Someone mentioned Montessori schools, which seem to do pretty well. Another along similar lines, but more extreme, is Sudbury Valley schools:
http://www.sudval.org/
Kids are taught whatever they ask to be taught. They aren't divided into classes, they can just wander around the campus asking for help from any teacher they like. If you start kids young in this environment it works really well; kids are hard-wired to learn as much as possible if you don't make it a miserable experience.
Something else they do: every kid gets a vote in school decisions. A kid's vote counts as much as a teacher's. It's like they're teaching kids to be citizens in a democracy, instead of subjects in a dictatorship.
I once read that (iirc) New Zealand used to have horrible public schools, and fixed it with this system:
- Every parent can send their kids to whatever school they wish.
- Each school is directed entirely by the parents, with no interference from government bureaucracy.
- Each school gets $X per enrolled student.
It took about ten years to shake out, then they had great schools.
The Sudbury Valley model is definitely an extreme as far as the freedom & responsibility it invests in its students -- the school decisions you mention include expelling students, whether to rehire each teacher every year, etc.
>- Every parent can send their kids to whatever school they wish.
This is an impossible system to work if you don't have unlimited funds for education. Parents want to send their kids to "the good school" getting the better grades, with better facilities or whatever. Not all parents in an area can do this, there isn't enough room. As the good school gets fuller, it takes more of the cream and the other schools suffer. But this school is leaching the money away from other schools too as the richer parents that help to contribute time and resources and money move to the "good school". Ultimately the other schools aren't getting the pupils they need to run properly and suffer incredibly. The one school gets better the others worse.
>- Each school is directed entirely by the parents, with no interference from government bureaucracy.
There are many areas of running a school that can be made more efficient by using local government departments. Paying employees, insurance, grounds-keeping, building maintenance, healthcare provisions, utility purchasing, school meal provision, etc., can all be run more efficiently with a local grouping of schools rather than individual schools fighting it out for themselves. Do you know who is good at administrating such groups? Local government.
Indeed things like creating syllabuses and setting exams can too be streamlined by cooperation across schools.
>- Each school gets $X per enrolled student.
I'm assuming here that you're not allowing x to vary from school to school. What about areas with high levels of non-native language speakers that need translators and extra helpers. Or that by some quirk have large numbers of disabled students that require special care and equipment. Or those in rural areas that pay a lot more for bus travel than inner-city schools. Do these schools have to restrict the care and opportunity they give to pupils because of costs that are out of their control?
Except, apparently, it did work. (I wish I still had a citation.) Yes, I expect bad schools suffered. In fact, I expect the bad schools went out of business entirely as people abandoned them in droves. This leaves a market opportunity for private schools to spring up and get that tuition money.
I wasn't really referring to things like building maintenance, just instruction methods, curricula, stuff like that. Those are the things that I think should not be streamlined and standardized, for the very reasons described by our distinguished valedictorian.
You raise good points about varying $X but I would keep it constant anyway, because although in an ideal world we should vary $X according to the factors you mention, in the real world it would vary according to the political pull of the people living in different areas.
Kids are taught whatever they ask to be taught. They aren't divided into classes, they can just wander around the campus asking for help from any teacher they like. If you start kids young in this environment it works really well; kids are hard-wired to learn as much as possible if you don't make it a miserable experience.
Something else they do: every kid gets a vote in school decisions. A kid's vote counts as much as a teacher's. It's like they're teaching kids to be citizens in a democracy, instead of subjects in a dictatorship.
I once read that (iirc) New Zealand used to have horrible public schools, and fixed it with this system:
- Every parent can send their kids to whatever school they wish.
- Each school is directed entirely by the parents, with no interference from government bureaucracy.
- Each school gets $X per enrolled student.
It took about ten years to shake out, then they had great schools.