Let's talk Education!
Lets assume, for many years, the government had undertaken to provide all the citizens with shoes on the grounds that they are an urgent necessity. If someone was to suggest that this field be turned over to private enterprise, he would probablybe told something like: "What! Do you want everyone except the rich to walk around barefoot?"As a result of the fact that education has been tax supported for such a long time, most people find it hard to consider an alternative. Yet, there doesn't seem to be anything unique about education that distinguishes it from many other human needs, like shoes, that are filled by private enterprise. The shoe industry seems to be doing its job with immeasurably better than public education is doing its job.
Admittedly, I have never thought much about how education is administered. Hey! I had a really good experience in public schools. But, as I spent time inside inner city Jackson and in the Delta, I experienced the crisis of public education. I decided to looked at my public education objectively, and it didn't make sense:
I almost had to move schools in middle school because the back of my neighborhood was being redistricted into Brandon. Thinking back on that experience... My educational future was not based on my intellect or choice, but on my geography. Luckily for me, Brandon schools were not much different than Northwest. But, what if I lived in Jackson? New Orleans? the Delta? This led me to ask a couple questions... Should the government be permitted to remove children forcibly from their homes, with or without the parents consent, and subject the children to educational training and procedures of which the parents may or may not approve? Should citizens have their wealth expropriated to support a failing education system and children who are not their own? Seems to be counter-intuitive to America's ideals of individual rights. The fact remains: most parents are compelled to send their children to State schools since they are taxed to support these schools and cannot afford to pay the addition fees to send kids to private schools.
The solution is to bring education into the marketplace. When educational institutions have to compete with one another in the quality of training they offer--when they compete for the value that will be attached to the diplomas they issue--educational standards will certainly rise. When they compete for services of the best teachers, the teachers will attract greatest number of students, then the teachers salaries will certainly rise.
Our industry has followed this model through our history--our education should be permitted to do so. Unfortunately, our governmental solutions to education have hurt the very people they were intended to help (much like other government initiatives like the minimum wage--more on that later). It should be turned over to private competition and enterprise not because education is unimportant, but because it is crucially important.
Charter schools, vouchers, and a free-market approaches are amazing success stories and should serve as model on how to combat poverty and education reform.
Washington D.C
Harlem Children's Zone
New Orleans
Even Haiti!
Education shouldn't be a partisan issue. This issue is so important to the future of our nation. I think this could be the right track.. what do you think?
Blake
(credit to Ayn Rand's Capitalism: A Unknown Ideal)
2 comments:
Interesting post!
I think people would run into a problem because the majority of private schools in the US are religious. Some require strict admissions guidelines (both academic and ethical/moral) that most public school students couldn't meet. How are vouchers going to help these students? Also, do vouchers come with strings attached? If so, many private schools may refuse to accept them. The government can't force a privately owned school to accept students.
Will small communities be able to support schools without federal/state funding? Schooling is expensive, and in poor or rural areas, how are schools supposed to be able to break even with a limited supply of students? Increase tuition? That only makes things worse. Private companies have no reason to put a school in a area that won't make it any money...much less pay great salaries for teachers. Sure, some districts may benefit from privatized education, but I think that many too would suffer more than they do now.
It is not an easy problem to solve. Im a fan of private schools, but it doesn't seem like you could extend this to the masses without completely rethinking the way the US does education.
What would be the problem of completely re-thinking education? The education system in the United States propagates poverty. No doubt, public schools in certain areas are doing an adequate job (I won't say anything about state-run education, which says amazing things about controversial figures to promote a political agenda etc FDR), but schools in under served regions are failing. The worst public schools in the country serve the children who need a good education the most. Private schools are completely autonomous, but programs like Geoffrey Canada's is a mix of private and public funds. If it takes x amount of dollars to educate a student in a public school, why couldn't that money be given to the family to choose the school that best fits their needs?
It is always easier to spend other people's money than your own. We always take better care of something that is our own. Instead of getting taxed to pay for failing schools, why not keep it and take ownership of our own education?
Makes sense to me.
Post a Comment