In my libertarian stance, one of the few areas in which I concede to the need for government to spend public money is in public education. A republic of educated people is probably going to do better with respecting rights of individuals than any other alternative. And yet I am easily frustrated by the simple arguments about whether everyone should go for a four year college education or not. To my mind, this question is an obvious red herring because clearly, not everyone who is capable of going through the college curriculum thinks it worthy of his time.
My sense of worry that policy debates in education are getting increasingly pedantic was elevated when I read this article under the title, "Should All Kids Go to College?". Granted that questions like these are often posed so that the author could tackle both sides of a difficult and polarized subject, it is clear that it adds to the confusion. It is abundantly evident that not all kids should go to college because not all kids want to and because one does not have to attend college at a pre-set time.
In conclusion, primary and high school education are worthy of worrying about in terms of the numeracy and literacy of minors. I am not sure that it is a policy issue to worry about the specific drop out rates in college since universal completion at college rates should not be expected. At the same time, the crude argument that there is an inherent and real distinction between vocational training and academic training is patronizing to poor kids and outrightly preposterous. Many people who maintain the argument that certain classes or people ought not to be taken through academically rigorous courses assume that competence is one equals inability in the other and cite the greatly admired apprenticeship system in Germany. Well, they are probably wrong because I have met a German professor of political economy who is also an apprentice in carpentry.
My sense of worry that policy debates in education are getting increasingly pedantic was elevated when I read this article under the title, "Should All Kids Go to College?". Granted that questions like these are often posed so that the author could tackle both sides of a difficult and polarized subject, it is clear that it adds to the confusion. It is abundantly evident that not all kids should go to college because not all kids want to and because one does not have to attend college at a pre-set time.
In conclusion, primary and high school education are worthy of worrying about in terms of the numeracy and literacy of minors. I am not sure that it is a policy issue to worry about the specific drop out rates in college since universal completion at college rates should not be expected. At the same time, the crude argument that there is an inherent and real distinction between vocational training and academic training is patronizing to poor kids and outrightly preposterous. Many people who maintain the argument that certain classes or people ought not to be taken through academically rigorous courses assume that competence is one equals inability in the other and cite the greatly admired apprenticeship system in Germany. Well, they are probably wrong because I have met a German professor of political economy who is also an apprentice in carpentry.
No comments:
Post a Comment