Philosophy Now Forum

Dalek Prime wrote:First of all, education in Canada is not a federal prerogative. Second, I think what you suggest is a bad idea all around. The reward of being educated is a goal in itself.

True but many just see it as a chore without reward and with the accumulation of a debt.

Just look at the drop out rates and recognize that we have to find more ways to motivate our young to stay in school.

Regards
DL

Greatest I am wrote:

Dalek Prime wrote:First of all, education in Canada is not a federal prerogative. Second, I think what you suggest is a bad idea all around. The reward of being educated is a goal in itself.

True but many just see it as a chore without reward and with the accumulation of a debt.

Just look at the drop out rates and recognize that we have to find more ways to motivate our young to stay in school.

Regards
DL

Show the drop out rates. Then show how you can use these to prove your conclusions.

Fact is that more kids stay longer than at any time in history.

Greatest I am wrote: A parent motivating and helping his child to succeed better might thus become the norm.

Regards
DL

They are perfectly free to do this right now.

Hobbes' Choice wrote:

Greatest I am wrote:

Dalek Prime wrote:First of all, education in Canada is not a federal prerogative. Second, I think what you suggest is a bad idea all around. The reward of being educated is a goal in itself.

True but many just see it as a chore without reward and with the accumulation of a debt.

Just look at the drop out rates and recognize that we have to find more ways to motivate our young to stay in school.

Regards
DL

Show the drop out rates. Then show how you can use these to prove your conclusions.

Fact is that more kids stay longer than at any time in history.

Hmm. How best to inform.

https://www.ted.com/talks/zimchallenge?language=en
https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=p ... gAu1i6aChs

You will not think that to be the best way to show the stats but I have supplied stats before just to end in arguments on the source.

Your last statement indicates that you already have a source you trust.

Please post it to prove your statement.

Regards
DL

Hobbes' Choice wrote:

Greatest I am wrote: A parent motivating and helping his child to succeed better might thus become the norm.

Regards
DL

They are perfectly free to do this right now.

Indeed. But they do not have the promise of dollars as their reward and that should up the numbers who try considerably.

Regards
DL

Greatest I am wrote: Please post it to prove your statement.

Regards
DL

https://www.theguardian.com/education/2 ... -high-ucas

Hobbes' Choice wrote:

Greatest I am wrote: Please post it to prove your statement.

Regards
DL

https://www.theguardian.com/education/2 ... -high-ucas

I did not see drop out stats in that link but while bouncing around, I noted that the rate has improved somewhat.

This O.P. is about getting value for those your link speaks about.

Regards
DL

Greatest I am wrote:

bobevenson wrote:

Greatest I am wrote: Students would pay up front and the goal is to recoup as much of it as possible.

Are students forced to pay up front, and how much? What if they don't have any money, are their parents forced to pay?

That is usually the case today (depending on government and other opportunities), and that would not change except for the fact that a parent will see an opportunity to recoup his dollars if the student does well. A parent motivating and helping his child to succeed better might thus become the norm.

Regards
DL

No, what I mean is can the government coerce parents to pay a certain amount of money up front, and if so, how much, and to whom?

bobevenson wrote:

Greatest I am wrote:

bobevenson wrote: Are students forced to pay up front, and how much? What if they don't have any money, are their parents forced to pay?

That is usually the case today (depending on government and other opportunities), and that would not change except for the fact that a parent will see an opportunity to recoup his dollars if the student does well. A parent motivating and helping his child to succeed better might thus become the norm.

Regards
DL

No, what I mean is can the government coerce parents to pay a certain amount of money up front, and if so, how much, and to whom is it paid?

Parents already pay up front for education so coercion is already in play. The amounts vary so I cannot give you a dollar figure.

My son is presently working on his degree and it has not cost us a dime so far and that funding will continue as long as he performs to the required standards. I think all students should have that same opportunity.

Regards
DL

bobevenson wrote:Education is no different than any other product or service and should be available to everybody at the same price in a free market. Government should not be involved in education at all, and should be forced to sell its schools and eliminate the payrolls of teachers and administrators.

I agree with your first and the system I propose enhances the free marketplace more than it is right now as poor teachers are quite hard to fire.

I also agree that the government should not own the facilities but do not agree that government has no role to play.
Education is key to the progress of a nation and that gives governments a loud voice in what standards they need to keep the country doing well.

Regards
DL

Greatest I am wrote:

bobevenson wrote:Education is no different than any other product or service and should be available to everybody at the same price in a free market. Government should not be involved in education at all, and should be forced to sell its schools and eliminate the payrolls of teachers and administrators.

I agree with your first and the system I propose enhances the free marketplace more than it is right now as poor teachers are quite hard to fire.

I also agree that the government should not own the facilities but do not agree that government has no role to play.
Education is key to the progress of a nation and that gives governments a loud voice in what standards they need to keep the country doing well.

Regards
DL

You believe government should have a loud voice in educational standards? These are the people you wouldn't ask the time of day from for fear of getting the wrong answer. You say the system you propose enhances the free marketplace because poor teachers are hard to fire? If education is not publicly funded and operated, I guarantee you that private, profit-making companies in a competitive market will have no trouble firing poor teachers.

Greatest I am wrote:

Hobbes' Choice wrote:

Greatest I am wrote: Please post it to prove your statement.

Regards
DL

https://www.theguardian.com/education/2 ... -high-ucas

I did not see drop out stats in that link but while bouncing around, I noted that the rate has improved somewhat.

This O.P. is about getting value for those your link speaks about.

Regards
DL

Drop out occurs when a person hits the limit of his potential.
That fact that there are record numbers of people applying to university throws out you idiotic claim that kids dropping out is because they are not paid.

bobevenson wrote:

Greatest I am wrote:

bobevenson wrote:Education is no different than any other product or service and should be available to everybody at the same price in a free market. Government should not be involved in education at all, and should be forced to sell its schools and eliminate the payrolls of teachers and administrators.

I agree with your first and the system I propose enhances the free marketplace more than it is right now as poor teachers are quite hard to fire.

I also agree that the government should not own the facilities but do not agree that government has no role to play.
Education is key to the progress of a nation and that gives governments a loud voice in what standards they need to keep the country doing well.

Regards
DL

You believe government should have a loud voice in educational standards? These are the people you wouldn't ask the time of day from for fear of getting the wrong answer. You say the system you propose enhances the free marketplace because poor teachers are hard to fire? If education is not publicly funded and operated, I guarantee you that private, profit-making companies in a competitive market will have no trouble firing poor teachers.

Seems we are close on these issues.

The loud voice I want to hear from governments is words that would put the spurs to our floundering education horse and demand more of the competition we both favor.

Regards
DL

Hobbes' Choice wrote:

Greatest I am wrote:

Hobbes' Choice wrote: https://www.theguardian.com/education/2 ... -high-ucas

I did not see drop out stats in that link but while bouncing around, I noted that the rate has improved somewhat.

This O.P. is about getting value for those your link speaks about.

Regards
DL

Drop out occurs when a person hits the limit of his potential.
That fact that there are record numbers of people applying to university throws out you idiotic claim that kids dropping out is because they are not paid.

That is not what I said at all.

As to drop out having reached their potential. B.S..

Have you looked at adult education to see that so called limit of potential being surpassed by those same drop outs.

Regards
DL