A Response to "The Separation of School & State" by Wendy McElroy

Read This First --------> Editorial Link

WM,

I have no problems with apprenticeships or home schooling; I think they are both fine alternatives to public education. However, the reality is that those most in need of public education, the poor and disenfranchised, are the ones least likely to have the capability to offer those alternatives to their children. They generally do not have the money for private education and they certainly do not have the time or opportunity to offer home schooling as more often then not they are single parents or both parents are working just to make ends meet. By drawing public funds away from public schools, you are exacerbating an already significant problem in quality. If your argument is that the quality of education in public schools needs to be improved, I agree. But, finding better ways to get a better return on investment for money spent would be a more focused approach then to take money away in hopes of getting some sort of benefit from a carrot and stick approach.

Furthermore, the current request, by a small minority of groups, for regulation of private schools stems from, and is a reaction to, the request to provide these schools with public money, either in the form of vouchers or some other vehicle. The truth of the matter is that any time public funds, which are derived from taxes on all, are to be used for any purpose, even more so for education, then it is reasonable and frankly mandatory to ensure that the money is not being used in a way that is contrary or harmful to the public at large. In a climate where a challenge to the theory of evolution is prevalent, I for one want to make sure that we are not funding fundamentalist views with American taxpayer dollars.

Lastly, as a researcher you should know that it is disingenuous at best to site references that have little or no scientific basis. At the time that the Frenchman made his quote it would have been nearly impossible to have accurate census data to back up his claim. In fact, the dearth of properly educated people from that time and beyond is what prompted the formation of public education in the first place. Your usage of such passages and then your passing "references" to "other" studies is also misleading and frankly not worthy of a researcher and someone whom, I am assuming, understands the importance of using empirical evidence to prove a point. You are engaging in an intellectual slight-of-hand to support your viewpoints and that only detracts from your position. I would expect more from a researcher, editor and someone who is a proponent of better education for all.