[natedogg]

Vouchers are the only answer. Even your ideas, which sound good, cannot possibly be right for everyone.

Some parents may not want their child to attend a school that has sports programs and some may feel that school isn't school without sports programs. Some may feel that a big crowded school is a good social environment, and some may not. Some may feel that rote memorization is an important part of learning, and some may not. And then there's the obvious issue of reality vs. superstition -- oops I mean science vs. religion.

There is no way for a central planning approach to work for everyone. If we have one comprehensive rule that says, for example, "no art class in high school", or "everyone must take P.E.", we are bound to infuriate many parents.

The answer is to let every parent decide what they want for their kids and then enable them to act on it. To do otherwise is nothing short of agreeing that the state has more right to direct your child's education than you do.

And the only way to let parents decide is some sort of voucher system. Our current system is such that only the rich can decide what's best for their childern. Everyone else must simply accept whatever crap the state has to offer.

Also, home and self-schooling will grow rapidly with advancements in online education, which adds a new dimension to the whole issue. What happens when your child can get high quality chemistry instruction for free (or at least cheaply) online? Why would you risk sending him to an unacceptable school environment with teachers who
spend most of their time disciplining instead of teaching?

Just pocket the voucher and stay home. No voucher? Still worth it. Maybe you want to send your kid to school part time because you think the socialization is important, but all of his college prep classes are done at home online.

Online education, both structured and self-directed, is honestly going to revolutionize how we approach education in this country.

natedogg