Split Thread Does compulsory schooling equate to slavery? (Split from: "Liberal Fallacies" thread)

[RandFan]

1. Which premise? Which conclusion?
2. Please rephrase this. Does this mean "no evidence supports the assertion that the State's threat of interpersonal violence degrades the performance of the education industry"? Abundant evidence supports this assertion.
3. Educational neglect statutes apply to parents. Truancy laws apply to students. Young children do not see the State's hand (fist, actually); they see betrayal by their parents.
5. How does the Gaussian (normal) distribution relate to our discussion? Please elaborate.

1. The premise is that your opponents promote interpersonal violence and the conclusion is that people promote interpersonal violence in spite of the fact that it degrades society. This is sophistry. Loaded language and ad hominem poisoning of the well.
2. I've yet to see any.
3. Loaded language. Asserted. [citations missing].
4. See previous post.
5. I don't know how many times I can make this point to you. My uncle has sheep. Every once in awhile one is born black. A single example of a black sheep does not falsify the rule that in general sheep are white (the normal distribution of sheep are white). So, give me an example to illustrate how the interpersonal violence (which I don't accept but will consider for argument sake) degrades education. Then, explain how that example apples to the typical child in state run education (don't just assert it, demonstrate it).

 

[RandFan]

My parents did not let me stay home and watch TV instead of going to school because they were afraid of the State. They made me go to school because they wanted me to get an education.

My father would have loved to have kept me home to work the farm. He was afraid of the state and I'm damn glad. My father isn't typical but there are enough poor people wiling to put their children to work that I'm damn glad I didn't grow up under Malcolm's ideal. I would very likely have had a menial job my entire life.

ETA: Most parents work hard to ensure their children graduate from state run compulsory schools. I I did and I'm very glad I did. One son graduated from the university and is a programmer. My other son is in college and my daughter is a graphic production artist for a photography studio.

I was so proud when my children graduated. I knew that statistics demonstrated they would have a much better change at avoiding dead end jobs.

 

[Malcolm Kirkpatrick]

http://www.salon.com/2013/08/19/indescribably_insane”_philadelphias_public_school_nightmare/¹
And how did Philly schools reach that low point?

http://www.alternet.org/dont-be-fooled-investors-charter-schools-are-cash-cows²

1. I read this yesterday. Observe that the author does not give the district's per-pupil spending, the trend over time, or the role of legacy costs (retiree pensions and health care). The author does note this:...

The district was hit with a double whammy in 2011, when stimulus funds that it had idiotically been using for operating expenses dried up, and incoming Gov. Tom Corbett took office eager to prove his reactionary bona fides by enacting massive budget cuts to public education to the tune of $1 billion statewide, disproportionately hitting Philadelphia. The result was an absurd $629 million shortfall, which was filled by a mix of cuts and city tax hikes.

The idiots, in other words, were Barak Obama (D) and Ed Rendell (D).
2. Funny: the author spends some time on the relation between the Cato Institute, the Institute for Justice, and supporters of charter schools. Shock! Free marketeers oppose State-monopoly enterprises. This says what about the case for or against charter schools?
Some supporters see investment possibilities in competitive markets in education services? So? Find a government school district where teachers and administrators donate al their time and the author might have a point.

From the article: ...

Brain also told a nice whopper when the anchor asked him if there was any investment risk due to some public backlash against using taxpayer money to pay for charter schools. He claimed, “Most of the studies have charter schools at even or better than district public education.” Actually, most of the studies have shown the opposite: charter schools consistently rank at even or worse – sometimes much worse – than traditional public schools. For example, the Center for Research on Education Outcomes (CREDO) at Stanford University found that students in every single Pennsylvania cyber charter school performed “significantly worse” in reading and math than their peers in conventional public schools. That’s a 100% failure rate.

From Jay Green's blog:...

The next couple of weeks will be an interesting test for journalists who cover charter schools. For years, CREDO’s report has repeatedly been quoted as unambiguous evidence that charter schools don’t work. No one can now do that in good faith. CREDO now finds that the evidence on charter school performance is generally positive and improving significantly.

I make less of the public/private distinction than most, and less of the for-profit/non-profit distinction than most. We are all public citizens and private individuals. The legal difference between an employee and an independent contractor is a matter of who is responsible for certain paperwork (tax withholding, etc.). Unions, even "public sector" unions are private (i.e., member-owned) 501-c(5) corporations. "Profit" is a bookkeeping term: the difference between total revenues and total costs. An organization that has no line in its balance sheet for "profit" must attribute all revenues to "costs". This says nothing about the motives of the people in that organization. The most effective accountability mechanism that humans have yet devised is a policy that lets unhappy customers take their business elsewhere.

 

[A'isha]

1. I read this yesterday. Observe that the author does not give the district's per-pupil spending, the trend over time, or the role of legacy costs (retiree pensions and health care).

If you think those factors are relevant, demonstrate that.

The author does note this:...The idiots, in other words, were Barak Obama (D) and Ed Rendell (D).

No, they weren't. And it's "Barack".

2. Funny: the author spends some time on the relation between the Cato Institute, the Institute for Justice, and supporters of charter schools. Shock! Free marketeers oppose State-monopoly enterprises. This says what about the case for or against charter schools?

That, in Pennsylvania at least, the people in charge of public schools are being paid off by private charter-school proponents, and as a result are gutting the public school system and shifting funding to failing charter schools. The entire budget shortfall could have been more than made up for by the money spent on charter schools.

This is, you'll note, the exact same "cartel influence" thing you're accusing teachers' unions of pulling. Projection, perhaps?

From Jay Green's blog:...

"In the intervening four years, CREDO has released additional reports for six states. Five found gains for charter schools (IN, MA, MI, NJ and NY), while only one found declines for charters (PA)."

Huh. Decline for charters in Pennsylvania.

Just like the article said.

 

[ehcks]

Because "legitimate" means "legal" ...

And legal, in a democracy, means "determined by society to be something that should be allowed."

 

[bruto]

A portion of this thread disappeared into "Abandon All Hope," which is probably where it belongs, but there was one statement that I thought worthy of following up. I can't post that followup to AAH directly, so I hope that if it is inappropriate here, the moderators will stick it there. An allegation was made about the makeup of the moderating team here, and out of curiosity I started a thread with regard to this. It would appear that the allegation is not well founded, and the thread is here:

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?t=264031

Small potatoes in a big slumgullion, but we can only do one thing at a time.

 

[Malcolm Kirkpatrick]

And legal, in a democracy, means "determined by society to be something that should be allowed."

No. "Legal" means "codified by government rule makers". NOT(society = government).

 

[RandFan]

No. "Legal" means "codified by government rule makers". NOT(society = government).

Because it is impossible to remove government rule makers. None have ever been voted out of office.Once in office they have the job for life and never have to answer to the public. No rule maker has ever had to step down. No rule make has ever been voted out of office because the people didn't like his or her behavior. Werner didn't step down. Wiener, Jim Wright, etc., all still in congress because there is no such thing as govt by the people for the people.

 

[Malcolm Kirkpatrick]

Funny: the author spends some time on the relation between the Cato Institute, the Institute for Justice, and supporters of charter schools. Shock! Free marketeers oppose State-monopoly enterprises. This says what about the case for or against charter schools?

That, in Pennsylvania at least, the people in charge of public schools are being paid off by private charter-school proponents, and as a result are gutting the public school system and shifting funding to failing charter schools. The entire budget shortfall could have been more than made up for by the money spent on charter schools.

Philadelphia School Board and State officials were "paid off" by Cato and the Institute for Justice? Really?

From the article: ...

Brain also told a nice whopper when the anchor asked him if there was any investment risk due to some public backlash against using taxpayer money to pay for charter schools. He claimed, “Most of the studies have charter schools at even or better than district public education.” Actually, most of the studies have shown the opposite: charter schools consistently rank at even or worse – sometimes much worse – than traditional public schools. For example, the Center for Research on Education Outcomes (CREDO) at Stanford University found that students in every single Pennsylvania cyber charter school performed “significantly worse” in reading and math than their peers in conventional public schools. That’s a 100% failure rate.

From Jay Green's blog:...

The next couple of weeks will be an interesting test for journalists who cover charter schools. For years, CREDO’s report has repeatedly been quoted as unambiguous evidence that charter schools don’t work. No one can now do that in good faith. CREDO now finds that the evidence on charter school performance is generally positive and improving significantly.

From Jay Green's blog:...

In the intervening four years, CREDO has released additional reports for six states. Five found gains for charter schools (IN, MA, MI, NJ and NY), while only one found declines for charters (PA).

Huh. Decline for charters in Pennsylvania. Just like the article said.

The article said:...

Brain also told a nice whopper when the anchor asked him if there was any investment risk due to some public backlash against using taxpayer money to pay for charter schools. He claimed, “Most of the studies have charter schools at even or better than district public education.” Actually, most of the studies have shown the opposite ...

CREDO is one study, not "most". Again, from Jay Greene's blog: ...

Altogether, the best research tells a consistent story: charter schools are working. In order to find much evidence to the contrary, you’ll need to dig into third or fourth tier research. And you’ll need to invent a justification to ignore the random assignment literature, though you probably shouldn’t bother. Relying solely on third-rate research simply says that you were never interested in evidence in the first place.

 

[RandFan]

Philadelphia School Board and State officials were "paid off" by Cato and the Institute for Justice? Really?The article said:...CREDO is one study, not "most". Again, from Jay Greene's blog: ...

I've no problem with the idea that charter schools are working. I think it is to be expected. None of that is an indication that we should get rid of public schools. Again, you have not demonstrated that getting rid of the public option would be detrimental to society.

 

[Belz...]

Children are not uniform.

No but they are so cute in uniform.

 

[A'isha]

Philadelphia School Board and State officials were "paid off" by Cato and the Institute for Justice? Really?

That's a weak dodge. The article is nice and clear about who was doing the paying off.

Again, from Jay Greene's blog: ...

Considering that this list doesn't even mention CREDO, its cherry-picking bias is pretty transparent. And in any case, it's nothing more than a red herring.

Charter schools don't work in Pennsylvania, despite more than half a billion dollars being spent on them (a sum that could easily make up for the public school shortfall).

Why do you think that is, Malcolm?

 

[Agatha]

Since all four of my children went to independent (fee-paying, not state-supported) schools, and two of them were home schooled from the ages of 14 to 16, you might think my instincts would be to agree with Malcolm Kirkpatrick. I don't.

Even if I did, the ridiculous rhetoric of equating law enforcement with kidnap, assaults and forcible infection with HIV would be enough to give me pause. As a lurker from the beginning of this thread, the loaded language (such as shills, cartels, organised violence etc) is not doing the argument on MK's side any favours.

 

[jimbob]

Prior to child labor laws, Hawaii was thirty or forty feet farther south-east of Japan than it is now. Do you expect Hawaii to lurch back to its previous position if legislatures repeal child labor laws?

What does this mean?

Are you implying that human nature has fundamentally changed in this time?


If you think that children won't be exploited as child labour, then a law against it does no harm. Personally, I am against minors as miners, so think laws against that are good. In other parts of the world there are child miners, so the demand from unscrupulous employers is still there.

 

[Malcolm Kirkpatrick]

That's a weak dodge. The article is nice and clear about who was doing the paying off.

So the biographical material on analysts who support charter expansion was padding?

Considering that this list doesn't even mention CREDO, its cherry-picking bias is pretty transparent.

Or, the list contains primary sources and not summaries.
From Jay Greene's blog: "To date, nine studies lottery-based evaluations of charter schools have been released. Let’s go through them, starting with the earliest work."

And in any case, it's nothing more than a red herring.

Seems to me it's a direct rebuttal to:..."Brain also told a nice whopper when the anchor asked him if there was any investment risk due to some public backlash against using taxpayer money to pay for charter schools. He claimed, “Most of the studies have charter schools at even or better than district public education.” Actually, most of the studies have shown the opposite ..."

Charter schools don't work in Pennsylvania, despite more than half a billion dollars being spent on them (a sum that could easily make up for the public school shortfall). Why do you think that is, Malcolm?

Move part of a district's enrollment from school A to school B and move some fraction of the per pupil budget with them and of course the budget for school A will fall. Unions, even "public sector" unions, are private 501-c(5) corporations. They function as a combination talent agency and employment law firm. They negotiate contracts and oversee contract compliance. I see no benefit to students, parents, real classroom teachers, or taxpayers in a policy that gives to schools operated by dues-paying members of the NEA/AFT/AFSCME cartel an exclusive position in receipt of the taxpayers' age 6-18 education subsidy. I see no benefit to teachers in a State policy that requires all teachers in a school district to engage one specific provider of contract negotiation services. One can make a decent case, on free rider considerations, for school-wide collective bargaining. The same argument does not apply to districts with multiple schools or States with multiple school districts. With teachers and employment contracts, as with curricula and students, one size does not fit all.

 

[RandFan]

Compulsion has malign effects on education system performance for several conceptually separate but interacting reasons.

?

Compulsion kills student motivation (the point of the Einstein quote).

Parents compel their children to attend parochial, private and independant schools as well as home schooling.

Children do NOT know the difference. You admitted that.

Access to compulsion means system insiders do not need to appeal to customers (their audience is assembled at gunpoint), so the system operates more for administrative convenience than for customer (student, parent, or taxpayer) satisfaction.

There is always private parochial schools. No one has a gun to their forcing them to go to state run compulsory schools. The state compels the parents to educate their children. Not go to public shool.

Access to compulsory funding (taxation) means system managers do not need to operate efficiently. Each of these points summarizes large classes of events. Why do schools group students in "classes". Why do schools "grade" students? Consider the dictionary definitions of "class" and "grade".

While I am sympathetic to a number of your concerns and would love to discuss them, what does this have to do with interpersonal violence.

Children are not uniform. Bureaucracy operates through rules composed by remote authorities with no local knowledge. The State's organized violence is a blunt instrument.

Again, I think you have a point but for the life of my I can't see what any of that has to do with interpersonal violence.

 

[Malcolm Kirkpatrick]

What does this mean?

It's a reference to "post hoc, ergo propter hoc".

Are you implying that human nature has fundamentally changed in this time?

No. I'm saying that normally-concerned parents will invest in the human capital of their children. Normally-compassionate humans will support policies that enhance children's life chances. Given the chance, many normal politicians will parasitize the societies they control. As societies got wealthier, in many countries parasitic politicians directed increasing levels of resources into State-controlled schools.

If you think that children won't be exploited as child labour, then a law against it does no harm. Personally, I am against minors as miners, so think laws against that are good. In other parts of the world there are child miners, so the demand from unscrupulous employers is still there.

The demand of unscrupulous State-school employees for children to serve 12-year sentences as window-dressing in the make-work program we call "the public school system" is, unfortunately, still there.

 

[A'isha]

So the biographical material on analysts who support charter expansion was padding?

Um, no?

Or, the list contains primary sources and not summaries.

What does that have to do with anything? CREDO is a primary source, and not a summary. Why was it not mentioned?

Seems to me it's a direct rebuttal to:..."Brain also told a nice whopper when the anchor asked him if there was any investment risk due to some public backlash against using taxpayer money to pay for charter schools. He claimed, “Most of the studies have charter schools at even or better than district public education.” Actually, most of the studies have shown the opposite ...

Except it's not, because that list is cherry-picked and incomplete.

Move part of a district's enrollment from school A to school B and move some fraction of the per pupil budget with them and of course the budget for school A will fall.

And when the ostensible justification for slashing school A's budget like that to move enrollment and budget to school B is because school B is supposed to be better, it's kind of problematic when school B isn't, in fact, doing better after all.

Unions, even "public sector" unions, are private 501-c(5) corporations. They function as a combination talent agency and employment law firm. They negotiate contracts and oversee contract compliance. I see no benefit to students, parents, real classroom teachers, or taxpayers in a policy that gives to schools operated by dues-paying members of the NEA/AFT/AFSCME cartel an exclusive position in receipt of the taxpayers' age 6-18 education subsidy. I see no benefit to teachers in a State policy that requires all teachers in a school district to engage one specific provider of contract negotiation services. One can make a decent case, on free rider considerations, for school-wide collective bargaining. The same argument does not apply to districts with multiple schools or States with multiple school districts. With teachers and employment contracts, as with curricula and students, one size does not fit all.

What does any of that have to do with the failure of charter schools in Pennsylvania to perform the way their proponents claimed they would?

 

[A'isha]

We have already discussed how organized violence degrades the performance of the education industry.

We haven't "discussed" it, you asserted it without any supporting evidence other than a dishonestly-edited Einstein quote that, in its unedited version, specifically and explicitly exempts American and British schools from this degraded performance.

 

[Malcolm Kirkpatrick]

We haven't "discussed" it, you asserted it without any supporting evidence other than a dishonestly-edited Einstein quote that, in its unedited version, specifically and explicitly exempts American and British schools from this degraded performance.

False on two counts. I have repeatedly supplied evidence, in the form of variations in system performance as a function of the degree of parent control (the inverse of government control). Nothing in Einstein's observation on the malign effects of compulsion exempts US schools. The generalization is correct. He had no direct experience of pre-college US schools.