[oldmancoyote]

How do you disrupt public education? You do what certain political activists have done during the past 70 or so years.

1) You relax the laws that require public education using the rubric that private schools will allow for competition and force improvement. It is no accident that fewer families dependent of public schools weakens support for public schools. It also means that political and religious agendas can be entered into American education where before they were forbidden.

2) You couple that with a long term propaganda campaign about how bad public schools are including portraying teacher union activists in the worst possible light in the news.

3) You starve funding for education to the point where, for example, California goes from the foremost example of excellence in education to one of the worst.

4) When teachers start to rebel at the corruption of American education, you vilify teachers claiming they are taking American education hostage.

The idea that technology offers a solution to a political issue is not realistic.

[jelliclesfarm]

Why are unions a good thing? They seem to hold students as hostages and at random.

It’s pretty gnarly. CA unfunded pension liabilities may be around $100 trillion

https://www.forbes.com/sites/christopherburnham/2018/07/30/t...

It has made CA into a nanny state. Gov. Newsom now wants to provide pre school education for the first four years. Where is the money for all this?

After school tutoring classes have become a cottage industry in affluent cities. In low income districts, schools are everything from day care to free meals. Meanwhile school funding is highest in low income districts (LAUSD is 17.xxk per student ..OUSD is 14.5k/student) and on the lower scale in affluent areas(Bay Area: 8-9k/student) as property tax and general fund gets redistributed.

Which is fine as society must bear the burden of educating all. But it seems like it’s all going for the care and feeding of union backed retired teachers. Unions have become so powerful that in LA, it’s a strike. In Fremont, teachers refusing to do more their hours...in Oakland...well. That’s a huge can of worms that no one can understand or fix. I don’t even know where to start with Oakland’s problems.

So clearly throwing money at ‘public education’ isn’t working because there isn’t a whole lot of educating going on for that money.

Interestingly there is just one school district that isn’t unionized. Clovis Unified School District. It’s near Fresno. If you google it, there is some fascinating info there. And yes, they are doing very well.

I am reminded of the 2010 documentary, “Waiting for Superman”

[yesenadam]

So clearly throwing money at ‘public education’ isn’t working

I wasn't aware that money was being 'thrown at' public education anywhere. However you define that exactly. But it sounds, the way you describe it, like stopping 'throwing money' is part of the solution? i.e. spending even less on public schools? How much is spent anyway, compared with some other important things the US spends money on, like, say, invading/attacking other countries? Or keeping so many people locked up?

[jelliclesfarm]

California spends between 50-70k per prisoner.(a lot of it goes to pensions for the prison guard union. Google it. Spine tingling. But then there are less of them than students and kids are more reliable on the rolls and increasing every year..and hence only averages to 10k/year) Most of them products of the public school system. That’s one way to look at it.

Public education isn’t free. Someone is paying for it. But public education isn’t accountable to the people paying for it.

Here is an extension of the thought experiment:

If public school education is parent directed/funded and ALL higher education/university/research/vocational studies after passing a very tough high school diploma is absolutely free, how do you think we would all fare as a society? Equal opportunity to all who have cleared their high school exams with flying colours.

[gaius]

One of the teaching union bosses in the UK said he’d start to care about pupils when they started paying union subs.

[yesenadam]

Do you have a reference for that?

[jelliclesfarm]

I also don’t get your first point. I don’t understand why private school education is a bad thing. I had a private school education in a different country and the idea that parents who can afford better education for their children wanting exclusive expensive education for their children to outshine others seems to offend Americans. I would like to know why? I know many parents who sacrifice a lot(mine included) so their children can get a better and superior education. Why is this a bad thing?

(My intention is not to be offensive. I honestly don’t understand.)

[oldmancoyote]

A fair enough question.

1) Of course private education can be superior, but it also can be corrupted by political and religious agendas as it is commonly being done today. Mandatory public education in America tries to raise children free of such narrow-mindedness, a necessity for a free democracy.

2) Alexis de Tocqueville wrote a seminal book on the nature of America called Democracy in America. Its central theme was how common public education (as well as severe inheritance taxes) prevented the creation of a permanent privileged class which would otherwise eventually destroy freedom and democracy. Mandatory public education is or at least was a great unifier and leveler of American society. Today we are being torn apart and set against each other, and I believe we must have a common education to counter that.

Not taking offense myself, but using an expensive education so children can outshine other children rather than reach their greatest potential is at its core anti-democratic and hugely offensive to those of us who understand and strive to sustain America's traditional values of freedom from oppressive forces. We aspire to a meritocracy (however imperfectly we achieve it).

I can not think of anything more basic to the American way as the ideals of equality and meritocracy. A mandatory public education of high quality is essential to who we are and to our aspirations.

Please understand I am NOT offended by your post. This is a free discussion among people of good will seeking understanding.

[dragonwriter]

> Of course private education can be superior, but it also can be corrupted by political and religious agendas as it is commonly being done today.

Public education also can be, and often is in the US, corrupted by political and religious agendas.

[veddox]

The Toqueville argument is a fair point, but the no-agendas-in-public-schools is nonsense. Every school has and actively teaches a worldview (aka an agenda). Banning all non-government schools simply means that all kids are taught the same worldview. (Which suddenly doesn't sound that democratic anymore...)

[NoRagrets]

Re Toqueville argument: I would take the stance that upward mobility is because of capitalism, not because of public education.

[ddingus]

One bad thing can be the purpose and or bias in a private school.

There are very good ones. There are very bad ones too.

Access to good private education takes more money than the majority of Americans have.

Charter schools often pop up, look sexy, and vary extremely widely. Again some good, a lot of "meh" and some bad.

The idea behind robust public education is the majority would get a good education regardless of their economic position.

I had pretty great public education, and I was poor in a backward town too. We have declined a shocking amount!

It just so happens I can remember every year. Odd. But, useful to compare to my own kids education. We were in better shape economically, but the quality was spotty throughout.

And it was stripped down.

A move to more private, or no public is likely a downgrade for way too many people, IMHO.

[earthicus]

> Access to good private education takes more money than the majority of Americans have.

I went to a fairly traditional private school (cost: $8k/yr) and absolutely hated it, but still did well. Eventually my hatred turned into a complete mental breakdown, I refused to go anymore, and after a search transferred to a super fancy independent study school (cost: $15k/yr) where I got to meet one-on-one with my teachers, or in small classes of less than 5 students. This school cured my depression in a few months and developed my intellectual and artistic passions over the next couple of years. Several of my friends followed me there in the next year or two, with similar positive effects on their sanity. If only everyone had this opportunity! Alas, Seattle spends only $15k per student in their public schools :-( Here's the data for all 50 states as a whole [1].

> Charter schools often pop up, look sexy, and vary extremely widely. Again some good, a lot of "meh" and some bad.

This is famously true of different public school districts as well. I'm not willing to discount anything that help move us away from the deranged format of traditional schools.

[1] https://education.cu-portland.edu/blog/classroom-resources/p...

[tmaly]

Something must be wrong here, how can a super fancy school with 1:5 ratio cost 15k and the per-student cost of public school cost 15k?

[earthicus]

The source i linked to gives a breakdown of how the public school money is spent in the second section, titled 'Where are schools spending their money?' You can see that Public schools have many legitimate expenses that private schools don't, along with bureaucratic overhead.

However, the reason my school could get away with such a small ratio, even compared to other private schools that cost the same, is because it is an independent study school - I only went two days a week for a few hours a day.

Imagine you have one teacher working for 10 hours and 10 students. If each student goes all 10 hours, your ratio is 1:10. If each student goes only 1 hour, your ratio is 1:1.

[jelliclesfarm]

Pensions. Public school systems are unionized.

[jelliclesfarm]

Right. That’s why unions make it worse. With the passage of time, more students due to increasing population but also higher pension burden.

This is like a tottering tower built on a semi solid foundation. It will topple because soon there is not enough money to educate but only to maintain those who have retired.(aka not productive in the economic system). It is highly irrational.

I wonder if public education is exactly what’s leading to inequalities and the need for equality is actually making us accept lowest common denominator.

Having classes on the basis of age is also problematic. I think children should be educated in groups with different age groups. Instead of curriculums, they can learn whatever they want and be guided to pursue what interests them most. The evaluations can be once in 3-5 years maybe? And they can streamed into groups according to their abilities. In a lot of ways, the pressure will be off kids and they can truly learn..to be the best in what interests them and where their abilities are their strengths.

[lazyasciiart]

Your comment begins with "that's why" but I can't see any relationship between it and what you are responding to. Can you explain the connection?

[jelliclesfarm]

Sorry. That was wrt to the latest lausd strike that is going to begin. That news item is what triggered this thought process for me and why I started this thread. I should have mentioned it.

[yesenadam]

public education is exactly what’s leading to inequalities

How do you figure that?

[jelliclesfarm]

I didn’t state that..I said that “I wonder if public education is exactly what’s leading to inequalities“

And I meant intellectual inequalities. Some skills need practice(music, for example)...others need an persistence and some others need aptitude. A public school in my district right now has to choose between building a swimming pool or pay teachers more wages to build up their last drawn salary which will be their lifetime pension when they retire as a defined benefit.

All students lose because they never find out where they excel because they have to receive uniform education that is affordable to all after redistribution of resources.

[yesenadam]

So (you wonder if) everyone getting the same education is leading to inequalities? Sorry, I really don't follow.

[jelliclesfarm]

But with more private schools, wouldn’t it be more affordable especially for the middle class?

Public schools should only be for those who can’t afford their children’s education. If one is wealthy one must pay more their kids education. I mean..if I am a multi millionaire, I am getting a fancy car and a nice house. Why can’t I pay more for my child’s education?

Public education shouldn’t be tied to property tax. We will pay less tax with the option to educate our kids the way we see fit. I still don’t understand what charter and magnet schools are in this country. I will get around to it soon. Regardless, this system is failing. So if it fails, it must be fixed..no? How is the next step..but the first step is to admit that there is a problem, no?

[midasz]

Interesting to see the HN bubble pop up again. What is the middle class? And why aren't the 'lower class' accounted for? Children should have equal chances, the 'lower class' is living paycheck to paycheck - how will they afford schooling for their children? This just causes a bigger rift.

[jelliclesfarm]

Why should children have equal chances?

Is it a birth right? This is an entirely foreign concept to me.

It’s not that the ‘lower classes’ shouldn’t have children but it is expected that from their weakened position, their progeny will likely have lesser chance to thrive than others and will have to fight harder. It is also better if they have fewer children because they can devote all available resources to fewer children.

I understand that this might seem distasteful to many. But I want to dissect this and absorb it rationally.

How can the statement ‘children should have equal chances’ be supported rationally?

[yesenadam]

How can 'children shouldn't have equal chances' be supported rationally?!

[ddingus]

What middle class?

There is one, but it is small now. Something like half the nation makes 40k per year.

That 40k has to do

Housing Food Transport Health care

Add paying private tuition?

Most will end up in what remains of public education or any number of very mixed bag charter schools.

So we will have thrown wrenches into what was pretty great public education for almost everyone, declare it isn't working (no surprise there), to achieve a market system that will deliver spotty education?

The whole thing is a net loss, if you ask me.

I would and never have opposed high end or specialized private education for those who can afford such things.

Denying what is probably the majority of Americans a solid education to expand on that just does not seem to make sense.

Worse, doing that is failure to invest in our own future. That spotty education will have a direct impact and already has.

Funding public education can be done, and should be done. And when it is propely funded, educators are not larded down with too many mamdatory requirements, stripped of the agency needed to do it right, works well.

Worked well enough to advance our nation very considerably, I should add.

Couple that mess with essentially 4 decades of flat wages taking us from one family member being able to provide reasonably to both parents working full time plus, which shifts a lot of problems onto schools increasingly unable to deal with them, and it is no wonder the future looks grim.

You say public schools should only be for those unable to afford it.

Ok, that is rapidly becoming a majority of people.

Which is it?

People earn enough to invest in the young people who are our future and who will take care of us in our old age

, or

Make it a public investment, anyone is free to augment, given they have means.

The fact is, public education only works well at scale.

We either fund it and get the benefit and security that comes along with a well educated population, or we don't.

This nation was built by people attending great public schools and colleges. The more we have stepped away from that, the less we have gained.

And there is already inexcusable student debt for college. How much do we want to bet that same thing happens in a sea of private primary education schools all looking to make money first, educate second? Charters already do that with super inconsistent, meaning generally worse overall outcomes, now.

Low odds on that one.

And they will make money first no matter what. That is what business does. No blame, no shame just facts.

Public education is about education, not making money.

I have just not seen the benefit overall, just some people getting better for their money while a lot of others get a whole lot worse.

And causing all of that so very wealthy people can get or do what they could just do anyway?

Laughable. Seriously.

Had I the means you brought up, trust me, educating my kids properly would be no problem, and it would be no problem while easily contributing my share to public education so my better educated kids grow into a competent, well educated, civic minded society they would likely be able to earn more than their share of wealth from.

Nice problems to have compared to the growing mess now.

Very nice problems.

[jelliclesfarm]

I know I am going to be downvoted for sure..but I will say it anyways..

Why do adults have children if they are not sure they can give them the very best they need to survive in a world that is increasingly hostile to their survivability?

When survival is based on money and money is based on finding work and that is dependent on quality of education, shouldn’t parents plan ahead before they bring a child that is absolutely dependent on that for every need? Where is the personal responsibility?

[ddingus]

Yes

The fact is, we just do not need to be that shitty.

And the child is with us no matter what we think of the parents.

I have one I more or less have to care for right now. I did not fuck the mother, in fact, didn't make any of the choices.

And talk accountability all day long. But there it is, child in the street, or...

We can do better than this. We need to long before we resolve all the petty squabbles over who should have done what in a risky world no matter what we do.

[tmaly]

You assume only adults have children with this statement. This is not entirely a correct assumption given the number of teen pregnancies.