Compulsory Attendance vs. Compulsory Education

Under compulsory attendance laws, children are required to locate and enter their public or private school building for a certain number of days per year. They are required to be there, but they are not required to learn. Only home schooled children are required by law to learn. If they don't learn, their home learning program can be terminated. Of course, this is discriminatory, but the State is not interested in equal treatment under the law. This is the difference between compulsory attendance and compulsory education.

This reminds me of an old Calvin and Hobbes (tm) cartoon. Calvin was at school sitting at his desk, the teacher was in front of him and asked "Who would like to summarize what we just read? Calvin how 'bout you?"

Calvin says,"Sorry! I am here against my will. I refuse to cooperate." He then stands up and shouts "They can transport my body to school, but they can't chain my spirit! My spirit roams free! Walls can't confine it! Laws can't restrain it! Authority has no power over it!"

The teacher then says "Calvin, if you'd put half the energy of your protests into your school work..."

Calvin says "You can try to leave a message, but my spirit screens its calls."

As Calvin noted, you cannot force anyone to learn if they do not have the desire to learn. This is hardly a recent discovery. Learning can only be encouraged, not compelled.

Bodily exercise, when compulsory, does no harm to the body; But knowledge which is acquired under compulsion obtains no hold on the mind.
Plato, circa 400 B.C.

New Hampshire Politics

P.O. Box 1120
Merrimack, NH 03054

Full T1 direct Internet Backbone connection and Internet Services
provided by Mainstream EIS