Hacker News Reader

Comment by deadeye | Hacker News Reader

The problem with public schools is that they are free and required (essentually). That is a bad combination.

There is really nothing intrinsically good about the average public school. Many are filled with kids that aren't there to learn. From the attitudes seen in this forum, that seems to be OK, because school is paradoxically about "socializing", while most here report being bullied.

As noticed here many home schoolers have religious reasons for their choice. The reason is simple, "Don't send your children to Ceasar and then be upset when they come home as Romans".

View on HN

> Many are filled with kids that aren't there to learn.

That's on the kid, not contingent on whether school is public.

> most here report being bullied.

Anecdotes like this are not worth much. What do the stats say?

> There is really nothing intrinsically good about the average public school.

Schools don't just socialize, though that is also important. Whether they succeed at educating well depends on more than one factor, but policy & curriculum is clearly one. Kids are better prepared in some countries than others, still through public systems.

If people want to homeschool, let them. Public school should still be assessed accurately.

>That's on the kid, not contingent on whether school is public.

Yes and no. The interest of the kid to learn is on the kid/family, for sure.

However, the fact that a kid who has no interest in learning is forced to go to public school is a function of how public schools operate.

Again, free and required is a bad model. They should either be free and selective or, less ideally, available and costly.

> Again, free and required is a bad model. They should either be free and selective or, less ideally, available and costly.

This is a good way to ensure the most vulnerable members of your society don't get educated. But I suppose that might be a feature to some people.

Educated or babysat?

You're assuming that school is decidedly negative if at the outset a kid doesn't "have an interest" in learning. I disagree.

100%

Homeschooling is growing and will continue to grow because it is a cheaper alternative to private school (for people whose incomes aren't so high that the loss of one income eclipses the savings of not paying for private school, e.g. most people). The growth of homeschooling is probably highly correlated with the disconnect and distrust people have with public school. Public school already has an advantage, it's literally free. So it has to have noticeable problems people feel like they can resolve at home, for people to want to leave it behind

> it is a cheaper alternative to private school

That depends. Often it means one parent stays home to educate and watch the kids, otherwise, someone else has to, and that usually costs money. If a wife otherwise would bring home a decent salary, then it isn't cheaper.

Subtract the costs of daycare, summer camps, etc., etc. from that salary, and "decent" can become a pretty high bar.

https://www.childcareaware.org/families/cost-child-care/help... . In my country daycare is subsidized. Notwithstanding, it's not that high of a bar. Two-income households still bring in more net money despite expenses.

There is no "etc etc" in this context, we're talking about watching the kids while parents work.

I literally said in my comment, for people who don't make so much that the loss of one spouse income is so much more than the cost of school

You edited your comment, and also, this:

> e.g. most people

Is false.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com