Finland ranked seventh in the world in OECD's student assessment chart in 2018, well above the UK and the United States, where there is a mix of private and state education

  • cricket97@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    14
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Yeah let's pull exceptional students down to the baseline. Every child should be forced to go through the government approved curriculum, nothing can go wrong with that.

    Private schools are based. Much better education than public schools. Obviously I don't want public schools to be gutted, so let's make laws preventing that rather than preventing children from getting a good education that public school will never be able to provide.

    People here are way to authoritarian.

    • adriaan@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      1 year ago

      Look at the Netherlands for a good example then. Private schools aren't banned but public schools are so good even the princesses go to them. You're just so used to public schools being underfunded that you think they can't work. The reason you'd want to ban private schools is because it creates an incentive for the rich and powerful to fix your shitty public schools.

      • cricket97@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        9
        ·
        1 year ago

        Why do we need to ban private schools if Netherlands was able to create good public schools without doing so? There is a limit of how good you can make public schools when you have no selection criteria. Private schools are based. I like that there is an option outside of government run institutions.

    • someguy3@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      You have gifted programs in the public school. Your thinking shows the exact problem, that public schools can only "pull students down". You can only see public schools as bad instead of, you know, funding them to be good. How about funding them so they pull everyone up, huh?

      Then you go on to conspiratorial thinking to vilify, gasp, public schools.

      • cricket97@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        A genius being around average people will pull them down. It's a good thing to concentrate our smartest children in an environment that lets them learn with equally intelligent peers. There might not be enough hyper intelligent kids in a geographical region to warrant the resources required to fully support that minority of students. Nothing I said was conspiratorial.

        • V H@lemmy.stad.social
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          There are over 160 selective secondary state/public schools in England. Being state run does not prevent the existence of selective schools.

        • someguy3@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          Dude, gifted programs. Advanced classes. They are together. This is really easy. Any reasonably sized school will have enough to fill out an advanced class.

          And this ensures all students can live up to their potential! How about that? Instead of only the ones that can afford stupid high tuition. Who have to pass screening, and wait times, and wait lists, and then long commutes. If you want more advanced people in society, the way you do that is opening the doors to more people, at all points in their life, right where they live.

          And what the other guy said about selective public schools.

          And yes you're on about government approved education dogwhistle and authoritarianism. Dude, you're right down conspiratorial thinking.

          • cricket97@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            1 year ago

            Almost every good private school has extensive financial aid programs. At the private school I went to, they had blind financial aid, meaning you got accepted first and if you couldn't afford it, you would get in for free, so there was no discrimination against poor people.
            I'm not against gifted programs and more resources being allocated to public schools. But private schools play an important role in this imperfect system and getting rid of them "because it's unfair" just brings people down.
            It's not a conspiracy to suggest that public schools abide by a government approved curriculum. You are way too sensitive. You can improve public schools without making private schools illegal, is my point.

            • someguy3@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              edit-2
              1 year ago

              You know what's even better than financial aid? Not needing it in the first place! Because you have excellent public schools. Which works for everyone, at all times, in all locations.

              Had a bad year and couldn't get the grades to make it to private school that one year? Well now you can pay attention to the excellent teachers you have in public school.

              Can't take the 1+ hr bus ride to a school far away? Well you can have an excellent school 10 minutes away.

              And this all also starts in grade 1. Or Kindergarten if we get that sorted out. So you have good education before you ever have marks in any substantial way. This starts wayyyyy earlier than you're portraying. How do you think someone can develop at later stages when they don't have good schooling to begin with? Really I can't emphasize this enough. Smart people don't just pop up out of the blue and then we whisk them away to private school. How do you think people become smart or capable in the first place? We need good, public, accessible, education from the very start.

              m “because it’s unfair” just brings people down.

              Oh you're still stuck in your mentality that public schools "bring people down". I think you have this because that's all you've ever seen. You can't seem to conceive of good public schools, that have gifted programs, that don't "bring people down", that can in fact bring people up.

              When rich and upper class don't use the public schools, there is zero incentive to make them work. As seen by the current state of the US. It's so bad that, like I said, you can't even seem to conceive of a public system that doesn't "bring people down". It's so bad that you've defined the public system as "bringing people down". That it must "bring people down". You've said it multiple times.

              And yes saying "government approved education" is a thinly veiled dog whistle. If there was any doubt it was gone when you said authoritarianism. You just don't like that I called it out, so you have to say I'm "way too sensitive".

              • cricket97@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                4
                ·
                1 year ago

                I'm not saying the public school system indiscriminately brings people down, but for the intellectual top 1% of kids it definitely can. stop thinking in absolutes. I think it's a good thing for smart kids to hang out with smart kids. Believe it or not, different degrees of intelligence require different needs to allow children to reach their full potential. I believe that private schools are great in making sure that potential is met. It's up to the schools themselves to allocate funding rather than a government bureaucracy, which is notoriously inefficient and frankly always will be, especially at scale. Advocate for improving funding to public schools so private schools would be unnecessary instead of making the choice on behalf of people.

                • someguy3@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  1 year ago

                  for the intellectual top 1% of kids it definitely can.

                  Really? Do I have to add caveats to everything I say? It's already long enough. But this is also about wayyyy more than the top 1% of kids, this is about everyone. You want a more capable society? That means everyone.

                  I think it's a good thing for smart kids to hang out with smart kids.

                  Again, advanced classes. This is so simple.

                  Believe it or not, different degrees of intelligence require different needs

                  Again, advanced classes.

                  private schools are great in making sure that potential is met

                  Again, advanced classes.

                  And again, this means more students potential is reached. And that more students have the opportunity to become smart and educated from the very beginning. I notice you don't respond to any of that, you're back to acting like smart people just spring out of the blue to be whisked away to private schools. Think about how many people never intellectually developed in the first place because they never had good education to begin with. You want more smart people in society? The solution is public schools to develop those smart people.

                  government bureaucracy, which is notoriously inefficient and frankly always will be, especially at scale.

                  And now you define public schools as inefficient and all those connotations. Just like how you defined things before.

                  Seriously, it seems you can not even conceive of good public schools that yes serve and educate top students well (but again these students don't just pop up out if the blue, they are educated from the very start).

                  • cricket97@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    arrow-down
                    4
                    ·
                    1 year ago

                    But this is also about wayyyy more than the top 1% of kids, this is about everyone. You want a more capable society? That means everyone.

                    Hmms seems like you are implying here that it does actually bring those 1% of kids down for the betterment of the rest. I thought it wouldn't bring kids down?

                    It's a simple difference of opinions. I believe that private schools are better empowered to allocate resources to produce the best result since it bypasses government bureaucracy. That's it. Acting like "advanced classes" is some sort of own that defeats the purpose of private schools is a cop out frankly.

                    You want more smart people in society? The solution is public schools to develop those smart people.

                    This can happen without making private schools illegal.

      • afraid_of_zombies@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        The gifted program at my kids school is based on a single standardized test and practically speaking there is no way to appeal. It isn't some perfect system.

        • someguy3@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          So… marks. And I assume you can enter at most times.

          So NOT ability to pay $$$, and ability to live in a certain area, and ability to have parents with pull, and ability to pass subjective screening (oh you went to what school before? Well this other student went to this other school we like more).

          • afraid_of_zombies@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            4
            ·
            1 year ago

            I don't know why you are assuming when I am right here and you can just ask. Well okay I know why you are assuming I am just going to pretend that I don't.

            It is one standardized test given once a year. Kid is sick during it? No appeal. Kid had a bad teacher that year? No appeal. One single thing goes wrong on a single day of an entire year and your kid lags behind for at least another year. No teacher recommendations, no gpa, no retest, no other options. Maybe next time ask before you assume.

            Oh and it isn't some great equalizer either. I see tutoring places bragging that they can get your kid a better score on the test. If you have the money and the time you can get your kid in the program.

            • someguy3@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              1 year ago

              Dude I'm assuming because that's how I've seen it work. Once a year, cool. Pretty much what I thought. I don't know why you're trying to turn this into something else. Boy and you run with that.

              So your argument is more criteria. Ok cool.

              And see my previous message about all the things that it's not about. It doesn't need to be 1000% equalizer for public schools to be a pretty good friggin thing.

              • afraid_of_zombies@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                3
                ·
                1 year ago

                Now

                Once a year, cool. Pretty much what I thought

                Before

                And I assume you can enter at most times.

                Keep your story straight instead of assuming.

                • someguy3@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  Did you just assume what I meant the first time? Oh no. And now explicitly against what I said. Oh no.

                  Peace.

                  • afraid_of_zombies@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    arrow-down
                    3
                    ·
                    1 year ago

                    I went with he literal meaning of the words that is an inference not an assumption. You assumed something not state while I looked at what was stated.