The advantages of a competitive education system

PANAM POST – There is no discussion that educational excellence is sought. It does not matter what current or thought a person comes, everyone wants the best education for their children. In other words, it is not in the end but in the media where proposals differ.

It often happens that people with few resources must send their children to public schools or universities because they have no other choice because they can not fund a private education. In addition, in a context where technology and globalization are advancing by leaps and bounds, it is important to question the role of education in a changing world.

In this context, it is essential to encourage competition in schools (primary, secondary, universities) to achieve a better result. The main beneficiaries of a competitive system would be the people with the least resources. What happens today? Those people who have resources can choose with fewer disadvantages to which school or university their children will go.

While people with fewer resources find their choice a lot more limited. They can only choose between the centers of public studies because they can not pay the private ones. So, how to achieve a competitive system that includes all people?

The point would be to change the focus of the subsidy. Instead of subsidizing the offer, it would be much more efficient to subsidize the demand. What does this mean? That the money spent on education follows the interests of the student and his family. When subsidizing the offer, they are financed with taxes to public schools and universities, but in many cases there are poor results and precarious study conditions.

Again, those people who do not have enough resources for their children to study in private centers will have no choice but to choose among the public options available. Instead, by subsidizing the demand, instead of using the money in the universities, it would be delivered educational vouchers to families that can only be used for that purpose.

So, for example, a person could receive a voucher for an amount “X” and could use it to finance their education in a private school or university if it is considered the best option. Maybe it happens that this person opts for a public institute and is also valid. But this would only happen if the public institute achieves an educational quality that is valued by the market.

The greatest benefit of this proposal is that it multiplies the number of opportunities students have to study. They get much greater freedom of choice and action. Fighting for equal opportunities is very noble, but it is unreal and fanciful. Equal opportunities will never exist because we have different abilities and it is good that it should be so.

By Ivan Cachanosky