EKIP– Expert Club for Economics and Politics A Different Opinion
Even though schools are supported by our taxes, we only laugh at the failure of a product we ourselves helped create.
Illiteracy was demonstrated by the candidate students at the Bulgarian language exam at the Plovdiv University "Paisiy Hilendarski". This was the finding in the public space in recent days. The reason for it was the pearls that came to light from the exam. Those who wanted to be students created the ugly image of Rambo Silek in an attempt to reproduce the name of the famous Gabrovo artist.
In fact, it can be argued that there is rather a defect in our education that creates such misunderstandings. Think about it – we live in a country with a state-controlled education system. And, although schools are supported by our taxes, we only laugh at the failure of a product that we ourselves helped create. As for general education schools from 1 to 12 grades, 99% of students there gain knowledge in public ones and only 1% go to school in private schools. 1 That is, a big laugh falls.
This is how Rambo Silek was born. His parents are student apathy, stuck in the status quo methodology, the obsession with getting excellent grades, bureaucracy and a rigid curriculum. There is no denying that these are all signs of our educational system. So why is it so normally perceived?
The most common argument in favor of public education is that it provides equal opportunity for all through a standardized scheme of mass education, with the help of which students receive the same basic knowledge and skills without exception. This idea leads to the logic of averaging skills and knowledge, and it seems that the average level that has been formed in our country is quite low. That is, the main function of such education does not work.
Of course, the alternative of private education is always on the agenda, but opponents of this approach can rightly point their finger at the above lines and the mentioned only 1% of students in private schools. A market-oriented system will not be accessible to everyone, they argue, referring to such data and the current situation. The argument against such a claim, however, is called competition. It is precisely competition that would break the monopoly of Rambo Silek education. It is obvious that with a limited supply of a quality good, consumers who appreciate its value will fight to acquire it. This raises its price and limits the number of potential buyers to the wealthiest of them. But as the supply expands, the price gradually decreases until equilibrium is reached. Of course, if the cost of providing private education is too high compared to the price that those seeking it are willing to pay, then this good would remain a luxury.
So the question is, can we shake hands at the equilibrium point? To answer it, let's outline the differences between the approaches. The market-oriented one offers quite flexible solutions to some of the existing problems. Here are a few specific ones:
- Homework should not be “work.” Additional assignments are given in case the student needs them or is working on an individual project that cannot be allocated enough time in class.
- Moving from one grade to another is not a sure sign of mastered skills and knowledge. Development should be supported by actually acquired abilities in a given subject. The status quo of the current school cycle puts actually acquired knowledge in the background. Grades should play the role of certificates, not just numbers that teachers are obliged to fill in the diary.
- Testing and evaluation should not be based solely on learned facts (often learned incorrectly). A personalized approach helps to eliminate the funnel through which knowledge is currently being pushed;
- The school should be managed by a manager. It is important that the director has not only pedagogical experience, but also a managerial perspective on the institution and budget assigned to him. With increased parental involvement in decision-making, the school would function like a small company with a good team.
Many of the above examples can work right now without radical changes. However, going to school is not just a series of days spent absorbing ideas according to foreign rules that contradict our perceptions and knowledge that is almost never put to use. If we allow this to happen, the problem is not with the victims. It is wrong to accuse young people of illiteracy when we have been subsidizing it for at least 12 years without remorse.
---
1 According to NSI data: STUDENTS BY GROUPS OF CLASSES AND GENDER IN COMPREHENSIVE SCHOOLS BY FORM OF OWNERSHIP IN THE 2011/2012 ACADEMIC YEAR
What nonsense, that only the wealthiest, not the smartest, should enter the best schools?! Is there any point in even commenting on such nonsense!
(Stoyan)
Why did you decide that it had to be this way? I.e. where does it say that only the wealthiest will enter the best schools?
School/education (as a product) is not something you choose whether to buy or not - every parent will want to enroll their children in school and educate them. It follows that private schools will have guaranteed users - the students. Then the owner will say to himself, why should I raise the quality, when I can still make a profit for a little invested money? Someone else will decide to invest more and raise the quality, but of course he will say to himself, why shouldn't it be more expensive for me than for others, since my school is much better?!
In fact, which goods on the market are expensive and which are cheap? Perhaps private schools will be the first commodity where quality will be cheap and bad - expensive?
"This increases its price and limits the number of potential buyers to the wealthiest of them." - here you say it yourself and then:
"But as supply expands, the price gradually decreases until equilibrium is reached. Of course, if the cost of providing private education is too high compared to the price that those seeking it are willing to pay, then this good would remain a luxury." - this only seems to support my words.
And what is this handshake? Who will shake hands? The state is excluded from the equation. Have, for example, the energy distribution companies shaken hands with consumers or consulted them about the quality and prices they offer them?
And then you mention some major changes in the teaching itself and the methods of assessment, which I have great doubts about being correct and positive. Unless you have worked in the education system for years and seen it from the inside, and have a pedagogical education.
Here is another quote from your article: "knowledge that is almost never used", and your article is titled "Why are pearls born in school?"... Don't you see the connection? After all, many of these "knowledge that is almost never used" and more precisely, their lack, lead to the birth of many of the pearls in schools.
Let's go back in history, to the time of socialism, before 1989. Back then, there were no private schools, only state schools. But there were no such gems as today's. So this state model of education worked as it should, and now it doesn't work. And you propose as a solution, not to see what the real problems of education are, but to simply replace the system with another. For me, this is not a solution.
Have you ever thought that part of the reasons for poor education are the result of a changed value system, of improper upbringing by parents?
(Stoyan)
Every limited resource must be produced and purchased in some way. Just as every parent will want to enroll their children in school, every parent will want to give them the best food, buy them apartments and cars. Does this mean we should make housing free too?
I see that you are not familiar with the pricing process in the market, I will not be able to explain it to you, but it does not work in the way you imagine. The article itself explains some of the possible scenarios for the price of the commodity - education. I also want to remind you that education is currently being paid for - very inefficiently through the tax system.
First of all, I have been part of the education system for years, about 16. Also, the very fact that I do not have a pedagogical education, but an economic one, helps me understand how a system of production of limited goods works.
The system before 1989 was suitable for that model. It was financed by it and served the (bankrupt) planned economy. Neither that type of financing nor the planned economy exists anymore.
You are somewhat right about the upbringing and attitude of parents. But these are processes that the educational system can hardly influence.
Bob Dylan, are you sure there weren't any gems like that? Or were they just not publicized?
To be honest, I don't see a huge difference in the knowledge of people who graduated before '89 and after '89 - in both cases, basic knowledge of economics, politics and management is lacking; narrowly specialized personnel are being produced, but they are not aimed at the high levels, but at the lowest. In short, we have an army of welders, and not a single factory director.
It scares me how Bulgarians, with every reform in education, jump up and shout "it was better before". No matter how much we turn a blind eye, the world is changing, and education must change with it, because otherwise we risk our children being able to survive only in a world that disappeared in 1989.
Not to mention that there were great ideas in Bulgaria, like making private schools... free!
Bob Dylan, are you sure there weren't any gems like that? Or were they just not publicized?
To be honest, I don't see a huge difference in the knowledge of people who graduated before '89 and after '89 - in both cases, basic knowledge of economics, politics and management is lacking; narrowly specialized personnel are being produced, but they are not aimed at the high levels, but at the lowest. In short, we have an army of welders, and not a single factory director.
It scares me how Bulgarians, with every reform in education, jump up and shout "it was better before". No matter how much we turn a blind eye, the world is changing, and education must change with it, because otherwise we risk our children being able to survive only in a world that disappeared in 1989.
Not to mention that there were great ideas in Bulgaria, such as making private schools... free!
You asked me why I decided that only the wealthiest would get into the best schools, and I answered you. But you didn't answer my question about which goods are cheap/expensive in terms of quality.
You also didn't answer my question about what kind of handshake you mean, who will agree with whom about what?
During the 16 years you were part of the system, what subjects did you teach? What schools or universities did you teach at?
The education system before 1989 still exists today, it hasn't changed much at the moment. But surely, since the good education was during that regime, it should automatically be dropped as an argument, because everything done by the communists is, by presumption, bad?
Before you sat down and wrote this article, you probably researched and made calculations like:
average salary = XXX BGN.
average taxes paid by both parents in one year = XXX BGN.
of these taxes paid, the state allocates = XX BGN per year for education
We draw the line and get: currently a family of 4 (2 parents with 2 children) pays an average of 2000 BGN per year for the education of 1 child.
An elementary school has:
number of teachers = XX
average salary for a teacher = XXX BGN
money for maintenance and development of the school and school facilities = XXXXXX BGN.
average number of students = XXX
and here we can make a comparison:
amount of teachers' salaries compared to the fee per student per year
and how these values will compare to the above calculation for the current situation, or assuming that such a private school will operate normally, what average fees the teachers will have to pay.
I'm sure you've done such calculations before writing your article. Please share them with us, though I'm really not familiar with the pricing process. And statements that aren't backed up by numbers don't seem serious to me, especially for an economist.
(Stoyan)
Neither I nor the author has made calculations to open a private school. These calculations (even if they were made) are absolutely untenable when made by people who do not manage schools. The article is based on knowledge of public policies in education, not on grocery calculations.
Since you want me to persist in my ignorance, I will enter your tone. What is quality? What is high/low price? What is a good achievement in education, what is a failure?
As for the hand issue, it's about withdrawing taxpayers from funding this system.
I haven't taught, I've been trained by teachers, principals, and other specialists from the Ministry of Education. What does this have to do with the topic? I think you didn't read what I explained to you about pedagogical education.
What is happening today (and the last 10-20 years) in schools? Teachers (especially young ones) have lost motivation to work. First, low salaries, second, they no longer have control over the children. A student can act like a monkey and ruin the learning process, and the teacher can do nothing. He can't expel him (because something could happen to him and he would be held responsible later), he can't be forced (because then an angry parent will come and hold the teacher accountable for his attitude towards the child). The teacher is powerless, and the learning process is broken. This cannot but lead to the pearls in question on the exams, and not only there. There were such students before, but they were not tolerated and were not allowed to do whatever they wanted. But now there are even more of them. Many. And why? Because the value system is different now. It is based on the material, not the spiritual. Children don't feel the need to read a book. Material things have become more important - the chalga, the malls, what clothes you will wear, how you will dress up at the disco tonight. And that is why the parents are most to blame, because they are responsible for the initial upbringing, they have to turn the child's head and show him what is important in life. And this is becoming increasingly difficult, because simplicity is everywhere around us. A big problem is that it is given such importance, it is replicated, it turns into fashion. The media deals with simplicity in all its forms and suddenly this becomes more important than anything else. A magnifying glass is put on the everyday, the stupid, the petty, the thoughtless, the vain. We watch reality shows in which the weak are humiliated in order to give us pleasure. And our politicians are like that. The language they use, the way they conduct a dialogue is primitive and simple. And children see this and accept it as normal, as right.
It doesn't matter whether a parent pays for their child's education or not. If they don't care about it, if they don't sit down to ask their son what homework he had, check him, scold or praise him, if they don't exercise control, then the child still won't learn. Why? Because they'll see that they can get by without putting in the effort.
These are the real problems. And now you are telling us that we have a problem with education in Bulgaria, let's solve it by making schools private. Well, that won't solve the problem at all. It will even make it worse. I asked you about the calculations because, if you really calculate how much is currently paid in taxes for the education of one child per year, the amount would probably be 10-15 leva, and 100% there will be no private school that has such low fees. I am 99% sure that there will be no school with fees 10 times higher than this amount. And it will happen that many children will not be able to afford an education. And now you are telling me that I am uneducated and I don't know that these were public policies in education. But are they suitable for our country, are they applicable to Bulgaria?
(Stoyan)
The child subsidy is around 1000 BGN at the moment, not 10-15 BGN. A large part of the problems you are addressing are a result of the current system.
For example, teachers cannot conduct the educational process normally because of the wrong incentives that govern the system. Namely, many schools do not want to lose numbers (subsidies), quality is not a criterion for allocating funds. Poor and outdated education, in turn, has devalued itself and fewer and fewer parents and students see sense in it.
Poor students will be able to find an education, there are many options for them around the world - charitable foundations, church schools, scholarships, etc. Not to mention that investing money by parents in their children's education will certainly change the attitude towards the process and teachers.
10-15 leva is the amount of taxes per person per year that goes to education. Now replace this paltry money with a fee of a few hundred leva per year of school and think again how applicable this model is to Bulgaria. I don't know what church schools you are talking about. Do you even live in Bulgaria or have you lost touch with reality?
(Stoyan)
The very fact that a parent currently spends 15 leva on their child's education makes them not interested in it. The model of paying for something you get is completely applicable. It exists for all goods that the state has not decided to seize. According to your logic, the state should take care of food, clothing, and housing.
I'm talking about places where there is charity, which should be a top priority for the church. By the way, evangelical churches in Bulgaria allocate money for education.
I'll tell you again, people won't have the money to send their children to school. And it won't be a small percentage of the population, it'll be a large one. Completely ignoring the fact that I mentioned earlier that the best schools will only be available to the wealthiest. And these alternatives that you're talking about simply don't exist right now.
As for the state seizing goods, that seems ridiculous to me. The state has not seized education, but it takes care of the population being educated. As you yourself mentioned, a subsidy of about 1000 leva per student, a subsidy! And of course, the state must take care of the food, clothing and housing of the population. It does not have to give them away, but it must create conditions for citizens to have them. That this should be the state's first concern. What else could the role of the state be?
I have the feeling that you read a lecture on a given topic (like the one about private education) and immediately praise it, and decide to write an article on how this thing should be implemented in our country. But does this model have bad sides, does it always succeed? Is this model consistent with the specifics of the state, with corruption, with the culture of Bulgarians, with their way of thinking, with the chalga? Yes, all these things also have an influence.
I wonder if there is a country where there are no public schools, only private ones.
(Stoyan)
You contradict yourself, one moment the state takes care of people's clothing and attire, the next it creates the conditions. What we are talking about is the state taking care of exactly the conditions by gradually withdrawing from education and ceasing to impose taxes to finance it.
The market creates alternatives, unlike the state. There are many ways to educate children - even one example that excludes school is homeschooling, which is becoming extremely popular in the US. Not to mention the huge amounts of money that are given by parents for various types of private lessons - another example of private education and state failure.
The article is based on much more than "one lecture" 🙂 How does culture and corruption play a role in private education?
Here is my view, as someone who works in the education system:
1. There is complete irresponsibility on the part of parents towards their children. They think that we, the teachers, are governesses, not educators. They do not listen to our advice, but say: "I will raise my child as I decide. My child will be beaten if they beat him!"
2. The parent's pocket is not deeply dug into, and therefore he does whatever he wants. Do you know how many times we release students from school to go skiing with the family, on vacation abroad, or simply "because the child needed to rest and his grandmother from somewhere came to visit". They show complete indifference when they are told that their child has many excused or unexcused absences. Would the children be absent with or without a reason if the parent paid a solid fee every month!?!
3. Students are not allowed to repeat. If you leave a student for a make-up exam - the parent comes and moves the child to the neighboring school because "they didn't stress him out with exams there."
4. You can't pull an ear - it's a crime. You can't scold - the student won't sleep peacefully at home. At the same time, the student has the right to curse his teacher, swear at him, make up nicknames, threaten with the words: "if I tell my father, you'll see what will happen to you."
5. When you leave a student for consultation to help him - the parent immediately calls and says: "What are these things!?! Is my child the worst at school? I don't want him to stay in school any longer! You have no right! This consultation is not mandatory!"
6. If you include him in extracurricular activities - No way!!! The child is signed up for swimming on Monday, violin on Tuesday, dancing on Wednesday, singing on Thursday, etc. He is very busy.
7. The minister says: Every principal has levers to punish students for bad behavior and so on. Yes, but these levers are only on paper. When it comes time to use them, the parent writes another complaint to the minister, he immediately calls the head of the RIO and again the principal is guilty because he wanted to use one of the levers for punishment. All principals are always on the side of the parent, not the principal or teacher.
CONCLUSION that we, the teachers, make: I sing my song and leave. The more I work and want everything to be fine, the more the bosses check me, because there are always people complaining about how strict we are and how we want everything to be fine. We don't leave remedial classes, we write high grades, because when we write low grades, the parents send tests, because according to them, their children are almost gifted.
On some of your points, let me express my complete disagreement:
1. A parent has every right to raise their child as they wish, with the only restriction being to respect their freedom of moral and religious choice. Another right that a child has is to defend themselves. Do you want me to raise my child according to a pseudo-Christian code that teaches us to turn the other cheek? If you think so, I don't see what right you have to complain at all.
4. As a student at an elite high school, I've seen enough ways to trip me up without pulling my ears or yelling at me like I'm hysterical. Including, I think teachers have TOO much power that is not in any way controlled at the moment.
6. Every child (or parent) has the right ONLY to choose which extracurricular activities to attend. If the parent or student feels that your choice is not a priority, you do not have the right to impose your choice - although we know that grading provides the perfect lever for pressure on the student.
As for excused and unexcused absences - I have seen cases in which students who, after 9th-10th grade, have focused on a particular field; who go to extracurricular activities and represent the school and the country in international competitions; and who win medals, are subjected to pressure, either because they are absent (being at competitions) or because they have not chosen another field in which to excel.
In conclusion, Bulgarian teachers have the right to complain, but not when it comes to "levers" for "pressure", authority and power.
Obviously, Ivanova can give an expert assessment as a person who really participates in the education system (and not judging by her experience as a student) and she gives this assessment, supported by facts. However, you think you know more than her and do not accept her assessment, and even make general conclusions?! Forgive me for the expression, but you are horses with lids. When someone starts to express an opinion in the field of economics, you immediately cut him off with the statement that he does not know, that he has not studied, that he is not a specialist. And now you do not accept the opinion of the specialist. I do not know what you think, but you clearly have very high self-esteem. Do you actually have your own opinion or is it hammered into your heads?
As for the problem itself, you can't force a parent to take care of their child's upbringing and education. You want them to pay dearly for school, fine, but they won't care about their child, they'll care about their money. That's not the way, that's just not right.
P.S. In 1. you both talk about freedom of choice of religion, and you violate this freedom and accept your worldview as the only one.
Back to front.
Bob: You're a fool because you don't read what's written. I didn't say I understand the learning process any more than a student who was part of a rotten system. I'm saying I understand education from a systems perspective, which is what economists do. Just like I don't understand treating people, but I understand the health care system.
Avalanchemaster: I agree that students need to be given more freedom, but not that teachers have the full toolkit. Or rather, in some places they do, in others they don't. The problem is when there is no choice, and when we have a state education that follows a one-size-fits-all model for everyone everywhere.
Mrs. Ivanova: With what you say, I think you support the thesis of the article. Parents are not interested in school for the following reasons - they do not pay for it, and they do not have the opportunity to make a choice between different systems of education and teaching. It is also problematic that teachers/administrations cannot maintain quality, because the current system does not have the levers for this. That is, if students do not comply with discipline now, they cannot be expelled or punished.