re: Should education be compulsory?

quote:

---

People believe "media narratives" not because of school but because of societal pressures

---

no. people don't actually believe media narratives because of societal pressure. that may make them pretend to believe or not actually question something and take for granted it's the case, but societal pressure has no bearing on whether or not someone actually believe something.

quote:

---

Then we wouldn't have a nation filled to the brim w/ government indoctrinated drones who believe it's government's job to "take care" of them.

Learning HOW to think, instead of being told WHAT to think would be the norm, not the other way around like it is now.

---

What a logical fallacy this is.

Parents teach their children their politics for the most part. So imagine those that think the government should take care of them being in charge of teaching their children everything they know, and those children not being exposed to anyone else.

I know the education system isn't perfect but why posters on this board continue to act like it is some sort of brainwashing facility is beyond me. Most kids don't give a shite about politics and the ones that do learn more from their parents than school.

Also, why would you think that most fast food workers would or could teach their child how to think on whatever level you find acceptable?

Haiti is a shithole because their government is corrupt. people aren't corrupt because they are more or less intelligent.

quote:

---

Right..... Haiti is a shithole because of their system of government

---

quote:

---

This is all true. "Government schools" are not the problem. The problem is the people in charge. Treat the disease not the symptoms.

---

Just tinker with it here and there, put the people you like in charge, and poof! Like magic, everything works. Except that’s been exactly what we’ve done ever since the federal government took over education. The problem is the system itself. Education is much too centralized now as a result, and all levels of public education are severely lagging, and now people spend their entire lives paying for college. Kids spend their adolescent years learning how to pass standardized tests instead of actually learning.

quote:

---

Now imagine if they weren't.

---

Then they'd know how to think for themselves, like me. I was home schooled. You know how I continue to learn, to this day? I read. I think about what I read. I ask myself if it makes sense. If I'm unsure, I read some more, and eventually I figure out where the truth is in the midst of all the bs the world throws out there.

When you go to school (most schools) you learn how to be a "compassionate" fool. You don't learn economics, you learn socialism. Socialism is not a valid economic system. But it "sounds" so compassionate.

They re-write the history books to tell whatever story fits into their narrative. And kids show up at protests shouting nonsense about all of the hateful, "privileged" white people. Someone asks them for just one actual example of this white privilege, and they can't do it. Same thing happens when you ask them for just one observable scientific example for evolution. They can't do it. All they have are talking points. Make them self-examine their beliefs, and they freeze up, or start shouting at you.

quote:

---

more educated populace

---

problem is they're becoming less and less educated.

Absolutely not


You can never force someone to learn if they don't want to

quote:

---

There's absolutely no reason that course material couldn't be posted online for anyone to access. Those who wanted to learn could do so and those who didn't, wouldn't. And it would be the same as it is now except we'd save a whole lot of taxpayer money.

---

In theory, perhaps. But federal law mandates that all students have equal access to educational opportunities, and the fact remains that a significant percentage of students do not have access to the internet, usually because they can't afford it.

In addition, exactly how would you suggest that six-year-olds access that content online, especially if there is no adult at home to help them?

quote:

---

In theory, perhaps. But federal law mandates that all students have equal access to educational opportunities, and the fact remains that a significant percentage of students do not have access to the internet, usually because they can't afford it.

In addition, exactly how would you suggest that six-year-olds access that content online, especially if there is no adult at home to help them?

---

The short answer is the same way they are doing so right now all across the country with schools shut down. And maybe they have to learn from 5:30-8:30 after their parent gets home from work, or mostly on weekends, or whenever is convenient for their own family situation. That's kind of the point.

Ask people who homeschool—you can get a day's work of schoolwork done in about 3 hours, as compared to the grossly inefficient 8 hour model of two hundred years ago that we're still clinging to despite vast innovations in technology.

Internet access? Easy. Instead of spending around $12,000 per student in public school to provide what we do now, spend $500 a year per student to make sure every child in America from age 5 to 18 has government paid-for internet access and a new laptop every 3 years.

Since they already exist, you could use the public school buildings as tutoring centers where students could go if they are having particular difficulty in a subject that they can't get past without one on one help, and they could also still provide special education services for students with disabilities. But that vastly decreases the expense and vastly increases the efficiency. Now instead of wasting time and money trying to give every student live teacher instruction on every lesson, now it's just utilized when necessary. We need a fraction of the teachers and facilities. Now maybe we're spending $1500 per student.

As I qualified in my original post on the matter, I can understand why it would be beneficial to maintain elementary school as we know it up to a certain point. Maybe fourth grade or so...up to the point that reading skills reach a certain level. So maybe now we're talking $2000-$3000 per student. A whole hell of a lot better than the $12,000 we're spending now.

But that's just a better mousetrap.

The point of the thread is stop trying to make it compulsory. If your family does not value education, fine, you have the government's permission to sit it the eff out.

You're going to anyway.

If forced to be there, you're going to clog up some classroom somewhere, not put any effort into anything, get passed through the system anyway, suck resources like a vampire, and probably disrupt efforts to educate others because you are bored.

If we're going to insist on maintaining the highly inefficient model we have now, the best thing that could happen is that we start treating education as a privilege instead of some kind of bastardized version of a compulsory right (kind of like forcing all people to vote).

Set behavioral and performance standards and if they are not met, we're so sorry Mrs. Jones, but Little Johnny scores normal on IQ tests and shows no signs of having a learning disability, which means he has no recognized excuse for not meeting standards. We're really sorry to tell you this, but if he can't keep up we're going to need his spot for someone who will value this opportunity. We have fewer spots than we have students who want them, so we're going to have to give his seat in the classroom to someone else.

All you'd have to do is frame it that way and many of the parents who don't give two farts in the wind about school right now would be protesting outside the principle's office demanding that they be given an opportunity for their child to be in school.

Human nature.

Oh, P.S.—I'm sure federal law mandates all sorts of stuff. I thought we were answering the question of the way we thought things ought to be rather than stating the way things are now.

quote:

---

Until some shite bag doesn't send their kid to school, the kid grows up to be a useless criminal and either damages your property or injures you, then your taxes pay to feed and house them.

---

Why do you refuse to admit that this is what happens anyway?

Did you miss the DOE statistic I posted earlier? 19% of high school graduates can't read. In other words, almost 1/5 of students passed all the way through the compulsory educational system right now are prepared to become nothing but useless criminals, as you put it. That's not counting those who drop out. That's graduates.

Exactly why do you think that would be worse if they weren't required to go through the formality of showing up at the school building for 13 years?