We are working on a brand new version of the game! If you want to stay informed, read our blog and register for our mailing list.
Bill: Education Variety
Details
Submitted by[?]: Protectorate Party
Status[?]: passed
Votes: This is an ordinary bill. It requires more yes votes than no votes. This bill will not pass any sooner than the deadline.
Voting deadline: September 2048
Description[?]:
| recongnizing that a monopoly prevents innovation. We propose a small number of schools privately run under the supervision of the Dept of Ed to insure the students' education meets the requirements as outlined by government. The costs for lower to middle income students attending this school are paid by the government. |
Proposals
Article 1
Proposal[?] to change The education system.
Old value:: Education is entirely public and free; private schools are banned.
Current: There is a free public education system and a small number of private schools, which are heavily regulated to ensure they teach adequate skills and information.
Proposed: There is a free public education system and a small number of private schools, which are heavily regulated to ensure they teach adequate skills and information.
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
| Date | 08:36:17, May 05, 2005 CET | From | Leviathan Party | To | Debating the Education Variety |
| Message | Clearly the PP has no sense of how actual education systems work. There is no 'monopoly' on anything; curriculums are adopted by districts, which are smaller than most voting districts, and then taught in a manner chosen by each individual school. School boards, elected by communities, oversee both the district and the individual schools. Monopoly? Not in the least. Each district is free to adopt their own school model, their own curriculum, as long as they meet national standards. Let us note that the PP has proposed these private schools would still be held to these same national standards. So what's the difference? The PP wants the costs for lower income students paid for by the government, so we're still paying for the education, and since local communities already control how their schools are run, thereis already plenty of opportunity for community guided innovation. Conclusion? This bill is unnecessary to acheive the stated aims, and would only allow for the classist system of private, economically segregated, education. |
| Date | 13:17:27, May 05, 2005 CET | From | Labour Party | To | Debating the Education Variety |
| Message | OOC: I think you're making asdsumption, and I'm not sure what model you're using. E.g., a national curriculum applies in the UK and local authorities are not free to adopt their own curriculum. I'm still gainst the bill though. |
| Date | 20:03:10, May 05, 2005 CET | From |  Protectorate Party | To | Debating the Education Variety |
| Message | Though schools are often organized into districts rarely is the curriculum or the methods set at this level. Mandates from higher governmental structures prevent freedom at this level. Even if this was true the schools within a district are not permitted to deviate from that outlined by the board thus a monoply would still exists. a student within a district will not be able to be exposed to any difference even if they changed schools. The private schools proposed will be permitted more flexibility in teaching with performance still tracked by the dept of ed. Costs are picked up by the government but it is expected to be lower then the cost of a standard school as outlined in previous debates. We are not paying every bill in any case so there will be a lower cost to the government. Where does the economically segregated education come in to this picture? Costs are the same as a standard school for all but the elite who must pay extra. Thus why does this "allow for the classist system of private, economically segregated, education"? |
| Date | 20:33:18, May 05, 2005 CET | From | Leviathan Party | To | Debating the Education Variety |
| Message | The solution to the PP's concerns seems to be to simply make sure the Ministry of Education isn't getting its fingers into too many pies. And frankly, there rarely exists the kind of uniformity you seem to fear within a same school, much less an entire school district. Even under the most authoritiarian of principles, teachers are free to do as they like in their classrooms; how would you stop them? Observe them every day of the year? The PP's concerns are valid, but they would not be solved by private schools, nor are they currently a problem in our education system. This makes us extremely suspicious of this proposal because it seems there's an ulterior motive at work. ooc: well let me put it to you this way: the MInister of Education in this cabinet better damn well be doing the job the way i just described or he's out of work. and seriously, i can't speak to other people's experiences, but as a teacher i can tell you that education is the least top down industry in the universe. a nation or state can dictate curriculum all they want, but ultimately if the district doesn't support it, it doens't happen. this process then repeats for individual schools, teaching teams and individual teachers. the kind of monopoly you're worried about only happens if the national and state level education authorities make it their business to crack down on teachers and schools. and i assure you that is not happening under this government. |
| Date | 23:59:07, May 05, 2005 CET | From | Free Reform Coalition (FRP) | To | Debating the Education Variety |
| Message | OOC: I'd take a private school over a public school any day. sand to the LevP, congrats on being a teacher. I have much respect for teachers. IC: If private schools are so bad, why do they do a better job of teaching than public schools? And what makes the LevP think that this country will be the ONLY country in the world and history with a public school system that is better than the private school system? |
| Date | 01:45:45, May 06, 2005 CET | From | Leviathan Party | To | Debating the Education Variety |
| Message | They don't. As previously noted, private schools expel students who don't maintain basic academic standards; public schools can't turn anyone away. Private schools have also historically spent more per student than public schools, which allows for smaller class sizes and more individualization. Properly funded public schools (ooc: and if you want one with your RL fetish, check out Princeton, NJ) show performce on par if not better than those of private schools. Thus, an excellent public education system is possible if we fund it sufficiently, which makes private schools completely unneeded. Please drop this dead end legislation and move onto an issue that actually requires attention. |
| Date | 02:17:07, May 06, 2005 CET | From | Free Reform Coalition (FRP) | To | Debating the Education Variety |
| Message | OOC: as a teacher, LevP, you should no that there is no relationship between smaller class sizes and performance, only the percieved quality of education. IC: as for properly funded public schools, we can see clearly that this has not worked. You can't simply throw money at something so the problem can go away. In the UK and the US they have been throwing money at inner city public schools for years, wth absolutely no change in quality of education or output. And you want to know why the suburban areas like your Pinceton NJ school has better output? Becuase the families of the children are predominantly middle/upper class and pay for extra tutoring as well as help raise funds for extra activities. Once again, the individuals in the community have to help the public system for it to work better. Furthermore, I have already argued that private schools can do it with a tighter budget than public schools and still outperform them. Namely the catholic schools in america, which do not prejudize against different religious grooups. By having a monopoly on education you restrict children to a mediocre education. Money doesn't fix the problem of a system that has inherent flaws that are very difficult to fix. All that we can do is make it possible for people to find better ways to educate themselves. |
| Date | 02:22:31, May 06, 2005 CET | From | Free Reform Coalition (FRP) | To | Debating the Education Variety |
| Message | As to expulsion, where is the incentive to study or actually pass an exam if it doesn't have consequences? What can a public school do to make a student care about education? the answer is nothing effective. Private schools have the significant advantage that the parents and the child have a vested interest in keeping their child in the school and doing well because of the consequences. The real question is, why don't you want to let children have the best education that they can get? |
| Date | 02:48:28, May 06, 2005 CET | From | Leviathan Party | To | Debating the Education Variety |
| Message | Read some Kohn; high stakes testing does not work, and you won't find a reputable educator who would argue for them. You're speaking as a politician, trying to force your views onto educators. Why not let the educators tell us what they need, and for once, let research guide policy? |
| Date | 03:03:35, May 06, 2005 CET | From | Free Reform Coalition (FRP) | To | Debating the Education Variety |
| Message | Why DON'T we let research guide policy and vote yes on homeschooling when the evidence shows that it works? Why don't we vote yes on private education when it clearly produces well educated, knowledgable people and leaders? Why are we forcing everyone into a second rate education simply because some of them cannot afford anything better? Why aren't we making it easier for people to make money and improve their situation? Is it becuase the main detractor is a disgruntled teacher? |
| Date | 04:20:27, May 06, 2005 CET | From | Leviathan Party | To | Debating the Education Variety |
| Message | You really need some listening skills. Go talk to actual teachers, go read some actual books on education, go learn about what education really is when we get rid of high stakes tests and culturally hegemonic curriculum. Home schooling is bad for students because it takes them out of a social setting where the truly valuable learning that goes on isn't measured by high stakes tests. Private education is bad not just because it sets up a classist education system, not just because it tends to siphon funding away from public education, thus lowering the per student spending in public schools, but because it sets up an artificial environment for students. How can we create well rounded democratic citizens if some of our schools are social or cultural bubbles. Home or private schooling might produce kids that test well, but they fail to fulfill greater obligations we have to our children and society as a whole. It's no accident that educational theorists and researchers favor public education over private, and you'd do well to actually educate yourself on the issues before you continue to speak out of ignorance. ooc: and you'd do well not to mix ooc and ic comments. |
| Date | 02:03:14, May 07, 2005 CET | From | Protectorate Party | To | Debating the Education Variety |
| Message | Since the change in government the LevP comments most likely will not be valid as to how the Min of Ed will behave, therefore we move this to a vote. |
subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe
Voting
| Vote | Seats | ||||
| yes |
Total Seats: 61 | ||||
| no |
Total Seats: 39 | ||||
| abstain | Total Seats: 0 |
| Random fact: Party organizations are eligible for deletion if they are over 50 in-game years old, do not have at least 1 active member or are historically significant and possess historically significant information. |
| Random quote: "Anarchy stands for the liberation of the human mind from the domination of religion, the liberation of the human body from the domination of property, liberation from the shackles and restraints of government." - Emma Goldman |