In The Case against Education: Why the Education System Is a Waste of Time and Money, Bryan Caplan uses Earth data to make the case that compulsory education does not significantly increase literacy. I’m skeptical that prosociability and the ability to manage your own boredom are taught at school in a way that would not be learned otherwise. Managing your own boredom requires freedom, which is the opposite of compulsion. Sociability requires permission to speak, which is forbidden by default in classroom-style schooling. Algebra and calculus seem the most IQ loaded of anything taught in school.
I don’t doubt that it’s useful to have the whole population learn reading and arithmetic, but this seems to me like it’s the kind of thing that can be taught in a few months. (Or a single month to a smart child.) If kids don’t learn reading automatically then that would imply that they wouldn’t text each other in the absence of school which, to me, is reducto ad absurdum.
In The Case against Education: Why the Education System Is a Waste of Time and Money, Bryan Caplan uses Earth data to make the case that compulsory education does not significantly increase literacy.
Compulsory education increases literacy, see the Likbez in the USSR.
Managing your own boredom requires freedom, which is the opposite of compulsion.
One can make the opposite assertion, that it’s fastest learned through discipline, and point to Chinese or South Korean schools.
I don’t doubt that it’s useful to have the whole population learn reading and arithmetic, but this seems to me like it’s the kind of thing that can be taught in a few months.
From my couple years experience teaching average (non-selected) kids, expecting that something can be taught to them quickly is a recipe for disappointment.
If kids don’t learn reading automatically then that would imply that they wouldn’t text each other in the absence of school which, to me, is reductio ad absurdum.
Texting isn’t enough for literacy, lots of kids can text but cannot read and understand a book, ask any teacher.
In The Case against Education: Why the Education System Is a Waste of Time and Money, Bryan Caplan uses Earth data to make the case that compulsory education does not significantly increase literacy.
My reading is that he claims compulsory education had little effect in Britain and the US, where literacy was already widespread.
When Britain first made education
compulsory for 5-to-10-year-olds in 1880, over 95% of 15-
year-olds were already literate. [1]
There’s an interesting footnote where he references a paper on economic returns of compulsory education, which cites many sources (p14) finding little to no economic return from schooling reform (though limited to Europe).
In The Case against Education: Why the Education System Is a Waste of Time and Money, Bryan Caplan uses Earth data to make the case that compulsory education does not significantly increase literacy. I’m skeptical that prosociability and the ability to manage your own boredom are taught at school in a way that would not be learned otherwise. Managing your own boredom requires freedom, which is the opposite of compulsion. Sociability requires permission to speak, which is forbidden by default in classroom-style schooling. Algebra and calculus seem the most IQ loaded of anything taught in school.
I don’t doubt that it’s useful to have the whole population learn reading and arithmetic, but this seems to me like it’s the kind of thing that can be taught in a few months. (Or a single month to a smart child.) If kids don’t learn reading automatically then that would imply that they wouldn’t text each other in the absence of school which, to me, is reducto ad absurdum.
Compulsory education increases literacy, see the Likbez in the USSR.
One can make the opposite assertion, that it’s fastest learned through discipline, and point to Chinese or South Korean schools.
From my couple years experience teaching average (non-selected) kids, expecting that something can be taught to them quickly is a recipe for disappointment.
Texting isn’t enough for literacy, lots of kids can text but cannot read and understand a book, ask any teacher.
My reading is that he claims compulsory education had little effect in Britain and the US, where literacy was already widespread.
There’s an interesting footnote where he references a paper on economic returns of compulsory education, which cites many sources (p14) finding little to no economic return from schooling reform (though limited to Europe).