Poll: Should public schools be abolished?

[Perd Hapley]

Should public schools be abolished?

[roo_ster]

Yes.

Best case solution:
Everyone provides for their own kids' education.

Acceptable Compromise:
Voucher system.

[makattak]

Your question is too broad. Federal and state control of public schools should be abolished. My preference would be that there be no public schools at all, but under the constitution, there is no restriction of that power for the localities.

So, I would prefer they be abolished, but I am opposed to imposing such a preference on localities. Sate or Federal control/influence? Abolish it, no question.

[Jamie B]

Yes.

Best case solution:
Everyone provides for their own kids' education.

That will eliminate any educational consistency in the US, and reduce US educational levels.
It will not work.

[Gowen]

Since before the founding of this country public education was important to the colonist.  Education should be controlled locally.  Today, being a teacher has turned into a comfy gov job, summers off, every holiday known to man off, tenure, a gov retirement (that in some states cannot go broke) and a nice income.  Hey, I'm making the case to abolish the education system.

[Nick1911]

That will eliminate any educational consistency in the US, and reduce US educational levels.
It will not work.

Agree.

I use to be pretty libertarian about this; but the sad truth is, most people are just too damn irresponsible to provide k-12 for their kids.  Hell, most people can't handle their finances well enough to not have a ton of high-interest consumer debt (spent on depreciating liabilities) and living paycheck to paycheck.  These are the people that are getting foreclosed on because they can't make good financial choices about the real estate they buy.  Know why there's payday loan places with predatory intrest rates everywhere?  Because people use them.

To make sure the government even gets income taxes, we have to have withhold even giving that money to people - otherwise it would be all gone by the time tax time comes around.

And these are the people that I'm expected to believe will put themselves in a position to educate their children on their own dime?

Now, maybe it's the theoretical right way to run a society.  That if someone screws over their kids future, it's their right.  And, maybe that is "right".  But that society on top of current American culture would sprint towards destruction like an Olympic event.  Not a world I want to live in.

[AJ Dual]

Yes.

Best case solution:
Everyone provides for their own kids' education.

Acceptable Compromise:
Voucher system.

This.

Amazingly, this is what some European Countries do for primary and secondary education. They just give each family $xxxx per kid, and you go pick the private school of your choice. They all compete in a mostly semi-free market on the quality of their education.

Funny how the American Left is usually so quick to point out "Europe does it this way"... "Europe does it that way" etc.

[longeyes]

And a number of European nations offer business-oriented apprenticeship programs in addition to public ed at the secondary school level.  These are through private industry.

[MicroBalrog]

Your question is too broad. Federal and state control of public schools should be abolished. My preference would be that there be no public schools at all, but under the constitution, there is no restriction of that power for the localities.

So, I would prefer they be abolished, but I am opposed to imposing such a preference on localities. Sate or Federal control/influence? Abolish it, no question.

Technically speaking, under the Constitution there's no restriction of that power to the states either, and several state constitutions mandate public education to be maintained.

But of course I am not sure what you mean by "imposing". Do you mean no Federal enforcers should come in to shut down the last surviving public school in Nowhere Country, East Kentucky, or do you mean that there should be no attempts by private citizens from out-of-state to persuade the East Kentucky school board to shut down?

[lupinus]

Yes. I'd take a voucher system as being a good alternative. At the very least, kick out the federal government let states administer it without federal interference.

[roo_ster]

That will eliminate any educational consistency in the US, and reduce US educational levels.
It will not work.

Wrong. 

Do you think the big city school districts are doing much of anything to teach their students in the first place?  Do you think that showering them with taxpayers' dollars improves educational outcomes in any statistically significant way?  If you do, you reach that conclusion by faith, as the empirical data shows otherwise.  Kansas City, the court-ordered billion dollar experiment is but one data point.

It will increase the educational level of the population that matters: those who go on to work in useful occupations and pay taxes. 

It doesn't matter much if the rest are housed in the same building while wasting their time (and taxpayer dollars).  Sure, some urban athletic powerhouses that feed the NFL/NBA will take a hit, but that is not too great a price to pay.

[Ron]

Ge the Fed out of education and turn it over to the states. Eliminate the Dept of Ed completely.

[MillCreek]

Wrong. 
It will increase the educational level of the population that matters: those who go on to work in useful occupations and pay taxes. 

Isn't this a good thing? They can pay taxes to support the uneducated deadbeats!

[zahc]

I use to be pretty libertarian about this; but the sad truth is, most people are just too damn irresponsible to provide k-12 for their kids.

So? Would the world be worse off?

I think that formal education in the form of government education, is a bad thing, so I think the less of it children get, the better off they will be.

All those little angels who are being forced to go to high school don't learn CRAP unless they want to. If they wanted to, they would learn anyway. I'm fairly smart, but I would never give formal education the credit. There is no doubt that I would be stupider than I am, if I had to waste entire years of my young life attending schools like my peers.

VOLUNTARY education provided for people who WANT to be there and who will be kicked out if they are disruptive (actually they wouldn't need kicked out; they wouldn't be there in the first place if they didn't want to) would be superior for those who actually want to learn.

You don't have to believe me. It's pretty clear that as a nation, our 'educated' children graduate as idiots.

Take the actual amount of retained knowledge gained from highschool, and you could probably teach it in a short summer class, to someone who actually wants to learn it. For the amount of actual knowledge kids absorb, it's such a colossal waste of resources.

Thinking that our nation will magically be better off if we force everyone to send their children to (an arbitrary amount of) (government-run) (so-called) education is wrong-thinking. It's a cargo-cult effort.

Would it be ok for us to mandate that (for example) ADULTS attend (an arbitrary amount of) (government-run) (so-called) education from say age 30 to 35? Is it ok for the government to mandate that? Why not? Don't you want people to be smart? If it's not mandatory, people might decide their time is better spent on something else!!!!!11

A person's teenage years could be better spent in an apprenticeship, in productive voluntary education, or working than wasted in boring classrooms, burning millions of gallons of diesel riding around in buses, under the thumb of government authority, being probed by school administrators, contracting and spreading STDs in the taxpayer-funded, pseudo-prison environment of public education.

But the idea of (gasp)children actually being productive and free, and parents being free to raise them as they see fit, is too far against the cultural tide to be considered.

[MillCreek]

An interesting corollary to this poll would be to ask how many people here are parents who actually have, or have had, children in school.  If I recall from similar threads, a number of participants do not have or have had any children of school age, and their distaste for public schooling comes from their own experiences.

[makattak]

Technically speaking, under the Constitution there's no restriction of that power to the states either, and several state constitutions mandate public education to be maintained.

But of course I am not sure what you mean by "imposing". Do you mean no Federal enforcers should come in to shut down the last surviving public school in Nowhere Country, East Kentucky, or do you mean that there should be no attempts by private citizens from out-of-state to persuade the East Kentucky school board to shut down?

By definition, persuasion is not imposition. I am meaning no federal enforcers showing up and shutting down the schools.

[MicroBalrog]

Take the actual amount of retained knowledge gained from highschool, and you could probably teach it in a short summer class, to someone who actually wants to learn it. For the amount of actual knowledge kids absorb, it's such a colossal waste of resources.

And this is true. Even for the knowledge the kids are intended to absorb it's a colossal waste.

I've had better  results with the kids I taught English in a few months, 2 hours of face-time a week, than their teachers had in 3 years. And I am not a qualified English teacher.

[Jamisjockey]

Kind of.

The Federal department of Education should be abolished.

And then, methods of education should be left up to the states. 

In my own state, I would support the abolishment of public schools.

That will eliminate any educational consistency in the US, and reduce US educational levels.
It will not work.

There is already no educational consistency in the United States. 

[HankB]

. . .  this is what some European Countries do for primary and secondary education. They just give each family $xxxx per kid, and you go pick the private school of your choice.  . . .

Other European countries are rather different - Sweden and Germany are downright hostile to the concepts of home schooling; the Swedes have gone so far as to seize a child off an airliner prior to departure (parents were moving to India, the birthplace of the mother) in order to force the child into a Swedish school; there's actually a small unofficial cottage industry there where people "rescue" children from the Swedish version of CPS so they can escape to other countries with a better educational system. (Poland is often mentioned.) And not to Godwin the thread, but Germany actually is enforcing Nazi-era education laws against things like homeschooling; German judges have come right out and said that beyond academics, the purpose of schools is to indoctrinate the children with acceptable German values.

As for here in the USA, they're constantly crying about money for the schools - over half of my property tax bill goes to the local school district, which has a really fancy athletic field. But that's not the worst in Texas - a local school district up around the Dallas area built a $60,000,000 athletic stadium. Yep, that's right, sixty million dollars for high school football. And they're complaining about money shortfalls. 

[Viking]

Yep, homeschooling was easier prior to 2011 or so. Now you need some extremely special circumstances if you want to homeschool your kids. We do have school vouchers here though, so you can place your kid in an independent school if you want to. I don't know if vouchers extend to private schools, and I'm not quite sure of the difference between private schools and independent schools (who are also privately owned and operated). Might have something to do with curriculum, and probably also if they are selective of their students...

[Jamie B]

Kind of.

The Federal department of Education should be abolished.

And then, methods of education should be left up to the states. 

In my own state, I would support the abolishment of public schools.

There is already no educational consistency in the United States. 

There is educational consistency which is confirmed through standardized testing.
My kids participate in Terra Nova testing yearly, and my daughter will take the SAT in a few years in order to attend college.

I never said that I agree with the efficiency of the current educational system.
Money is not generally spent wisely, teachers are usually not held accountable for their own performance, and there are no incentives for improvement in the results of school's efforts.
The educational system does need huge improvements.

The most logical and cost effective way to improve US education is to allow vouchers in all states.
The competitive pressure from parochial and private schools would force extreme improvements in public schools.

Currently in OH, in my area specifically, public schools average about $9,000 per student.
The Catholic school where I send my kids is about $4,500 per child.
I see extreme amounts of waste with the public schools - building new schools that are unneeded while existing buildings are scuttled unnecessarily.

[MillCreek]

I would be a fan of vouchers if:

the private schools had to take all applicants, and provide them with the same education for the same amount of money as any other school.  So if you have a $ 5000 voucher, and your child requires special education, is disabled or is a disciplinary problem, any private school has to take your child and educate them for that $ 5000.

We ask the public schools to do this, so in a voucher system, why should the private schools be exempt?  I think it would create a nice level playing field that will give us the opportunity to see who does a better job. 

[Fitz]

The "level playing field" concept is precisely what has ruined public schools. Why transfer that concept to private schools?

[Fitz]

Also, i friggin laugh at the idea that standardized testing makes learning "consistent."

Sure. Consistent.... if by consistent you mean "we train to the test instead of actually teaching the children."

I worked for the public school system in Texas. The majority of the year was spent doing "TAKS" prep. Ignoring critical thinking and actual learning, in favor of just training the inmates students to take the test

[Jamisjockey]

There is educational consistency which is confirmed through standardized testing.
My kids participate in Terra Nova testing yearly, and my daughter will take the SAT in a few years in order to attend college.

I never said that I agree with the efficiency of the current educational system.
Money is not generally spent wisely, teachers are usually not held accountable for their own performance, and there are no incentives for improvement in the results of school's efforts.
The educational system does need huge improvements.

The most logical and cost effective way to improve US education is to allow vouchers in all states.
The competitive pressure from parochial and private schools would force extreme improvements in public schools.

Currently in OH, in my area specifically, public schools average about $9,000 per student.
The Catholic school where I send my kids is about $4,500 per child.
I see extreme amounts of waste with the public schools - building new schools that are unneeded while existing buildings are scuttled unnecessarily.

If you really think that the schools in the inner city of any major city compared to those in the suburbs, especially the more affluent suburbs, have any consitency, I've got a bridge to sell ya.  Many schools have shifted from teaching to test prep. 
Standardized testing is just another unfunded federal mandate that the states bear the burden for. 

The DoE is UNCONSTITUTIONAL.  The Federal government has no right nor responsibility to create "consistency".

I do not support vouchers.  I support pay-as-you-go non-public schooling.  If you'd like public schools in your state, and a voucher system, the beauty of the constition is that you'd then have the ability to support political candidates who support those things.....IN YOUR OWN FREAKING STATE.