Why do children have to go to school?

Jimoslimos · 12-09-2011 02:10AM

Chuck Stone wrote: »

Actually, if you think about it, since children were forced to go to school there have been massive world wars where millions and millions of people have been killed.

So could I make the argument that school failed to teach people not to kill each other on an industrial scale?

Oh dear......I've made this argument before and not for the last time,

Correlation =/= Causation

If this was 200 years ago you might be asking "why do children have to work in unsafe industrial revolution factories and risk killing or seriously maiming themselves?" Which is worse??

Liam Byrne · 12-09-2011 02:14AM

Aoifey! wrote: »

whywonder wrote: »

As far as I'm aware, you can choose to home-school your children.

You can, but it's very rare in Ireland.

Rare =/= impossible

Therefore the entire premise behind the OP's question - the "have to" - is false.

/thread

Chuck Stone · 12-09-2011 02:14AM

Fremen wrote: »

Historically speaking, weren't those same institutions a bazillion times more authoritative under communism?

And what if communism would have won the cold war? We might have thought that communism was the way to do things.

For the record I think communism is always doomed to failure. You just can't plan for the needs and desires of many people.

longhalloween wrote: »

What child likes school?

None.

Yes, kids seem naturally averse to being sent somewhere they don't want to go. That's a completely normal reaction imo.

As a result the population would be largely illiterate and lacking in basic arithmetic as it was BEFORE the education was enforced.

This ^^ is an assumption. Most people who leave school never pick up a book again. Who's to say that people who have no interest in school would not be just as happy if they'd never attended?

Incidentally it was also this time when war/famine/disease/zealotry/political upheaval/ injustice/ lawlessness was more prevalent.

As I said before much advancement was made before children were forced to go to school. AFAIK forced schooling is a relatively new thing (~1900?). It's impossible to say if forced schooling has advanced society.

And you think enforced education is a bad thing?

I don't know if it is or not. That's why we have this thread!

Fremen · 12-09-2011 02:17AM

digme wrote: »

Most children are out playing at that age and interact just fine.

In a disciplined setting though. This includes long periods of sitting down and working.

PseudoFamous · 12-09-2011 02:18AM

1. To free up workers:
It makes sense for one person to teach 25 kids, rather than one parent teach 2/3 kids. This frees up workers, enabling the economy to reach a higher GDP, and give a larger amount of income to families due to more than one or no parents working.

2. Parents likely will be unqualified to teach:
As most parents will likely be unqualified or unsuited to educating their children, it makes more sense to allow a specialist to educate them, as they will clearly understand how to teach children more effectively.

3. To give children essential skills:
Literacy and numeracy are vital in any intelligent society, if children did not attend school (Not today, the first generation who did), literacy and numeracy would be minimal.

4. Without basic skills, specialisation cannot occur:
In educating the entire population, more of the population can specialise in an area of study, further enhancing human knowledge in medicine, engineering, as well as agriculture, mathematics and communication.

5. To encourage socialisation:
Kids who live in rural areas may be less likely to socialise without school, due being made to work on a farm with their parents without any other occupation.

That's all I can think of at the moment, but I'll think of more some other time. If someone who knows something about economics could jump in, that'd be great.

Greentopia · 12-09-2011 02:20AM

Chuck Stone wrote: »

Nice reply. There's definately something sinister about the whole thing imo.

I lol'd.

Sinister indeed.
Have you read Platos' Republic? he describes how a stable stratified society can be created within a few generations throught the use of a magnificent myth. (He states in his example a mythology that all men are born of the earth, but are constituted of different kinds of metal-gold-the leaders; auxiliaries and military-silver, farmers and peasants-bronze and iron. There's some social mobility at birth but essentially very little.
It's what he called the 'Noble Lie'.

This 'noble lie' so to speak is what has furthered the ultra-materialistic mythology born in the factories, schools, and prisons of capital.
It has become the most subtle and overarching lie in human history.
It's a lie you see that had to be accepted by persecutor and persecuted alike and that's exactly what has happened.

It's no accident that the factories, schools and prisons of the industrial revolution had a family resemblance-it's because these institutions, beyond any other-that ensured the sucess of the dominant puritan work ethic.

It's fascinating to read about this stuff and understand the roots of these systems which control us. Crucial as well I believe as it's the first step on the road to real freedom. Self-employment and the rejection wage slavery has been my route out of it...but that's another story...

Fremen · 12-09-2011 02:20AM

Greentopia wrote: »

Oh you think I'm making a case for communism? :pac: no, sorry. I don't favour any authoritarian systems of Government like communism as practiced in countries like Russia, Cuba etc, or capitalism or any system that seeks to enslave and brainwash the masses.
And that's all I'll say as this is AH not Politics

Then perhaps you (or possibly foucault, though I haven't read him) shouldn't have singled out capitalism. And that's all I'll say on the matter.

Chuck Stone · 12-09-2011 02:22AM

Jimoslimos wrote: »

Oh dear......I've made this argument before and not for the last time,

Correlation =/= Causation

Your stance betrays you. Why don't you apply this rigour to people who say we wouldn't be as advanced only for forced schooling?

Better still, why don't you answer the question in the OP rather than trying to find holes in views which don't conform to your world view?

If this was 200 years ago you might be asking "why do children have to work in unsafe industrial revolution factories and risk killing or seriously maiming themselves?" Which is worse??

Irrelevant.

Liam Byrne wrote: »

Rare =/= impossible

Therefore the entire premise behind the OP's question - the "have to" - is false.

Moot point. People must seek permission to home school. It's not exactly a chioce. Also I think that people must display that they are indeed educating their kids to an acceptable standard in the eyes of the state.

That is hardly chioce.

/thread

Gonna school you and tell you that this is not your call.

longhalloween · 12-09-2011 02:25AM

Chuck Stone wrote: »

This ^^ is an assumption. Most people who leave school never pick up a book again. Who's to say that people who have no interest in school would not be just as happy if they'd never attended?

I disagree with that. Everyone I know has gone on to do further study after school and everyone I know has read books.

But it's not just books. I can't imagine how difficult it would it would be to not be able to read or write. You wouldn't be on this site if you never learned to read. They are fundamental methods of communication and in a technological age arguably more important that speech.

Chuck Stone wrote: »

As I said before much advancement was made before children were forced to go to school. AFAIK forced schooling is a relatively new thing (~1900?). It's impossible to say if forced schooling has advanced society.

More like 1930's- 40's

The last epidemic in Europe was the Flu Pandemic in 1918

The last war in Europe ended in 1945.

The last famine was our own in 1845.

Things have been going pretty well for us lately.

Contrast this to the rest of the world where education is not encouraged or enforced. We're a first world nation BECAUSE of our education.

Mickeroo · 12-09-2011 02:29AM

As well as the learning/social aspects I think a big part of it is to prepare kids for the old 9 to 5 when they get older, it basically gets them used to going to work from an early age which in turn gets them to integrate as functional members of society.

policarp · 12-09-2011 02:31AM

Chuck Stone wrote: »

I think it's, frankly, a bit weird forcing children of 4/5 years of age to go anywhere even if it is a place where they are taught stuff which they may or may not want to learn.

At that age it's the parents choice what the child is taught. The child has no say in their future, be it religion, sport, politics, music or any other lifestyle choice until they are 16,then they can sort their own lives out.

Chuck Stone · 12-09-2011 02:35AM

longhalloween wrote: »

I disagree with that. Everyone I know has gone on to do further study after school and everyone I know has read books.

3rd level is entirely by choice. Also, it's impossible to say whether people will want to learn with or without forced schooling.

I have a knowledge hungry mind and therefore I truly believe that with or without the forced part of my education I would have sought knowledge.

But it's not just books. I can't imagine how difficult it would it would be to not be able to read or write. You wouldn't be on this site if you never learned to read. They are fundamental methods of communication and in a technological age arguably more important that speech.

That still doesn't explain why 'we' force 4-year-olds to leave the safety of their family home so they are at the mercy of people we don't know... actually it sounds quite cruel when I think about it.

Things have been going pretty well for us lately.

For us westerners and humans perhaps but for everyone(thing) else it's not so clear cut.

Chuck Stone · 12-09-2011 02:38AM

Mickeroo wrote: »

As well as the learning/social aspects I think a big part of it is to prepare kids for the old 9 to 5 when they get older, it basically gets them used to going to work from an early age which in turn gets them to integrate as functional members of society.

So you think it's just training for the corporate world?

That's handy for the corporate types. Getting the state to train the young'uns to be compliant for the work place.

Yuck.

Greentopia · 12-09-2011 02:40AM

Fremen wrote: »

Then perhaps you (or possibly foucault, though I haven't read him) shouldn't have singled out capitalism. And that's all I'll say on the matter.

He didn't 'single out capitalism', he cogently and brilliantly explained the mechanisms of power, hierarchy, and punishment which are used by the carceral system of schools, prisons particularly in his book, factories etc which are capitalist institutions after all, how the disciplinary techniques used in them created our modern society with it's submissive populace, as I've said.

His book is much more complex than that but I'm tired and my brain hurts so I'm off to bed.

zenno · 12-09-2011 02:41AM

scooby2791 wrote: »

Going out on a limb here, but I'd imagine it would be to learn things?

well imagine that. I hardly ever went to school, in fact I don't think I ever spent more than 15 minutes in any class as I had my own interests instead of been force-fed out of date junk.

the o.p has a question and it might be an unusual one to some people but for me it makes sense as I have learned advanced computer skills in hardware/software and electronics and a lot of other neat stuff, but I thought myself without the help of school or anyone out there. I teach myself so the o.p has a valid point as I succeeded i'm sure millions of others have as well.

Pherekydes · 12-09-2011 02:50AM

Chuck Stone wrote: »

No.

I will accept a good argument.

Because children are easier to brainwash than adults.

Why do you think?

longhalloween · 12-09-2011 02:50AM

Chuck Stone wrote: »

3rd level is entirely by choice. Also, it's impossible to say whether people will want to learn with or without forced schooling.

I have a knowledge hungry mind and therefore I truly believe that with or without the forced part of my education I would have sought knowledge.

Maybe, but do you think that everyone else shares your insatiable curiosity to learn? Because I don't.
Granted there are people who lack formal education but went on to great things, but these are a tiny minority.

Also, good luck trying to learn when you're illiterate, and everyone around you is too. That kind of environment doesn't foster the urge to learn. Intellectuals often get bullied by those less intelligent.

Chuck Stone wrote: »

That still doesn't explain why 'we' force 4-year-olds to leave the safety of their family home so they are at the mercy of people we don't know... actually it sounds quite cruel when I think about it.

That comment borders on paranoia. So instead of forcing your child into education you are restricting him from exploring the world for fear of the unknown? That seems more cruel.

Chuck Stone wrote: »

For us westerners and humans perhaps but for everyone(thing) else it's not so clear cut.

That's exactly the point I was trying to make. Our education has benefited us, maybe not everyone else but hey, what can ya do :rolleyes:

policarp · 12-09-2011 02:53AM

Reading Riding and Ritmatic. . .

Chuck Stone · 12-09-2011 02:53AM

zenno wrote: »

the o.p has a question and it might be an unusual one to some people but for me it makes sense

Those people who thanked the 'to learn stuff' reply are not the kind of people I would want teaching children personally.

Imo critical questions from children should be given due regard. I mean is there any parent out there who can answer their kid honestly who says

'why do I have to go to school'

Has any parent ever said

'because I will be punished if I don't'

It's just one of those things we accept as being normal without really thinking about it.

I think questioning things which we think are normal is healthy.

Pherekydes · 12-09-2011 02:56AM

Greentopia wrote: »

Sinister indeed.
Have you read Platos' Republic?

Come on, his name was Plato.

longhalloween · 12-09-2011 03:02AM

policarp wrote: »

Reading Riding and Ritmatic. . .

If that was your experience in Primary school you have my deepest sympathies

PseudoFamous · 12-09-2011 03:03AM

Chuck Stone wrote: »

Those people who thanked the 'to learn stuff' reply are not the kind of people I would want teaching children personally.

That's excellent, because they likely wouldn't unless large scale schooling didn't exist. +1 for large scale education from you, so.

Chuck Stone wrote: »

Imo critical questions from children should be given due regard.

To an extent, but children tend not to understand or want the answers to their own questions. They want to hear their "opinion". Try convincing a kid who wants sweets otherwise.

Chuck Stone wrote: »

I mean is there any parent out there who can answer their kid honestly who says

'why do I have to go to school'

Has any parent ever said

'because I will be punished if I don't'

I can remember asking my Dad that when I was young, and he answered "So you can get a job and take care of a family if you decide to". Pretty heavy stuff to put on a child, but I think that his answer was completely and utterly true.

Chuck Stone wrote: »

It's just one of those things we accept as being normal without really thinking about it.

I think questioning things which we think are normal is healthy.

Definitely, but after thinking about it, I've come to the conclusion that the current system of education is indeed better than it's alternatives.

zenno · 12-09-2011 03:04AM

longhalloween wrote: »

Granted there are people who lack formal education but went on to great things, but these are a tiny minority.

I don't believe this assumption as young kids have a very active imagination and interests at this young age and it would be good for parents to spot their gifts in what they are good at or interested in and focus and help the kid in this regard instead of forcing the kid off-track into forced learning of which could melt the kids mind in some regards. this is how I managed to learn myself as my parents knew I had a fascination with taking radios and other electronic things apart trying to see how they worked and it payed off. parents should see and help the child along in his/her interests and that will be a very beneficial learning experience in time.

longhalloween · 12-09-2011 03:04AM

Chuck Stone wrote: »

I mean is there any parent out there who can answer their kid honestly who says

'why do I have to go to school'

Has any parent ever said

'because I will be punished if I don't'

I think a better answer would be 'so you can get a good job, provide for your family and enjoy life to the fullest'

zenno wrote: »

I don't believe this assumption as young kids have a very active imagination and interests at this young age and it would be good for parents to spot their gifts in what they are good at or interested in and focus and help the kid in this regard instead of forcing the kid off-track into forced learning of which could melt the kids mind in some regards. this is how I managed to learn myself as my parents knew I had a fascination with taking radios and other electronic things apart trying to see how they worked and it payed off. parents should see and help the child along in his/her interests and that will be a very beneficial learning experience in time.

I am happy you have found your calling. You're parents were good to spot it.

It's also fortunate that the formal education you acquired as a child provided the building blocks to further your passion because Ohm's law becomes difficult if you've never encountered fractions or algebra before

GoldRush4821 · 12-09-2011 03:13AM

I see a lot of merit in primary school where kids are taught the basics and allowed to develop as social and intellectual beings. Likewise I see merit in Further Education (i.e college) which gives you the qualifications necessary (not always essential of course) to enter the workplace. What I don't like is secondary school, and specifically, how long it takes to complete. There is absolutely no need to be stuck in that environment for 5 or 6 years. I don't know who designed it that way, or why but to me it just seems like a waste of 3 - maybe 4 - years. It seems that school is just a way for the state to control our lives from a very young age and get us used to taking direction, abiding by rules and generally just being submissive.

What I think could, and I stress could, be a good idea is if the legal working age was lowered to 15 or 16. Then, let secondary school finish when the person hits that age (be rid of the entire Junior Cert), they can then go out and experience real work for 2 - 3 years, find their true interests and pursue that in college when they turn 18.

Obviously there'd be some flaws there but it'd be such a better way to spend your formative years.

Jimoslimos · 12-09-2011 03:23AM

Chuck Stone wrote: »

Your stance betrays you. Why don't you apply this rigour to people who say we wouldn't be as advanced only for forced schooling?

Better still, why don't you answer the question in the OP rather than trying to find holes in views which don't conform to your world view?

I never argued the opposite case, for what its worth I believe we'd still have wars regardless of education, religion or otherwise. I think that although we may be at a similar level of advancement, the fruits of this would NOT be available to all.

Chuck Stone wrote: »

If this was 200 years ago you might be asking "why do children have to work in unsafe industrial revolution factories and risk killing or seriously maiming themselves?" Which is worse??

Irrelevant.

Actually it is relevant, much the same arguments would have been made at the time. Children were a source of cheap labour, the economy would have suffered if they were all withdrawn. People would have argued that kids were learning important social skills by being in the workplace at that early age. And yes, I'm aware that these arguments can be applied both for and against compulsory schooling

Chuck Stone wrote: »

So you think it's just training for the corporate world?

That's handy for the corporate types. Getting the state to train the young'uns to be compliant for the work place.

Yuck.

TBH, I agree with you here, education shouldn't be merely be an exercise in preparing robot armies of workers. Unfortunately this seems to be the case, especially with universities touting future job prospects as an incentive to study there.

zenno wrote: »

well imagine that. I hardly ever went to school, in fact I don't think I ever spent more than 15 minutes in any class as I had my own interests instead of been force-fed out of date junk.

the o.p has a question and it might be an unusual one to some people but for me it makes sense as I have learned advanced computer skills in hardware/software and electronics and a lot of other neat stuff, but I thought taught(FYP) myself without the help of school or anyone out there. I teach myself so the o.p has a valid point as I succeeded i'm sure millions of others have as well.

Really? Honestly, would you have been able to learn advanced computer skills without basic arithmetic or the ability to read? How about the not-so-fortunate millions? Its pretty easy to pick out the success stories (the Richard Bransons, etc) but makes for dull reading if you were to follow up on everyone else who left school at an early age.

My own situation was that I could read at an advanced level before I entered school. Do I think schooling was still necessary? Yes. Is the education system perfect? Not by a long shot, but far better than leaving the decision up to kids or (even worse in some cases) the parents.

Before people (generally 14yr olds) start whining about compulsory schooling, they should maybe take a look at places in the world where education is deemed a luxury.

zenno · 12-09-2011 03:25AM

longhalloween wrote: »

because Ohm's law becomes difficult if you've never encountered fractions or algebra before

there is, and always was such things as books from basic to advanced. if a kid has the interest in such things whether it be a music book if they love music or a science book if they like science then you give them books and they learn because they like to learn things that they really like. how do you think the teacher learned about such things as electronics capacitors resistors diodes transformers and etc... all this can be learned from the experts book in basic format up till advanced without any tutoring from teachers and at a very young age.

longhalloween · 12-09-2011 03:29AM

True...but you have to read first... I haven't seen a book on learning to read yet.

Ruu_Old · 12-09-2011 03:30AM

An bhfuil cead agam dul go dtí an leithreas?

4leto · 12-09-2011 03:32AM

For structure and to learn shyte

Why do children have to go to school?

Comments