Education should be Mandated in the United States of America

I return the thanks and the belief this is productive. I think there are too many claims in your post to address well in 10k characters, So I will address as many as I can sufficiently. If there were no limit I would address them all. 1. Prioritizing Parents and Indoctrination. You are absolutely correct that teachers indoctrinate students as well. You are correct that this leads to a clash between the parent's ideology and the teacher's ideology. I agree too that parents need to have some say in the education of their children. Even in a utopian society, People would still likely have emotional attachments to offspring that they sire or birth. Being that we're debating in our current reality, I have to accept society functions best when parents have some control over their student's education. You also agree with me that parents do and are indoctrinating their children when they teach their thoughts, And they themselves feel or think that their ideology is the best. With all of these agreed upon statements in mind, The middle ground, The compromise between the two stances is a mandated public school system. No matter what, Instruction indoctrinates. Having competing viewpoints is the only defense against indoctrination. The stress involved with the choice between believing one's parents or one's teachers, Or even one's friends who learn a different ideology from their parents or teachers, Is a necessary stress. Neither of us would say that a life with no stress creates strong, Individualistic human beings capable of succeeding in life. This is a necessary stress. Homeschooling alone would then be indoctrination from one side. I. E. No compromise at all. Homeschooling, With the mandate and tests required, Is a compromise that greatly favors the parents. Private schooling is nearly identical to homeschooling. The private school selected will more than likely be biased towards the parent's views, Limiting ideological diversity. This leads to less well-rounded children. Children who have have not had to question certain positions that a significant, If not majority of the population differs from their parents and their private instructors on. I propose to you that the people can hold the teachers accountable if they push an extreme ideology, As many have been held accountable and fired for improper teaching. The public school we must strive to build needs to be above extreme ideology and give children only the tools required to think for themselves, Countering in some way the indoctrination of the parents on the child. In this respect, It should be an effort of all members of our society to disable bureaucrats from having any control over the Public School curriculum. Instead, It should be educators who make the curriculum. Children are more likely to accept their parent's views even with our current system in place. This can be proven statistically through various means. I do have sources for this, But posting sources on this site is now a struggle. If you or the audience wish for me to supply them I'll be happy to do so but I believe this is not a controversial point. So, In short, Your current view guarantees the parent's rights as strong as possible, Which is admirable to me. I contend that you put too little faith in the Public School System' efficacy at giving children the basic tools required to succeed, Even if we can both agree that it needs to be improved drastically (and can easily be, Given the state of education in other countries) I contend that you discount the importance of ideological diversity and its role in strengthening individuality for our children. I contend that you put too little value on the child's rights. 2. Public School Funding, Safety, And Strength of Workers. We agree on taxes, The distribution of those taxes, And the duty of the government here. Some schools currently are dangerous places for students i. E. Poisoned water, Loose ceiling tiles, Nails sticking out of floors, Et cetera. This is an unequal funding issue which was my point. These structural insecurities are easily resolved with proper funding. This is certainly the government's fault currently. Few people run and mention these issues. This is not an argument against public schools as a concept, Just the execution in our current reality. There is less guarantee that the homes of some children are any safer. "Dangerous criminals" are forced to attend the same schools. Please let's keep in mind we're talking about children here. If there is any chance to prevent children from becoming criminals it is in the public school system. Interactions with supportive adults go a long way to stopping more crime than we will ever know. There are abusive parents out there. More than we will ever likely know. I can count with the fingers on my left hand the friends I have had who were not stressed more than necessary or directly abused by their parents, And these aren't even intentional mistakes on the parent's part. Were y0ur parents perfect? Children who have committed crimes are not classified on the same level as adult criminals, Nor should they be. From where do you think their criminality arises? From the public schooling system, Built to educate, Support, And keep children safe, Or the reality outside the public school systems? In what world can you say it is better for society that children who are neglected at home should stay at home? Now, What better real world experience is there for children than experiencing delinquency on low levels in a relatively safe environment? People tend to make fun of parents who go overboard with concerns for 'safety' and end up weakening their children. These children are called 'sheltered. ' This term applies exceedingly well to home schooled and private schooled children. Parents will get air purifiers, Mask their children, Et cetera to prevent them from getting sick. This in turn leads their immune systems to develop less. This in turn makes them more prone to sicknesses for the rest of their life. Some parents put paddings all over their child when they go to ride a bike or skateboard. Other parents ban their children from those experiences altogether citing safety concerns. If you value real world experience as you say, There are many experiences of value to be had in public schools. These lessons are extremely important, In my view, To be prepared for the real world outside of the parental shelter. This is called 'socializing' children. It is a known objectively important step for well-balanced children. It is a well-known problem for home schooled children. Home school parents try to mitigate this by exposing their children to other home schooled children with mixed results. Home schooled children grow up and what many of them will tell you after they are adults is that they lacked socialization and feel it is important for their children. What publicly schooled children will say is they love how smart home schooled or private schooled children are. There is not a reason both of these strengths cannot be merged with the public school system. Neither you or I agree that schooling needs to last as long as it does. I would submit to you and our audience that children graduating high school at 18 today could be taught everything they have learned up to that point at a much earlier age. 13 is my opinion, At the very least. Some children have graduated college at far less of an age (I do have sources, Again). I propose that outside of mentally challenged situations this will be true. I can cite over a decade of teaching experience to this as well. There is no question that better educated workers make for a stronger work force. Even if your specialization is narrow and focused, Cross pollination will help every field. A plumber or electrician without math or physics knowledge will lead to more cases of electrocution, Shoddy plumbing, And wiring. 3. Board of Education and Authority You claim that homeopath, Astrology, Religion, Et cetera should have a place in schools because I, And the majority of scientists, Have "twisted facts. " You are making a claim that no facts can be known to exist. This is not true. To be frank homeopathy and astrology are taught in schools to some extent. The evidence in direct opposition to them, With no evidence for them makes your argument an appeal to ignorance when there is no ignorance on the subject. You're saying that my facts are not facts. If that is the case I can't help you, And I wish you the best. The parents are free to present their evidence to their children if they wish it. A federal board would say you cannot teach demonstrably false science as 'up for debate' science. To pretend it is not known. Splitting these choices among more than one Board means that arguments don't all lead to the same authority. Multiple boards will make multiple decisions when only one decision is factually true. Appealing to scientific fact is not an 'appeal to an anonymous authority. ' Science is not anonymous. In conclusion: We agree parents indoctrinate. We agree schools indoctrinate. Your position is that the parent's indoctrination is acceptable and the school's is not. If you have your way, The parents indoctrination will be unchallenged. The school's indoctrination will never be unchallenged by the parents unless it is perfectly of the same ideology, In which case you should have no issue with it. Your conclusion at the end of R2 is that the educator's indoctrination would, And is currently, Going unopposed. Giving children no room for escape. The reality is that the school is never unopposed by the parents unless the parents don't care at all. In which case, The school is superior for the child than the parents. The only system in which indoctrination is not challenged is an education that stems from the parents alone, Or from the parent's selections alone. I submit that this is the only scenario in which the child has no escape. -Thoht