and curriculum requirements are necessary. This has been pointed up by the Creation “science” advocates who, if left to their own desires, would replace Geology, Biology, and Genetics with Genesis.
Jason Allen almost 13 years ago
I recall reading a study done some years ago that showed students in private schools general performed better than public school. The same study found that parents that sent their children to private school were more likely to be involved in their children’s education. That is the key: parental involvement.
hotdogger almost 13 years ago
Darheforce’s premise is that people will choose expensive and inferior private schools over public schools. Really? Like competition for students will result in offering bad education and people will choose that?
Odon Premium Member almost 13 years ago
Step One: Recognize teachers are trained professonials.Step Two: Take politicians and politics out of education.
Motivemagus almost 13 years ago
hotdogger, private schools as they are today do not correspond to what Darkeforce is describing, which would be competitive for-profit schools for the public. In practice, I suspect that schools which are cheapest (and therefore cost the state less) will tend to win government contracts and dominate in a region, rather than having true competition – that it will become like the insurance industry. A totally free-enterprise system would have no government influence at all, in which case only those with the education or money or both would be able to determine and select the best schools for their child. One can go back to the earliest days of public education to get a better sense of its intent, which was to create good citizens and educated voters. Later it shifted to creating a competitive nation (as in the 1950s). Other nations continue to use public education as a tool to drive competition, for example China. Not all of these approaches are those I approve of for various pedagogical reasons, but they are better than either the free-for-all or the “Christian madrassas” people seem to be proposing from the right.And yes, my kids go to Catholic school for two reasons: competitive academics (in Boston we have a choice – we went to the tougher ones) and ethical (not dogmatic) grounding. If our public schools were better, they would go there, but we don’t live in the right suburb for that.
mjkaswan Premium Member almost 13 years ago
@Jase99: You are correct that parental involvement is key to improving education. With respect to the performance gap, consider that the average public school spends far less on a per-student basis than the average private school. Resources matter, too.
WarBush almost 13 years ago
^You forgot to mention that private schools get to pick and choose which students they attending. Keeps the riff raff out.
MurphyHerself almost 13 years ago
You forgot the bit about getting there early enough to start the fire in the stove. My aunt wouldn’t go back to teaching because of that:)
Jason Allen almost 13 years ago
Yes, I should restate that parental involvement is “a major key,” not “the key.” Funding is also important. As an employee of a major publisher specializing in education, I implore you all to demand more, More, MORE funding for text books, tests, answer sheets, and assorted personality assessments. Oh, and standardized state testing 5 times a year!! All subjects!
Motivemagus almost 13 years ago
Actually, towerwarlock, there is no evidence that a voucher system would have provided enough money for a poorer family to attend a better school, and once a voucher is supplied, it then becomes another political football, and another “entitlement” that can be cut at will.1opinion, DrCanuck, you’re in my zone now! There are indeed different learning preferences; David Kolb’s research suggested that in fact you learn best by going through multiple learning methods within a short (say 2 hour) cycle of time. He identified four styles of learning, for the record, and his research is the basis for a lot of corporate instructional design and elementary schools in the UK. Sadly, not enough of that being used in schools here.Having said that, some respond better or learn quicker using certain kinds of content, e.g., visual versus verbal, which means you also want to address multiple sensory channels if you want maximized learning.So the answer to your last question, DrCanuck, which is a very good one, is based on what your learning objectives are. If it is to master an array of facts, e.g., historical events, then I would say you try to appeal to whatever works, and don’t worry if they don’t learn by all of them. If you are teaching them to learn, on the other hand, that’s a different ball game. And in fact this is part of what liberal arts does very well.
WarBush almost 13 years ago
The way they designed the voucher system is to deceive the public. They make it seem like everyone’s kids who attend a “failing” school can attend a prestigious prepratory school when in fact the only schools they can afford to go are Catholic schools and the like. I remember seeing one of the young students from a failing school saying she learns a lot about God but not enough about everything else. Its a real tragedy.