🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <1993Jan12.010953.28946@mixcom.com> daniel.offutt <daniel.offutt@mixcom.mixcom.com> writes:
>The parochial schools produce better educated children than do the
>public schools -- generally without resorting to expensive schemes like
>paying children for learning.  Moreover, they do so at a lower cost per

Do they?  Lets say they do, for the sake of my next question.

WHY?

The example used to justify the pay-for-education was "when the 
parents were involved by rewarding the child"  In the case of 
a parochial school, would you agree parental involvement is going to
be higher?

Now, the next question is harder to answer, for the reason that each
parent/child relationship is different.     

If the key (ok ONE of the keys) to a students succes is parental
involvement, how can the government/schools/society obtain more
parental involvment?

>student.  In other words, the parochial schools provide better education
>for less money.  Innumerable economists have attributed this difference
>to the artificial suppression of competition between public schools. 

Not to mention the even more innumerable teachers who will tell you
that the parocial institutions PAY LESS than the public schools.
(education majors reading this, please feel free to chip in some
numbers here....)

>Thus a simple way to improve the quality of education provided by the
>public schools would be to let each child's parents decide which school
>the child will attend, among all the available public schools.  The

And how does this system address 'everyone' trying to put all their
kids in 'the best school in Milw.?'  In a 'truly competative environment'
one answers excessive demand with excessive price.

Please address the situation of 'everyone' wanting to send their
child to school X.

(Now **I** don't have an idea how to fix either the parents who don't
give a damn, nor how under a 'pick the best school' what you do with
the non-picked school.  BUT:
This was a small blurb I heard:  The prob. is HOW the education is done.
The model is based on events of old.  Before the student had things
like television (passive activity) or Nitendo (lots of action, noise,
excitement, ad nausium) etc.  Thus the attention span is much shorter
and the child expects a bit more action than the avg. classroom.
With the new tool of the computer, perhaps the day of HOME EDUCATION
will/should return.

Technology changing education is not new.  Mass-produced paper
replaced the slate each student used to have.  

I'll stand with the idea the model used today for education is
incorrect for the tools aviab. and the way to go is home based
computer driven teaching.)

so there. :-)

comments?


-- 
Marc Rassbach    marcr@studsys.mscs.mu.edu    If you take my advice, that
MS-DOS - it's not   marc@milestn.mil.wi.us    is your problem, not mine!
my problem!     If it was said on UseNet, it must be true.
   Unix - It's a nice place to live, but you don't want to visit there.