Postman argues that Sesame Street undermines the traditional idea of school (page 143) and he compares and contrasts what he believes are the traditional ideas of school versus the type of education Sesame Street brings. Postman points out that "attending school is a legal requirement, [whereas] watching television is an act of choice"(143). He believes that forcing children to go to school is the traditional idea of what school should be. However, the pursuit of knowledge should be voluntary, allowing children to receive benefits from their own choices instead of allowing them no choice at all.
Gaining an education is important in the U.S. today, but it contains many flaws. Students are forced to go to school by the government. This causes tension between some students and the school system. Examples of this include students who ditch school often.
A solution to this problem would be to allow parents to choose whether or not their children should go to school. Along with this, the government should eliminate their public schools and replace them with privatized schools. The parents and students would better appreciate school because they would not want their money to go to waste. Also, the kids that do not go to school would be able to begin their careers at an earlier age instead of wasting years of their lives learning useless algebra that they will never use in their entire life.
I completely disagree with your views. When you said that the tensions between some students and school systems is caused by the government forcing us to go to school, I don't really understand it. Usually the students who have problems with the schools are the kids who don't really care for their future and education. They are the ones who would rather go out and do whatever without any regard to how it is affecting themselves. Most students today actually take their education seriously because they care for their future, and even if the government didn't force these students to go to school, I am pretty sure they would still go voluntarily to have a better life ahead for them. I also completely disagreed with your statement on how if all public schools were turned into private schools, then parents and students would appreciate school more because that is not true at all. Students may complain all the time about school work and hating school but education is what is going to make them successful in life and they all know that. Parents know that the most because they have been through it and want their kids to have a better life than them by working and studying harder in school for a better job, career, and just overall a better life. Besides, most families today wouldn't be able to afford a private education. College is already so high and now you want to make free public schools to be private and charge money too. Lastly, algebra is a daily part of life. Math is what makes the world function; everything in the world somehow ties back into math. (money, architecture, electricity, numbers, etc.)
ReplyDeleteEverything Vincent said was spot on. Even if the government did not force us to attend school, either our parents will make us go to school or we will go to school on our owns. Getting an education is super important and everybody knows it. Without an education we can't fulfill our careers and do what we want to do in the future. Also, my siblings and I went to a private school in the past and money was being drained out of my parents. When we switched to public schools, my parents were more appreciative of it and we weren't spending as much money as before on our education. So, maybe privatizing a school isn't the best idea to improve our education and the problems inside of it. A good way to fix problems in a school system is actually listening to what the students want. Many schools often do what they think is best for the school and the students, but they never really ask the students what we want. That's one way we can improve our school system. Anyways, getting an education and going to school is an important factor in becoming successful in the future, so the government forcing us to go isn't really a problem.
ReplyDeleteAmerica was based on the idea of freedom. If students want to drop out of school and do what they think is best for them, who are we to stop them? Later in their lives, if they feel they made a mistake by dropping out of school, private schools would allow them to finish their education.
ReplyDeleteHaving a bright future is a strong motivation for students to go to school, however, if that student knows that their education is being paid for by their own parents' money, they will try their best in school to make sure their money does not go to waste. It's common sense.
By privatizing schooling, taxes will be greatly reduced because government will not be funding schools which will give parents more money to pay for their children's education. Some private schools will be cheap while others will be expensive. This will allow all parents to balance the cost and quality of education their children receive.
There are lots of jobs and careers in the world that don't require algebra. For example, someone could work as a janitor for their whole life and never have to use the quadratic formula. Another example is someone with a career as an English or History teacher who would not have to use math in their classroom. Instead, they would learn grammar and teach our past. In other words, math is not a necessity in life.
It would be better if schools would ask the students how the schools could be improved. Public schools do not do this very often. However, private schools will always be looking to improve their schools to increase revenue, so they will not only ask the students how to improve their schools, but also the parents and staff.
Nathan, first of all, all your counter arguments back are completely wrong and confuse me for many reasons. Students are allowed to drop out of high school if they want too, no one is forcing them to go so by you arguing that students should have the freedom to drop out cause America is based on the idea of freedom is completely wrong because they already have the right to drop out.
DeleteSecondly, schools are basically paid by our own parents through taxes and state funds that are provided by again, our taxes. Students all over the US are already doing their best in school because they are trying to set a better path for their life and career ahead of them.
Third, even if schools were privatized, taxes are still going to be high for many things. California has issued so much budget cuts on schools that our tax money goes more to the city than school so it doesn't matter if schools are privatized, taxes will still be high. California will always find more reasons to tax higher to get more money from us.
Lastly, arguing that some jobs and careers in the world don't require algebra is the most absurb thing I have heard. Janitors still have to use algebra to figure out their taxes, their bills, and their paycheck to see if they are being paid fairly. English and History teachers may not have to use algebra when teaching but when it comes to grading, average, and rounding, they still have to use algebra. Our world requires math and algebra to run so I don't understand when you say math is not a necessity in life. Math was used in creating the internet, the computer your typing right now, and this blog that was created through the coding.
I don't agree with anything you said Nathan. First of all, kids who don't go to school aren't ditching because of the government. They probably don't even consider the government when they skip class. As for making it legal to not have to go to school, that wouldn't solve anything. Even if you won't use some of the subjects in your future, it's better to expand your mind to various types of subjects. And if a parent were to choose if their child went to school or not, then it would be unfair for most children. What if a child wanted to go to school to learn and to become someone, but their parents decided that getting a job and bringing in money was more important? How is that fair for a kid who wants to learn? Plus, kids need discipline. If I were to let my little brothers choose if they wanted to go to school every morning, then they would always say no because all they want to do is play. School helps children learn responsibility.
ReplyDeleteStudents don't ditch school because of the government. They ditch school because the government forces them to go to school. Students should go to school because it helps them expand their minds, but they should not be forced into doing it. If a parent forced their child into making money, then that child would have to convince their parent that going to school would be more beneficial. If the parent is irrational and unreasonable, then it becomes the communities job to help that child. Kids will not have the choice if they want to go to school or not. Their parents will decide that for them. Their children will always learn discipline, even if they don't go to school because they will likely be working.
ReplyDeleteI completely and utterly disagree with all that Nathan has said. By privatizing schools, less students are actually going to attend any sort of school. This is due to the rising number of families that have low incomes in which they make free education for their children the only chance they have. I personally think that privatizing education is a barbaric idea. Isn't education a given right to any child? Not only less children will go to school because it costs money, but crime will rise as well. "He, who opens a school door, closes a prison"- (Victor Hugo). Privatizing schools will unleash a abundant amount of crime as well as darkening our future. Public education gives every child a chance to have a brighter future as well as a happier future. Kids do ditch school but not in overwhelming amounts . So what is the point in privatizing schools? So just the people with money can have a future? So we can have a darker future with less people to be qualified for jobs? This is a statement I strongly disagree with. People such as Theodore Rosevelt and Malala have fought to give children the right of an education. And it's okay to just strip this right from their lives? Think about it.
ReplyDeleteIf schools are privatized, the amount of students that ditch school will decrease because they will not go to school because they have jobs or they will go to school because they are better motivated to go because they will not want their parents' money to go to waste and privatized schools will likely provide better education than public schools.
ReplyDeletePublic education is not truly free. Taxes pay for public education. Parents with low income will still be able to send their children to school because their taxes will be reduced once public education is gone.
If anything, our future will be brighter because crime will not increase, it will decrease. This is because the education system will be improved upon and the younger generation will be able to hold steady jobs whenever they want to. Lastly, education is not a right. It only feels that way because every child must go through the education system.
First of all, private schools do not all cost the same. There will be a market for inexpensive schools if public schooling is removed. This will allow parents with low income to send their children to private schools. Low income families may also have to invest money into their child's education. This will motivate them to assist their child and promote their education so their investment is not wasted.
ReplyDeleteAs for Malala, she has good intentions but she is not our government and she's not even an American. It is written nowhere in our constitution that education is a right.
Actually, low income families indeed will have to pay more money than usual. The public education tax is one percent of all property taxes. This is why low income families are able to have the right for an education. Most private schools are over fifty times more expensive than the public education tax. And since you said education wasn't a right, here is a quote from human rights activist and youngest Nobel Peace laureate Malala Yousafzai.
ReplyDelete"I don't know why people have divided the whole world into two groups, east and west. Education is neither eastern nor western. Education is education and it's the right of every human being"- (Malala Yousafzai).
I apologize Nathan but I also do not agree with you. Let me explain, there are kids who are homeless and the public school doesn't even know about it. Majority of homeless kids want an education and what better place to obtain that than through public schools; which are closer to being free in comparison to private schools. Aside from them, just because a parent is putting money down for their child to attend school doesn't really heighten the chance of that child wanting or appreciating school in general. If a student doesn't like school then they will show it either way. Besides, Neil Postman has demonstrated throughout his whole book how important reading and writing is as it challenges students to think intensely and with meaningful purpose. Lastly, I don't understand what you mean by "kids that do not go to school would be able to begin their careers at an earlier age...". That doesn't make sense because with todays society what career are you obtaining without an inkling of education?
ReplyDeleteRudy, thank you for your comments, so much of what I was going to comment was greatly already said by you. Like Rudy said, "What is the point in privatizing schools?" Nathan, so much of your reasoning for privatizing schools is completely invalid. You claim that there will be a reduced crime rate because children will get jobs and stay out of trouble, but how can you assume there are enough jobs for all these children and what type of low paying jobs are you expecting these underaged, un educated children to get? Lets pretend that these children manage to get a job, it will most likely be a minimum wage paying job. Did you know that the average yearly income for a person making minimum wage is around $15,000. How will these people be able to afford a home, be able to send their children into a privatized school system, and lastly how will this in anyway benefit the economy.
ReplyDeleteIt seems like you are suggesting a system in which the rich will have the opportunity to attend the best private schools and the upmost chance for a better future; meanwhile the rest of the disappearing middle class and lower class will be unable to escape the cycle in which the rich just get richer. You seem to suggest a lot on what america is based on; do you think America, the land of "opportunity," will really be able to fulfill its purpose if opportunities are only available to the wealthy and privileged.
First of all, I want people and children to have the opportunity to choose their own destiny without government interference. Homeless children will have the chance to earn a job in order to pay expenses if they don't have to go to waste time at public school while they could be earning money at work.
ReplyDeleteIf a child isn't motivated to go to school, then the parent can stop their education and make them get a job. It's not our responsibility to force people to take classes in order to make them think critically. There are still plenty of career choices and opportunities for high school drop-outs. A list of people of dropped out of high school that became billionaires: Henry Ford, Carl Lindner Jr., John Rockefeller, Amancio Ortega, Kirk Kerkorian, Francois Pinault, David Murdock, Richard Branson, and Joe Lewis.
The children who do not go to public school will get low paying jobs, but they will have more time than others to climb the corporate ladder. Even high school graduates get minimum wage paying jobs but by the time that they get their job, children who start at an earlier age will have more time to climb the corporate ladder and get increased pay wages.
By addressing the billionaires that were college drop outs you proved my point of how kids still need some sort of education to pave a way for themselves. Besides what makes you think that people who can't pay for private schools want to resort, at the end of the day, to low paying jobs. Usually people who are at the bottom want to reach the top but money always seems to be the issue. Also, if you think that making schools private would heighten the rate of students in school then you're wrong, because there are some people now who have to take their kids out of public school due to financial purposes. Face it, money makes the world go round and if you don't have it life is harder.
DeleteOnce again, I have to disagree with your invalid arguments. You claim that if children drop out of school earlier, they will have more time to get higher up on the corporate ladder, but that is assuming that their jobs offer corporate jobs to un educated people. Also, if there are more high school drop outs, then the competition will rise, making it harder for people to possibly even have a chance at getting corporate jobs.
ReplyDeleteYou listed people who dropped out of high school and became billionaires, but these are extremely unlikely cases. If it was that easy to become a billionaire, then everyone would be.
Isn't it America's goal to have an increase of people attend college and become educated. How will the system you are implying help the lack of engineers and doctors in America? If America actually chose to use your suggestions then the only way to save are country is to increase the amount of outsourced foreign workers. People are always complaining that "our jobs" are being "taken" by foreigners; do you want to feed into the amount of disgruntled complaints. I do my research to make sure that I have valid arguments, please do yours. Lastly, my main question is, how in any valid way, will this benefit our country and our country's citizens?
I'm not saying I agree with everything Nathan's saying, but at the same time, I don't agree with everything you're saying either. Sorry to say this, but not everyone needs to attend college. I mean, I guess it would look good on our reports if we had a high portion of the population going to college, but we don't need that. A portion of the population needs to, and would be better suited, to do trade jobs, and they don't need a college education for that. They should go through highschool, then instead of going to college, go into a trade job and further their skills in that job. If we had the UK's aptitude test system, we wouldn't need to outsource jobs to foreign workers for that because we would already have a portion of the population ready to take those jobs.
DeleteYes, I completely agree that not everyone is meant for college. My argument was that we should have more opportunities for those who do want to go to college, not limiting them. In the US, we have shortage highly educated workers. That is why we are not outsourcing jobs to foreign trade workers, but instead, outsourcing jobs to to highly educated foreigners.
DeleteIf anything I think there should be an increase of the amount of trade schools, so that people who do not go to college are skilled enough to get jobs that pay more than minimum wage.
I think you might have confused the argument I making. I don't think that college is everyone's solution, though I do believe that it can indeed, be a solution for many people.
All jobs offer the ability for an employee to take a step up in their career/job if they work hard and bring success to the business whether it comes in the form of a pay raise or a promotion. There are always ways to increase success in ones career.
DeleteAmerica's goal is to pursue life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, not educational opportunities. A benefit from private education is that it will give more students a more niche education. This will likely increase the number of people who go to college and become engineers or doctors because they will be able to pursue these careers at an earlier age. Private schools will be more specialized than public schools which will attract more students and increase efficiency in a certain area of study.
I disagree with this post entirely. Public school provides students with basic skills such as reading, writing, and arithmetic, all of which are necessary for maintaining a decent job or even surviving in the the world we live in today. How can one "climb a corporate ladder" when one does not posses the ability to even write their name. There wouldn't even be a "ladder" to climb for them.
ReplyDeleteI understand what you mean and partially agree with it. However, I don't think children should be allowed to completely drop out of school. I think some general education is still required. I'm not exactly sure on the details, but in the UK, around 10th grade for them, they take an aptitude test that determines whether or not they should go to college or take a trade job. I believe a system like this would be better, because it would allow people who are going into jobs like plumbing to better their skills, while also allowing people who would like to further their education go to college.
ReplyDeleteAs many people have already said, I disagree with Nathan's assertion that all schools should be privatized. As people have already mentioned, low income families would not be able to educate their children if they had to send their children to private schools. However I understand some of the concepts behind Nathan's argument. Perhaps a compromise of both arguments would make a happy medium. Mandatory public school to a certain point, and the rest is optional private school. Yes, this is sort of what our country has in place already, but I'm saying less mandatory time. Many students will only need skills up to around eighth grade to get through their life. Why should they be forced to spend the next four years learning things that aren't necessary and that they don't enjoy? Some people genuinely enjoy learning and would want to continue to do so and such individuals should have that opportunity. Other people have already brought up this kind of system and I agree with them
ReplyDelete