As an alternative to public school, students if they so choose are given the amount of money equivalent to the public school's future expenditure on them. Then instead of going to school, they go to the Knowledge Court.

The Knowledge Court is much like a food court. Students may mix and match whatever courses they please. Where they end up depends on the courses they take. How far they get depends on how much time and money they devote to their education. Frugal students can skip lessons and head for the bookstore/library if they think there is something they'd rather figure out on their own.

Students could specialize in one thing, it is all up to them. If all they wanted to do in their life is construction work, then all they'd have to take is construction courses, ie. worksite communication, mathematics, algebra, geometry, cement work, etc.

The courses would be a diverse range of traditional and vocational courses with a focus on real world experience and career development.

All vocational courses would be like internships. Students would truly learn the ethics of life (cooperation, friendship, tolerance, etc) by having to work with others on the job, instead of just being read trite stories about them in kindergarten.
-- Spacecoyote, Dec 15 2007

In other words, a public school which doesn't force people to go to lessons. One of my cousins goes to a school like this (in Israel), and she barely goes to any lessons, spending most of her time in the playground.

You'd need immense self-motivation to actually learn anything, and that's something that not many kids have, in my experience (I know I certainly wouldn't have enough for this).

Hence, I'm afraid, a [-].
-- dbmag9, Dec 15 2007


This is baked in college and for many it doesn't work even at that age.. This is also reminiscent of school vouchers which "W" keeps pushing for. The problem is two fold: If you pull money out of public schools then they collapse and the second is that if you give a kid all that money, he will study alcoholism and debauchery.
-- MisterQED, Dec 17 2007


//If you pull money out of public schools then they collapse//

Is that because public schools are so poor that no-one would use them voluntarily? They can only survive because taxpayers are obliged to pay for them? If they had to compete for funds, they would lose?
-- angel, Dec 17 2007


The students wouldn't be given actual money, just points that could be used.

Trading the points for money/drugs would be illegal.
-- Spacecoyote, Dec 17 2007


// would be illegal //

Ah, the same way that making murder and drink-driving illegal has completely purged our society of these evils ?

Yeah, right.
-- 8th of 7, Dec 17 2007


Too, so much for the principle that the best education is a well-rounded one.

I applaud you for all the research that must have gone into the assessment that over-specialization is OK after all. Shirley you did not pull that out of your poop hole.
-- globaltourniquet, Dec 17 2007


I have no idea what UB is saying, as usual.
-- Spacecoyote, Dec 18 2007


// Is that because public schools are so poor that no-one would use them voluntarily? They can only survive because taxpayers are obliged to pay for them? If they had to compete for funds, they would lose? //

No, it's more likely because education is best a group activity, which directly contrasts with a separatist / isolationist idea of abandonment of that which needs improvement. If everyone went to the private school, it would suffer manyh of the same ills as a public one over time.
-- RayfordSteele, Dec 20 2007



random, halfbakery