Vouchers as a way to empower a child

Discussion transcript

During a Discord debate on the end of school coercion (Feb 17, 2024), the following metaphor of schools as museums emerged as an argument against school vouchers proposed as part of Lex Libertas in Poland:

Museum model (this text in Polish: Muzeum a bon)

Two aspects of the museum metaphor

There are (at least) 2 distinct (but inter-related) aspects here:

1. How opportunities arise
2. How people make use of the opportunities

Note on the two aspects in the case of Poland

In Poland, where the voucher scheme was proposed:

1. Opportunities arise fantastically, in Poland, these days. The number of initiatives is staggering. Awareness is great but ... funding is discriminatory.
2. The use of opportunities is usually parent driven and is inhibited by pricing

Government needed to prime immature market

Reservation: If a voucher holder does not find a suitable and accessible institutional educational option ("school") they will not, by themselves, be able to cause they vision to come to life.

Comment: If you say that in immature "market", the government should help build schools, you might be right. However, vouchers can be used to secure investment based on contract that may then be financed by banks. This will work nicely assuming the country itself got those institutions and legal solutions in place.

In a mature "market", like Poland, options are too rich to list.

Abandonment of public schools

Reservation: The institutions will come about by some decision-making process - and rather than the state unilaterally deciding these, it should be based on consultation with the citizens (including children, but not only children - after all, museums are used by adults too)

Comment: State investment should be based on democratic decisions, yes. In Poland, I believe we will rather have an excess of schools abandoned by children! In other words, the opposite will be a problem. Local authority will need to sell schools into private hands or convert them into cultural centers.

Government that steals from children

Reservation: the museum example was mostly speaking to the 2nd - if all available choices are free of charge (or maybe have just a nominal fee) children (indeed all people) can make use of them as much as they want, in any combination they want, based only on their needs without being limited by the value of their voucher.

Comment: the museum metaphor is lacking a bit here, because sharing schools (as opposed to parks and democratic oases of education) is a bit hard. On a perfectly competitive market, the cost of a free museum will have to be taken away from the opportunities to finance other museums, those which children might prefer. With the arrival of on-line opportunities though, all forms of sharing will become easy. I mentioned School in the Cloud in Poland with 25,000 students. Incidentally, it provides best freedoms for kids, most respect for their needs, and yet it is crippled by funding cuts at the hand of the government. This made vouchers idea so popular. Getting rid of the yoke of uneducated officials.

Vouchers for small purchases

Reservation: They would also not feel pressured to use their vouchers for formal options that result in qualifications over the informal ones that are enriching but do not result in a certificate.

Comment: I do not fully understand. Vouchers could be used for any educational purposes, incl. buying books or a computer.

Revenue amounts to child dreams

Reservation: Museums would still need to show engagement but instead of being forced into a narrow metric of voucher revenue (which will happen just as surely as teaching to the test happens in schools) they could look at more holistic measures.

Comment: please explain. I am pretty sure we can prove it theoretically that vouchers are the best way to empower a child. it can make its own decision with fewer financial constraints. As for teaching for the test, it will die a prompt death (unless parents interfere in learning).

Child's brain is the best decider

Reservation: "the principles of perfect competition (museums do not meet that perfection, but educational options do)." educational options (at least the formal ones) most certainly do not; their value is not definable at the time of consumption; this is why the cost of fee-based education has been rising so rapidly.

Comment: our proposition Lex Libertas does not include tools to define "formal" education. Specific certificates might arise if there was a demand. It is important that you stress "value at the time of consumption". As a democratic and self-directed advocate, you probably agreed when I say that the brain is optimized to make perfect choices for the moment, that's why they should be respected.

The pleasure of learning defines optimum learning at the moment! Just in case, I add my text that contains all necessary evidence:

https://supermemo.guru/wiki/Pleasure_of_learning

Flawed schools will not survive

Reservation: "The school will not have that option because the poor quality of service will immediately result in children quitting the school." no, there are many reasons why children may continue; for example, because they have bonded (at least in a surviving shared oppression way) with others and don't want to lose their friends.

Comment: yes. they can also be pushed by parents or may be bound by contract (as in the example of school that is built on demand). However, in evolution, an inferior species dies out. Poor educational choices will hurt schools and will make them bleed students. The worst the school, the faster the departure of kids, even with little time for bonding.

Voucher implementation must be link to child freedoms

Reservation: besides this there are other arguments against vouchers (such as how their implementation in the states is leading to defunding public education, and increasing fees of for-profit schools)

Comment: you derive those observations from implementations where parents make decisions. not children. Public or private education does not differ on a "free educational market" because kids do not care about the ownership of a building or a school. Profiteering works in conditions of limited information (parents looking at school rankings) on an imperfectly competitive market (big schools against big schools). Those problem disappear when kids make decisions (they know instantly if they like the school or not) and when the number of competitive options is as rich as in Poland (School in the Cloud is free).

Summary

1. we do not need to debate it as it is the case of the law proposed for Poland, while our cause is the end to coercion
2. I leave you with a hopefully convincing question:

Imagine a child has a dream: How do you help him realize that dream if the money destined to help is in the hands of government officials? We want kids to have their own "pupil accounts" and feel "adult" and empowered :) ... I know it moves your heart a bit:)