As I read Tuesday’s column by Derrick Godfrey titled “Education would run more efficiently if privatized,” I couldn’t help but think about the other side of the issue. I feel quite strongly education should not be privatized for a number of reasons.
If all schools were private, that would mean the government could not impose standards on schools. Sounds like a good thing, I know, but it wouldn’t be. If schools aren’t regulated then no one would have to meet certain levels (to pass Subject Area Tests, for example).
Then, no one across the country could say their high school diploma meant anything because there would be no standards to judge it by. Who’s to say this school covered biology the way it should or that school covered math effectively?
Private schools can choose who they let in. I’m not saying there would be more racism if all schools were privatized, but there would definitely be discrimination – based on gender, social class, color, among other things.
While the private schools in the country may still do this today if they wish (at the risk of being sued, of course, although they don’t have to say why you were rejected), public schools must take everyone. What a relief everyone can get a decent education without worrying about being turned away!
People also need public school to be free. Private school can be enormously expensive, especially if a family has more than one child. Although some families may find private school more ideal, the fact is not everyone can afford it, and if public schools weren’t free, a large percentage of students could not go (scholarships or not).
Schools were mostly private up until 1870 or so, and it turned out not to be a good thing. Many of the immigrants (and, before the Civil War, slaves) could not get a decent education and had to be taught at home, if at all. Teachers basically only had skill in the subject they taught. Schools could decide if they wanted to hire someone based on their skill rather than any sort of formal education on the part of the teacher. By 1870, every state provided free elementary education. For the first time in the history of the U.S., everyone could learn how to read!
Godfrey asked why the government doesn’t socialize education. What he failed to point out is the government has done a lot for public universities. Schools were given land and tax money to set up a college. Mississippi State is one such land-grant institution. Do you think if this were a private school we’d only be paying $5,000 a year for in-state tuition or $13,000 for out-of-state?
Look how expensive the Ivy League schools are or just private colleges in general. Not to mention the fact MSU gives out tons of scholarships every year and waives out-of-state tuition for a number of people – everyone from children of alumni to band/chorus people to people who score well on the ACT. Private schools are a lot stingier with their scholarships. It’s almost impossible to get one unless your family lives on less than $10,000 a year or something absurd.
Before land-grant institutions existed, there were less than 1,000 colleges with less than 160,000 students in total. Most of these universities were privately funded by corporations. Between 1862 and 1890, the land-grants enabled many of our nation’s colleges and universities to open their doors. The number of students has been ever increasing since then.
Godfrey said he envisions “a society in which different schools are set up by entrepreneurs who provide children with a myriad of different options for education. They would be motivated by the desire to run a profitable business and provide their consumers with the most up to date educational tools on the market.”
But, I ask, how can this be good? Everything is so commercialized and sponsored by products as it is. Do we really need to do that to education? Schools would then push certain careers or products as “better” than anything else. They would turn school into one really long infomercial and demand all sorts of things from the students to promote their company. On a side note, what about the mascots? I mean really, who wants to go to school with Windex or Post-it as their symbol? So intimidating.
There are a couple of reasons the government doesn’t pay for college for everyone, the largest factor being the expense. Can you imagine what it would cost to pay for everyone in America to go to college?
Another big reason is the one Godfrey admitted himself: “Some occupations do not require formal education to provide the highest usefulness to society.” Plumbers, electricians and construction workers are just a few of the many jobs which do not require a college education. Many of these jobs pay just as well, if not better, than jobs which require a degree. And while these jobs may necessitate a year or two spent in some sort of training program, college would be overkill for them. Why, therefore, should the government have to pay for college for everyone when not all jobs require it? Nearly all jobs, however, require a high school diploma or equivalent, and so the government is sure to provide people the means to achieve it.
Godfrey also said, “Such generalized school is not even likely to make kids smarter. Gaining knowledge comes from a desire to do so, not from English classes in which everyone reads the SparkNotes of famous literature because they would rather spend their time elsewhere.” I have a couple of problems with this.
One: Going to school will not make you “smarter.” Period. Sorry, but that’s the way it is. Some people are inherently born with higher brain function than others; I don’t know how else to put it. The point of school is to give people an education and, whether you have a high IQ or not, being educated is useful in today’s society. It allows people to work at different jobs than if they have no formal education or just a high school diploma (which, of course, is still a form of education).
Two: In college at least, people want to be here. I’ll have none of this rubbish about reading SparkNotes because they want to be elsewhere. OK, so maybe it’s your parents who want you to be here and not you, but still, someone is paying for your education and you are here. High school is different. You have to go, and a lot of people hate it, but no one (except your parents) makes you go to college. People want to get a good education and a bachelor’s degree so they can go out in the world, find a good job and make some decent money. So, while everyone has his or her days of dislike for school in general, we all want to be here. People read SparkNotes instead of books because they are lazy and don’t want to take the time. That has nothing to do with wanting to be in college or not.
I think Godfrey and whoever else thinks education should be privatized should take a look at the other side of the issue. I’ve laid out a number of reasons why eliminating public education would be a bad idea, and I feel they are important points which at least need considering. Having free, public education and cheaper college opportunities are some of the greatest privileges we can have in this country. Let’s not take that away.
Hannah Kaase is a senior majoring in animal and dairy science. She can be contacted at [email protected].