Private education

[aneeshm]

Another very important point which I'd like you (Okku) to address is that of family culture, which is a huge disparity creator.

If you're born into a family with strong values of hard work, moral uprightness, self-discipline, liberalism (I'm not referring to political liberalism in the American sense, I'm referring to a belief in individual liberty and responsibility), and a living and thriving tradition of intellectualism, then you have an unbeatable advantage over someone born into a family without these traits. The disparity caused by this is so large as to be unimaginable.

And this is all transmitted by birth, mind you, not merit. This is an advantage which is far, far bigger than private education ever could be, and screws up the equal opportunity ideal far more than any inherited wealth advantage ever could.

How do you deal with this?

 

[GinandTonic]

aneeshm peoples rights are whatever soiety chooses to assign them. In the US people have the right to arms, but not in the UK. In the EU people have the right to a free education. The elected representatives have deemed it so, and passed the laws and assigned the funds to inforce such a right.

 

[bathsheba666]

Another very important point which I'd like you (Okku) to address is that of family culture, which is a huge disparity creator.

If you're born into a family with strong values of hard work, moral uprightness, self-discipline, liberalism (I'm not referring to political liberalism in the American sense, I'm referring to a belief in individual liberty and responsibility), and a living and thriving tradition of intellectualism, then you have an unbeatable advantage over someone born into a family without these traits. The disparity caused by this is so large as to be unimaginable.

And this is all transmitted by birth, mind you, not merit. This is an advantage which is far, far bigger than private education ever could be, and screws up the equal opportunity ideal far more than any inherited wealth advantage ever could.

How do you deal with this?

Well, firstly deal with it in another thread.
Secondly, all the more reason why education should offer equal access, then perhaps others can at least equal this 'unbeatable advantage'.

 

[ParkCungHee]

So, if a student disrupts the class for 5 minutes a week with a comment which annoys the teacher, but other than that does most of the work, mostly on time with decent marks should we expell them?

No, we'd put them in a vocational program, in the exciting world of digging ditches. Learn and become certified to use the Standard Infantry Entrenchment Tool, as a Agricultural-Irrigationist Engineer.

 

[azzaman333]

No, we'd put them in a vocational program, in the exciting world of digging ditches. Learn and become certified to use the Standard Infantry Entrenchment Tool, as a Agricultural-Irrigationist Engineer.

But they don't have the strength to dig ditches, because they were too busy planning new ways to annoy the teacher.

 

[aneeshm]

Well, firstly deal with it in another thread.
Secondly, all the more reason why education should offer equal access, then perhaps others can at least equal this 'unbeatable advantage'.

This difference is an order of magnitude larger than any education difference can cause, because it changes not only what skills and abilities a person has, but determines, in large part, the nature of the person himself.

 

[downtown]

There is kind of a new thread about this now.

 

[amaterasu]

*feeling the strain of having to reply to so much*

for the social culture point, I don't think this to be a major issue, people can do what they want, if someone is born within a family with a good work ethic generally whats to say the kid will follow? and even if they do was the childs choice to work harder then average, so any results were organically made by the child. Also if there isn't a good work ethic the child can make their own, social moulding isn't my scene.

On the social/philosophical classes, now if we regulate them there will be a offical state doctrine and clamp down on thought won't there!
No, first of all, if thecourse is on philosophy then you shouldn't stop it, as then you are stopping though, which isn't the aim. Seeing as it's philosophy, it's more of a mental developmen programme then direct teaching right? So it's fair that they can do that, otherwise then parents couldn't talk to their kids about that type of thing. Hmmm, it's a tough point that one, I would just make the class public, more of a peoples' forum, so they could disucss together, and everyone would learn but mabye thats a bit utopian, so instead let it go on. The ideas being taught there A) still require considerable input from the students, as the spirtual style message from them need the students imput and thought. Folks who can't afford the classes could also ahieve the same thing by just discussing similar things together, and get similar results with similar input.

gonna go check back at what other things have been raised.

if something is desirable, should it not be worked towards? Who said the big raod was made with the slave labour of the rich? they just have to sacrifice some of their interests for the interests of the millions of others, and lets say that you have to be a child to walk along the road, and if you want a car you have to build one yourself.
While the private schools still need input, what's easier?

to have a nice private school with plenty of facilities and tutors to help you, you don't really havw to try as they will take more time to help explain it to you, or, a state school with normal facilities and teachers, where you ned to work a lot harder then with a private school to get the same grades? I'm fine with there being winners and losers, so logn as the winners have been made by their own input, rather then being born into money anmd having everything they need put right in front of them without doing any work.

And, with the k*X thing, thats the point. They are being given an advantage they have nothig for, they are being given a birth right, whichis utterly unfair and discriminatory.

 

[bathsheba666]

This difference is an order of magnitude larger than any education difference can cause, because it changes not only what skills and abilities a person has, but determines, in large part, the nature of the person himself.

Even assuming I buy your concept of relative magnitudes, which I don't, then my first response still pertains.

So, even more so...

You seem to be arguing that there are natural imbalances, so it doesn't matter if we add even more. I understood that from your first post, (whilst naturally finding it morally repulsive), hence my answer.

Hence this answer hasn't changed....although there's now just a little bemusement to accompany the repulsion.

 

[ElEmpecinado]

I'm against it because it means rich kids are given better education, whereas poor kids aren't given as good education. Therefore the best jobs go to the well educated private school kiddies. It's making a new caste system imvho.

And now you have to ask yourself exactly whose fault that is...I'll even help you out, hows about the people who set up the private school system? Aren't they to blame that people want to send their children to what they view as better learning environment's?

And I don't see education as a market, nor a priviledge, everyone should be able to get a good education. I'm for equality of oppurtunity, and private education quashes that.

I agree on your first points. But I think private education is not the cause of people not having the ability to get a good education everywhere, but the result.

I'll say this, I go to a private school, my children will also unless the public school system is changed. Until then I'll choose the better choice. And for my situation it's certainly not public.

 

[Perfection]

I support high quality public education, but if you can provide a better education the the government then I fully support that too. I also support greater flexibility in choosing public schools like open-enrollment. Open-enrollment allowed Perfs to get an extremely kickass public education.

 

[AnitaGaribaldi]

I've read the posts.

I think the best for a country is to have good state free schools. All kids should get good education.

But we don't leave in a perfect world. I hate the idea of taking the freedom of the parents. The parents have the right to choose the best education for their children.

I don't have children. I would put my children in a good public school, if they could get into one. In my country we do have few very good public schools but there are entrance exams. My high school was in one of these. This is an unfair system, only the parents that can afford prep courses or private tutors get their children into the best public (free) schools. No poor children in my class. All children were at least middle class. In Brazil ca. 70% of the population is poor.

If my children couldn't get into a good public school, I'd have to pay a private one. No choice here. I would not risk the life of my children. The situation is really bad. Many teachers give up their jobs because the low money does not pay off the risk of being shoot.

 

[skywalker]

I'm against it because it means rich kids are given better education, whereas poor kids aren't given as good education. Therefore the best jobs go to the well educated private school kiddies. It's making a new caste system imvho.

The inequality perpetuated (imperfectly) by the private school system is completely drowned out by the benefit of giving good students a decent education.

 

[amaterasu]

The inequality perpetuated (imperfectly) by the private school system is completely drowned out by the benefit of giving good students a decent education.

WHy should it only be extended to good rich students?

 

[Chandrasekhar]

WHy should it only be extended to good rich students?

New tactic: Because they have the money?

 

[Perfection]

WHy should it only be extended to good rich students?

Ideally, everyone would get a perfect education, of course that's impossible, however if someone can give thier kids something better then the state can, I don't think we can morally say "no, you're not allowed to do that."

 

[Red Door]

WHy should it only be extended to good rich students?

Because the state schools teachers are paid crap, and hence, aren't very good. Unless you pay teachers more, and give them more training, you aren't going to get good teachers.

Private Schools are the way to go for the future, most private schools give scholarships to people they believe would succeed at their school. Private Schools give students a better education for a student to succeed at life.

 

[GinandTonic]

Ideally, everyone would get a perfect education, of course that's impossible, however if someone can give thier kids something better then the state can, I don't think we can morally say "no, you're not allowed to do that."

Thats the score.

Because the state schools teachers are paid crap, and hence, aren't very good. Unless you pay teachers more, and give them more training, you aren't going to get good teachers.

Private Schools are the way to go for the future, most private schools give scholarships to people they believe would succeed at their school. Private Schools give students a better education for a student to succeed at life.

The way to go is to improve state schools. Since there are lots of state-funded schools that beat the private schools in the league-tables very year it is clearly possible for state funded schools to work. It's not even a case of great weges of cash (though a little more never hurts) it is a question of letting the sucesses get on with it and fixing the failing schools. It is good for society, it is good for business and it's good for the individuals concerned.

 

[aussieboy]

Thats the score.



The way to go is to improve state schools. Since there are lots of state-funded schools that beat the private schools in the league-tables very year it is clearly possible for state funded schools to work. It's not even a case of great weges of cash (though a little more never hurts) it is a question of letting the sucesses get on with it and fixing the failing schools. It is good for society, it is good for business and it's good for the individuals concerned.

On average, however, in America the private schools tend to be better than the government schools. Why? The teacher at the private school works under the assumption that if she doesn't do her job well, she'll be out of a job. Government schools have by and large become creatures of the teacher's unions, who are notorious for making it impossible to fire any teacher, damn the quality and damn the consequences.