[CyberCowboy777]

They wanted public education available for all, not forced upon all. (Prep schools and Universities were the choice, schools a child would not attend until 10 or older)

Not 12 years of education based on politics and social engineering, not government RUN schools, not schools that limited religion or replaced parental authority. NOT forced and not to regulate choices of the parent.

You can see a vastly different view of what a "Public" education was to them.

[justshutupandtakeit]

As the world becomes more complicated and more information accumulates it requires more time to assilimate that knowledge. Of course, we have a vastly different educational course of study now than 200 yrs. ago. How could we not? There are whole cultures that this era knew nothing of. No knowledge of the beginnings of civilization in the Fertile Crescent, little knowledge of Ancient Egypt, almost nothing about China or India or Japan.

200 years ago there was no science taught to speak of, no American history except the Revolutionary period, no American literature, little art, no study of statistics or calculus, physics was in its infancy as was chemistry and biology.

Now even 12 yrs. is not sufficient to do more than learn the basic. A Batchelors Degree is just scratching the surface in most disciplines. Education back then was heavy on Greek, Latin, the classics, philosophy, rhetoric, logic and Theology most of which is essentially irrelevant to modern life. Such an education today would prepare one for nothing though I might enjoy it.

Public schools back then, as now, were run by local authorities. Schools are as close to the people as any institution in American life. When you condemn public education you are, in fact, condemning participatory democracy. That is fine but let's be honest as to what is implied here.