Change the bit about admitting anyone regardless of ability and it sounds like a good idea.
Of course trying to force a system that works for a country with a tiny population onto the third most populous nation in the world, is a little bit problematic.
But it’s a false choice. The schools are required to conform to certain standards that then eliminates some of the differentiation between the schools. If a school cannot limit attendance based on certain academic standards then it just turns all private schools in what public schools are now. In which case, why waste energy on vouchers?
There is a lot more to differentiation than just entry limits. Even if entry limits are not allowed schools can differentiate themselves through innovation in technology and pedagogy. That is what many private schools in Sweden have done. Furthermore introducing more competition and choice itself is likely to improve the quality of education.
And if voucher schools can just keep the weakest students out that greatly limits their usefulness for low-income kids, many of whom fare poorly at academics.
As for population, voucher schemes would be introduced at the state or city level in the US. Sweden has 9 million people which is more than most states in the US.
So out of some notion of egalitarianism you hamstring the best students in favor of the worst ones. How is that a good idea?
Simply sharing a school with weaker students hamstrings the best students? For one thing, these schools presumably create advanced sections for the brighter students if necessary. For another going to school with weaker students might actually be a valuable experience for the best students. They won’t have the luxury of living their lives in the company of just the highly intelligent.
Well for one a school must limit the students somehow, so for every poor academic student who doesn’t give a fuck about being in a school you have a chair that could be filled by someone who would take advantage of it. You’d open up good academic institutions to the problems that face regular public high schools in that people who think going to school is a pointless chore and ruin it for everyone else.
Weak students don’t necessarily or even usually “ruin it for everyone else”. Students who are highly disruptive can be dealt with through disciplinary measures even without ability-based entry restrictions. On balance I think both strong and weak students benefit by interacting with a wide range of students. And like I said brighter students can be challenged academically through special classes without being segregated into separate schools.
Well if you have 30 desks and you are not allowed to choose for academic criteria then every desk filled with a non-academic sort is a desk lost to the academic sort. The experience of public school pretty much disagrees with you. The weaker students really do hold back everyone else by lowering standards so that they aren’t being failed constantly. You’re just saying that instead of having public schools we should lower the standards of private schools by removing choice until they are exactly the same as public schools. In a homogenous nation like Sweden that has a miniscule population this might be manageable, in the US, not so much.
So what? A decent school education is a basic right for every person not just “academic sorts”. Perhaps you don’t agree with this but it is the basic premise of pretty much every rich country including the United States. A lot of poor countries too even though they don’t have the resources to implement it.
Sweden isn’t actually that homogenous a society. IIRC its proportion of immigrants is similar to the US. And who said anything about lowering standards? Just because schools have to admit students doesn’t mean that they have to keep promoting them even without minimally adequate performance. There isn’t a shred of evidence that the Swedish voucher system has lowered academic standards; in fact quite the opposite.
When I was walking around Stockholm Sweden a few years ago, it looked homogenous to me – more so than walking around Manhattan, Chicago, or San Francisco.
Some people don’t even want the basic education that is on offer to them. I’m tired of this notion that shits all over personal responsibility. Yes, school can be fixed, no doubt about it, but there is an anti-education culture amongst America’s poor that is disruptive to other students.
Yes, I fully believe that we should have a system for creating elites. Society is benefitted more by helping them excel than by holding them back.
Heil Hitler. Joke. Seriously:
If every student from every kind of background is given equal opportunity to get any kind of education, it will not hold back the “elite”, it will give the talented a chance, whether he or she is working class or upper class. Sweden isn’t exactly going under due to it’s so called “totalitarian” school system. Your beloved “elite” (whatever that is) will also be given every chance in the world, so everybody’s happy.
I’m not talking about elite as in money, I am talking about elite as in talent/skill. He said that they aren’t allowed to keep people out based on academic standards. That might work for a homogenous country like Sweden (calling Sweden diverse is a joke) that has a tiny population, but I am not so certain that it can translate to a truly diverse nation with a massive population like the US. I’m just skeptical.
I have no idea how the system works in Sweden, but I know in charter schools in the US, schools are not allowed to have entrance exams but they ARE allowed to be rigorous: the idea is that kids that are failing everything will soon transfer to a less rigorous school, and after a bit kids that aren’t interested in working won’t even apply.
I guess that’s fair.
A quick look at Wiki says that Sweden does have a significant immigrant population. Some of them are from next-door Finland, but many others are from the Middle East and Southern Europe.So Sweden is not as diverse as the US but it’s a lot more diverse than people think.
In any event the relevance to this debate is not clear. The Swedish voucher system has increased the diversity of the schools available so it should be even more useful in a more diverse country.
Why?
Wouldn’t a more diverse population require a greater variety of schools so long as they meet basic academic requirements? Do you want to reduce the options available to parents when it comes to schools?
Reducing options comes in more than one flavor. It can either be by not giving people school choice, or by requiring schools to conform to particular standards that eliminate their ability to organize themselves creatively. So please stop repeating this mantra about choice because it’s not simply about choice.
The problem here is that they aren’t allowed to have academic requirements for entrance.