Compulsory Education - Make a Change
Can any country claim to be genuinely Liberal - when there is a COMPULSORY education requirement in place ? An obligation by law, set by the state.
To spend continuously 8 - 11 years doing something, potentially against your will ?
And with a STATE set curriculum for everybody as a mass - being mandated to learn it ? How flexible is that ? How individualistic is that ?
To study or not, and WHAT to study, to educate themselves or not, to qualify themselves or not - that is for each individual to choose. Or, at least for their parents (or guardians or legal carers) to determine - in cases of people who are not legally adults.
Abolish all COMPULSORY education - and keep education available, but make it VOLUNTARY - NOW - or when it is possible to do so.
Why don't law makers and the people in government prepare to act … and to make a CHANGE.
To spend continuously 8 - 11 years doing something, potentially against your will ?
And with a STATE set curriculum for everybody as a mass - being mandated to learn it ? How flexible is that ? How individualistic is that ?
To study or not, and WHAT to study, to educate themselves or not, to qualify themselves or not - that is for each individual to choose. Or, at least for their parents (or guardians or legal carers) to determine - in cases of people who are not legally adults.
Abolish all COMPULSORY education - and keep education available, but make it VOLUNTARY - NOW - or when it is possible to do so.
Why don't law makers and the people in government prepare to act … and to make a CHANGE.
Scroll to see replies
Sounds like a great way to end up with a generation of kids lacking the knowledge, qualifications, life experience and social skills required to integrate into society or attain jobs when they reach adulthood, before realising this was a stupid idea and reinstituting compulsory education.
The reality is that the state has both an obligation and a vested interest, from both a moral and pragmatic standpoint, in ensuring children receive an education that prepares them to be productive and independent members of society by the time they're finished, and this generally falls under modern definitions of liberalism which acknowledge there is a role to be played by the state rather than pursuing some ungoverned utopia. Libertarianism is closer to what you're looking for here.
The reality is that the state has both an obligation and a vested interest, from both a moral and pragmatic standpoint, in ensuring children receive an education that prepares them to be productive and independent members of society by the time they're finished, and this generally falls under modern definitions of liberalism which acknowledge there is a role to be played by the state rather than pursuing some ungoverned utopia. Libertarianism is closer to what you're looking for here.
(edited 3 years ago)
You bringing back the workhouse while you are at it?
What do you think children should do instead?
Compulsory education wasn't brought in at a time when kids otherwise could choose what to do, stay at home, go travelling etc.
It was brought in to solve two problems:
1, to replace work. Children worked before we had compulsory education, and part of the reason of bringing in mandatory education was to change this and replace manual labour with something actually useful and humane.
2, to allow all children to access education - by making it compulsory and forcing the goverment to take on the responsibility of educating all children, you set up a system where all kids no matter how rich/poor have a somewhat equal start to life. Before we had compulsory state-funded education the rich were educated, the poor attended sunday school inbetween days of manual labour.
---
There are plenty of good arguements about when compulsory education should stop. 16? 18? 21? 14? etc.
But to abolish it entirely is just foolish. If parents really don't like state education they are free to educate their children at home. One my cousins is home schooled and that's her parents choice, and perfectly allowed by the goverment. But to remove the requirement that children are educated is very badly thought out.
What else are they going to do? Work? Is that the country we want where a family can choose to send their 10 year old to work? Because there are struggling and poor families that will, and if you make it societally exceptable to have kids work, there are companies that will exploit it - we know this, because it happened before, and still happens in other parts of the world. So they aren't going to work? What else? If they aren't in education, and they aren't working, they are just doing nothing? That's not good for them either..
Honestly this thread sounds like a kid who just doesn't like school trying to find a way of justifying it.
Compulsory education wasn't brought in at a time when kids otherwise could choose what to do, stay at home, go travelling etc.
It was brought in to solve two problems:
1, to replace work. Children worked before we had compulsory education, and part of the reason of bringing in mandatory education was to change this and replace manual labour with something actually useful and humane.
2, to allow all children to access education - by making it compulsory and forcing the goverment to take on the responsibility of educating all children, you set up a system where all kids no matter how rich/poor have a somewhat equal start to life. Before we had compulsory state-funded education the rich were educated, the poor attended sunday school inbetween days of manual labour.
---
There are plenty of good arguements about when compulsory education should stop. 16? 18? 21? 14? etc.
But to abolish it entirely is just foolish. If parents really don't like state education they are free to educate their children at home. One my cousins is home schooled and that's her parents choice, and perfectly allowed by the goverment. But to remove the requirement that children are educated is very badly thought out.
What else are they going to do? Work? Is that the country we want where a family can choose to send their 10 year old to work? Because there are struggling and poor families that will, and if you make it societally exceptable to have kids work, there are companies that will exploit it - we know this, because it happened before, and still happens in other parts of the world. So they aren't going to work? What else? If they aren't in education, and they aren't working, they are just doing nothing? That's not good for them either..
Honestly this thread sounds like a kid who just doesn't like school trying to find a way of justifying it.
(edited 3 years ago)
Libertarianism. Ok.
Thank you for the comment.
Even in that case, I would state that education, any education, should be voluntary - instead of compulsory.
It is for an individual to choose - whether to educate themselves or not. It should be only with their free will.
By all means - keep education available.
Thank you for the comment.
Even in that case, I would state that education, any education, should be voluntary - instead of compulsory.
It is for an individual to choose - whether to educate themselves or not. It should be only with their free will.
By all means - keep education available.
Original post by DiddyDec
You bringing back the workhouse while you are at it?
If by the workhouse you mean something illegal, something against an individual's will, or some abuse etc - then no.
But there may be a need to introduce jobs or industries, for people to work at, that do not require much education. Maybe there should be that alternative too.
Original post by Vlad83
If by the workhouse you mean something illegal, something against an individual's will, or some abuse etc - then no.
But there may be a need to introduce jobs or industries, for people to work at, that do not require much education. Maybe there should be that alternative too.
But there may be a need to introduce jobs or industries, for people to work at, that do not require much education. Maybe there should be that alternative too.
Child labour?
Original post by fallen_acorns
What do you think children should do instead?
Compulsory education wasn't brought in at a time when kids otherwise could choose what to do, stay at home, go travelling etc.
It was brought in to solve two problems:
1, to replace work. Children worked before we had compulsory education, and part of the reason of bringing in mandatory education was to change this and replace manual labour with something actually useful and humane.
2, to allow all children to access education - by making it compulsory and forcing the goverment to take on the responsibility of educating all children, you set up a system where all kids no matter how rich/poor have a somewhat equal start to life. Before we had compulsory state-funded education the rich were educated, the poor attended sunday school inbetween days of manual labour.
---
There are plenty of good arguements about when compulsory education should stop. 16? 18? 21? 14? etc.
But to abolish it entirely is just foolish. If parents really don't like state education they are free to educate their children at home. One my cousins is home schooled and that's her parents choice, and perfectly allowed by the goverment. But to remove the requirement that children are educated is very badly thought out.
What else are they going to do? Work? Is that the country we want where a family can choose to send their 10 year old to work? Because there are struggling and poor families that will, and if you make it societally exceptable to have kids work, there are companies that will exploit it - we know this, because it happened before, and still happens in other parts of the world. So they aren't going to work? What else? If they aren't in education, and they aren't working, they are just doing nothing? That's not good for them either..
Honestly this thread sounds like a kid who just doesn't like school trying to find a way of justifying it.
Compulsory education wasn't brought in at a time when kids otherwise could choose what to do, stay at home, go travelling etc.
It was brought in to solve two problems:
1, to replace work. Children worked before we had compulsory education, and part of the reason of bringing in mandatory education was to change this and replace manual labour with something actually useful and humane.
2, to allow all children to access education - by making it compulsory and forcing the goverment to take on the responsibility of educating all children, you set up a system where all kids no matter how rich/poor have a somewhat equal start to life. Before we had compulsory state-funded education the rich were educated, the poor attended sunday school inbetween days of manual labour.
---
There are plenty of good arguements about when compulsory education should stop. 16? 18? 21? 14? etc.
But to abolish it entirely is just foolish. If parents really don't like state education they are free to educate their children at home. One my cousins is home schooled and that's her parents choice, and perfectly allowed by the goverment. But to remove the requirement that children are educated is very badly thought out.
What else are they going to do? Work? Is that the country we want where a family can choose to send their 10 year old to work? Because there are struggling and poor families that will, and if you make it societally exceptable to have kids work, there are companies that will exploit it - we know this, because it happened before, and still happens in other parts of the world. So they aren't going to work? What else? If they aren't in education, and they aren't working, they are just doing nothing? That's not good for them either..
Honestly this thread sounds like a kid who just doesn't like school trying to find a way of justifying it.
Thank you for this.
I am not a kid - I am a 37 years old man, who went through compulsory schooling, something like 10 years in total - both in my native country's system, and partly in the UK system. And overall, I studied for 16 years in a row.
And still .. I state that compulsory education should be abolished. And any studying should be at an individual's free will.
What children should do instead ? They should do whatever they want and prefer to do.
Except something that harms their health and safety. Which harms them and brings harm to others.
Those children who want to study, should study or do schooling.
The fact that, without compulsory education, children will otherwise go and work, doesn't mean that education should be compulsory, to prevent kids from working. They will not necessarily go to work, or their parents will send them to work.
The government can introduce laws stating that some particular (young) ages are not allowed to work, or not allowed to do some particular kinds of work, to preserve children's health and safety. That is it - that is the solution here.
If kids want to do nothing - the government should not be able to make them do something.
If they want to do nothing - then they do just that - nothing.
The home schooling possibility is good indeed, this is positive, it gives people freedom, but it is partly a solution to the issue - but that is not an entire, complete solution.
Hence - abolish compulsory education.
(edited 3 years ago)
Original post by DiddyDec
Child labour?
Yes, possibly. Child labour is ok, except : when someone else makes a child work, against the child's will ; when such labour harms or endangers a child's health and safety, and makes a child suffer, and therefore is not suitable for a child ; and when a given job cannot be adequately done by a child, resulting in harm for the job, rather than a useful result.
Original post by Vlad83
Libertarianism. Ok.
Thank you for the comment.
Even in that case, I would state that education, any education, should be voluntary - instead of compulsory.
It is for an individual to choose - whether to educate themselves or not. It should be only with their free will.
By all means - keep education available.
Thank you for the comment.
Even in that case, I would state that education, any education, should be voluntary - instead of compulsory.
It is for an individual to choose - whether to educate themselves or not. It should be only with their free will.
By all means - keep education available.
With all due respect, but this is one of the stupidest opinions I've seen on this forum in the literal decade I've been here.
So you want little kids to choose whether to go to school or not? ****ing hell that's stupid. No child wants to go to school but it is good for them. Imagine a child who never goes to school. Illiterate, completely inept in pretty much every core skill imaginable.
A huge proportion of the workforce and society would be completely unskilled. What do you suggest those people who can't read, write, add or subtract do? There is no demand for someone with that severe lack a of skills in a developed country.
Even if you make it up to parents, you forget quite how *****y some parents are. If a lot of parents were told their child didn't want to go to school, they wouldn't fight them on it. Whether this is out of apathy or love, it's an incredibly poor decision that would genuinely ruin kids' lives
A huge proportion of the workforce and society would be completely unskilled. What do you suggest those people who can't read, write, add or subtract do? There is no demand for someone with that severe lack a of skills in a developed country.
Even if you make it up to parents, you forget quite how *****y some parents are. If a lot of parents were told their child didn't want to go to school, they wouldn't fight them on it. Whether this is out of apathy or love, it's an incredibly poor decision that would genuinely ruin kids' lives
it's certainly not everyday you find someone arguing in favor of Child Labour..
Original post by fallen_acorns
it's certainly not everyday you find someone arguing in favor of Child Labour..
Or simply that children should be given the option on whether or not they'd like to go to school.
Original post by fallen_acorns
it's certainly not everyday you find someone arguing in favor of Child Labour..
Reckon he owns a textile company? Life just hasn't been the same since the industrial revolution ended
Original post by Vlad83
Why ? Are children not people too ? Whilst adults are given options to do what they like, children should not be ?
Children don't eat vegetables. They're ****ing stupid. If kids did what they want they'd ****ing die. Do you think the age of consent should be removed? If kids are capable of making sensible decisions then clearly there's no reason for it. Sometimes rules have to be enforced for people's own goods
Original post by fallen_acorns
it's certainly not everyday you find someone arguing in favor of Child Labour..
I argue that people should be able to do what they like. Except when it harms others. And yes, children should be free to engage in labour, except in circumstances when it harms them (children), when they are made to do it by others and adults, against their will, and when a child's work creates a negative rather than a positive result in the workplace.
Original post by Vlad83
Yes, possibly. Child labour is ok, except : when someone else makes a child work, against the child's will ; when such labour harms or endangers a child's health and safety, and makes a child suffer, and therefore is not suitable for a child ; and when a given job cannot be adequately done by a child, resulting in harm for the job, rather than a useful result.
Vlad, are you left-wing or right? If you don't mind me asking
Original post by Jmoore12
So you want little kids to choose whether to go to school or not?
Yes, that's right.
****ing hell that's stupid. No child wants to go to school but it is good for them. Imagine a child who never goes to school. Illiterate, completely inept in pretty much every core skill imaginable.
That is their choice. And the choice of their parents / guardians. No child wants to go to school ? Not necessarily. Does everyone of working age not want to go to work ? Many likely do not, but not everyone.
A huge proportion of the workforce and society would be completely unskilled.
That is their choice and free will. Should be at their free will.
What do you suggest those people who can't read, write, add or subtract do?
Once they find that this harms their life and chances etc and they want to learn these skills an be educated, they should be free to, by all means. But it is their choice.
There is no demand for someone with that severe lack a of skills in a developed country.
Then such demand could be artificially created. The job market could be tailored accordingly. When there is no demand, then some people will not be in demand, in that sense. This can stimulate them to educate themselves and learn skills, to be in demand. But it is their free will and choice.
Even if you make it up to parents, you forget quite how *****y some parents are. If a lot of parents were told their child didn't want to go to school, they wouldn't fight them on it.
Then later on, when they are no longer children, these people can choose to be educated and can go and study.
Whether this is out of apathy or love, it's an incredibly poor decision that would genuinely ruin kids' lives
Then later on, when they are no longer children, these people can choose to be educated and can go and study.
Yes, that's right.
****ing hell that's stupid. No child wants to go to school but it is good for them. Imagine a child who never goes to school. Illiterate, completely inept in pretty much every core skill imaginable.
That is their choice. And the choice of their parents / guardians. No child wants to go to school ? Not necessarily. Does everyone of working age not want to go to work ? Many likely do not, but not everyone.
A huge proportion of the workforce and society would be completely unskilled.
That is their choice and free will. Should be at their free will.
What do you suggest those people who can't read, write, add or subtract do?
Once they find that this harms their life and chances etc and they want to learn these skills an be educated, they should be free to, by all means. But it is their choice.
There is no demand for someone with that severe lack a of skills in a developed country.
Then such demand could be artificially created. The job market could be tailored accordingly. When there is no demand, then some people will not be in demand, in that sense. This can stimulate them to educate themselves and learn skills, to be in demand. But it is their free will and choice.
Even if you make it up to parents, you forget quite how *****y some parents are. If a lot of parents were told their child didn't want to go to school, they wouldn't fight them on it.
Then later on, when they are no longer children, these people can choose to be educated and can go and study.
Whether this is out of apathy or love, it's an incredibly poor decision that would genuinely ruin kids' lives
Then later on, when they are no longer children, these people can choose to be educated and can go and study.
Then later on, when they are no longer children, these people can choose to be educated and can go and study.
Quick Reply
Related discussions
- Do you think A-levels should be structured differently?
- Should PE be compulsory?
- If you were the schools minister, what would you do?
- Should children be forced to take RE for gcse?
- Should A-level Maths or A-level Statistics be compulsory?
- Problems with the school system
- Alevel Geography+Pe+Psychology
- Primary Education at UWE (3 year BA)
- Time on campus
- A guide to pooling at Cambridge
- TMUA for BSc Economics at LSE
- Cambridge Maths Personal Statement
- Classics- Oxford or Cambridge?
- How easy is it to change qualification?
- UCL Psychology with Education
- Rishi Sunak proposes the Advanced British Standard
- Can someone mark my LNAT essay?
- Dropping out of college
- Should I take physics now or is it too late? Can I catch up?
- Mathematical Computation or Computer Science at UCL
Latest
Trending
Last reply 2 days ago
Is it true that British unis are prejudiced towards degrees from Scottish unis?Last reply 2 days ago
If the Russell Group was now a fair representation of what it still claims to beLast reply 1 month ago
Is University of Birmingham prestigious and respected well enough in UK ?Trending
Last reply 2 days ago
Is it true that British unis are prejudiced towards degrees from Scottish unis?Last reply 2 days ago
If the Russell Group was now a fair representation of what it still claims to beLast reply 1 month ago
Is University of Birmingham prestigious and respected well enough in UK ?
