> Could someone explain to me just how,when and why Bowles and
Gintis
started writing this garbage?>
I got a similar prescription from a prominent left academic living in a high-income jurisdiction who shall remain nameless here. My wife isn't too happy with our public school system either (in Montgomery County, MD, among the richest counties in the country).
It's possible that upper-middle class folks expect too much from public schools -- they're just too damn fussy.
Funny thing about Gintis is that he evidently does not understand that the way that marketization actually happens in public services does not conduce to competition (in the textbook economic sense), much less 'individuation.'
What you really get is a perverse sort of tracking -- kids whose parents have money get into a college track, and the rest get crummy private operations. Marketization, via vouchers or charters, is resegregation dressed up as "choice." A possible counter-example is the Catholic school, which has a good reputation for reasons I don't claim to understand. That cost advantages of the Catholic schools relative to the public system have been exaggerated is plain enough. But even if they cost the same, and notwithstanding their capacity to get rid of the worst-behaved students, do people here agree that they do a better job (religious education aside)?
mbs
> > >Gintis (coauthor with Samuel Bowles of "Schooling
> in Capitalist America")on school choice. He's "arguing
> for competitive markets for the delivery of>schooling".
> > >
> > >http://olam.ed.asu.edu/epaa/v2n6.html
> >
> > I especially liked this:
> >
> > I would argue that the process of individuation,
> which is central to dignity and self-esteem, requires
> competition.
> >
> > What a load of garbage! From this to market economies, no
> > less... ghastly.
> >
> > Bill
>