Furthermore, I agree that families and churches are generally more central to socialization than are schools, but this doesn’t mean that schools shouldn’t try to have more of an impact. Leonard may be right that the liberal order is doomed if students are taught illiberal/premodern belief systems in school (I think he suggests this). However, I have to disagree with his prognosis for science if the liberal order were to fade: science might very well be in trouble too, as long as we have democracy. I’m not worried so much about an actual dark age as I am about avenues of research being politically closed off by an illiberal/premodern electorate.

Lastly, if 1/3 of Americans believe in Creationism, then it should be taught in school, just like any influential strain of thought, e.g. Marxism. John Tomasi suggests in his “Liberalism Beyond Justice” that a politically liberal way to accomodate fundamentalist students who are taught something incompatible with their religious beliefs would be to note on the educational materials that the students are not required to believe what they read. Regardless of whether this is efficacious or satisfactory to them or their parents, it seems to me that the message is true for anything students learn in school. The important thing is, as several commentators have noted, critical engagement with different ways of thinking. People who are educated to do this can participate in and understand liberal democratic politics and consistently abide by the evolving conception of justice that such politics produces.

And for that matter, the Constitution was written before the idea of public schools was invented.

Science works. It works even in illiberal societies. So I don’t worry much about student liberation causing some sort of dark age. Quite the reverse. Science will survive the enstupidation of the masses, because it is an elite enterprise; but the liberal order will not.

I think your verbs should be in the past tense — or at least they soon will be.

When I say that a private school is “expensive,” I mean to the customer. Even $2,000 annual tuition is still $2,000 more than a public school costs. Ease up. I’m on your side.

You’re repeating a Big Lie. Most private schools do not cost five figures. The median in most states is under $5,000 a year. That’s considerable less than what public schools cost to educate a student–often less than half.

See, for instance, here:

http://www.cato.org/pubs/pas/pa-486es.html

If you think about it, it makes sense. Many private schools are attached to churches–like the Catholic schools–and they work hard to keep costs down.

Private schools are also not more homogenous than public schools. In fact, in most states, you can find public schools that are downright segregated. In South Carolina, I can show you public school districts that are over 95% Black. Some diversity! (And guess what a fine education our public school administrators provide for these lucky African-American students.)

http://www.schoolchoices.org/roo/jay1.htm

We’ve got to examine the facts rather than rely on the lazy assumptions that keep us wedded to the outmoded, woefully inefficient, and radically unjust system of monopolistic, government-run education.

There will still be schools like your daughter’s, where parents who’d rather play hackysack than lock up the homeless will still send their kids. Meanwhile, warmongering, knuckle-dragging creationists will still prefer the local evangelical madrassa.

Also, people being what they are, some schools will find ways to only accept the “right kinds” of students.

The most exciting part of vouchers is their potential for generating creative responses on the supply side of things – there will be a sudden surge of new private school customers who are looking for a quality school that their voucher ticket can cover, and I believe that educational entrepreneurs will meet the demand by opening “blue-collar” private schools.

One argument for public schools (which I did not hear you address here) is that they force children together from different backgrounds, fostering tolerance and an appreciation for diversity. Widespread use of private schooling would keep children from interacting daily with very different parts of society. For example, I send my children to a local Waldorf school; I love the school and so do the children; but the school body is made up almost exclusively of well-meaning left-leaning pasty-white semi-Luddite granolas such as myself. I’d prefer my daughter not to say “Daddy! What’s that?” the first time she sees a black person when visiting colleges.

Any thoughts?

I said much the same thing on the Left2right site last night. I’m glad i’m not the only one who thinks that teaching critical analysis is more important than teaching our kids to memorise the scientific facts we’ve so far discovered.