RE: Compulsory Schooling is Child Imprisonment, Part 3
Yes, I support a fully free market in education. This means that all education is voluntary and all schools are private. A lot of people will read that statement and think, "Oh no, only private schools--how will people afford to educate their kids?" People associate private schools with expensive tuition bills because, in our un-free market education system, private schools are very expensive to operate. The cost trickles down to the consumer, of course, which is why even "affordable" private schools are expensive from the standpoint of the lower middle class and the poor.
But think of all the barriers to entry the current state-monopolized education system places on private school options. Their facilities must meet state standards--many of which are silly or unnecessary. Their curricula must be on par with the curricula of the public schools--which is pretty subpar and leaves little room for innovation. In many places, their administrators and teachers must have certain degrees. They must provide an amount of instruction that is usually equivalent to 1,000 hours per year--which all of us in the homeschooling community know is way more than necessary for most students. And they are constantly being hit with more rules and regulations to comply with.
In addition to their regulatory burden, it's important to acknowledge the impact of supply and demand on private schooling. Because the state has created a situation in which K-12 education is compulsory and "free" (we know it's not free, but a lot of people don't make the connection that they're actually paying for it dearly in taxes), the supply of private education options is artificially low. Of course this means that until the demand increases, prices will remain relatively high. If the artificially "free" option were removed from the market, supply of private choices would increase, and market competition would cause aggregate prices to drop significantly. Of course, there would still be private shools with astronomical tuition rates to serve wealthy populations, but there would also emerge affordable options for people at any economic level, in addition to alternative options like homeschooling and apprenticeships. There might also be schools that are funded in a similar way to public schools, but on a smaller scale. Like if you and your neighbors got together and opened a community school, using funds from neighborhood membership fees. Such solutions would not run counter to a free market education system, as long as your participation in the neighborhood covenant was voluntary and you could leave at any time.
It's interesting to look at India, which has a relatively free market education system, compared with most other countries. The solutions Indian entrepreneurs have come up with to serve the poorest families are many and varied. I might do a Steemit post about this at some future date.
Wow! Thank you so much for the detailed response :) It seems you and I share near-identical overall philosophy on the topic. With that said. Have you heard of the children of the forest school in Russia?
I'm in the voluntary semi-home-school, semi - collaborative-community run education systems paired with a exceedingly healthy dose of nature to help children speed up their thinking, develop their own models and critical thinking skills.
I've been introduced to a compelling idea lately concerning 'educating children'. One I would like to share with you and get your input on as well. To help shape my thoughts if you're interested in sharing them!
The idea is simply to not 'educate' children at all. That is to not offer up or force the vast majority of our ideas onto them, thus perpetrating dogma and faulty models. The idea is that the role of a parent or educator towards children is to have the main goal of increasing critical thought and facilitating the children's own development of thought.
So, a system like this would consist mainly of discussion and asking children questions and demonstrating methods to either prove themselves right or have them realize the flaws in their thinking. This way, not only are the children learning, but teachers (facilitators) would be able to learn a great deal from the children as well as some well believed dogma could be proven false. This model would also see a removal of age-based classes, and strict teacher-student relationship.
Before going on... Have you heard of this idea? What do you think of it?
I'm personally in agreement with you about the ideal education for children. Well for my children, and others whose parents are of like mind. My daughter is homeschooled with very limited curricula outside of books and maps and the internet. She has several opportunities each month for educational or social interaction with other homeschoolers as well as conventionally schooled children. And she spends one day a week in the forest with a group of homeschooled kids, swimming in streams, making tree forts, and generally getting dirty.
I have heard of the Russian forest school, though it's been a couple years since i read about it.
The method of raising children to be critical thinkers that you outline is pretty much in line with my philosophy, too, although I would still call it education. The word "educate" means to draw out. Not to cram in. What you're basically describing is teaching through the Socratic method, unless I've misunderstood.
Awesome!! I'm so happy to hear this :) Your children are so fortunate! The generation that will certainly evolve our paradigms!!
From my understanding and from what you told me it sounds nearly identical in function!
Wow! Thank you for that :) You instantly just shifted my perspective for that word :) I love it now!!
I'm just recently (maybe 2 years) beginning to come to these conclusions for the future of my child raising (I don't have any just yet). I am so happy that you are presently doing this and sharing information about it!! Thank you, for doing this, my future children will definitely appreciate it, from the further understanding and example you are giving!