The Separation of School and State - PeachParts Mercedes-Benz Forum

mikemover · #1 02-25-2004, 09:25 AM

Wednesday, February 25, 2004
By Wendy McElroy

In the wake of a fatal shooting, the security for a D.C. high school was officially turned over to the city’s police department last week. Armed officers will patrol the halls.

This is one more indication of the severe problems haunting the public school system: violence, illegal drugs, the mandating of medication such as Ritalin, low academic achievement, controversial curricula, perceived prejudice against boys.

Parents who wish to explore educational alternatives at their own expense should be encouraged to do so, yet the opposite is occurring. Advocates of public schooling view other systems of education as threats to be regulated, discouraged and sometimes demonized. (Often the income and careers of these advocates depend upon the continued tax funding of public schools.)

Is there any validity to their criticism of educational alternatives?

Two of the most viable ones are homeschooling and apprenticeships. Neither prevents anyone from choosing public schools; each merely offers a choice at no public expense. How could anyone reasonably object to that?

One objection comes from the assumption that public schools are necessary for children to become literate. The assumption is unfounded. Prior to the spread of public education in the early 1900s, literacy rates in America were amazingly high. A much-quoted estimate comes from a book written in 1812 at the behest of Thomas Jefferson. The French statesman Pierre Samuel DuPont de Nemours, who emigrated to America, declared of young Americans, "Not more than four in a thousand are unable to write legibly, even neatly."

Other sources also attest to high literacy rates prior to the 1900s, a literacy that arose largely from homeschooling.

Pointing to the past is unnecessary. Today homeschooled students often perform better on standardized tests than those from public schools. In 2001, for example, homeschooled SAT-takers averaged 568 on the verbal test and 525 on the math; the national average was 506 on verbal and 514 on math.

Moreover, nations that actively encourage apprenticeship programs such as Germany and Switzerland enjoy very high literacy. Clearly, public schools are not a necessary path to that social goal.

Two additional criticisms of educational alternatives are common.

First, alternatives weaken the public school system; and second, they harm children.

The first argument assumes that dissenting parents should support and strengthen a social institution they believe damages their children. Their "social obligations" are placed in conflict with their parental responsibilities. No such conflict exists. Parents who use their own judgment and money in educating their children deprive no other parent of that same right. If public schools, with all their advantages, cannot compete with free market options, then they deserve to weaken because children deserve better.

The second criticism is that educational alternatives harm children.

In the ‘80s, when homeschooling appeared on the social radar, it was closely associated with the Religious Right. Homeschoolers were viewed as extremists and unqualified amateurs. As homeschooling entered the mainstream and a generation of homeschooled children scored well on tests, public suspicion faded.

The accusation of harm shifted. Homeschooling is now said to mask child abuse. This was the message clearly implied by an Oct. 14 CBS News two-part report entitled "A Dark Side to Homeschooling." The report created a furor of protest in the homeschooling community; it also encouraged politicians to call for anti-homeschooling legislation.

Conservative columnist Michelle Malkin examined a push for legislation in New Jersey. Four adopted boys were found to be starving although child welfare officials claimed to have visited the home no fewer than 38 times. Rather than condemn the bureaucracy, politicians blamed the fact that the foster parents had homeschooled. Thus, all New Jersey homeschoolers may be subjected to indignities like criminal background checks and obstacles like health regulations more stringent than those imposed on public schools.

Malkin concluded, "God forbid children be taught by their own parents without oversight from the all-knowing, all-caring, infallible … child welfare-public school monopoly!"

With apprenticeships, the concept of harm often draws upon the specter of "child labor" even though modern apprenticeships bear no resemblance to the 19th century images that arise at the sound of that term. Apprentices entering programs in the U.S., for instance, must be at least 16 years old. Moreover, apprenticeship as alternative education was established as a matter of parental and religious liberty by the court case Wisconsin v. Yoder (1972).

The case addressed the Amish and Mennonite tradition by which children were employed from age 14 to 16 on the family farm or in a family occupation, like carpentry, instead of going to school as the law usually requires. The court found that such employment did not constitute harm. Today, these apprenticeships remain a de facto exception to child labor laws and open the door to other exceptions.

My purpose is not to dispute with parents who send their children to public schools. I believe the system is a brutal failure, but parents must decide for themselves. I advocate extending alternatives far beyond the typical private versus public school debate, and even beyond homeschooling.

Apprenticeships, experiments like Montessori and the School of Living, self-guided education, mentoring … The cost of public education is not measured in tax dollars alone. A universe of educational possibilities has been obstructed by the attempt to enforce a government monopoly over how, where, when, and what children learn.
_______________________
----Wendy McElroy is the editor of ifeminists.com and a research fellow for The Independent Institute in Oakland, Calif. She is the author and editor of many books and articles, including the new book, "Liberty for Women: Freedom and Feminism in the 21st Century" (Ivan R. Dee/Independent Institute, 2002). She lives with her husband in Canada.

mikemover · #2 02-25-2004, 06:24 PM

I figured between the title, and my well-known (around here) political leanings, and the fact that I took the time to post it, people would get the point.

Sorry. Next time I'll comment. :p

It's another article in support of ending the government's systemized indoctrination of our children (public schools). And the writer makes her case quite well.

Mike

AustinsCE · #3 02-25-2004, 08:14 PM

No alternatives arent the answer, we gotta pay the teachers more....

jpb5151 · #4 02-25-2004, 08:39 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by mikemover
In 2001, for example, homeschooled SAT-takers averaged 568 on the verbal test and 525 on the math; the national average was 506 on verbal and 514 on math.

This isn't really a surprise. After all, parents who care enough about educating their children to home school them probably place education very high on the priority list to begin with. Maybe these same children would be above average in public schools as well.

Botnst · #5 02-25-2004, 09:57 PM

Failure to provide high-quality, public education to every child will increase the separation and segregation between the "Establishment" and non-establishment citizens.

On another thread, there is strong antipathy among the correspondents toward the educated elite: The "Ivy League" grads. If the same stratification increases between public grade school and private academies, it will do nothing but increase the animosity between classes. This is a bad thing, to increase class envy.

Thus, it is in the best interest of the ruling elite to ensure that public education will provide a clear path for the deserving student from mediocrity to excellence. Failure to provide for that path will result in the ossified stratification of Europe--a class-based society in which merit is far less importance than blood. God help us all if we begin to think that outcome is a good idea.

Botnst

mikemover · #6 02-26-2004, 12:36 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Botnst
Failure to provide high-quality, public education to every child will increase the separation and segregation between the "Establishment" and non-establishment citizens..........

..........Thus, it is in the best interest of the ruling elite to ensure that public education will provide a clear path for the deserving student from mediocrity to excellence.........
Botnst

That is a huge part of the problem....The government IS failing to provide students with an education that will provide this "clear path" to success.

"Quality education" and "public education" are FAR from synonymous. In fact, they are speeding apart in opposite directions, at an increasingly rapid rate.

The ever increasing gap between the "haves" and the "have-nots" is a consistent phenomenon in EVERY society throughout history, under EVERY form of government man has devised thus far. This tendency supercedes education, government, economy....It is a result of human nature....Some will educate themselves, some will not. Some will work for success, some will not. Some will exploit others for gain, some will not. When you find a "cure" for human nature, please let me know.

Mike

Lebenz · #7 02-26-2004, 12:49 AM

Quote:

That is a huge part of the problem....The government IS failing to provide students with an education that will provide this "clear path" to success.

It’s not “the government” it’s the parents of the students and the students themselves. All any teacher can do is lead the student to the waters of knowledge. Learning takes more effort than merely drinking...................................................................

mikemover · #8 02-26-2004, 01:31 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Lebenz
It’s not “the government” it’s the parents of the students and the students themselves. All any teacher can do is lead the student to the waters of knowledge. Learning takes more effort than merely drinking...................................................................

Excellent point...but instead of asking parents to "be parents" and play a part in their child's education and discipline, public school administrators are suggesting, or in some cases MANDATING, that they drug their kids with Ritalin! When I was in school, there was none of this "Attention Defecit Disorder" bull$h!t....The cure for "ADD" in my school was a loud, sharp "Sit down, shut up, and pay attention!!" from the teacher! Worked almost every time, too!...."If it ain't broke......"

Instead of challenging the advanced students, they sedate them so that they can "dumb it down" to the lowest common denominator and avoid hurting the lazy students' feelings! Now they're doing away with Honor Rolls and Dean's Lists! Are they going to erase any TRACE of reward for hard-working and hard-studying students? They're too busy enforcing their absurd "zero tolerance" rules to get any teaching done! Sending kids home for bringing asprin or a pair of nail clippers to school, that's brilliant policy!

I just posted on another education-related thread that the single most important variable in your education is YOU. Parents and teachers obviously play a huge role, and both are failing in that regard in more and more cases lately.

Parents and teachers don't stress the importance of education and responsibility and self-reliance, and then they wonder why the kids behave the way they do.

Sorry, but I'll stick with my daughter's private school, where she is taught subjects that are relevant, she is taught these subjects well, she is expected to pay attention and perform (without Ritalin!), and is rewarded when she does so, and penalized when she does not. She can also bring a damn Tylenol to school when she has a headache, and they don't call the cops! Imagine that!

So far, she's an "A" student, a couple of "Bs", does basketball, football, music, soccer, with no discipline problems, no drug problems, no alcohol problems, hasn't been shot at, hasn't been "zero-toleranced", hasn't needed Ritalin (

).......

Mike