Forums → WEPR → School

Public education oversteps the constitution and is an inefficient waste of tax dollars. And I hate the homework and the fact they punish me for being smart(honors math has same curriculum with twice the homework, I might not get credit for taking Latin classes outside of school which specifically say the school must give me credit for, the list goes on).

It is definately not a waste of tax money. Without education, we'd be back with the middle ages. Illiteracy, uninteligence etc. How are we supposed to get jobs if you don't have an education, or know how to do the job? Alot of jobs require math skills, so without education (especially math) our world would fall.

U might hate skl but everyone has to do it. But also think of people who cant go to skl or the kids in Africa who have to walk 20 miles to get to a skl with 1 teacher and 200 students. So before u slag off skl just be lucky you have access to a good education u ungrateful child

I actually like school. You get to see all your friends, meet new friends, make girlfriends, all the good things in life. When it comes to the work it's just depends on the kind of work. If it's work that I really like then it's good, but if it's a subject that I really hate then it sucks!

Most people whop hate school dont hate it rele they just hate work. And those are the people who aren't going to get far in life

No one responded to the fact that public school oversteps the Constitution, which it does.

And yes it does waste tax dollars. Lets say education was privatized.
Everyone could expect to pay 1.5k less in taxes. School costs 2k per year, per student, so the poor would be hurt a little more; however, schools would be come vastly more efficient: the schools that would do better would be the ones known for having better curriculums, teachers, supplies, transportation, and cost. In the end, schools would be forced into competition like the rest of the business world, which would result in even lower costs and improved quality.

No, I don't hate work, I hate the busy work which has no educational value or merit.

XCoheedX- your argument that we would be back in the middle ages is a Straw-man fallacy suggesting that we would be completely uneducated. Education is one of the most highly valued things in the world, most would still choose to have education. If one we to poor to afford education, a charity most likely would be willing to assist.

Finally, if you could choose the school you could go to with free-market education, you would find a school where you are better able to make friends as people are more similar. I would go to a school with higher academic standards and thus there would be less, druggies and other kinds of people I don't hang out with.

I"m going to agree with post of the people here and say that most people that don't like school just don't like the work involved. School is a great chance to meet friends and do things that we wouldn't get the chance to do otherwise. The work is necessary to learn something well (most of the time) so I don't mind it, as long as it isn't busy work.

@necromancer: You're wrong about public school and the US Constitution not being compatible. Education is left up to the states, NOT the federal government. Look at the 10th amendment to show that States implicitly have this power.

Not to mention, I'm pretty certain there would have been a Supreme Court challenge against public school if there was a Constitutional issue.

You can't privatize education and still require it. Your stipulation that school would only cost 2k per student per year made me laugh. The year I went to private school, it cost 5k per student per year. In 1995. I'm pretty sure inflation has made that number go up, not down.

Many private school are also better because they have a greater freedom to place restrictions on who may attend and who gets kicked out, while public schools don't have that luxury. Sure, your school will be better if you only accept students with an IQ over 120, have rich parents so the kids don't have to work after school, and kick people out of school instead of suspending them for fights. Try putting all the kids in the 80-90 IQ range in your school, and your private school suddenly doesn't have such a great average.

I agree with you about busy work; that's a sign of lazy teachers, IMHO.

I also agree with XCoheedX. If we didn't have public education, we couldn't have forced education either. We already have illerate, ignorant people today with mandatory school. That number will only go up if school is not required. I don't know if most would still choose education; many would, but we should be trying give everyone the opportunity to be successful.

I'm amused at your assertion that charities would fill the gap. Just like charities have kept people from being homeless and starving on the streets. Because you know teachers are going to want to work for crumbs when they are already underpaid. You might have some scholarships available, but not nearly enough to cover everyone.

There's also a great value into having a diverse school, even with people you don't like. Think you can insulate yourself from people you don't like for the rest of your life? Wait till you have a job. You're damned lucky if none of your coworkers are people you wouldn't hang out with.

Look, I have a libertarian streak a mile wide, but education is the area where I draw the line and say the government needs to offer public education, because we will have an uneducated populace otherwise.

to necromancer theres a reason skl is state owned and it isnt a waste of tax dollars. I got to state skl. U think that my parents cud afford private then u r sadly mistaken. Ur probly American and dont understand how taxes are in the uK but my parents pay 40% of what they earn in taxes. So if they had to pay even more they wouldn't be able to feed me and my bro so don't say ' the poor will be a little worse off' u ignorant b.a.s.t.a.r.d o ye and those poor guys that you dont hang out with wudnt b able to afford their drugs u rich boy

For me, the problem with school is that politics has interfered far too much. Arguments about standards and the inefficient use of money by most systems have blunted any benefits offered by an education.

Ye but its a gud thing that the govts do care to improve educational standrds in skls but it can go too far

I see now that a complete end to public education would not get too far, how about a compromise. Instead alter how they are run, allow pupils to choose which school they would like to go to, and have the government give a certain amount of money to each school depending on the number who go to it, such would allow for the better schools to prosper an the worse schools to reform or falter. In this struggle of the fittest America's educational standards would increase as schools compete for attendance. Feel free to critique or add on to this idea.

The US' take on education is laughable at best.

They bases all the education on mainly useless rote teachings which help out the average person little to none in the real world. Sure, basic math skills are needed. And knowing history is always a good thing I suppose. English classes area must, because Thor knows the American vernacular and literacy on average is in the pit. These are really needed.

Yet go above and beyond these...is pointless. Most people do not need to know math higher than basic algebra. Science? Pfft, I have not actually used my science knowledge for anything more than random trivia and sounding well learned.

Now I am sure some people are going to go "But what about those people who wants to be scientists or mathematicians," to which I reply "Well good for them."
The thing is though those people are in a very small percentage of youths that go to school. And the thing is, all those frivolous classes are mandated by law for every student in the US.

In the end, the US is just trying to play catch-up with the rest of the world which is beating the bejeesus out of it. And guess who gets the short, nasty end of the stick? All the students that are not the figurehead of academic perfection.

I know that in many European countries, students from a very young age get to choose what career they want. They take all the basic reading, writing and arithmetic classes and such in the beginning grades, then take classes that are geared more for what they want to do in life. Which in my opinion makes a helluva lot more sense. Why force a kid to take ungodly amounts of math and science courses if he wishes to be a mason? Or a chef?

School is great....when im ill or when are holidays..scool is an ideal waste of time.But its true that scholar system must be reformed...

well if you just hate school because you have to work, if you dont go you cant really get anywhere in life

Hm, skills-based jobs and labor are now in higher demand, and of course in order to maintain any semblance of public infrastructure, one must have a labor-intensive workforce.

It's true, too- the way to this is not through higher education, but rather through apprenticeships, certificates etc. Yet I am currently debating whether Devoidless is right in downplaying the importance of higher education because I figure that education is empowerment but more importantly, it is something that you can only appreciate the further you get with it. On the other hand I'm also aware that my perspective is skewed specifically because my background strongly emphasises the importance of higher education. I know that I complained about some of my subject choices (or lack thereof!) when I was younger but now I have found application for them. To toss modesty aside, why do you think I comment so much on most things? It's not like I'm exactly pulling random statements out of my rear end- it's because I can apply all my knowledge. Then again, I also know I am fortunate enough to receive a vastly superior standard of education (throughout my life), and this is extremely important in terms of what kind of attitude you end up having to learning.

I think it would be inaccurate to say that every, or even most, or even any significant proportion of kids know what to do with their lives. Most people aren't even sure of this throughout the course of their careers- if you've somehow got motivation or the inspiration to pursue any one path with any degree of conviction, you are very fortunate that you don't have to bow down to the societal pressure that somehow expects you to funnel your opportunities and options into a single stream later on in life.

That's the issue regarding the breadth of education- it stems from the philosophy of giving kids every chance to foster their potential so that none of it is wasted. Maybe 'voidy is right in claiming this is a wrongheaded approach. I'm a little less hesitant to say that it doesn't appear particularly sustainable.