But even if I were to drop the argument that education is not a right and agree with the status quo that holds it to be a right, government funding of education is not protecting that right unless it can prove students are being educated at the institutions they attend. Loaning someone money to pay tuition is not protecting a right if there is nothing in place to make sure that education is what’s going on in the classroom. To say otherwise is to say college admission, and not education, is a right.
But that is exactly what politicians who are using the promise of low student loans are doing. They are promising low student loan rates because that’s what young voters want to hear. Students don’t want to hear a politician say the government is going to step in to make sure courses will become rigorous in order to make sure the right to an education is being protected.
This is an election year and this is what politicians do in an election year. They promise goods and services to people whose vote they need. Our declining education system is a serious issue that needs to be addressed, and throwing money at it is not the answer.
Article comments
— go to most recent comments1 - Clavos
Excellent essay, Kyle!
All of yours are trenchant and very well written, but your premise here is not only spot on, it's of vital importance if we are ever to improve our educational system to a level which will genuinely benefit all of our population.
My mother in law passed away some years ago. She, like you, taught at college level (in her case, English, at Auburn). She was German born, a brilliant thinker and an enthusiastic, dedicated and able teacher. But she was appalled at the way our "everybody has the right to an education" centered system processed and promoted students who were neither capable nor educated well enough to have reached her classrooms. She told me of the system in her homeland, in which students are continually observed and measured as they pass through the system, and who, based on their skill levels and other criteria, are steered to either university or technical/craft institutions during their adolescence. Though still at least nominally based on the notion that everyone has the right to an education, it seems far better able to serve the needs of both students and society than our own, which appears to serve neither.
I suspect this essay will likely generate some lively discussion.
Kudos, Professor!
2 - Dr Dreadful
Although education is not enumerated as a right in that thar Bill of them, there is that pesky Ninth Amendment which says that just because the Constitution doesn't specifically state something as a right, it doesn't mean the people don't have it.
The United Nations' Universal Declaration of Human Rights is not so circumspect. Article 26 specifically states that everyone has a right to a basic education. While it doesn't go so far as to include higher education, it does say that it "shall be equally accessible to all on the basis of merit".
I think part of the concern here is that this is not, in the US, happening.
I'm with Clavos though in that the American system, in which anyone who can grunt can get into college, doesn't particularly serve anyone well by this state of affairs. Remedial English and mathematics courses, for example, don't belong on a college campus because the people who need them manifestly aren't ready for college. And they take scarce resources away from other areas in which they could be used.
3 - Kyle Scott
Thank you for the kind remarks and encouragement. It is needed as I wait during the calm before the storm as I anticipate some unsupportive comments.
Clavos, thank you for sharing your story.
Dreadful, I agree with your reading of Amendment IX (and X), and I applaud the amendments for their humility, and Univ. Dec. of Human Rights, but I don't defer to either. In neither place is right clearly defined, only characterized or itemized. I am not convinced that education is a right, even if merit based. Education is desirable and should be pursued, and there is merit to the idea that the government should get involved when discrimination occurs, but I still don't think that it reaches the level of a right.
4 - Glenn Contrarian
It's nice to think of education as a right. In fact, most liberals feel that access to a quality basic education should be a right. But I hold myself to be a contrarian, and education is one area where I strongly disagree with my fellow liberals.
My youngest son did not excel in school here stateside - slightly below average (it's a long story, and ADD plays a central role). When we found out how many of his friends were carrying guns to school each day, and how even his best friend was turning out to be a dealer, we took him to someplace where we knew that school was stricter, and the kids valued education much more - the Philippines.
He graduated from high school in Manila this past April, and he learned a few lessons along the way, such as (1) most schools in this world actually do NOT allow students to go to the next grade if they fail, (2) the English he was learning in that really nice school in Washington state was NOT up to the standards of a school in a third-world nation (he almost failed English there), and (3) by his own admission, whereas most of his fellow students stateside were really happy to get an 85%, the students in Manila sometimes cried if they got less than a 90%.
Now my son is a good kid - he really is. Yes, my opinion is quite biased, but even at the age of 17 has never once raised his voice to me, never slammed the door in my face, never refused to do what I told him to do. He is always respectful to his elders and particularly to women. He has a real sense of honor. He is a good kid, and to keep him that way, I had to get him out of America.
And that's the real shame. A third-world nation is providing better basic education than does the richest nation in human history. In fact, when it nears graduation time, one sees scores of banners in every neighborhood congratulating this or that graduating class, or this or that valedictorian or cum laude student, or a group that passed a particular professional certification. When was the last time we saw such enthusiasm for education in America?
Next month he begins college in the Philippines. Stateside universities are world-class and make no mistake, but our K-12 system is failing our nation.
I blame the conservatives and the Republicans for so many of America's ills. One of the things they've done to tear this nation down is to slash K-12 education funding, vilify the teachers, and pay them FAR less than they're worth. BUT I hold my fellow liberals as even more culpable in our K-12 failures, for we have set the bars too low, we've allowed the mediocre to pass at the same rate as the outstanding, we've engendered an "I'm OK, you're OK" atmosphere, and the students wouldn't know an academic challenge if it slapped them in the face.
The failure of our K-12 system is the single biggest factor in my belief that America is in decline, and I believe that the said decline is probably irreversible. Oh, it might be a few decades yet before we begin to accept that the torch has passed elsewhere, that we no longer have any right to call ourselves first among equals, that "American exceptionalism" is and always has been a myth. But the great wheel turns.
I did my part to serve my country, but there comes a time when a man must make a choice whether to keep plugging an ever-increasing number of leaks in the boat, or to get the wife and kids to the lifeboat. Sure, the lifeboat's a lot smaller with far fewer amenities, but it's easier for one's family to breathe on top of the waves than beneath them.
5 - smartalek
Just once, I'd like to see someone who says anything like,
"Our ------ system is a serious issue that needs to be addressed, and throwing money at it is not the answer"
with regard to education, medicine, justice, or any of those other goo-goo societal functions, say the same with regard to the military.
What is it, I wonder, that makes the defense of the nation, and its material and other interests, so much more amenable to being answered by having money thrown at them?
6 - Baronius
Let's make distinctions between basic education and advanced education, and between human rights and civil rights. The Universal Declaration of Human Rights addresses basic education. As Dread notes, it specifically doesn't recognize the universal right to higher education. It says that such education shall be "generally" available. In other words, it's not a human right, but it's a legitimate aspiration.
It's up to each country to decide what it holds to be a civil right. The US can declare that higher education is a civil right if it wants to.
Those distinctions having been made, I agree with the gist of this article.
7 - Dr Dreadful
In neither place is right clearly defined, only characterized or itemized.
I think that is part of the rationale behind the Ninth. The Framers knew that there were many "natural rights", most of which were blindingly obvious to anybody with a couple of functional connected brain cells and shouldn't need to be listed, and/or were protected by other constitutional clauses.
A common theme in the writings and speeches of the FFs is a wariness of government. The general feeling was that the inclination of people in a position of power was to expand that power to its maximum possible limit. They recognised that future generations would come to regard certain things as rights, things they couldn't anticipate. What they could anticipate was that some arseholes would try to deny them on the grounds that they weren't constitutionally protected.
8 - Igor
Right? Is that ALL that counts? In spite of the Ninth amendment?
-NO right to education : stop offering it free
-NO right to having a million dollars : take it away
-NO right to "Too Big To Fail" : stop doing it
-NO right to take away someones house : stop bank repossessions
-NO right to a million dollar yacht : take it away
Hey, there are many "NO right" situations I can think of. I bet you can too.
What idiocy you offer, Kyle. And that goes for your lapdog Clavos, too!
9 - Dr Dreadful
One of the rights the Founders were pretty damn clear about is the pursuit of happiness. (Note: not the right to be happy, but the right to go looking for it.)
And since our society is currently set up in such a way that success in life depends a great deal on one's quality of schooling, I think we ought to be able to reasonably agree that it is our responsibility, as guarantors of that right, to ensure that everyone has access to at least a good basic education.
10 - Clavos
It's one thing to make a good basic education accessible, that's in the interest of society and the nation; it's yet another to declare it as a "right," and insist that the government (i.e. the taxpayers) must pay for it and everyone must avail themselves of it.
For years, there has been an over-the-top trend in this country to proclaim everything desirable, no matter how absurd, as a "right."
Now, even animals have "rights"...
Meh.
11 - Clavos
@ Igor #8:
Except for the first item in your list there are no such "rights." Lack of those "rights" does not in any way imply prohibition of the activities you list.
The "idiocy" here is in your lack of logic.
12 - Dr Dreadful
It's one thing to make a good basic education accessible, that's in the interest of society and the nation; it's yet another to declare it as a "right," and insist that the government (i.e. the taxpayers) must pay for it and everyone must avail themselves of it.
Among the most crucial of the enumerated rights is the right to a fair trial. It's not a right most of us will ever need to avail ourselves of. But does that mean we shouldn't have it?
Nobody's suggesting that we should forcibly educate Knuckles McThicko to bachelor's degree level. But should Knuckles decide that it's something he wants to pursue, he should have the opportunity to at least try.
13 - roger nowosielski
If Kyle's main point is that the "right to education" is being used as a political football, hardly anyone would disagree; but then again, it's not any kind of revelation and hardly a significant point.
Kyle's professorship, or tenure, as the case may be, has got to be of a rather recent vintage, it's fairly safe to assume. Had he gone through through the grind in the sixties, I'm willing to bet his views on the subject would have been considerable more mature. Meanwhile, what's lost in the shuffle is the quality of graduate and undergraduate education available even at city colleges levels, not to mention accessibility in terms of reasonable tuition costs, availability of scholarships, the GI Bill -- all of the above. What's also lost in the shuffle is the value we used to attach back then to good old fashioned liberal arts education, as opposed to vocational studies or any vocational training which was supposed to land you a job. Things have surely changed, and Kyle, having missed on the experience, appears totally unaware of these dimensions. Not a very enlightening or penetrating article considering it has been penned by an instructor in political philosophy.
So yes, Clavos should know better.
14 - Glenn Contrarian
"Smartalek"
On your wish that someone would say that we can't improve education by throwing money at it, do you not realize that you get what you pay for? And if you somehow think that you're going to solve a school's problems by taking money away from it, you're living in a fantasy land.
41% of ALL teachers in Texas are moonlighting...which means they're not doing anything after school hours like grading tests or making lesson plans or talking to students in trouble. Do you REALLY think that you're paying teachers in Texas too much? Or do you think they're paying them anywhere close to enough, since over two-fifths of them have to have second jobs just to make ends meet?
Like anything else in life, you get what you pay for. You can't have a Cadillac if you're not willing to pay for it. You can't have a really nice house if you're not willing to pay for it. And you're not willing to pay what's needed for our teachers to not have to take second jobs just to make ends meet, then you're NOT willing to pay for a quality education for our kids.
15 - Kyle Scott
Roger N.--I'm not sure of the point you are trying to make or how mine is immature. (I always enjoy the, "I'm old so I know more" critique.) The post was about education and rights, not about the evolution of education, if that is what the choppy response was supposed to point to.
The only point where you address the argument is in the first paragraph so I'll respond to what's there. Not a revelation--no suggestion that it is, only that its worth writing about because it's a point of view that's not penned frequently. Not a significant point--that can only be true if you don't appreciate the stakes of the game. Defining rights and what ought to be open to debate and what should be guaranteed is quite significant to anyone concerned about reasonable policy and discourse.
16 - Kyle Scott
Igor. Yes, I too can think of many NO RIGHTS as you title them. Let me know of a book, article, etc. that discusses the relevant aspects of everything and I'll follow it up with one of my all encompassing treatises. Until, then, judge on the merits.
Feel free to write your own post, or, if you are going to throw around personal insults, do it in your full name.
17 - Dr. Joseph S. Maresca
There is such a thing as compulsory education. After the basic education requirement, the rest depends upon whether or not a student goes to college or enters a trade. A strong public school system is just asimportant as a top functioning library system. Politicians and voters agree on the need for higher education in order to remain competitive internationally. This convergence of strategic constituencies is loosely in synchronization with the Law of Competitive Advantage. Thousands of professional physicians, lawyers, accountants, engineers, actuaries and others will be retiring in record numbers. Who will replace them and how will this new cadre of budding professionals be educated?
18 - Kyle Scott
You assume that going to college means you are getting an education rather than just a degree. I make no such assumptions and there is evidence to support the claim with students studying less and grade inflation on the rise. But you are right about an educated society being one that is more competitive, as I posited in the article as well. But I am not sure how that transforms it from a need to a right, or something desirable into a right. I need a car to get to work, should the government buy me one, is it my right to have a public transportation system? I desire good food, should the government subsidize my eating habits? These needs and desires do not fall within my definition of rights, nor any that definition that I am willing to accept. This, as I wrote, doesn't mean the government shouldn't or can't play a role in the education system, but only it is not a right, it is a policy choice.
19 - roger nowosielski
The very fact, Kyle, you're addressing your "point" in the context of obscene rise in tuition costs, that you seem to approve of situation, that you make no mention of the predatory practices of banks and government in administering the student loans -- that you consider such matters not germane enough to the discussion -- warrants nothing better than a "choppy" response. And if there are important policy decisions that are implicated in or supposedly follow from your rather one-dimensional treatment of the topic, you have yet to say what they are.Y
And this isn't an argument from "I'm older than you so I know better." You're just green.
20 - Igor
The colleges and universities seem to have become the tools of the Finance Industry, an industry that contributes little but extracts much from our society. Will finance be the parasite that dooms American society?
21 - Kyle Scott
You're right Roger N. I should have addressed every relevant aspect of the education debate. Sorry for ever thinking I could only focus on a small sliver of it in ~700 words. Good job addressing only what you wanted to and not the substance of my argument. And yes, calling me green is the, "I'm older than you so I know better" argument.
22 - roger nowosielski
I suspect there is a reason you haven't addressed some of the relevant aspects. By invoking the question of whether education is a right, you have conveniently diverted the discussion of a far thornier issue, the unprecedented rise in tuition costs and predatory banking practices.
Nice job.
23 - Dr. Joseph S. Maresca
I agree with Igor. Finance is becoming too pervasive. We need more students to study Municipal, SEC Accounting, Cost Accounting and Governmental Accounting. We need to place a greater emphasis on Financial, Operational, Regulatory and IT auditing to root out core problems in government and industry or it'll be too late. Finance should get out of the business of easy money and emphasize such things as infrastructure, as was done historically in the discipline. Finance should get more into Personal Financial Planning and the actuarial side of accounting/finance. Then, pensions would be better protected.
Above all, we need to define derivative instruments in the Uniform Commercial Code, as we did with checks and drafts.
24 - Igor
Finance accounts for 40% of US industry profits, these days. I guess that's where our tax dollars are going.
25 - Cindy
"To say that everyone has a right to an education because it will help them move up the socioeconomic ladder is political pandering."
The socioeconomic "ladder", read the tremendous disparity in wealth between people, is a product of the system of government in place, which exists to serve those in power. It privileges some over others.
What good is a "right" given to me by my oppressor? I have a birthright to self determination which has been confounded by the creation of a system in which decisions are made for me and not by me. I have no choice about this and no avenue to object.
I imagine that those who are demanding their right to education would like education to be accessable to all and not made more and more inaccessible by a system that clearly functions against them and in favor of those with more wealth. I imagine that they are trying to level what they see as an unfair playing field.
They want the "right" to an education because they understand that the alternative is to become victims of the system. It is as if they are saying, "If you want a system this unfair to those without wealth, and so biased toward the wealthy, that the wealth and income disparity in your system will sever us from being able to acquire even the basic tools to even allow us access to try and create enough wealth to be comfortable and maybe even give us access to the "American Dream" (what they have been promised), then we want the access to those tools to be a right!"
That you don't understand that makes me scared that you are any sort of "educator". It is people with your failure to question the sytem and think independently that let's you act like an unquestioning tool for the powerful and privileged. You are certainly not giving anyone any kind of education, but are an agent of indoctrination in service to the clearly failed system in place.
"A right is anything that is constituent to my being. Reasoning, communicating, moving around, these are rights. I should be able to think and say what I want so long as it does not harm another. I don’t need a government to give me the capacity of speech or thought, but I do need the government to protect me from some brute who doesn’t think I should be able to think or speak freely."
Perhaps the brutes that we need protection from are those who would seek to control the culture in their own interests by imposing rules upon us, which we have no avenue of personal participation in creating. Perhaps the access to the very tools of success in this system, ought not be viewed as "entitlements".
It is our birthright to determine what sort of system we want. You prefer to teach students to be a slave to the system that is.