Quote:
Originally Posted by Mach  Regarding your comment, screening is paid for in opportunity cost even if you make a choice NOT to invest in screening. Screening may even by itself be worth investing in simply because of it's carrot approach to getting kids and parents more serious about their education. It may in fact me a primary factor IN developing human capital, and not be some opposition approach. |
Screening, theoretically speaking, comes in 2 variations: the strong screening hypothesis where there is no human capital role for certification and the weak screening hypothesis where are some skills advancements. The problem is generated when we refer to its practical application. For it to work it is reliant on cost (i.e a low ability individual should remark "I will not go to university and pretend to be high ability as it is too costly to acquire the signal"). However, once we have class divides, those costs are virtually eliminated. It becomes "Stuff it, I will go to university and daddy will help pay for it". More and more education resources are destroyed by that process. The support of intergenerational divides, rather than a human capital role, dominates expenditure