Thursday, September 30, 2004

COMMUNIST EDUCATION

"The importance of education is given much attention in countries pulling out of economic, technological and cultural backwardness.

This was the case in the former socialist European countries after World War II. For a short period of time the illiterate population was transformed, schools were opened, and universities were established where the "cadres" learned the knowledge necessary to rebuild countries destroyed by the war, to apply themselves to build factories, roads, bridges, and hospitals. The educational system of the time pretended to provide all with equal possibilities for education. Official policy took measures targeted at the creation of a society in which the principle of ability at work in the education, would be highly respected, in order to develop a polyvalent socialist personality. The socialist countries had millions of graduates at high schools and universities, and the structure of the youth at the time was such that the major part consisted of recently-graduated young people, specialists who experienced social promotion through graduation.....

Two contradictory processes can be noticed in education during this period. On one side, efforts were made to democratize the studies of young people, to create the indispensable management staff. On the other side, a radical ideologization of the education system was established. Marxism and the materialistic view of the world were introduced, including glorification of the struggle between the classes. The selection and procedural criterias of the educational staff thus became political, and the schools and universities turned into arenas and battlefields of discrimination and fights.

This period saw the penetration and domination of politics in all areas of economic and social life. This policy prevailed in everything, so this socialization could not omit the field of education. In practice it was shown that the results achieved in the course of studies were more a consequence of the socio-political status of the parents, than of the personal abilities of the pupils and students. It is possible to conclude that education became the formal means for preserving social stratification and the reproduction of the social and political status quo.

This kind of education system weakened young people and national potentials and deprived the nations of former socialist countries of the most able individuals. Therefore it could not sustain the competition with capitalism, where competitive spirit and the personal abilities of individuals are placed in the first plan.....

The solution to the crisis in education lies in the separation of the school and State; the end of all government involvement in education. The best proof of this is the socialist utopian experience. The seeds are being sown for Libertarian educational reform where Communism once reigned."

More here




MONEY NOT THE ANSWER

Even if both Bush and Kerry think so:

"All the money the candidates are offering, of course, is meant to be a proxy for academic success. Unfortunately, that massive federal spending will produce educational excellence is about as likely as an impulsive child making good on his bribe. Let history be the guide. According to inflation-adjusted data from the National Center for Education Statistics, between 1965 and 2002, federal expenditures on education exploded from $25 billion to $108 billion, and inflation-adjusted per-pupil spending in America's public schools tripled. Nonetheless, according to the U.S. Department of Education's "No Child Left Behind: A Guide for Policymakers", since 1965 "test scores nationwide have stubbornly remained flat."

"Ah," but Bush would explain, "these results preceded the days of accountability: NCLB ensures the money will be put to good use by making states set performance standards and by demanding those standards be met." Unfortunately, reality suggests that NCLB is actually inducing states to lower their standards. Consider Michigan: It had relatively high performance standards prior to NCLB, but lowered them in 2002 when 1,500 of its schools were identified as "needing improvement" while Arkansas, whose students typically do much worse academically, had no schools on the list. And then there's Washington State, for which the "Seattle Post-Intelligencer" reports that "[t]he list of schools in the federal doghouse likely would be much longer had state officials not lowered the minimum scores students need to meet standards in math and reading...." So much for the promise of "accountability."

Sadly, Kerry presents no options that are better than NCLB. Although he has endorsed minor reforms like tying teacher pay to performance, Kerry's plan is basically the same old school yard deal: Offer billions of dollars to "fully fund" our education system--despite the fact that we already spend more per student than any other industrialized country--and hope the votes come in.

More here.





HOME-SCHOOLING IN BRITAIN

Sean Gabb has just written a big summary of the state of home-schooling in Britain. This excerpt from his summary of the legal situation may be of particular interest:

"As it currently stands - in September 2004 - the law does not require parents to register their children with any school; and, within the defined meaning of "suitable" they can provide their children with whatever education they please. Parents who wish to teach their children at home are not legally required:

*to seek permission from the Local Education Authority to educate "otherwise";
*to inform the Local Education Authority that they have children of school age;
*to have regular contact with the Local Education Authority;
*to have premises equipped to any specified standard;
*to have any teaching or other educational qualifications of their own;
*to cover any specific syllabus;
*to have any fixed timetable;
*to prepare lesson plans of any kind;
*to observe normal school hours or terms;
*to give formal lessons;
*to allow their children to mix with others.

Sections 437-443 of the Education Act 1996 oblige Local Education Authorities within England and Wales to take action if it appears that a child is not receiving a "suitable" education. If it established that a child is not receiving a "suitable" education, the Local Education Authority may serve a notice on parents requiring them to establish that such an education is being provided. However, in the case of R v Gwent County Council ex parte Perry (1985), the courts held that the Local Education Authority should give parents "a fair and reasonable opportunity to satisfy it that proper education is being provided, having first allowed a sufficient time to set in motion arrangements for home education". But failure eventually to comply with this notice may be followed by a school attendance order. This may be challenged in the courts, which will dismiss the notice if shown - on the balance of probabilities - that the child is indeed receiving an education that a reasonable person would consider to be "suitable".

This legal duty placed on Local Education Authorities applies only where children appear not to be receiving a "suitable" education. Where no evidence is available that they are not receiving such an education, they have no legal right to seek information from parents. This is not an absolute bar on making enquiries. In the case of Philips v Brown (1980), the courts held that the Local Education Authority is entitled to ask parents for information as a basis for making the decision as to whether the education they are providing is efficient. If the parent fails to provide information, it could be concluded that prima facie the parents are in breach of their duty.

But the Local Education Authority is not allowed to specify the nature and presentation of such information. Nor can they carry into their enquiry assumptions and expectations based on their experience of formal schooling".

***************************

For greatest efficiency, lowest cost and maximum choice, ALL schools should be privately owned and run -- with government-paid vouchers for the poor and minimal regulation.

Comments? Email me here. For times when blogger.com is playing up, there is a mirror of this site (viewable even in China!) here

***************************

No comments: