Should school be compulsory?

[Paulclem]

I watched half an interesting debate the other night on education - you know looming election and all that.

One of the points made by a professor - refuted by another admittedly - was that in answer to the question "What are schools for", he said one of their functions is as state funded childcare that is supporting the workers who contribute to the economy.

There is no doubt that this is partly the case, as the recent snow school closures and the resultant hoo hah about schools shutting and parents missing work to look after children testifies.

Of course it's not the only purpose, but it is an important one. perhaps that's why the govt is so supportive in funding education - or is that a vote winner? (Probably the vote winner).

It's just another complexity in the whole complex conundrum that is a school, it's kids, the teachers, the unions, the govt policy, the educational research, the theoretical bias in teaching style at the time, the parents, the geography of the school etc. etc. etc.

But I think it is a key question. One succesful Headteacher made the point that there are things schools can do, and there are things schools haven't a hope in achieving.

They really haven't a hope of solving poverty in the short term in the backgroung, education and circumstance of children. That's social work.

They haven't a hope of helping children with psychological problems - major, (yes I've seen them in an ordinary classroom), and minor. That's psychology.

A school can't possibly solve locally poor literacy and numeracy attainment in parents which affects the attainment of the kids. That's for adult Educators.

Yet all these are potentially disruptve to the progress a school and it's children can make. There's loads of other issues too as well.

Perhaps when schools are free from some of these concerns then they could get on and work on what they really are for, and develop some new thinking.

[Gladys]

I found that part of the whole "gifted" package was that I didn't really need to work at anything to learn it. Learning simply came naturally.

Certainly, the gifted intuitively understand how to learn. But how to learn can be taught, albeit with difficulty.

Perhaps when schools are free from some of these concerns then they could get on and work on what they really are for, and develop some new thinking.

Exactly. The unmet demands on a teacher for childcare, social work, psychology, bullying control, crowd control, and the provision of food leave little time for formal education. There's only so much schools can do, so that parental involvement is usually vital.

If schools were voluntary, needy children would be more likely to miss out, though most get little from school anyway. Nevertheless a substantial minority of the needy do benefit greatly. A sacrifice of the many for the benefit of the few?

With less needy children, the classroom would be a more congenial place. But what would replace compulsory education; how might these education savings be reallocated?

[Paulclem]

Certainly, the gifted intuitively understand how to learn. But how to learn can be taught, albeit with difficulty.



Exactly. The unmet demands on a teacher for childcare, social work, psychology, bullying control, crowd control, and the provision of food leave little time for formal education. There's only so much schools can do, so that parental involvement is usually vital.

If schools were voluntary, needy children would be more likely to miss out, though most get little from school anyway. Nevertheless a substantial minority of the needy do benefit greatly. A sacrifice of the many for the benefit of the few?

With less needy children, the classroom would be a more congenial place. But what would replace compulsory education; how might these education savings be reallocated?

I'm for compulsory education - no doubt about that - but as to the form it takes. There might be the room for creative thinking.

School is economically conveniant -pooled experience, resources, you know where they all are or should be etc.

On the other hand we seem to be in accord that it is a one stop misery for some, and it doesn't do what it is set up to do for a significant minority.

We do have different forms of school here - faith, state, grammar, special, private, and there are the home tutored and units set up for those who have been excluded, or have a specific difficulty like a hearing impairment.

Perhaps on way of coping with the current system might be to have stringent assesments of current and likely sources of pupil problems, and take them out to another unit where they can have costly but targeted teaching/ councilling with a view to a supported return to mainstream in the future.

It might not work with the child in question, or be only partly successful, but the benefits to the school would be enormous. At least they'd get better teaching time.

What was the figure ?% of the kids take up ?% of the school's time?

[The Atheist]

Hey guys,
for those who don't know my background: I'm currently training to be a secondary school teacher in the UK.

Well, very good idea for a thread - we've actually been kicking around similar stuff in The Man's Thread.

Yes I believe school should be compulsory (and also team sports for every child under 16) whilst children could be home-schooled etc I think school has the added benefit of teaching children how to interact with others who may have a differing opinion etc.

Going by the experience of myself and my children at schools for the past 45 years, I found the main thing learned about difference of opinions is that the strongest person's opinion just about always wins.

I'm not sure that the social interaction lessons at school reach the right audience and I certainly doubt that they achieve the right result.

I have a son who was bullied at school so severely that we took him out of school for six months and then started him at a new school.

He was five.

I'm not saying he's typical by any means, but every time I see a kid commit suicide through bullying at school, I stop and ask myself again if it's worth it.

That is why home schooling is really rising here.

Are you sure it's that and not just a reflection of the creationist and white separatist movements - both of which have realised in recent years that homeschooling is a much better way of indoctrination?

I remember. I think there's a systemic problem often. teachers easily feel threatened, not without cause over here, as education is always a hot political potato with accusations of trendy lefty teaching flying around etc.

That's part of the problem, but also almost unsolvable. Teachers' unions by their nature attract socialists into positions of loudest wheel, so it's become cyclical and probably impossible to break.

Perhaps when schools are free from some of these concerns then they could get on and work on what they really are for, and develop some new thinking.

Brilliantly put all through that post.

I'm for compulsory education - no doubt about that - but as to the form it takes. There might be the room for creative thinking.

And because creative thinking costs mucho bucks, a system which struggles to stay afloat financially has about as much chance of getting the money to do it as me climbing Everest.

Even worse, you just know that if someone actually threw a billion pounds at the education system to be innovative, it'd be the biggest ####-fight ever to see who got their grubby hands on the dough.

As you say, teachers have gone from simple pedagogues to social workers, nutritionists and psychologists - tasks to which I don't believe many are adequate.

I remain convinced that there isn't a realistic answer and that the only thing we can do is try to find a school which is worth your kids attending and go for it. I have always taken highly active involvement in my kids' education - crikey, I've washed more paintbrushes than Picasso. I've coached rugby and soccer and stand in the freezing rain crossing kids in the afternoons, but you're still pretty helpless in the system.

When I rule the earth I am cloning you, Paul, and installing you as headmaster in every school on the planet.

[Paulclem]

Well, very good idea for a thread - we've actually been kicking around similar stuff in The Man's Thread.



Going by the experience of myself and my children at schools for the past 45 years, I found the main thing learned about difference of opinions is that the strongest person's opinion just about always wins.

I'm not sure that the social interaction lessons at school reach the right audience and I certainly doubt that they achieve the right result.

I have a son who was bullied at school so severely that we took him out of school for six months and then started him at a new school.

He was five.

I'm not saying he's typical by any means, but every time I see a kid commit suicide through bullying at school, I stop and ask myself again if it's worth it.



Are you sure it's that and not just a reflection of the creationist and white separatist movements - both of which have realised in recent years that homeschooling is a much better way of indoctrination?



That's part of the problem, but also almost unsolvable. Teachers' unions by their nature attract socialists into positions of loudest wheel, so it's become cyclical and probably impossible to break.



Brilliantly put all through that post.




And because creative thinking costs mucho bucks, a system which struggles to stay afloat financially has about as much chance of getting the money to do it as me climbing Everest.

Even worse, you just know that if someone actually threw a billion pounds at the education system to be innovative, it'd be the biggest ####-fight ever to see who got their grubby hands on the dough.

As you say, teachers have gone from simple pedagogues to social workers, nutritionists and psychologists - tasks to which I don't believe many are adequate.

I remain convinced that there isn't a realistic answer and that the only thing we can do is try to find a school which is worth your kids attending and go for it. I have always taken highly active involvement in my kids' education - crikey, I've washed more paintbrushes than Picasso. I've coached rugby and soccer and stand in the freezing rain crossing kids in the afternoons, but you're still pretty helpless in the system.

When I rule the earth I am cloning you, Paul, and installing you as headmaster in every school on the planet.

My wife would probably want to throw in a reality check on that.

I have always taken highly active involvement in my kids' education - crikey, I've washed more paintbrushes than Picasso. I've coached rugby and soccer and stand in the freezing rain crossing kids in the afternoons, but you're still pretty helpless in the system.

This is the same in the UK. If you want to know what's going on, you've got to get in there. It's a pity that all kids aren't supported like this.

[Gladys]

I have a son who was bullied at school so severely that we took him out of school for six months and then started him at a new school.

He was five..

Bullying peaks on entry and exit from Primary School and is one of the worst aspects of compulsory schooling. Children are bullied, become accomplices, or join the voyeuristic bystanders. What's worse, many a school teacher or principal join actively or passively in the assault, inside and outside the classroom. Tragically, most of the bullies are articulate and popular à la 'Lord of the Flies'.

Compulsory schooling teaches bullying if nothing else!

[virginiawang]

Hi Gladys, Though I want to agree with you completely, I do have a slightly different opinion on this issue than yours.
To allow all children in a country to attend school is a perfect idea. If school is not compulsory, chances are that a great deal of children from poor families cannot receive education, though they desire it as much as other children. It is just wonderful as a picture that all kids have to go to school each morning for whatever reasons you know, and they just have to. It speaks of freshness, energy, and all the ideas that are ideal. Do you remember a scene in The Idiot where the prince played around with and involved himself in a group of school kids? I enjoyed the chapter everytime I read it.

[Paulclem]

Bullying peaks on entry and exit from Primary School and is one of the worst aspects of compulsory schooling. Children are bullied, become accomplices, or join the voyeuristic bystanders. What's worse, many a school teacher or principal join actively or passively in the assault, inside and outside the classroom. Tragically, most of the bullies are articulate and popular à la 'Lord of the Flies'.

Compulsory schooling teaches bullying if nothing else!

I think there is a lot of bullying, but it is not the aim of compulsory education, and it does need dealing with. It shouldn't stop what is a very positve aspect of the modern world. I think we'd be in a very different and less progressive place without it.

[The Atheist]

I think we'd be in a very different and less progressive place without it.

No question on that one - education is important from an evolutionary perspective.

Without learning from past discoveries, nothing new would ever happen.

[Gladys]

It is just wonderful as a picture that all kids have to go to school each morning...It speaks of freshness, energy, and all the ideas that are ideal. Do you remember a scene in The Idiot where the prince played around with and involved himself in a group of school kids?

In teaching children, I well remember the brutal contrast between the schoolmaster and 'idiotic' Prince Myshkin:

They were the children of the village in which I lived, and they went to the school there--all of them. I did not teach them, oh no; there was a master for that, one Jules Thibaut. I may have taught them some things, but I was among them just as an outsider, and I passed all four years of my life there among them. I wished for nothing better; I used to tell them everything and hid nothing from them. Their fathers and relations were very angry with me, because the children could do nothing without me at last, and used to throng after me at all times. The schoolmaster was my greatest enemy in the end! I had many enemies, and all because of the children.

[virginiawang]

Hi Gladys, Do you have an experience in teaching children? I once tried, but I failed ten out of ten. Everytime I wished to become an English tutor to kill my time, I was dismissed at the first meeting, in a very polite and indirect way after the teaching session, of course. I never had a chance to meet my student for a second time. It is interesting. I don't know why even now. That happened many years agao. After that I know I can never become a teacher.

Back to the topic which is being discussed here, I wonder where all the kids will go each day if they are not pushed to a school, to learn and to spend time with other kids. What will happen if all the kids sleep at home as much as they like, for example for a whole morning, and eat and watch TV till late at night? That can be a real problem.

[Scheherazade]

The OP:

Hey guys,
for those who don't know my background: I'm currently training to be a secondary school teacher in the UK.
The other day, I had a conversation with my tutor and he said that maybe one day school won't even be compulsory anymore. Unfortunately, I didn't have time to ask him what he meant. There are two possible scenarios:
1. school is not compulsory, but if young people decide against school, they have to do some sort of training or apprenticeship.
2. no form of education or training is compulsory, if young people opt against school, they are not obliged to take training and can stay at home.

I must admit, I rather liked the idea of school not being compulsory, because so many pupils (and parents) don't care about education at all and disrupt the lessons, making it difficult for everyone else to learn. If school was not compulsory, only the ones who do care would show up, which would create a much more stress-free learning environment for both pupils and teachers.
But what would happen to those who don't go to school (especially in scenario 2)? I suspect that these would mainly be the pupils from disadvantaged backgrounds, especially those whose parents consciously opt to receive welfare rather than look for work. I.e. especially those pupils for whose benefit compulsory, free, state schooling was invented would suffer from the abolition of compulsory education. But on the other hand, it seems to be mainly middle class people who care about equal opportunities etc, wile many of those who are intended to benefit from such schemes do not make use of the opportunities offered to them. Generally speaking, I've come to conclude that people eventually solve their own problems if left to their own devices. Whereas if there is no incentive/ no negative consequences, they will just waste their opportunities. So maybe, if compulsory schooling was abolished, those parents would finally realize that their children need an education and would encourage them to go to school. On the other hand, it would probably take a few years, if not decades, for people from such backgrounds to realize this and meanwhile the children would suffer because of their parents' unwise decisions and attitudes. So I'm not sure whether it would be socially responsible to abolish compulsory schooling altogether, because children are not mature enough to decide to go to school anyway and irresponsible parents would make the decision for them.
What do you think? Can you think of any alternative models that would give everyone equal opportunities?
(Mods, please don't move this to the teachers' forum, because I want to get replies from members from all walks of life)

[cacian]

No it should not be because like any institution imposed on use before we are even born it is dictated upon the individual before they even blink.
I consider all institutionalised ideologies dated and will eventually crumble under the pressures that they exercise themselves on the individual.
I am not against learning and the emanciaption of the intellect but I see other better way of encouraging learning and seeking interests.
I feel that schools just like religion politics and marriages all institutions imposed on the individual in that a person is born into them without having a say or a choice on them.

[Monamy]

No it should not be because like any institution imposed on use before we are even born it is dictated upon the individual before they even blink.
I consider all institutionalised ideologies dated and will eventually crumble under the pressures that they exercise themselves on the individual.
I am not against learning and the emanciaption of the intellect but I see other better way of encouraging learning and seeking interests.
I feel that schools just like religion politics and marriages all institutions imposed on the individual in that a person is born into them without having a say or a choice on them.

On many circumstances I seem to agree with you, I have to disagree on this one.

You see, we don't 'realize' the benefit of schooling in our early age. We're curious yes, but curiousity alone will lead us nowhere... or worse, lead us to something bad. Schooling is essential, you can't do without it, you don't realize it until you're done with it.

That's how I see schools, and I agree and urge everyone to go through that one-stop-hell before they go on with their lives =P