Adam Smith, Book 5, Ch. 1, pt. 3, article 2, Education of Youth

TL;DR

Smith critiques educational financing and advocates for competition-based rewards.

Transcript

we now come upon book 5 chapter 1 part 3 article 2 and this is the famous section covering the education of youth and here we're doing article 2 called of the expense of the institutions for the education of youth when it came to education Smith had some views similar to those on infrastructure he thought it should be largely self financing and he ... Read More

Key Insights

• Adam Smith argues that education should be largely self-financing and expresses skepticism about funding it through national government revenues.
• Smith is critical of professors, suggesting that without proper incentives, they tend to shirk their teaching responsibilities.
• Educational endowments, like those at Oxford and Cambridge, are criticized by Smith for rewarding professors regardless of their teaching quality.
• Smith advocates for a competitive system where professors' pay is linked to the number of students they attract.
• He draws historical parallels, citing ancient Greek and Roman education systems as examples of effective competition-driven education.
• Smith views the Grand Tour, a common practice among wealthy British families, as a frivolous waste of time.
• He contrasts private education, such as fencing, with public education, like riding, favoring the former for its effectiveness.
• Smith supports minimal government involvement in education, advocating for public funding mainly for school buildings, not teachers' salaries.

Questions & Answers

Q: What is Adam Smith's view on financing education?

Adam Smith believes that education should primarily be self-financing rather than relying on government funds. He is cautious about using national revenues to support education, suggesting that this could lead to inefficiencies and a lack of accountability among educators. Smith argues for a system where professors' pay depends on the number of students they attract, fostering competition and improving teaching quality.

Q: How does Smith view professors in the educational system?

Smith is skeptical of professors, suggesting they are inclined to shirk their duties without proper incentives. He criticizes the system of educational endowments, which he believes rewards professors regardless of their teaching effectiveness. Smith advocates for a competitive system where professors are motivated to improve their teaching by linking their pay to student enrollment.

Q: What does Smith think about educational endowments?

Smith is critical of educational endowments, such as those at Oxford and Cambridge, as they provide financial support to professors irrespective of their teaching quality. He views these endowments as sanctuaries for outdated systems and prejudices, arguing that they do not encourage professors to improve or innovate in their teaching methods.

Q: What educational model does Smith advocate for?

Smith advocates for an educational model based on competition, where professors' salaries are tied to the number of students they attract. He believes this system encourages better teaching and accountability. Smith draws historical parallels with ancient Greek and Roman education systems, which he sees as successful examples of competition-driven education.

Q: How does Smith view the Grand Tour?

Smith views the Grand Tour, a tradition among wealthy British families to send their sons abroad, as a frivolous dissipation and a waste of time. He believes it does not contribute significantly to education or personal development, contrasting it with more structured and competitive educational systems that he supports.

Q: What is Smith's stance on private versus public education?

Smith contrasts private education, such as fencing, with public education, like riding, favoring private education for its effectiveness. He believes that private education, driven by competition and personal investment, yields better results than public education, which he sees as less effective due to lack of incentives and accountability.

Q: Does Smith support any government involvement in education?

While Smith generally favors self-financing education, he acknowledges the need for some government involvement to ensure accessibility for the poor. He supports public funding for school infrastructure rather than teachers' salaries, advocating for a system where education is affordable and accessible to all, regardless of economic status.

Q: How does Smith view education among barbarians?

Smith observes that among barbarians, the necessity of survival drives individuals to educate themselves without formal systems. He notes that this self-education results in a considerable degree of knowledge and invention, suggesting that the pressure to survive can lead to effective learning even in the absence of structured educational institutions.

Summary & Key Takeaways

• Adam Smith critiques the financing of education, advocating for a system where professors are incentivized to attract students. He is skeptical of educational endowments and believes that competition can improve teaching quality. Smith supports minimal government involvement, with public funds directed towards infrastructure rather than salaries.

• Smith contrasts private and public education, using fencing and riding as examples, respectively. He believes private education is more effective and argues that the Grand Tour is a waste of time. Smith supports a competitive educational model, drawing on ancient systems as successful examples.

• While Smith argues for self-financing education, he acknowledges the need for some government involvement to support the poor. He believes that education should be accessible to all, with public funds used for school buildings, and suggests that competition among professors can drive educational quality.