What is the purpose of public education?

I agree with your sentiments. Some of those things school does well and some of them not so much.

Our precepts behind education are locked in the 19th century.

To make people a stupid enough they vote for Republicans?

All of the above, of course.

People need marketable skills in order to function in an economic society. Schools teach the methods of acquiring more skills (reading and basic arithmetic first, including the methods for learning those things: study and drill).

We need to learn our own culture, and it’s helpful to learn others as well in order to function smoothly “in the whole world”. We get some by osmosis, but it’s better to get more with understanding and comprehension of where and how we came by our culture, which is where history also comes in.

Reasoning and problem-solving skills come from “more” eduction, including attention to problems of more complexity – and art, literature, music and drama, where students can learn to synthesize the basic things they have learned elsewhere (assuming they have) and invent and build new things – including new modes of expression and communication, new art and music, and new treatments of the same human conditions we’ve all experienced in all of human history.

Critical thought is important so that we don’t all have to re-invent the wheel by discovering the hard way that dragging things across the ground isn’t as easy as building a cart and using that to transport our goods and our selves instead – and every other painful lesson that we’ve learned. If we can read and understand from our reading why we do things the way we do them now, then we don’t have to learn “everything”. It also helps in debunking political claims, which is how I know that we don’t teach this any more, because so many people still believe in politicians.

Don’t forget gym class: to keep our bodies healthy enough to support our brains for a long life.

They’re all good points. I’d also like to add that the institution of education functions to socialise children to behave in a particular way. For example, to obey authorities, to be on time, how to share, how to listen, how to speak.

School allows children to interact with each other and build bonds with others of their generation. It prepares them not just for the workforce, but to be a member of a community.

It’s far more fundamental than being able to make a living. In a modern world people need to be able to read. Everything revolves around it.

Sometimes it’s had to predict which knowledge will actually be utilized later on. It makes sense to acquire far more than actually needed later in life.

I agree, life-long learning is key. Therefore young people need to learn how to learn.

I think many principals talked about here have to start way before most kids step into a classroom. If parents don´t start off the process of learning and set the basis for social interaction, a school environment will never be able to. If kids aren´t taught certain things by the age of 3, they either never will, or will always be catching up.

@cazzie Do you know of studies that demonstrate this? I actually am much more concerned the high school, the children being prepared to go out in the world or onto college. I think all children need to be stimulated from the age of zero, but ai don’t think it makes much difference if a child starts school from age 3 or 6, studies show it all evens out by grade 3, especially little impact by high school. I started kindergarten at 4, nursery school at 2.5. Many kids did not start kindergarten until 6, for some it was their first time in school, I don’t think there was much difference in learning.

I only mention this because when it comes to public education I want the finite amount of money spent where it helps the most. Now, if the parents are total wastes, I guess maybe getting the children at a young age in a stimulating environmentis better than nothing, but in America studies are showing that even with those children they still get all screwed up like their peers.

@LostInParadise What do you think about public education helping children who are mentally disabled, ensuring them an education. I know some teachers who complain it can be disruptive in classes if they are mainstreamed with the other children. Public education is for the masses, which also means it probably is not great at helping the very advanced or the very behind, should we spend dollars on those kids?

I think your orginal points were great. I want more support and hand holding to help kids apply to visit and apply to universities. I also want vocational education and guidance in high schools for those who will not go to college. Moreover, I would like a fast track, high school in three years, for those who hate school, but are smart enough to get through. I think it would cure some of the drop out problems.

@JLeslie , You raise some interesting points.
Somebody should look into the benefit of mentally disabled students being mainstreamed. If they get something out of it then fine, but if they don’t and are just disruptive then it does not make sense to teach them with the others.

I am all in favor of vocational education. Maybe it will lose some of its stigma as more desk jobs get outsourced. It might be a good idea to work with local industry to set up apprentice level summer jobs. It would be great for the students to get some real world work experience and, whatever other benefit the companies get, it would be great PR for them.

Something else I thought of. As has been mentioned, people should be taught how to work in groups, in both leadership and member roles. I know that what was called civics was once taught and I think it would be a good idea to revive it. It should be taught at a personal level. People should know about how to get in touch with their local congressional representative and how to write a letter to the editor. I would also mention getting involved in local government. It would be instructive to have a class visit an open meeting of the local government.

@LostInParadise We had apprenticeships in my high school. Kids actually got some credit for it I think? Not sure. It was in fields like auto mechanics. We also had cosmetology at my school, at the end of high school they could take their state test and be licensed, possibly they apprenticed as well?

My worry is that in the media so much is emphasized about needing a higher education to compete, but a large portion of the American population does not get a college degree. I hate this constant message that without a degree you are nothing. It depends on the career, and all people should feel respected for a hard days work. At the same time, I want it to be more affordale for students who want a college education to get one. Tuition seems astronomical, it can’t really be necessary for it to be that high, can it?

Also, just wanted to say I do not lean one way or the other on educating disabled or excellerated students, just wondered what you thought. I didn’t want it to sound like I wanted to get them all out of the class, I am not sure what I think.

We had a pretty good discussion of it here. The purpose as it stands now is to make adults that work and conform, not question or challenge the status quo.

Sorry I missed that discussion. There is unfortunately truth to what you say, but in posing the question I meant what the purpose should be from your personal point of view.

@LostInParadise Oh, to build open minds ready to challenge the status quo. Education’s boundaries should be limitless.

I wonder what public education would be like if it were kept on a small scale. Small classes starting in the home. Then moving on to outside influences like our neighbors, local businesses, parks, libraries, movies, hospitals, nursing homes, grocery stores, zoos, rivers, electric plants, water plants, wildlife refuges…we wouldn’t need outside influences except ourselves and the local community. We could explore the world from our own back porch. Hmmm, wonder if that’s how the Internet got started?

@bkcunningham Although I am all for homeschooling, generally I think education in the US should be less local at this time in our history. I want every child to have the opportunity to go to the same universities or have the same opportunity to pursue a career they are interested in. A small town in a remote area will be less likely to give a child in that community a chance at Harvard compared to the child in a wealthy suburb outside of Boston ifnthere are not basic standards around the country. I want education more level more equal.

The internet was invented first by the military for communication purposes.

Well whose teaching them in public schools @JLeslie? I know many, many men and women with college educations who have taught their children many, many things. I know your dad went to Harvard. Both he and you should be very proud. But, I suppose my point is, who started Harvard? Why is it one of the finest universities in this country? Just simple folks like you and me and other wonderful people in Flutherworld.

@JLeslie Your ‘internet was invented by the military’ is not accurate.

My dad did not go to Harvard. He did go to an Ivy league for his PhD, but he went to free city college for his undergrad. He was very poor. What made it possible for him to go to college was a school system that understood the type of prep necessary for college. I think there are many paths to a good education, my only point was I want all children in the US to have a reasonable opportunity to utilize what our country has to offer.

@cazzie What is the background then? That is what I thought. I’m interested in the history.

Here is the wikipedia on the history of the internet.

In my opinion, freedom of religion and socially/politically can only thrive in an informed society. An informed society requires reading at least a 12 year old level, and the ability to reason. These are the skills schools try to teach.

I thought it was Al Gore?

Just to be clear I am commenting on public education. I am fine with home schooling and local education. I don’t think everyone has to get a college degree. If a family of homesteaders with 10 children choose to live on a few acres, grow fruits and vegetables, hunt deer and raise chickens, living off their land to sustain themselves and utilizing what they harvest to barter for other goods, I have absolutely no problem with it. Everyone should be able to choose their life. But, if one of the children is fascinated with journalism, or has a yearning to move to the big city, maybe work on wall street, I want this child to have the opportunity, if his parents are unable to provide the needed education, to go to a public school that gives him the tools he needs to fulfill his personal goals and dreams.

It is a question of liberty for the individual in my mind, that each American child should have a chance to pursue their dreams, be provided the same opportunity. It is not for the public system to tell them what they should want.

The question is about public schools, I am not saying everyone has to go to a public school, or fit a particular mold.

Do you mean, ”...if his parents are unable to provide the needed education to go to a public school that give him the tools he needs…” @JLeslie?

Yes, thank you.

[mod says] This is our Question of the Day!

The main purpose for the public education is to prevail awareness for community development.

…prevail awareness makes no sense.