public schools (question inside)

[afleitch]

While I support the expansion of fee paying schools and support for smart, focused and keen kids from low income backgrounds to allow them to attend private schools (in the manner of the UK's gone, but not forgotten assisted places scheme) I don't support any measure to end or sell off public schools; they should adapt, with government money into training children in a manner of disciplines including crafts and manual apprenticeships as well as academic education.

[DanielX]

Should public schools be abolished and poor kids whose families can't afford private schools be sent to the "school of hard knocks"?

No. Public schools should be abolished and poor / disabled kids with an interest in education should be offered vouchers and other assistance in finding a good school, either from a public (state / local government) or private (charity) source.

In such a system, the children most likely to slip through the cracks would be those who would be least likely to do well in a school anyway (ie kids with severe behavioral problems).

There are precedents for this already; in many areas public housing projects  (which are often hellholes) are being replaced by giving families housing vouchers to live in ordinary neighborhoods.

[afleitch]

The 1980 Education Act by the Conservatives here in the UK introduced something quite similar, as I've mentioned above, the Assisted Places Scheme in which children who's parents could not afford to go to fee-paying private schools were granted, on a one by one basis, free or subsidised education if they passed the entrance examination. It changed most private schools from being exclusive to inclusive, accepting children based on merit and ability and not solely on how much money their parents had. My own family made use of the APS and I was began my secondary education under the scheme a year before it was withdrawn (I started in 1996)

The change in my own school was dramatic in the years that followed me. The bright, but working class kids were no longer able to afford to attend and the rich, but dim kids flooded back (which caused the schools overall examination results to dip)

Labour claimed it was an 'elitist' waste of public funds; for some reason equating intelligence, ability and the will to work with 'elitism' (not that it stopped certain former cabinet ministers and big party figures who voted for it's abolition from sending their kids to private schools because they could afford to.. )

[Filuwaúrdjan]

That politicians are often hypocrites is not exactly news

Most Education "reforms" of the past few decades (ie; all parties are responsible) had a largely negative effect on education for the majority of children IMO.

[Richard]

Public schools should be abolished, yes.  Instead, all schools should be privately run and the government may offer $10,000 per child vouchers schools can redeem.  Every child will still get an education, but it will not be controlled by the government.

[gumbiegirl007]

quite possibly one of the most ridiculous concepts i've heard of this week.

[A18]

I'm bored out of my mind so I'm bumping old threads.

Even in the early days of the republic, when schooling was neither compulsory nor free, it was virtually universal (slaves being an obvious exception). It's true that there was some local government involvement, but the system was largely supported privately by fees paid for by parents.

The government schools should be abolished, and replaced with a purely private sector in schooling. Government should, at most, provide for the truly impoverished.

[Undisguised Sockpuppet]

Before even thinking about fixing public schools we need to deal with the destructive gangsta "culture".