longweekend58 wrote on May 16
th, 2012 at 5:28pm:
hawil wrote on May 16
th, 2012 at 5:11pm:
freediver wrote on May 8
th, 2012 at 8:32pm:
hawil wrote on May 8
th, 2012 at 8:29pm:
freediver wrote on May 8
th, 2012 at 8:18pm:
Sir Spot of Borg wrote on May 8
th, 2012 at 12:42pm:
How does saving money mean better education?
Because it means that we get more value for the amount we spend. It means that both public and private school students get a better education out of the amount of money spent by the government. This is true regardless of how much money the government actually spends. It is illogical to link the public/private debate with the broader debate on how much should be spent on education.
Private education system is mainly practised in english speaking countries, compared to other European countries.
I cannot speak for Asian countries, because I do not know their system.
What the private system supports is elitism, because often job applicants from public school system have little chance to get jobs in higher paid jobs.
My own children, who were both educated in the public system can vouch for that, yet now they are using the private system to educate their own children, to give them a better chance in life, yet at considerable cost and effort.
The irony of all this is, that the students in the European countries with little or no private school systems perform as well or better than students from the dual system.
You are confusing two separate issues. The value placed on education, and the total amount spent, are separate issues to the private/public debate. Subsidised private schools improve the education for all students, regardless of the total amount spent by the government. It is effectively an extra education tax on the rich that allows the rich to put more money into both public and private education, for the benefit of all.
I,am not confusing anything, it is you who is trying to confuse the subject.
I claimed that private schools foster elitism, and I still stick to that claim.
What i find a little confusing is, that I have posted the "elitism" claim before, yet my post seems to have somehow disappeared.
it might help if you actually posted some evidence. Perhaps the 'elitism' you refre to is not quite what yuo think it is. If - as the evidence suggests - private schools give better educational and life outcomes than public schools then isnt it more likely to be true that public schools promote failure and medocrity? it is an equally valid point unless you subscribe to the soviet approach that everyone should be reduced to the lowest common denominator.
What sort of evidence do you expect?
Do you think that anyone will admit to blatant elitism or discrimination.
I can give one example.
Long time ago I was looking for promotion in government employment. To get the promotion, the applicant had to pass an exam and afterwards go to an interview.
When attending the interview after sitting for the exam, I was told that I did exceptionally well at my exam, but some weeks after I was informed that in the view of the person who conducted the interview, I did not reach the required standard, but to keep on studiyng to qualify in the future for the position.
My reply was, as I cannot change the view of interviewer, plus the fact, that I,am a New Australian, something I cannot change, I will not bother to again apply for the position.
I expected that the department would at least try to deny my allegation of discrimination on the grounds of being a migrant.
The reply to my letter was; "Your letter referring to the recent promotion exam and interview" has been received and noted.
My daughter, with a lot higher education standard than I, was once not directly told, but found after her application for a position, that the only people with private school education were giving interviews.
To try to proof this is completely another matter.