Talk:Compulsory public education in the United States

Move/rename?
Perhaps this article should be renamed "Compulsory public education in the U.S."? Note that an editor slapped the "Globalize" tag on it, but I removed it, since the article doesn't purport to cover anything other than the U.S. -- Ssilvers (talk) 18:45, 5 October 2010 (UTC)
 * I agree. Maybe "The Compulsory Education Movement in the U.S." would be appropriate as it focuses on a social movement rather than a specific concept or law. The change would also help distinguish it from compulsory education and public education. Clairestum (talk) 02:19, 6 October 2010 (UTC)

I'll proceed with the rename if you give me the go ahead. I (and the guideline) recommend the shorter title, as that makes it easier for a reader to find. Note that the guideline says: "Use lower case, except for proper names". Compulsory education movement in the U.S.? Let me know what you decide. See WP:NAME. -- Ssilvers (talk) 19:35, 30 October 2010 (UTC)

Lead Edit
I have made some major edits to the lead, as it had no sources before it know draws from new sources as well as sources used in the article. There is currently some redundancy between the lead and the body but I plan on expanding the body significantly and will resolve that issue. Clairestum (talk) 02:19, 6 October 2010 (UTC)


 * There should be redundancy between the body and Lead: Every statement in the lead should be expanded upon in the body. See WP:LEAD. -- Ssilvers (talk) 00:55, 13 October 2010 (UTC)

Does the word 'public' allow inaccurate dating of US compulsory education?
The title of this article is "Compulsory Public Education in the USA" but it starts with a "first wave" in the 1920s. The Wikipedia article on Education in the United States (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Education_in_the_United_States) has compulsory education laws starting in Massachusetts in 1852. Mississippi was the last state to pass a compulsory education law in 1917, according to the same article. If something happened in 1920 to make compulsory education suddenly 'public', at a time when there were compulsory education laws in all states, and those schools were state and/or locally supported, that watershed event is not revealed in this article. The discrepancy between this article's "first wave" date and other histories of American education make it seem unlikely that the information in this article is reliable. ForsookBook (talk) 20:05, 17 March 2014 (UTC)

The article is poorly written, and very NPOV, so its not fully clear what it's about. So it is easy to get confused in the way your talking about. This article is not about compulsory education laws, it's about a later movement in the U.S. that attempted to make PUBLIC (rather than private or religious) education compulsory for all children. Mingusal (talk) 17:55, 11 March 2015 (UTC)

Everson v Board of Education
SCOTUS did not 'create' the legal doctrine of separation of Church and State in the Everson case; Article VI and the 1st Amendment did that. Everson affirmed that Jefferson's 'Wall of Separation' applied to State and Local governments, and therefore public school funding. Hkl47 (talk) 13:31, 25 April 2014 (UTC)

Is this entire article just political propaganda?
Having corrected the point I mentioned above; it struck me that the tone of the entire article is nothing more than propaganda in support of the anti-public school system. First of all, the KKK is singled out as a supporter of public education as if there were no other supporters, when in fact the idea of compulsory education was a very popular. Is this an attempt to smear the idea with the stench of the KKK?

Further, it is implied that a Supreme Court decision was made because 1 justice was an 'admirer' of 1 particular author; a rather silly idea, and irrelevant altogether.

That the idea of compulsory education was an attack on immigrants and the Catholic school system when what is described is a campaign to remove public funding from all religious based schools is ludicrous. The separation of Church and State has nothing to do with compulsory education (or schooling).

I think this article is in clear violation of NPOV Hkl47 (talk) 14:41, 25 April 2014 (UTC)

I agree, the article is extremely NPOV. It under-explains this issue in both eras when it was debated, gives misleading information about what the argument over the issue was about and who was on the various sides, and it mischaracterizes both Supreme Court decisions involved. It also lacks context and leaves out crucial information. For instance, there is no mention that the post-WWII era fight over this issue came about due to a drive by Catholic education officials to obtain public funding sources for Catholic education - a fight that went on into the 1970s. Frankly, the article reads like something that was written from the point of view of an extreme partisan of Catholic education. In part due to this slanted nature, the article is also quite unclear and confusing. Mingusal (talk) 18:07, 11 March 2015 (UTC)

Requested move 10 March 2021

 * The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion. 

The result of the move request was: No consensus. -- Calidum 15:37, 19 March 2021 (UTC)

Compulsory public education in the United States → ? – Title is too broad for what the article is about, which concerns the movement to make American students attend only public school. There is concern about the title dating to 2010. –LaundryPizza03 ( d c̄ ) 15:35, 10 March 2021 (UTC)


 * I think the title is literally accurate – the article is about the U.S. movement to make public education (as opposed to private education) compulsory. But it's obvious from this talk page and the article's edit history that people find the title confusing. Would something like Movements to prohibit private education in the United States be clearer? I'm not an expert on this topic. —Granger (talk · contribs) 15:59, 10 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Oppose. The current title seems to be the best title for this article to me. Rreagan007 (talk) 16:42, 10 March 2021 (UTC)