Compulsory Schooling - Necessity or Waste?

[Makalakumu]

I wanted to throw up a poll to take an informal survey of the MT community. How do you feel about the concept of forcing someone to go to school? Compulsory schooling laws do just that. They force parents to send their children to school until they reach 16 or 18 years old depending on the state. Is this something our society needs to do?

 

[Makalakumu]

LOL, maybe I should have stayed in school longer so I could spell Compulsory correctly. Could a Mod kindly correct that for me?

 

[Stac3y]

No comment.

 

[Bruno@MT]

I wanted to throw up a poll to take an informal survey of the MT community. How do you feel about the concept of forcing someone to go to school? Compulsory schooling laws do just that. They force parents to send their children to school until they reach 16 or 18 years old depending on the state. Is this something our society needs to do?

No, by all means keep the children ignorant and unschooled.
It'll prepare them better for when the US turns into a 3d world country where they don't need advanced skills or knowledge.

The rest of the modern world meanwhile will make sure their population is educated enough to keep the economy going.
The wooshing sound you hear is the rest of the world passing by the US.

 

[Ken Morgan]

Schooling is an absolute necessity. Private schooled, public schooled, home schooled, or whatever, we need to learn many basic skills that will help us get through life.

We don’t live in a society where being uneducated is an option. There are no more high paying, unskilled jobs available to the uneducated. Gone are the days were you could get by without knowing how to read or write and still raise a family.

Not educating your children, in my opinion, is a form of child abuse.

 

[cdunn]

Either wisely, or unwisely, our Western society, at its very pins is a democratic one. Our communities and governments are built around the principle of group consensus. Our interpersonal relationships are built around informed consent. Everything is based around the ability of the individual to make informed decisions for himself. And the education is the key to the manner in which those decisions get made.

We must be educated in logic, in the fundamentals of ethics, and in the scientific method. We must learn to sort through sources, and discover those with conflicts of interest. In short, we must be taught to learn, and to apply that learning. For without this, we are more and more likely to inflict catastrophic harm to ourselves and to our society.

It is unfortunate that the modern school system unflinchingly fails in this task, but to take it away from the state is in error, for while the state can, and should, represent the interests of the people as a whole, well, Joe said it best:

Education is a weapon whose effects depend on who holds it in his hands and at whom it is aimed.

 

[celtic_crippler]

A few good reasons:

Whenever the people are well-informed, they can be trusted with their own government." -Thomas Jefferson

"If the children . . . are untaught, their ignorance and vices will in future life cost us much dearer in their consequences, than it would have done, in their correction, by a good education." -Thomas Jefferson

"If a nation expects to be ignorant and free in a state of civilization, it expects what never was and never will be." - Thomas Jefferson

...I like Thomas Jefferson. LOL

But here are some more modern quotes that say it better than I could..

Public education is the key civil rights issue of the 21st century. Our nation's knowledge-based economy demands that we provide young people from all backgrounds and circumstances with the education and skills necessary to become knowledge workers. If we don't, we run the risk of creating an even larger gap between the middle class and the poor. This gap threatens our democracy, our society and the economic future of America. -Eli Broad

Let us think of education as the means of developing our greatest abilities, because in each of us there is a private hope and dream which, fulfilled, can be translated into benefit for everyone and greater strength for our nation. - J.F.K.

Education is both a tool of social justice as well as a fundamental driver of economic development. -Kevin Rudd

 

[Darksoul]

-Humans need to be educated; they shouldn't be left on their own. As far as I can tell, every culture and society throughout the ages has had some form of education/training, regardless of the subject. Some places, it may have only been to train as a soldier, to learn how to fight, cause that was the order of the day. In the United States, I would like to see a balance of Federal and State standards for education, maybe with some local standards thrown in. I believe more emphasis should be put towards trade schools than the traditional college/university route.

Andrew

 

[Nomad]

Ignorance has caused and continues to cause way more problems in the world than a solid education ever has.

Unfortunately, with slashed budgets, bigger classrooms and underpaid teachers forced to teach strictly from mandated safe course material, the bar for what's considered a minimal standard of education keeps dropping.

The system needs a serious overhaul, but an education through high school should absolutely be required, in my opinion.

 

[Blade96]

i dont mind compulsory schooling - as long as they arent schools like the hell holes i went to.

In my opinion if the gov forces a child to attend a school like that THAT would be child abuse.

 

[chaos1551]

Has anyone here seen that movie 'Idiocracy'?

"Welcome to Costco, I love you..."

 

[Makalakumu]

Well, it looks like I'm the only one who has voted no. Here's why. As a long time public school teacher, private school teacher, and reformer I am beginning to really understand the power of choice in education. When we force students to go to schools, especially to failing schools or schools that teach material that goes against our core beliefs (whatever that may be) we are ultimately not as effective as we could be.

The idea of compulsory schooling laws, as we know them, was conceived in Prussia in Napoleonic times. Their design was to take the children away from the family and engineer them for the state. This kind of management was popularized in this country starting around 1840 and really didn't get into full swing until the early 1900s. It was during this time that the various elite visions of Utopia were thrust upon the people the schools began to be used as tools for propaganda. Teachers became social managers and education, rather then drawing out what was inside, became a process of putting in what was desired.

After learning about this, I now see a world in which the state supports education in a passive way. I see parents and students choosing schools that fit their learning needs and desires and the government giving large grants for tuition. I see the grants being available to adults choosing to better themselves at any time in their lives.

Ultimately, I see a society in which their is no need to force people to go to school because people can find options to learn what they want to learn. Compulsory schooling was designed for social engineering, not education. Real education comes from within, from the individual. The word education means to draw out. You can't use force to cram things in and expect that people will truly and honestly become educated.

 

[Carol]

As the aunt of two children that were home-schooled through grade 8, and four children that are currently in a charter school, I agree with you on educational choice, which I think is positive. I can't forsee that coming to fruition through elimianting compulsory schooling, which I don't think is positive.

 

[Makalakumu]

As the aunt of two children that were home-schooled through grade 8, and four children that are currently in a charter school, I agree with you on educational choice, which I think is positive. I can't forsee that coming to fruition through eliminting compulsory schooling, which I don't think is positive.

I wise man one said that looking from the inside out, it often seems like there is nothing else but the fishbowl. That said, I think that as soon as we discover that their is a fishbowl, we can start to see how we all can climb out of it. It starts with education and with teaching people that they have the power and ability to choose for themselves. If we really want to unlock our creative potential as a nation, we need to take the fetters off. We need to get out of this fishbowl.

Another thing is that I don't think people are going to stand for what they are getting and what they are paying for much longer. We are already getting educational choice as more and more people refuse to participate. And no matter how many drugs, how many labels, and how many sanctions we apply, it just goes on from there. In a way compulsory schooling is a way of denying the simple reality of what we experience in our daily life.

I know that I just stuck my sword into a sacred cow when I voted against compulsory schooling, but just consider for a moment what would happen if everyone could simply choose how they wanted to be educated, society supported them in that decision, and if there was no need to force people into a school?

Imagine sitting in a class where you and everyone else wants to be there and the teacher wants to teach you and everyone else. Perhaps compulsory schooling takes that away from us...

 

[Bruno@MT]

It starts with education and with teaching people that they have the power and ability to choose for themselves. If we really want to unlock our creative potential as a nation, we need to take the fetters off. We need to get out of this fishbowl.

I know that I just stuck my sword into a sacred cow when I voted against compulsory schooling, but just consider for a moment what would happen if everyone could simply choose how they wanted to be educated, society supported them in that decision, and if there was no need to force people into a school?
...

This doesn't make sense. You can already choose how you are schooled. What does removing compulsory schooling add? It seems as if you think that by removing the obligation to get an education, people will suddenly rise above themselves and get utterly motivated to learn. This is as realistic as expecting communism to be a successful economic model if you don't force the people to follow the rules.

Maybe you would only have motivated students left, but only because the rest drops out voluntarily or because they need to go to the factories at a young age.
Removing compulsory schooling will rapidly turn the US into a 3d world country, literacy will drop sharply, and you lose whatever knowledge industry you have left.

 

[Bill Mattocks]

It is up to the state, by which I mean the state in which one lives, not the 'state' as in the federal government. State's rights.

Public education is incredibly important in my opinion, and one of the facets of a functioning free society. Take away education, and as Jefferson said, freedom will not last long after. However, whether or not I strongly believe in it, it is a matter for each state to decide if education should be compulsory, and for how long students must attend. I would not be in favor of the current system we have, wherein the federal government collects and disperses education funds to the states, and threatens to withhold them if the states do not do as the federal government says.

And the world will always need ditch-diggers. If a person does not wish to become educated, so mote it be.

 

[Bill Mattocks]

Additional note: As always, one must be careful when jumping the chasm between something being a very good idea and the government therefore having the right to mandate it. Lots of things are good ideas, should the government require them therefore? People not engaging in all sorts of risky behaviors that are currently legal would be a good idea - does the government therefore have the mandate to put a stop to those behaviors?

So there are always two questions. First, is it a good idea, and second, does the government have the right to impose it as a law?

 

[Bruno@MT]

You already said yourself that the only way for society to remain free is to be educated. And I agree.
Now, if government mandates educationthere is no downside.

1) either the population would already do that itself, and this government stipulation is without effect
2) the population is not inclided to do this itself, and the government stipulation makes sure they do, thereby keeping the population free.

Historically, these laws were created not to -force- kids to get an education, but to make it possible. because just like in other countries, the elite and factory owners would rather have an ignorant population. By mandating that everyone get some sort of education, government made it impossible for lazy / uncaring parents to neglect their kids' education, or for the 'movers and shakers' to end up in a status quo where children can't get an education.

 

[Bill Mattocks]

You already said yourself that the only way for society to remain free is to be educated. And I agree.
Now, if government mandates educationthere is no downside.

Depending whether the government in question is the state or the federal government.

The states have the right to compel public education.

The federal government does not.

If the federal government compels education, then there is a downside - the damage it does to the Constitution. They haven't the right. To usurp power that rightfully belongs to the states because it serves a public good is not a good enough reason.

This is a common logical break in political understanding. If one can see a clear benefit in mandatory education, then one jumps to the conclusion that therefore it ought to be done.

If that were true, then the federal government could mandate no smoking, no meat-eating, and no being fat. All these things serve a public good - so of course the federal government should have the power to enforce them? No.

I realize that it sounds counter-intuitive to say that yes, public education is good, but no, the federal government ought not require it. But it's logical if you think about it.

 

[Makalakumu]

I think the key to understanding my position is to understand that I am not against public support of education. I believe that society should make education one of its core priorities. I would like to see large grants to families so that children could receive any education they desire. I don't think that children and families should be forced to go to a particular school. They should choose what is best for them and society should respect that decision.

The problem with compulsory schooling, in my opinion, is that it is a tool to force children into a particular type of schooling. Aside from the fact that this education is of poor quality (in the US) by nearly all measures, it now is being organized so that the state will determine everything that you learn, including history. This is a key point, because this is what woke me up to what this all meant. When government mandates the history that is taught and tests it with high stakes tests that determine whether or not you get a diploma, they have come out into the open and shown their hand. It's propaganda. In the US, our No Child Left Behind Laws mandated tests in all subjects including history and science, which will begin rolling out starting next year.

Just think about that for a moment and it suddenly dawns that we are amidst a quiet, creeping, incremental coup. Compulsory schooling is the major tool for this coup. A small group of elite now has the power to train everyone what to believe according to their desires. John D. Rockefeller, a man who started one of the leading foundations supporting compulsory schooling around the world said this...

"In our dreams, people yield themselves with perfect docility to our molding hands. The present educational conventions [intellectual and character education] fade from our minds, and unhampered by tradition, we work our own good will upon a grateful and responsive folk. We shall not try to make these people or any of their children into philosophers or men of learning or men of science. We have not to raise up from among them authors, educators, poets or men of letters. We shall not search for embryo great artists, painters, musicians, nor lawyers, doctors, preachers, politicians, statesmen, of whom we have ample supply. The task we set before ourselves is very simple...we will organize children...and teach them to do in a perfect way the things their fathers and mothers are doing in an imperfect way."

In US and across the world, the major foundations control the federal and state level Departments of Education, the major graduate schools of education, and the major publishers of textbooks. Have you ever wondered why your school day was structured the way it was? It was because these Foundations structured a new model of schooling that was being tested in the early 1900s.

In 1918, Alexander Inglis, an emeritus professor at Harvard, who now has a lectern named after him, wrote a book called Principles of Secondary Education. This book is an example of writings from that time period and represents the zeitgeist that was the genesis of our modern schooling institution.

According to Inglis, the system was designed with six functions in mind:
1) The adaptive function (schools are to establish fixed habits of reaction to authority the bells, the trivial rules, and rewards and punishments are nothing more then a Pavlovian training method designed to accustom students to a life of top down instruction).

2) The integrating function (this might well be called "the conformity function," because its intention is to make children as alike as possible. Standardized testing is the epitome of this function. Every unit will be strictly controlled for quality like a McDonalds cheeseburger).

3) The diagnostic and directive function (school is meant to determine each student's proper social role. The numbers and letters that we assign to bits of knowledge and acts of behavior are to be used to determine a student’s future despite the assumptions that went into their assignation).

4) The differentiating function (once their social role has been "diagnosed," children are to be sorted by role and trained only so far as their destination in the social machine merits - and not one step further. Development of the mind beyond that which is required for basic instruction in social roles is not only waste of resources, it is dangerous for social order).

5) The selective function (schools are meant to tag students with poor grades, remedial placement, and other diagnoses in order to identify the “unfit” for further intervention. This is a eugenics program as defined by Sir Francis Galton, the father of eugenics and whose ideas spawned a program that was funded in the United States by John D. Rockefeller. We used to direct these “tagged” individuals into forced sterilization programs, now we cram them full of pharmaceuticals and deny them opportunities for social advancement.

6) The propaedeutic function (the societal system implied by these rules will require an elite group of caretakers. School trains students for managers. The etymology of the word pedagogy comes from the Greek word paidagogos, who were a class of slaves whose responsibility it was to guide students through the lessons of the masters. Students will learn fixed habits of reaction to authority, how to shift from one person giving instruction to another, and how to obey without question and without the weight of troubling ethics).

When these schools were first rolled out along these lines, many immigrants from Europe rioted in the streets at having to face the prospect of having their children forced into these institutions. They made statements to the papers of the time that they had come to America in order to escape this sort of thing. The history of compulsory schooling is not something that many people know about.

It is something to consider as we move forward to the future.