--><div>
<font color="#002864" size="1" face="Verdana">http://www.mises.org/fullstory.asp?control=1425</font>
</div>
<div>
</div>
<div>
<font face="Verdana" size="2"><font color="#002864"><strong><font size="5">"Free" Education and Literacy</font></strong></font>
</div>
<p class="MsoBodyText"><font size="4"><span class="976580714-29012004">B</span>y
Barry Dean Simpson</font>
<p class="MsoBodyText">[<span class="976580714-29012004">Posted </span>January
28, 2004]
<p class="MsoBodyText"><img alt src="http://www.mises.org/images3/classroom.gif" align="right" border="0" width="225" height="226">A
common view promoted by advocates of"free" or public education is
that a system primarily based on fees would cause many children to forego an
education. Subsequently, literacy rates would decline, and America would slide
down a slippery slope toward low economic growth and stagnation. Whether
education is part and parcel to economic growth is not the concern of this
article. Rather, the charge of illiteracy in a fee-based or privatized system
seems to be weak at best, considering the history of education in America and
England.
<p class="MsoBodyText">England's system of education was not completely"free"
until 1870. However, literacy and attendance had been steadily climbing for
hundreds of years. In 1640, male literacy in London was more than 50%, and
more than 33% in the countryside. These rates were obtained under a privately
administered fee-based educational system.<a id="_ednref1" title href="http://www.mises.org/fullstory.asp?control=1425#_edn1" name="_ednref1"><span class="MsoEndnoteReference"></span></a>
As the demand for education rose during the Industrial Revolution, however,
private schools grew to supply consumer needs. By 1818, one of every fourteen
people in the total population attended school for some period. Twice as many
children attended school only ten years later. A Government Report of 1833 (criticized
for underreporting attendance levels) found a 73% increase in the number of
schooled children between 1818 and 1833.<a id="_ednref2" title href="http://www.mises.org/fullstory.asp?control=1425#_edn2" name="_ednref2"><span class="MsoEndnoteReference">[ii]</span></a>
During 1833, 58% of attendees paid full fees, while only 27% received
endowments for education.<a id="_ednref3" title href="http://www.mises.org/fullstory.asp?control=1425#_edn3" name="_ednref3"><span class="MsoEndnoteReference">[iii]</span></a>
<p class="MsoBodyText">The private system continued to grow in England.
Attendance in day school had reached one of every 8.36 of the total population
by 1851, and one of every 7.7 by 1861. The Education Act of 1870 provided
"free" schools for the entire population. In 1975, however, after
over 100 years of"free" schooling, the figure dropped only to one
of every 6.4 citizens.<a id="_ednref4" title href="http://www.mises.org/fullstory.asp?control=1425#_edn4" name="_ednref4"><span class="MsoEndnoteReference">[iv]</span></a>
The private investment in education in England prior to the Education Act is
phenomenal considering the circumstances. The wages of children were still an
important part of the average family budget. Eddie West estimates that a full
one percent of Net National Income was spent on day-school education alone in
1833. This figure exceeds that of America in 1860. Moreover, it exceeds the
figures of 1860 Germany and 1880 France where education was free and
compulsory.<a id="_ednref5" title href="http://www.mises.org/fullstory.asp?control=1425#_edn5" name="_ednref5"><span class="MsoEndnoteReference">[v]</span></a>
West argues that the goal of educating 100% of the population is unattainable.
But if universal education means at least 90% attendance, then a private
system of universal education had been achieved in England by 1860—a full
ten years before education became"free."<a id="_ednref6" title href="http://www.mises.org/fullstory.asp?control=1425#_edn6" name="_ednref6"><span class="MsoEndnoteReference">[vi]</span></a>
<p class="MsoBodyText">The situation in America roughly parallels that in
England. In 1650, male literacy in America was 60%. Between 1800 and 1840,
literacy in the Northern States increased from 75% to 90%, and in Southern
States from 60% to 81%. These increases transpired before the famous Common
School Movement led by Horace Mann caught steam. Massachusetts had reached a
level of 98% literacy in 1850. This occurred before the state's compulsory
education law of 1852. Senator Edward Kennedy's office released a paper in the
1980s stating that literacy in Massachusetts was only 91%.<a id="_ednref7" title href="http://www.mises.org/fullstory.asp?control=1425#_edn7" name="_ednref7"><span class="MsoEndnoteReference">[vii]</span></a>
<p class="MsoBodyText">While some people might wonder exactly what literacy
entailed during the early Nineteenth Century, anecdotal evidence points to a
highly educated and refined populace. In his book [i]Separating School and
State, Sheldon Richman gives a variety of examples of the sophisticated
nature of America's readers. Thomas Paine's Common Sense sold 120,000
copies to a population of three million—the equivalent of ten million copies
in the 1990s. Noah Webster's Spelling Bee sold five million copies to a
population of less than twenty million in 1818. Walter Scott's novels sold the
same number between 1813 and 1823—the equivalent of sixty million copies in
the 1990s. James Fenimore Cooper's The Last of the Mohicans also sold
millions of copies. Scott and Cooper are certainly not written on today's
fourth-grade level. Travelers to America during the period such as Alexis de
Tocqueville and Pierre du Pont were amazed at the education of Americans.<a id="_ednref8" title href="http://www.mises.org/fullstory.asp?control=1425#_edn8" name="_ednref8"><span class="MsoEndnoteReference">[viii]</span></a>
The reading public of Victorian England is so famous that numerous books and
college literature courses are devoted to the subject. In fact, England
eventually passed a paper tax to quell a public the leaders felt was too
smart.
<p class="MsoBodyText">The reason behind the successes of private, fee-based
systems should be elementary to any student of economics: Private
businesses are consumer oriented. The feedback of profit and loss tells an
entrepreneur when they satisfy, or fail to satisfy, the needs of consumers.
Entrepreneurs who continue to lose eventually cease to be entrepreneurs.
Conversely, profit is a reward to entrepreneurs who correctly anticipate
consumer wants. A brief look at the private schools of the period attests to
these facts. Private schools offered a varied curricula to students. While
public schools concerned themselves with the three R's, private schools
offered courses in geography, bookkeeping, geometry, trigonometry, surveying,
French, German, history, and sometimes dancing.<a id="_ednref9" title href="http://www.mises.org/fullstory.asp?control=1425#_edn9" name="_ednref9"><span class="MsoEndnoteReference">[ix]</span></a>
Specialty and night schools emerged to meet the growing demand of consumers.
Many states cut local funding for schools after the American Revolution, but
private education thrived.
<p class="MsoBodyText">Why then, did Mann and other so-called reformers lead a
call-to-arms to bring public, free schools to all children? One reason is that
consumers preferred the quality of the private schools. Although attendance per
se did not decline from 1830 to 1840, attendance in public schools began
to fall faster and faster. Mann and his followers developed many arguments to
attack the private schools. Such arguments ranged from bad parents who refused
to educate their children, to calls of private education being"undemocratic."
Economic arguments concerning economic growth, crime, and educated voters were
also used in an attempt to solidify the position of public schools. Once
educators and administrators organized into powerful lobbying groups, the die
of our modern public system was cast. Few people can afford to pay for
education twice: once through fees, and once through the fiat of taxation.
<p class="MsoBodyText">Most people now realize the failure of public schools,
even those who seek only to reorganize a bad system. Parents certainly realize
this fact, since private and home schooling is again on the rise. Apparently,
many people find that paying twice for education is better than receiving
little education at all. Economic theory shows us that private businesses
cater to the needs of diverse consumers far better than bureaucracies. History
tells us that a private system is feasible, that those at the bottom of the
ladder will gain the education they need, and that literacy will not suffer if
the mass of the pubic education system disappears—if only we will listen.
<hr align="left" width="33%" SIZE="1">
<p class="MsoBodyText">
<p class="MsoBodyText">Barry Simpson teaches economics at the University of
South Alabama.<span class="976580714-29012004"> </span>bsimpson@usouthal.edu<em>.</em>
<div>
<hr align="left" width="33%" SIZE="1">
</div>
<div class="MsoBodyText">
<div class="MsoBodyText" id="edn1">
<p class="MsoBodyText"><a id="_edn1" title href="http://www.mises.org/fullstory.asp?control=1425#_ednref1" name="_edn1"><span class="MsoEndnoteReference"></span></a>
Cremin, Lawrence A. 1951. [i]The American Common School: An Historic
Conception. NY: Columbia University. P. 17.
</div>
<div class="MsoBodyText" id="edn2">
<p class="MsoBodyText"><a id="_edn2" title href="http://www.mises.org/fullstory.asp?control=1425#_ednref2" name="_edn2"><span class="MsoEndnoteReference">[ii]</span></a>
High, Jack, and Jerome Ellig. 1988."The Private Supply of Education:
Some Historical Evidence." In Tyler Cowen, ed. The Theory of
Market Failure. Fairfax: George Mason University Press. P. 363.
</div>
<div class="MsoBodyText" id="edn3">
<p class="MsoBodyText"><a id="_edn3" title href="http://www.mises.org/fullstory.asp?control=1425#_ednref3" name="_edn3"><span class="MsoEndnoteReference">[iii]</span></a>
West, E.G. 1970."Resource Allocation and Growth in Early Nineteenth
Century British Education." Economic History Review. 23: pp.
83-84.
</div>
<div class="MsoBodyText" id="edn4">
<p class="MsoBodyText"><a id="_edn4" title href="http://www.mises.org/fullstory.asp?control=1425#_ednref4" name="_edn4"><span class="MsoEndnoteReference">[iv]</span></a>High.
1988. Pp. 364-65.
</div>
<div class="MsoBodyText" id="edn5">
<p class="MsoBodyText"><a id="_edn5" title href="http://www.mises.org/fullstory.asp?control=1425#_ednref5" name="_edn5"><span class="MsoEndnoteReference">[v]</span></a>
West, E.G. 1975. Education and the Industrial Revolution. NY:
Harper & Row. P. 201.
</div>
<div class="MsoBodyText" id="edn6">
<p class="MsoBodyText"><a id="_edn6" title href="http://www.mises.org/fullstory.asp?control=1425#_ednref6" name="_edn6"><span class="MsoEndnoteReference">[vi]</span></a>
West. E.G. 1967."The Political Economy of American Public School
Education." Journal of Law and Economics. (October): Pp.
127-28.
</div>
<div class="MsoBodyText" id="edn7">
<p class="MsoBodyText"><a id="_edn7" title href="http://www.mises.org/fullstory.asp?control=1425#_ednref7" name="_edn7"><span class="MsoEndnoteReference">[vii]</span></a>
Richman, Sheldon. 1994. Separating School and State. Fairfax:
Future of Freedom Foundation. P. 38.
</div>
<div class="MsoBodyText" id="edn8">
<p class="MsoBodyText"><a id="_edn8" title href="http://www.mises.org/fullstory.asp?control=1425#_ednref8" name="_edn8"><span class="MsoEndnoteReference">[viii]</span></a>
Richman 1994. Pp. 38-39.
</div>
<div class="MsoBodyText" id="edn9">
<p class="MsoBodyText"><a id="_edn9" title href="http://www.mises.org/fullstory.asp?control=1425#_ednref9" name="_edn9"><span class="MsoEndnoteReference">[ix]</span></a>
<font face="Verdana, Helvetica" size="2">High. 1988. Pp. 367-69.
</font>
</div>
</div>
</font>
|