Should the gov't educate?

[Mallory]

Do you think the government should be responsible for educating the children of our country?
I am going to school and taking education 101 and the people in my class freaked out when I said that I didn't think that it was the governments place to decide on the education of our children.
I also think the whole system really fosters irresponsibility. Teachers always say that if they just had parental support then it would be so easy but our system says we'll tell you when to send you children to school, how long they should go, what they should learn, who teaches, how to tell if they are learning,I could go on and on.
I also feel like many of the other students in my class are going to be public school teachers and that they can be irresponsible too. The things we are learning about they don't really have to make informed decisions about. They are going to work for a school that has a set curriculum, books, rules and they don't really have to do any thing but float along.

I would love to discuss this calmly. I am really looking for answers and I know that just reading a post doesn't really tell you how I feel. I am asking in a very respectful, curious manner. I also know that there are lots of wonderful public teachers and schools out there who work hard and make a difference. I am really just asking about the whole system.

[isis]

I would *love* to discuss this with you, but am on my way out the door.

Wondering if you have read any books on the subject (there are a few I recommend, and would like to know of any you may know of).

We have rights as human beings, sadly we are treated more and more as if our rights are actually permissions granted by government.

I have lost a good friend over this issue. I am unschooling (with Waldorf influence) and she became a public school teacher.

[sanna]

Mallory,

For me raising this question (whether the gov. has a right to dictate, I mean be resp. for the education of our children) has been very liberating! The more I myself become educated, the more I see the sad inadaquacies taking place in our public schools. To me they seem more like a large institution which is there in order to 'put' kids somewhere while the parents are working. But while the kids are there, they are being taught many things not worthy of them. And the presentation of it can deaden their enthuisiasum for learning.

I am intending on becoming an educator myself. Currently I homeschool my children, and I am a kindergarten aide in a Waldorf kindergarten. One direction I am considering is studying to be a Waldorf special subject teacher (German). This in itself is a difficult decision as I am questioning even sending my children to any school at all. I find learning to be so graceful done in a natural manner (esp. in nature), without rules etc.. At the same time, I recognize the beauty of learning from different (loving) individuals different things such as music, dance, language, art, clay, etc...

Ideally, community based learning would be the most holistic. Since that is sorely lacking now-a-days, perhaps a homeschoolling network or a Waldorf-based community would fulfill our goals (my families).

I realise that there are many public school teachers out there who deeply care for their students and the work they do. Unfortunately so many of them become frustrated with the formula they have to follow, the overcrowded classrooms, the lack of parental and collegial support, the low pay, the tremoundous amount of kids on drugs (ie; Ritalin, etc..), the poor diets these kids have, the sad fate of broken families, etc...

What to do? I myself could not work within such a system, which by its nature is full of misunderstanding of what children really need. I am all for those who try to create new models of schooling. And if this can be done within the public sector, all the better!

Good luck with your path!

[isis]

Hi Sanna,

How do you like it in the Kindergarten? How old are your children and are any in kindergarten, too?

Like I said previously, I am happily unschooling 2 children. My twelve-yr-old attended K,1,&2 at Waldorf. My daughter attended the Foundation year of W teacher training in utero. She is fast moving out of K age. Meanwhile a p-t K teacher position opened and I have applied. I would love the work- especially the creative aspects of the job and she would love school, but I struggle with the concept of bureaucracy. I soothe myself with the knowledge that they are not a government school, but power always corrupts- even in such a wonderful place.

As with most of my life, what I really want doesn't exist. I need to create it (if only for my grandkids). My ideal would be a cross between a Waldorf and a freeschool, a group of committed Waldorf families working together toward their children's education. There would still be a school day, but not as long as this standard "keep-them-busy-while-we-are-at-work" length. Morning lesson would still be as rich and wonderful as ever, but specialty classes would be optional- this would allow more time for personal interests and nature exploration. Kids are much happier in general in Waldorf schools than I have observed elsewhere, yet many are bored in classes that don't call to them personally, and given a substitute teacher, all kinds of pent-up feelings (from being scheduled and bossed around) emerge. Just like any parochial or public school. Been there!

I can't quite shake the idea that even a well-balanced diet can be force-fed! I want my children to grow up in an emotionally and intellectually nurturing environment where they have time to express their creativity and passions without being pressed on to the next "necessary" subject.
Dream on, I guess.

Meanwhile, there seems like no place better for my daughter and me than in a Waldorf Kindergarten. The Kindergarten is really my model for what any good grades class would be- just add main lesson(!) and leave the afternoon free. As much of a unschooling/freeschool advocate as I am, I still have a deep connection with Waldorf and see myself involved in one way or another. I would love to continue my teacher training. I have no clue whether I will get this job, but if I don't I may just open something up out of my humble home.

[sanna]

isis,
You sound to good to be true! I feel just as you do, about the combo of free (un)-schooling and Waldorf education. That is exactly why I am in such a quandry regarding our educational path!

To bad you are in iowa..?

My children are young, my ds is 5 and dd is 2 1/2 years old. So, when I say I am homeschooling, it isn't quite so, yet. I do really enjoy the Waldorf Kindergarten I work in. My son and daughter both come with me, a real bonus. It is pretty informal, yet very much full of rythym, etc.. My mentor/ their teacher has been teaching for 20 years. And she's great!

I am considering moving to California in order to become teacher certified in Waldorf. Still only in consideration.

Can I send you a PM sometime?

Blessings

[Mallory]

My boys are only 2 1/2 and 10 mo, but we will homeschool. I could never send my kids to public school and the more I learn the more sure I am. I am planning on having my own school (in 8 or so years). I imagine it as a place where we have a set curriculum but children move through it at their own pace. Even to just doing math for a month! I also am thinking mostly about middle school; grades ~4-8.

I believe that if we weren't paying for schools that most people could afford them. I do think that there would be a program to help pay for kids that need $ but with much lower rents and sales tax many of us would be okay. I also think that, though there are expensive private schools, many people would really open schools to help kids and that there would also be many affordable schools.

The size of school districs scares me:eek: In 1960 there were more than 40,000 districs and now there are less than 15,000. How much say can anyones PTA have and how much more power does the government have? ....I have to go sorry
Mallory

[Dot.mom]

I think the gov should be responsible for funding education for all, but should be in the business of providing a full array of choices for all learners. I know this is impossible and once the gov funds something, you have, by definition, a lot more limits on potential than otherwise. As stated in the recent issue of Home Schoolong Mag, "there is no free lunch"

[isis]

I admit that if there were tax-funded Waldorf or free-schools in my backyard I would be mighty tempted. However, I do not trust the goverment to tell me the truth. I would not trust them with my children.

[Britishmum]

This is really interesting.

If the government was not responsible for education, who would be? Ideally, yes, parents. Ones like the wonderful homeschooling parents who frequent these boards.

But what about those parents who could not be seen to be responsible/capable/able to be responsible for their children's education? It's hard not to seem judgemental, and I've thought a lot about this the past few days, recalling some interesting parents from my teaching days. How could the values of these people be reconciled and their children educated, I wonder.

Eg - the father who told me that he knew I wasn't allowed to give his child 'a clip round the ear' if he misbehaved, so I was to phone him and he'd come into school to do it for me.

vs the parent who didnt want her child to ever have to do art or anything remotely messy, because in their house, mess wasn't allowed, and their clothes were expensive - she'd hold me responsible for new clothes if the child ever got dirty.

vs the parents of children who I never had a rational conversation with because they were either in jail or too intoxicated to talk.

vs the parent who told me that he paid his taxes therefore I was to do whatever his daughter, aged five, wanted because she was a 'little princess'.

vs the parent who told me that his child should not be made to sit next to 'dirty Christians' or 'gypsies'

vs the numerous parents who didnt believe that formal teaching should begin before the age of seven

vs the even more numerous number of parents who believed that formal teaching should begin by the age of five

and so on and so on and so on.

Of course, these are some fairly extreme examples, but not unusual - I could think of a few hundred more even more extreme ones from over the years.

Of course, I worked with children of many other parents who shared similar values to one another, but even amongst those there are some differences that would be hard to reconcile without some sort of overall educational policy - eg whether or not, and how, to teach formal literacy/numeracy and at what age. Few people hold identical views on this.

I suppose an ideal is to have a wide variety of community schools so that parents have 'choice', along with those who wish to home or unschool. But beware - there is a great danger of division amongst communities and this approach will often lead to sink schools in one area and 'great' ones in another, and so the social divide widens. Then you throw in the issue of faith schools - a huge debate in the UK right now - and whether parents should have the right to send their child to a school reflecting only their faith. The concept of 'choice' is not as ideal as it might sound - it can lead to further division and social problems. The children of the poor/less influential end up without a great deal of 'choice' at all!

I think there is a basic dilemma here - about who has rights, the parent, or the child?

That is where the 'government' run education system comes in - the rights of children can be upheld rather than purely those of parents. Do all parents know what is best for their children? Are there perhaps others, who work in the field of education, who might know and understand more?

Of course, education decisions are often driven by politics and appeal to voters with 'quick fixes' like vouchers, 'choice', and promises that can't possibly be upheld. But in my experience, teachers are quite a stubborn group of people, and I have seen passive resistance to government 'initiatives' in the past that have led to them being overturned.

I think there is a lot to be thought about here, it's certainly making me think hard!

[isis]

I think the field of professional education, like the field of professional medicine, is an open question, and the history of both is interesting and sometimes disturbing. There have been many dangerous theories hailed then disproven in both and yet it all goes on. I am free to choose the health care and the education of myself and my children, thank heavens!

I am also thankful that there is both educational and medical research going on, and I am willing to consider what conclusions (often temporary) are brought forth. I am glad there are hospitals and schools doing their thing. I only use them when it is necessary. The best education and the best health care revolve around simple, common sense practices that are often lost in their institutionalization. For education: good books, good friends, good discussions, mentors, classes, etc. For medicine: good food, good water, exercise, fresh air, etc. For both: lots of love and freedom to move and think.

Admitedly, I would not agree with the methods or philosophies with which all parents are home educating their children, but unless it is proven that they are either neglecting or abusing their children, it is their parental right to educate them as they see fit. I would not call it the responsibility of the government to choose what kind of education a child may receive, just as I would not want the government to choose what kind of religion a family may practice.

In my perfect world would the government be in the business of educating children? No. Is it a current reality? Yes. I could spend my tax dollars more fruitfully at the private school of my choice or use that money to enrich our homeschool experience. The question of "if the government doesn't educate the masses, who will?" is a question assuming the world was full of blithering idiots before those kind, wise governments started enroaching on our rights by placing our children in manditory government schools. Truly, civilization has a long way to go, but we have come so far in spite of our governments, not because of them.

My humble opinion.

[Britishmum]

Isis, I wouldn't say that the world was 'full of blithering idiots' before the people handed responsibility for education to the government. However, the reality was that many children just didnt get an education - unless you call going down a coal mine or working on the land, or going 'into service' an education.

It is a myth that illiteracy for example, is a recent thing - my grandparents lacked education and were almost illiterate, as were many of their generation. Only the rich and priviliged received an education, either at home or in school.

The question is, what rights do children have to be educated? Our children are priviliged - they have parents who are able and willing to educate them, either at home, or in partnership with a school, over which they have some influence. But for many children, that is not a reality. Ideally, yes, everybody would be equipped with good parenting skills and be able to work with the community to educate their children. The reality is far from the ideal.

My examples in my first post were real examples from my own experience of parents who, quite frankly, would not have been able to educate their own children without the help of a school. I don't see that there is much choice but for these schools to be run by a local education authority, answerable to the government. These schools are not perfect, I'll be the first to admit, but are a far superior option to the 'education' that many of those children would receive at home, or in their poor communities, or none at all.

Were children so much better off before mandatory schooling? I don't think so.

[serenapt]

If all parents cared as much about their children's education, then the government wouldn't have to educate so many children. I taught in public school before becoming a mommy and there is absolutely no way that I would send my child to one. But, there are a lot of parents who don't really want to be bothered with the education of their children - and I taught many, many students whose parents told me that the only reason their child was even there was because the law required it and they would be fine with them dropping out after eighth grade - and they didn't mean drop out and be taught at home, either. And, since I will be old one day and my child's generation will be running the world, I would like to think that they are all at least educated in some way. Most teachers that you meet really have the children's best interest at heart and are fighting a losing battle - one in which the parent's don't care and don't support what is going on in the school. So, the teachers are doing the best they can with the circumstances they are given. Is is sad that it is the governments responsibility, but as more parents don't take responsibility, someone has too. Of course, the government isn't going to be responsible for MY child's education.

Kimberly

[isis]

Britishmum,

I completely agree with you that many people do not care to educate their children (or need and/or desire to work away from their children) and that schools are necessary.

I also believe that law should uphold that education is necessary along with food, water, clothing, shelter and humane treatment for all children birth through age 18.

I agree that in impoverished (or affluent, for that matter) areas, school can be a welcome respite from unhappy home situations. (As in those same areas, home can be a welcome respite from unhappy school situations.)

I agree that teachers in government schools work long and hard to educate their students.

What I don't agree with is that goverment be the creator of schools.

[Britishmum]

Isis, that's interesting.

So who would be your ideal creator of schools?

[isis]

people

[gena]

I taught in a public school for several years and that is part of the reason I am comfortable sending my child to one. I really think a lot of what is said about public schools is unfair. The people I taught with were some of the most intelligent, dedicated, caring people I have ever known. Admittedly, I live in a good school district, and I'm aware that some are not as good, but I believe the majority of teachers are trying to educate children as well as possible, even if I don't always agree with their methods.

That said, I do think people certainly have a right to make decisions about their children's education. But like Britishmum I cannot imagine a society in which everyone was expected to provide for their own children's education. I too saw many parents who were in no way prepared to do this. I taught special education and before government sponsored schooling, and in this country before special laws were passed granting them access, many children with disabilities were not given the education they needed to live happy, productive lives.

Finally I totally agree that people should run schools. Local control of schools is very important, although some basic standards do have to be applied. For instance, requiring access to education for all children regardless of race, religion, disability, etc. One of the most frustrating things for many teachers is to have legislators who know very little about education constantly coming up with new requirements or programs. If teachers, students, and parents in public schools could make the majority of decisions about the school, that would be ideal.

[Britishmum]

Isis, which people, and how?

Gena, I agree that public schools often get bad press, often unfairly. Like everything, there are bad teachers, mediocre ones, good ones, and great ones. I do think that some people have a negative 'blanket' approach to all schools as a result of bad experiences in their own school history. When you have seen a lot of schools over time, you realise that you can't make overall judgements.

[isis]

Who would educate the nation's (or world's) young if the government(s) did not do it, and how ?

What a wonderful question!

Often when people ask questions like this, they are assuming that it can't be done. Frankly, I'm not sure it can be done universally, or even nationally. I'm not sure I will see any kind of change in State schooling in my lifetime, but I am aware of a current revolution in education in terms of parents taking their children out of the standard system by homeschooling and creating homeschooling co-operatives, community learning centers, freeschools, charter schools, private schools and schooling initiatives. This is where all worthwhile change really comes from- inspired and active people, not governments.

As I see more lies yearly, monthly, daily coming through the mouths of government spokespersons, and knowing through average common sense that power always corrupts, I ask myself, how much do I need or want the influence of government in my children's lives? It only strengthens my desire to find alternatives with integrity in my own life and the lives of my children.

Do we really think that in order to have something it needs to be provided by the government? Do you really believe that humans or Americans cannot organize schools without being instucted and controlled by government?

I have some ideas, but more importantly, do you?

[Britishmum]

There is a catch 22 here. I think that we agree that some parents are unable to educate their own children adequately either personally or as part of a community initiative, for a number of reasons.

I'd suggest that the reason is often because many parents personally lack the educational background to do this. I'm not talking about college degrees or qualifications as teachers, I"m talking about the level of all-round education - academic, moral, social, emotional - that makes one able to take on such a responsibility.

I've just finished reading 'Inside the Brain' by Ronald Kotulak. He discusses at length the effects of a lack of education upon people and communities, including poor health, earlier death, aggression, gang involvement, alcoholism, drugs etc. The only way I believe that this cycle can be broken would be by providing high quality education for the next generation - not just from age five or six, but also before, through parenting education and high quality pre-school.

How is that going to happen? I don't see that it can happen through 'the people', when the people themselves have lacked the very education that would enable them to do the job themselves. I can't see any alternative but the government providing this sort of education system. Sadly, they probably won't, and the cycle will continue.

Maybe a solution is to have more parental/community involvement in schools as they currently exist. I am not convinced that 'choice' is the answer. It sounds great - just as school vouchers sound great to many people who resent their 'tax dollars' being spent on a system that they don't use. But I witnessed the disaster of pre-school vouchers in the UK, just as many of us predicted. I spent many hours trying to work with the parents whose children most needed quality pre-school to help them/persuade them to fill out the forms and apply for places. Of course, the well-off who understood the system did really well out of it and probably saved a lot of money!

I fear that the current talk of 'increased choice' will lead in the same way just to 'increased division' between the haves and have-nots.

[isis]

First of all I encourage our lurking friends to put in their 2c worth!

In reply to Britishmum...

Once again you are assuming that all positive change is possible only through government initiative. Are there other ways of thinking? Are there other ways for people to organize? Or are you just accustomed to thinking this way? I am not trying to single you out unnecessarily. My point is, we are so used to thinking that the Government is this magical kind-hearted god-parent who is responsible for all of us citizen-children. I do not feel this way. The nature of power is intoxicating and our leaders are intoxicated. The government is more like a beast which hungers for ever more. More laws to restrict citizens, more power, more money, more influence worldwide. Governments cannot have our best interests at heart because they have no heart. Only greed.

How do we help the poor?

Another wonderful question. Let's continue to debate and ponder, but as citizens let's not forget to do! And not wait for our Godfather to take care of "them". I have been poor myself, and felt fairly devoid of hope for awhile. We did keep afloat by organizing with our neighbors to take part in a not-for-profit food co-op program run through a local church and by the free advice and support of our local La Leche League group.

La Leche League is not a Government run group, yet there are many many meetings in every state. How do they do it? Hey, maybe they are on to something here! This is the kind of thing I am suggesting in terms of education. Yes, people *can* organize for worthy goals. If we waited for the government to create LLL, we would wind up with something overcomplicated, ill-run, wasteful and probably would sell formula. Let's not go there!

[Britishmum]

Isis, I don't feel remotely singled out. I'm enjoying the discussion, although I don't think you are fully understanding what I'm saying.

No, I'm not accustomed to simply expecting that the government is the only way to provide education, although I have devoted my whole career to trying to improve and contribute to the current system, warts and all. It is not always as gloomy a picture as it is painted. I have spent some fifteen years 'doing' something, not just 'debating and pondering' - although what I do is work within the system rather than imagine that in the current real world a national alternative is possible, probable or even necessarily preferable.

I also know that there are many parent/community initiatives that provide alternatives. However, my question remains unanswered. What about those parents/communities who do not have an adequate educational background themselves to make the wonderful initiatives that you dream of? (I repeat from my earlier comment that I'm not talking about degrees or tests or A grades, I'm talking about education in its broadest sense). If you remove schools from goverment control, what happens to them? Who is going to educate those children who are already disadvantaged? I guarantee, not your dedicated Waldorf expert from the community - the focus in many of these communities is survival, not theories of education. Where are the children's rights in all this?

I also have been extremely poor - financially - in the past. But never poor educationally or intellectually, so I don't believe that my sort of experience of poverty means much in this context. You too are literate and educated, so any poverty that you have lived through doesnt sound like it is terribly relevant to the sort of poor communities that I am talking about. In general poverty goes hand in hand with poor educational opportunities. Giving increased 'choice' sounds great, but I believe that the reality would just be an increased divide.

It's this practicality that I'm driving at, not the ideal that many parents could set up wonderful schools. I don't dispute it for a minute - just as many parents become LLL leaders. But the majority of mothers on the breadline don't go to LLL meetings, nor do they train to be leaders, they struggle to feed their children (probably with formula!) and the cycle of poverty, poor nutrition, poor health, poor education continues.

[isis]

So you're a public school teacher! No wonder you're so stubborn!:D

My interest is not in debating how to best help the "poor," but here we are. It seems like such a gigantic problem that has been addressed by better minds than you and I and still not "solved." If the Government schooling system disappeared tomorrow, I would have very little worry for the nation's middle class: they would moan and groan, but would find a way, possibly a better way. (Keep in mind we are not expecting all the teachers to vanish as well. How liberating for them to design, with parents, their own schools, and have no curriculum control from above!)

The rich already have their alternative system in place. Zero worries.

But if govt. schools disappeared tomorrow, what would the lower-middle class and those poor in depressed areas do? Get worse. I suppose that is your point. As a taxpayer, the public edcuation of those in poverty is one of the handful of things I see as worth supporting. And keep in mind I am not advocating the immediate destruction of the system. I am not looking for blood. (Leave that to the Government.)

I have faith in humanity. We, especially in the US, may seem too intellectually and morally lazy for meaningful change, but I think given necessity, we could learn pretty fast. All my life I have lived with sheep, braying at this or that, yet inevitably following the flock. Every time I run up against another system abusing power or ignoring basic human needs I have to ask why? I have ask are there different possibilities? Then I get busy creating alternatives and invite people to join me. More and more I see average people allowing themselves to think differently and it is heartening. Barring tragedy (please, no more of this) all change is an evolution. Evolution toward positive or negative is inevitable and usually is somewhat mixed. I have to stand up against an evolution toward *more* governmental and corporate power and less citizen liberty. Let's get out of the box.

[Britishmum]

Isis, I don't view myself as stubborn. I'd say - thinking, questioning, analytical, determined, resilient, resourceful, creative, open-minded.......... that's why I like to debate.

I'm asking some of the same questions again because I don't feel that they've been answered. I think that the issue of poverty is highly relevant here, and wanted to hear alternative suggestions to the education of those who, as you say, would struggle if central control of education was removed. You are right that the 'upper' groups of society would educate their children, although I wouldn't blindly trust that what they would come up with would be necessarily superior to the current public sector. Private enterprise does not necessarily equal superior service, and again, my question is, who has the rights, the parent or the child?

I too have great faith in humanity. I try in my work to bring about what I see as 'meaningful change', but the definition of 'meaningful' is, of course, an individual one.

Actually, I didn't mean to mislead you. I'm not a public school teacher, although I have always worked in the education field. I don't believe in stereotyping anyone, least of all an entire profession. I have worked with many teachers over the years - from the state and private sector, including alternative schools and home-schoolers, and would not describe them as 'stubborn', they are as much a cross-section of society (albeit from the more educated) as any other group. I don't believe in negative descriptions of individuals, or in generalisations about groups of people.

I bow out now, but thank you for an interesting debate.

[isis]

Britishmum,

Sorry you took offense. It was not intended in that light. I had no negative connotation with the word and I wrote it with a smile on my face. Things were getting juicy. Also, I am about challenging face value, and not about stereotypes.

Thanks for the debate. I have enjoyed it.

Anyone else? Or are we done here?

[Britishmum]

Isis, It can be hard to convey tone through the written word, but it would take more than being called stubborn to offend me!

[Alexander]

The role of government.

In much the same way as the government, through various finacial institutions is the "bank of final support", so too is the government responsible for a "minimum acceptable safety net".

Britishmum is right when she says / implies that it is next to impossible for a populus to educate themselves out of the soup of ignorance in which they wallow. To lift a population from the mire of gross ignorance, certainly government is needed, because it has power and authority.

The real question is, when we have achieved this basic, fundermental level of literacy, what do we, as the society do then?

And this is where both advocates ("pro-government interventionists" and "pro-alternaive educationalists") can be right.

Government is needed to prevent us from slipping back into that morass (heaven knows, we are only just above it), and ensure that the availability of a minimum is available to those unable to make a case for education.

That leaves the people who are better educated to strive for something they see (or consider) better, and those not so well educated but with enough snout to follow those that have a "vision" or "clarity" of what could possibly be better.

As I have said before, we have moved into a new era, and the "old system" of almost undiluted goverment intervention is coming, by degree, to an end.

Hope this helps.

a

[Mallory]

I was hoping you would jump in here Alexandar. I was going to post that isis really speaks for me and does so much clearer than I can, but Alexandar always makes me think.

I still have to write this paper on the benefits of our school system and I am getting nowhere. :confused:
It seems like the biggest reason is for poor/uneducated people but there are many studies that show that poor children leave our schools with little education and few marketable skills. Weather the whole district is poor or there is just a poor population within a bigger school, the children of lower economic levels don't get as good education as children of upper levels. And noone gets a good education- Is that the equality we are always hearing about;)

As I have said before, we have moved into a new era, and the "old system" of almost undiluted goverment intervention is coming, by degree, to an end.

Unlike Alexandar I believe our government is getting more powerful not less. Especially at state and federal levels.

The more government rules we have the less everyone is happy-we can't do sex ed or environmentalism because the far right is unhappy but we also can't do creationism or talk about our all white founding fathers because the left gets upset. I don't think these are things that anyone should have to compromise on and I think our school have to and end up pleasing no one. I do feel that some charter school programs are showing some hope. At least there is the possibility that there is some real choice.

I don't think the issue is so much

about who has rights, the parent, or the child?

But if we can really have equity and still have excellence or if those are mutually exclusive terms:confused:

[isis]

Mallory,

Thanks for your flattering remark. I have been having a very good time with this topic. I have recently been on the surging tide of feelings and ideas that recall my punk anarchy days. ;) (Now, because of e-mail the circled @ has an entirely new meaning!) Oh well.

Question: Are you writing this paper for school about the benefits of pub ed by choice or were you assigned this topic? Just curious. Good luck.



Alexandar- why do you think the time of undiluted govt power is coming to an end?

[sanna]

I have been following you all's discussion with interest. And I relate a bit to everything mentioned from each one of you. It is a valid question as to who would educate the children of this country as it is now, and not in some 'ideal' future oreinted country. I also have many ideas of how and what I believe the educational system can be vastly improved on. But the thing is, that change is a big thing especially here in this huge country. But it is possible, has been done over & over again, and is neccesary.

Change needs to happen in the public school system. There is no doubt. Change happens because of many reasons. One of which is us, here, discussing these issues. Implementing change in our own lives, sharing ideas with others, forming networks of ideas and breaking free of established norms.

Other ways of change occurs with intelligent creative people working within the system. Questioning, branching, lobbying, breaking molds. The charter school system is one such avenue. Also, public school teachers whose interest in education goes beyond the mainstream and who are consciously learning new ways to educate helps.

As more people see others homeschooling, non-public alternative schools, creating new paradigms, they will become broadened in their knowledge of what can be possible. But, like I said, change takes time, and effort from others.

I hope that we have the strength and the time (regarding the planet), to implement needed change in order to live the life that God intended and hopes for us all.

[mama joy]

This has been a great discussion. Thankyou!
I was a special education teacher in the public schools for 6 years, then went on to receive my master's degree in educational administration. That was quickly followed by the birth of my son and I have been home with him since. He is two now, and I have found myself becoming anxious about sending him to a public school. I find it to be such a dilemma, because I attended public schools, taught in public schools and am now certified to be an administrator in the public schools. I would not have come this far on the path of public education if I did not believe that there was value in the concept of public school systems. Yes, the system does not provide true equity in education, yes it is in dire need of reform in regards to making what children learn relevant and enjoyable. Even with the many, many problems, at least they are available to all children. I believe that was britishmum's point, that if the schools were not there, many children would not be educated.
There are many places in the world where children must pay for private education, even the children living in extreme poverty. Many of them do not attend school, or attend for a short period of time. Many girls have their education sacrificed for their male siblings.
Back to the dilemma. I believe there is value in the system and that change must be made, so should I be involved as a parent in order to make that change? I don't know. If all the parents who want change bow out, who is going to lead the pack? It certainly will not be our elected officials. Our administrators and teachers can try, but they can't do it alone. It must be the community, it must be local. Yet, when I think of my son entering kindergarten and listening to a 45 minute lecture on telling time (a story recently shared by another parent), my first thought is, over my dead body.
I hope this discussion continues. I really value the range of opinions. I hope it continues to broaden.

[isis]

Disclaimer: Strong views ahead.

My experience being "educated" in a really "good" public school district was irrlelevant, boring, absurd, unnatural and harmful. I was a "good" student, I got "good" grades, I "participated," got on decently with most teachers, won contests, was considered "thoughtful" and "creative" blah blah blah, did the extra-curricular thing and was college-bound with recommendations.

But from the day I stepped into kindergarten til the day I took home my diploma, I *hated* it. I woke up in the morning hating it and came home everyday burnt out. There were other things I would rather have been doing, and some of the school-related activities I might have *wanted* to do of my own volition if I had been given any CHOICE. But public schools are not about choice, they are not about self-direction, they are not about following your bliss- they are construction-paper decorated prisons. Inside their artifical walls these are the things I "learned":

-How to defer to "authority" never mind if they are fair, reasonable, moral or total idiots. Allow them to "tax" your spirit. (Training for dealing with law and government, paying taxes).

-How to become trapped in places you don't want to be, know there is no early escape (unless you drop out), and make the best of it by faking it. (Training for dead-end jobs, for staying in relationships that don't work, for dishonesty *or* how to drop out and disappear).

-How to hate learning and not to be "too" interested in anything. After being crammed with facts and tested, crammed with facts and tested, you just learn that anything that goes in doesn't need to stay there for long and like bulemia, puking up acid everyday begins to hurt your system. If you actually, despite everything, become interested in some subject or another, don't count on having any time to pursue it. Do that afterschool? Yeah right! After hours of homework you'll have plenty of enthusiasm left. (Training for general apathy.)


When I was in junior high and high school I didn't know a single kid who said they liked school. A common phrase scribbled on folders, blackboards and bathroom stalls was "school sucks." The supressed truth comes out in such places. Try saying it at the dinner table. And then we grow up and we are supposed to be *grateful* for our compulsory schooling, because some kids elsewhere have not been similarly insitutionally enslaved?

So many of us go through the system and turn out "okay," but what does this really mean? Does this have more to do with our immediate socio-economic environment than the schooling? Do those of us who turned out okay not notice all of those who didn't? What is "okay"? Not in prison? Just skimming the surface of life avoiding conflict? Just accepting the norm because it is easier? And is our society doing okay?

There are surely complex answers to this question, but here goes: Where is pre-mature sexuality, teen drug abuse, and the now-popular school shooting rampage coming from? Could compulory public schooling be part of it? If we treat young adults like inmates, and assume they are not trustworthy, why are we surprised when they behave as such?

And yet habit and tradition guide us forward. Moooo.

[Alexander]

Isis,

I think I'm in love.

a

[Dot.mom]

Isis, you paint such a vividly accururate picture. I'm not sure where to begin. I think so many of us have had similar experiences, but with different details. The questions remain:

By trapping children's bodies in school houses as compulsory education currently dictates, can we ever hope to capture their minds? If we could, why would we want to?

[sanna]

I had a pretty similar experience as Isis regarding education. Although I had 3 years in the midst of it that were actually enjoyable (I went to a Swiss boarding school and actually liked it! It was probably the communal feeling which I groved on..).

But then we moved to the US, and my parents suddenly had the feeling that public school was the way to go and was less 'bourgeois'. So, plop, there I was with 4000 other kids (a huge school). I went from being an excellent student to a depressed underachiever. I dropped out just before graduation and got my GED at 17.

I still carry those scars. One of the blessings of the Waldorf teachings I am receiving, is a healing of my own schooling. Of seing what is possible. Working in a Kindergarten has been very therapeutic for me.

Now I am in a place of deciding whether I want to continue sending my children through the Waldorf system, or home/unschool them. My own healing regarding school is coming to a closure. I don't feel the need to promote any educational system anymore. I do still appreciate the Waldorf way. It is a beautiful option. But I question the need to have my children be 'guided' by anyone else at such a level. And I question mandatory attendance. I like the enrichment offered at such schools. But, I am realizing that enrichement can be a thing that my children and I do together. By finding out what is important and interesting for them to learn in the moment. We can always take advantage of what others have to offer. That is friends, classes, traveling, etc..

Going in this direction though is a bit scary I have to admit. It changes my own career ideas first of all. My goal for ages has been to be an educator. I speak French and German and I pictured myself teaching a la Waldorf someday. Basically, thinking along these lines is writing myself out of a job. :)

But I am willing to do this if it is really the right thing to do regarding my children. I still feel that ideally, community is the way to go in educating our children. A more natural flow between one's own family and others who work together at times thru gardening, arts, etc..

I plan on thinking all this out clearly and meditating on it all. This is one persons way of working out what is right for their children's education. Others have their way.

Regarding public and even many private schools and the way they educate, I feel for the many children who may be really unhappy in that system. There are some, and I have met them, who actually like going to school, and I am happy for them. I realize that for them too, things could be so much better, and enriching in a more holistic environment.

But when it comes to the big question of what can be done to change all this.. I refer back to my previous post as to how the efforts of us all make a difference!

[scribblerkate]

Well, I believe the gov't should be involved in education. In funding it, in ensuring that everyone has access to it, in researching and providing the best educational approaches for different learning types, etc. A lot of the early posts actually did not address gov't involvement in education, but the present quality of education in public schools. Those are two very different things. Just because there are problems in the system now does not mean that removing gov't from the equation will solve those problems.

Yes, the community should be involved in education. In most places, it already is. The most invigorating public schools have a lot of parent, community, and even business (that's the group I don't want to see in the schools! whole 'nother thread) involvement, and these schools have energy and creativity.

Also, I believe it is possible for the system to have real choice and creativity without breaking down the system. Public schools can support lots of alternatives. Here in the Twin Cities area, we have public magnet schools based on many different philosophies, and I think more will continue to be added to the spectrum. Unlike, for example, the local Waldorf schools, any student has a good chance of attending these alternative schools within the public system.

We don't need to remove the system from education in order to achieve choice and creativity, we just need to get everyone active and involved. On the other hand, I strongly believe that we can never achieve true access (something I admint we haven't achieved yet, even with gov't involved) if the private sector is left to its own devices. The private sector, even good-hearted individuals and well-meaning charitable groups, cannot get around the fact that education is a public good. I am certain that many would not have access to the public good of education if we did not have gov't involvement.

Finally, since we haven't been able to get individuals or even our society as a collective whole to truly support education to date, what what makes anyone think that removing the system will remove the indifference and apathy toward educating our children that currently is rampant in our communities, and our society in general?

[Alexander]

Originally posted by scribblerkate

Finally, since we haven't been able to get individuals or even our society as a collective whole to truly support education to date,

This is utterly untrue. Sudbury Valley (www.sudval.org/) is one example of many where individuals have come together, with NO outside financing, and created and run an effective educational institution.

a

[scribblerkate]

Alexander, I wasn't really talking about specific instances but rather broader, overall community and social attitudes in the US. It is true that there are some communities that are very involved and motivated. It is also true that within our broader communities, and our society, some individuals are passionate and have banded together to try and make positive things happen. But generally, our society passes the buck on education, and is very apathetic and uninvolved. Even most parents fall into this category.

We're apathetic and disengaged as a nation and education is no exception, sadly, despite the individual postive examples we could all point to.

[Alexander]

Originally posted by Mallory


Unlike Alexandar I believe our government is getting more powerful not less. Especially at state and federal levels.


No. You misunderstand.

I actually agree that Gov. is getting stronger. But in my post, I meant to imply that the role of Gov. should, by natural consequence, be reduced.

Increased role of Gov. only slows down the movement towards democratic schooling, and relevent curriculum.

But the role is still there, even if it is there as a standard for all to see, and to avoid sinking to.

a

[Alexander]

Originally posted by isis

Alexandar- why do you think the time of undiluted govt power is coming to an end?

Every time any political system has tried to centrally control anything, whether it has been the innoculation of the nations children or planning the economy, one thing always stands out.

Significant initial success followed by stagnation.

Whatever a nation attempts, good initial central planning is bound to help get everything off to a flying start. But no goverment, or bureaucracy, has the rescorses to respond to the minutae of society's needs. For that we need the intemate co-operation of the individuals at large to be aware of, and participate in the "campaign".

This is why centrally planned economies (and communism) were so attractive to 3rd world economies. But after reaching a point where "the water flowed and the electricity surged", there are better methods of continuing the growth.

The market economy.

In this environment, people use their creativity, ideas, salesmanship etc to root out the most they can get of the economic environment they can. They exchange ideas, try new things, discard unprofitable practices.

But we (the Industrial Age Educationalists) still tend to think that education needs to be centrally planned! Right in the middle of a market economy that thrives only because central planning went out the window with Rooservelt, and central political planning was withstood from for 75 years.

Now, 30 years + into the Information Era, I feel that there is some inconsistancy in the way we educate.

Hope this helps.

a

[Alexander]

Originally posted by scribblerkate
Well, I believe the gov't should be involved in education. In funding it, in ensuring that everyone has access to it, in researching and providing the best educational approaches for different learning types, etc.


This I heartily agree with. The shame of it is that many with the position to fund change, effect change or encourage change are themselves treading on eggshells, partially unsure of their own moves and terrified of having an accusing fingure pointed at them.

So they fall back upon the old remedies (that are killing the system), knowing that the public at large understand the terminology... higher standards, more testing, better funding.

It is a shame, that not a single US state funds a school based upon Sudbury Valley School (www.sudval.org/), a school that was specifically designed to meet the needs of the Information Era society, and to be funded by the tax payer.

A great deal of money could be saved by encouraging the growth of these schools. They cost a fraction of regular "Industrial Model" schools, and are effective in producing happy, well adjusted members of society, ready to make their mark in the Information Era society that we all now live.

Hope this helps

a

[Teresa]

To make a long opinion short. . .
The government should continue to operate government schools.
Having said that let me clarify.
There will always be individuals and families who need "public" housing.
There will, likewise, always be individuals & families who need "public" education.
I'm glad these things exist for those who truly need them, but if at all possible, we prefer to avoid ever having to utilize either of them.

[Alexander]

Indeed.

And your analogy of public housing is a good one.

Right now, across the industrialised world, governments are are trying to "ensure" that educationally, we all have a garden 10' x 8', while some are able to have rolling fields or a wood, or a pasture.

In the process of ensureing that we all get the minimum, we are inadvertantly compelling all of us to only the minimum.

Many thanks for your input.

a

[anythingelse]

"It seems like the biggest reason is for poor/uneducated people but there are many studies that show that poor children leave our schools with little education and few marketable skills."

Exactly, my feelings that instead of government nannies teaching the children, put the government to work giving educational training to the moms. Trickle down. Teach mom english and she can teach all her kids, give mom hope and you give hope to the whole family. Say, Isis you live near me, are you talking about 4winds waldorf by the convent? We homeschool our 4, could never have afforded the extra $5,000.00 a head for that.
Mary

[Alexander]

Originally posted by Vanna's Mom
Exactly, my feelings that instead of government nannies teaching the children, put the government to work giving educational training to the moms. Trickle down. Teach mom english and she can teach all her kids, give mom hope and you give hope to the whole family.

Close, but no cigar!

What we end up with is government nannying the adults instead of the children.

Furthermore, teaching well is a gift, occasionally learned. Adults who need English taught to them are unlikely to make good teachers of their children.

This seems to be Indaustrial Age education through the back door.

Fail to teach the kids properly in school, shift the burden of responsibility onto the shoulders of (mostly) unqualified parents (read mothers).

We pay taxes for government to provide us with [i]experts[\i] to do this for us.

But the beaurocracy has become too heavy, inflexible and has drowned them.

a