I can't help but feel very let down by my state education experience, it feels like British state schools are a uniform Ford-esque production line that takes children as an input, utterly breaks their spirit, and produces a docile blue-collar workforce that doesn't really ask questions as an output. Private schools on the other hand actually seem to set their pupils up for life rather than simply being a cog.
The driving force behind this is that the well-paid jobs requiring certain skills like facility with maths, excellent reading and writing and verbal communication (presentation) skills, etc. end up being reserved for members of the aristocratic class and are obtained more by social connections than by some open competitive process. These include professions like lawyers, corporate managers, etc.
Hence, the educational programs for the serfs are cut down to the bone (as the serfs are not going to need those skills in their jobs as assembly line workers, miners, agricultural field hands, janitors, etc.). This of course helps perpetuate the class division in such stratified societies. Incidentally, encouraging contempt for education and skill development in the serf class is part of this whole problem. "What, do you think you're smarter than everyone else?" etc. Kids getting bullied for getting straight A's etc.
There has always been a strange borderland between these two zones, however, where the technologically adept can arise and prosper. Michael Faraday is perhaps the best example of a member of the serf class who broke the pattern.
I think it's disastrous to the long-term success of any nation, however. If America continues to slide towards such a system, it will fall behind China in technological development. Britain seems to have suffered from this issue: even though Britain was an early leader in computer technology (Turing, Colossus, etc.) they never had a Silicon Valley moment.
Except that it's happening in California as we speak... Earlier thread: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=31170431
The "Progressive" model of education was very consciously planned with the intention of keeping the riffraff down, and far away from "elite" studies. It's "Progressive" in the early 20th c. sense of that word.
Of course one can also err in a different direction, devaluing practical education altogether and leading to "overproduction" of aspiring elites that are wholly parasitical on their surrounding society. And the two problems can even coexist, as seen in the US today! Extreme credentialism at the highest end (due to elite overproduction) coexists with the most dismal failure to achieve even basic educational outcomes for the bulk of the population.
* Homeschool
* Use your local school's curriculum or a public one like Common Core or another one of your choosing
* Use one of many amazing online sources, like Khan. The great thing is if you struggle, you can always find an alternative teacher. I've found sometimes I need multiple different explanations over the course of weeks to understand a topic.
* Many communities in larger towns & cities have tons of offline learning opportunities for groups.
Yeah, schools.
But learning needs teachers, and it needs teachers in small groups (classroom sizes of 20-30 are far too big). You cannot solve this with tech alone.
A New Era: Intelligent Tutoring Systems Will Transform Online Learning for Millions https://arxiv.org/abs/2203.03724