I actually went to Kunskapsskolan as the equivalent of a High School student. Graduated in 2005. It work out very well for me, the freedom to go about the curriculum at my own pace suited me perfectly. The experience of going there was very much like what you would find at a university. The school demanded a very high level of motivation and discipline. And this makes it problematic, since quite a lot of students at that age were ill prepared to face that.
I might be hesitant to say that this reform has worked out well for Sweden as a whole, as I think for-profit entities in charge of public education is a step in the wrong direction.
Definitely the wrong direction, because it can go wrong on so many ways.
Myself I am a victim of for-profit education (well, my spouse is), effectively locked in by contract at a company for 10+ years more. It sounds so good in the beginning, but once you finish your studies and you stand in front of that loong walk...
"The school demanded a very high level of motivation and discipline. And this makes it problematic, since quite a lot of students at that age were ill prepared to face that."
Cherrypicking of the self motivated ones will reduce the level of motivation and self-discipline seen in the 'safety net' schools. Not good for society as a whole. I worry about this in the UK.
Mostly it's in Swedish media, though. And what's been most criticized is the ability to extract profit from state funds, given that the biggest independent schools are owned by off-shore VC companies. The situation is similar with Swedish healthcare.
Now, since I'm not in favor of any form of mandatory schooling it doesn't really matter to me exactly why the Swedish schools suck... But you must keep in mind that there was another, rather large reform in the early 90's: the responsibility for the schools were transferred from the state to the municipalities. This hasn't exactly worked out well either and surely has had impact on the PISA rankings (see e.g Maciej Zaremba's articles in DN, http://www.dn.se/kultur-noje/maciej-zaremba-en-forolampning-... ).
Mr Ledin goes one better. “We do not mind being compared to McDonald's,” he says. “If we're religious about anything, it's standardisation. We tell our teachers it is more important to do things the same way than to do them well.”
nice approach and i like the fact that at least something changes in school system since it needs to be improved for sure.
still i dont like schools to earn so much money. teachers and school managers need incentives to provide excellent lessons. but so much money as a profit?
another point is the philosophy of the school.
on the one hand they say that every student can learn at "his own level" but on the other hand they prefer standardization over everything else.
they only want the standardization to be used at the framework, the process side. they dont want every student to learn the same things at the same speed.
still it sounds like a contradiction to me.
with some improvements this could be a very nice approach.
employees should be able to get really big bonusses based on performance. half of the net profit should be used for investments and the other half should be extra tax for the goverment since imo schools should not accumulate huge profit amounts..
The school system in Sweden is many things (despicable, horrendous, etc etc), but free market it is not. These private schools don't operate on a free market - the government supplies the "customers" (students) under penalty of prison* for the students' parents, for crying out loud.
* Or possibly even worse: a student who doesn't go to school is liable to end up in the clutches of the meddling welfare board.
That's a BS semantic argument. First off you can be 'home schooled'. Far more importantly the question is does privatizing the school system improve average student performance OR lower costs and the answer is no.
It's not bullshit. The government are effectively outsourcing education to private companies. That's always going to result in rent-seeking on the part of the private companies. And it's not the same as free market/full privatisation, where the parents would pay the schools.
(Not that I think private schooling would be better or cheaper than publicly funded schooling.)
What on earth do you mean? Someone (the article) claimed the system was free market. I showed otherwise. It's about as far from semantic BS arguments as you can come.
I was not debating the efficiency of the private schools visavi public schools. Introducing strawmen is stupid.
Also: home schooling has been illegal in Sweden since 2010.
More to the point, while it's mandated that people buy car insurance few people argue that that's not a 'free market' because regulation is not the same thing as a state monopoly. After-all people also need food.
Car insurance also doesn't operate on a free market, for the reason you cite. I don't care that "few people" would argue it (appeal to authority; you like fallacies don't you?). You seem to think that something is either a state monopoly or a free market, but it is not so.
Words gain meaning based on what the largest group of people think. If 90% of the population think grapes refers to grapes including the stem and you try and restrict the definition further the only way to back that up is an appeal to authority. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Abhar-iran.JPG
PS: Most economists accept that many completely unregulated market tends to monopoly's which try to extract rents. However, once a monopoly shows up they no longer accept that it's a 'free market' so the term 'free market' does not mean what happens when government does not interfere with a market. After that it get's complected as to where the line is drawn between free market and something else, however the bar is surprisingly high as for example moderate sin taxes don't prevent free markets.
I very much doubt that the Swedish school system can be seriously described as despicable or horrendous, even if it has fallen from its former glory. Would you care to elaborate?
All mandatory school systems are despicable and horrendous. The first major issue is the coercion involved: they control a child's life for 9 years (or even 12 years in some countries). It's absurd. This alone should be reason enough to dissolve the entire public school system (and possibly put various Ministers of Eduction to trial).
The second major issue is that they are a tool the state uses to indoctrinate children (naive by nature) with whatever the correct values of the day are. Prussia (where public schooling originated) needed obedient soldiers, modern-day Sweden needs a large underclass of socialists willing to support various hare-brained political schemes. The schools reflect this. What happens, for instance, if you call homosexuality "not normal"[1] in a Swedish school? It gets you an F in biology and a label as a "homophobe" in the state-run media[2]. One wonders what happened to students who questioned communism in the Soviet Union.
See "Deschooling society" by Ivan Illich, "Underground history of the American school system" by John Taylor Gatto.
It's interesting that no mention was made of the Sweden's extremely poor policies and record with respect to homeschooling. There has been a lot of press the past few years over the Johansson family (child seized for being homeschooled) to the Himmelstrand family (severe fines for homeschooling). Here is a link to an HSLDA collection of other links that specifically address homeschooling in Sweden (http://www.hslda.org/hs/international/Sweden/).
26 comments
[ 2.4 ms ] story [ 55.8 ms ] threadI might be hesitant to say that this reform has worked out well for Sweden as a whole, as I think for-profit entities in charge of public education is a step in the wrong direction.
Myself I am a victim of for-profit education (well, my spouse is), effectively locked in by contract at a company for 10+ years more. It sounds so good in the beginning, but once you finish your studies and you stand in front of that loong walk...
Cherrypicking of the self motivated ones will reduce the level of motivation and self-discipline seen in the 'safety net' schools. Not good for society as a whole. I worry about this in the UK.
* generally worse results and increased inequality
* 5 companies dominate the market, and makes huge profits
* Sweden has fallen from 3rd to 19th on the PISA test in reading.
* huge quality differences between schools
* schools have become a "sorting machine" where motivated parents and pupils choose certain schools and avoid other schools.
* The experience from Sweden, and research from OECD shows that more competition in school does not produce better results.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Programme_for_International_Stu... http://www.localschoolsnetwork.org.uk/2011/01/why-gove-no-lo...
Article from Swedish Radio:
http://sverigesradio.se/sida/artikel.aspx?programid=2054&...
Report on OECD report:
http://www.antidotenews.org.uk/?p=628&dm_i=LEV,ACD6,33QO...
Mostly it's in Swedish media, though. And what's been most criticized is the ability to extract profit from state funds, given that the biggest independent schools are owned by off-shore VC companies. The situation is similar with Swedish healthcare.
Jakobsson, Anders; Oscarsson, Magnus; Karlsson, Karl - Göran. Det fria skolvalet hotar kvaliteten Svensk skola. http://www.newsmill.se/artikel/2010/12/09/forskare-fria-skol...
About Sweden's plummeting PISA scores in reading:
PISA 2009 – Executive Summary, OECD 2010 page 15
still i dont like schools to earn so much money. teachers and school managers need incentives to provide excellent lessons. but so much money as a profit?
another point is the philosophy of the school. on the one hand they say that every student can learn at "his own level" but on the other hand they prefer standardization over everything else.
they only want the standardization to be used at the framework, the process side. they dont want every student to learn the same things at the same speed. still it sounds like a contradiction to me.
with some improvements this could be a very nice approach. employees should be able to get really big bonusses based on performance. half of the net profit should be used for investments and the other half should be extra tax for the goverment since imo schools should not accumulate huge profit amounts..
* Or possibly even worse: a student who doesn't go to school is liable to end up in the clutches of the meddling welfare board.
These "free market" schools receive payments from the government for each student they have.
The government mandates that everyone attend school between the ages of 7 and 16 (or 6 and 15).
This is not a free market. You cannot have the government create customers like this in a free market.
(Not that I think private schooling would be better or cheaper than publicly funded schooling.)
I was not debating the efficiency of the private schools visavi public schools. Introducing strawmen is stupid.
Also: home schooling has been illegal in Sweden since 2010.
More to the point, while it's mandated that people buy car insurance few people argue that that's not a 'free market' because regulation is not the same thing as a state monopoly. After-all people also need food.
Yeah, you got me (insert rolleyes).
Car insurance also doesn't operate on a free market, for the reason you cite. I don't care that "few people" would argue it (appeal to authority; you like fallacies don't you?). You seem to think that something is either a state monopoly or a free market, but it is not so.
PS: Most economists accept that many completely unregulated market tends to monopoly's which try to extract rents. However, once a monopoly shows up they no longer accept that it's a 'free market' so the term 'free market' does not mean what happens when government does not interfere with a market. After that it get's complected as to where the line is drawn between free market and something else, however the bar is surprisingly high as for example moderate sin taxes don't prevent free markets.
The second major issue is that they are a tool the state uses to indoctrinate children (naive by nature) with whatever the correct values of the day are. Prussia (where public schooling originated) needed obedient soldiers, modern-day Sweden needs a large underclass of socialists willing to support various hare-brained political schemes. The schools reflect this. What happens, for instance, if you call homosexuality "not normal"[1] in a Swedish school? It gets you an F in biology and a label as a "homophobe" in the state-run media[2]. One wonders what happened to students who questioned communism in the Soviet Union.
See "Deschooling society" by Ivan Illich, "Underground history of the American school system" by John Taylor Gatto.
[1] Which is surely true, statistically speaking.
[2] http://www.svt.se/nyheter/regionalt/abc/homofobi-gav-underka...