When I try to make an analogy between the educational system and the business market system, asking people who occupies the position of consumer in our current education system, they always respond that without a doubt the student is the final consumer, and that the education they receive is the product, since it pays for their education, either directly through private institutions, or indirectly, through public institutions, however, I postulate in this publication that this is not the case, and that the student is not the consumer, but occupies the position of product.

---

In economics, a consumer is a person or organization that demands goods or services in exchange for money provided by the producer or supplier of goods or services. That is, it is an economic agent with a series of needs. It is also defined as one who consumes or buys products for consumption. It is therefore the final actor of various productive transactions.

---

Look, this is very clear to me when I studied administration under a specialized education system, in which the various companies pay for the education of those who will be their next workers. That's how I got work in the oil industry, while they paid for my education.

While there, an instructor explained to me that for that educational institution, the student was not the client, the client is the one who pays for the education, in this case, the oil company that was paying for my training was their client, I was the product , so the instructors had to convert a young boy just out of high school, into an efficient employee who handled administrative, accounting, financial and computer concepts, which they did very well, because I became a great employee, or so they did know.

However, I understood very quickly that to be successful in that environment I would need to forget my personal opinion, and dedicate myself exclusively to following orders and fulfilling them in the most efficient way possible, saving time, resources, and not skimping on consuming my free time to perfect and advance the work, all that would inevitably lead to my work being properly rewarded, however, it was not, I won many awards, then I went to the company and stood out, but the reward was never enough to offset the cost that I believed Having assumed, that's when I understood that the model was not made for me to choose, since there was only one option, and in what kind of market the consumer can not choose? It was then when I understood that the only one who had the option of choosing in the system is the one who pays for education, and that was the company, which decided in the first instance the institution that would train its workers, in the second instance it decided who would be the people chosen to be part of the education and work process, and ultimately decided together with the State, what should be taught by the instructors.

Evidently this system of education that I have placed as an example here, is very peculiar and does not represent the true complex educational system with its different characteristics, which vary according to the region, nationality, religion, economic conditions and many other variants, nevertheless, it serves to make clear a social law, and that all costs are borne by the final consumer, therefore, who assumes the costs is the consumer, as a result, the student can not be the consumer if he does not pay for education, and much less can it be if you are not allowed to make any decisions regarding your education.

Here we go to the second point, which is private education, the one in which the student assumes the costs of the educational process. Although the model of private education is generally defended by the people who support the free market, it must be understood that private education as it is conceived at present does not change the paradigm previously established in the previous example, since under the system of private education, the educational program, that is, what is to be taught to the students, is not decided by the students, but is decided by the State, which greatly limits the power of choice that may have the student. So, here arises the dilemma: who is really the final consumer, the student or the State?

Finally, we arrive at the purely public education model, where the cost is assumed by the State, which is the one with the taxpayers' money, whether by taxes or inflation, assumes the cost of the educational process. In this case, the State will assume the costs and decide absolutely everything, the careers that must be offered at the university, the program that must be taught, and how it should be taught. As we know, this system has been shown for different reasons to be much less efficient, however, I will not inquire into it, because it is not necessary for this occasion.

As you can see, the only real choice that the student has is to choose the career of their liking, in one of the institutions that provide it, and this only if they have the requirements that these institutions require, which, of course, varies according to the circumstances .

In short, you play with the cards that the education system hands out, or you just do not play. There is the decision of people to participate or not in the university education system, but what about basic and secondary education?

Something very curious happens with basic and secondary education, which is generally compulsory, that is, the State demands that young people attend educational institutions to study what the State decides should be taught, in the way in which the State decides what should be taught, the time the State determines. Do you still think that the student is the consumer and that education is the product?

The entire educational system superficially conveys the idea that it is built to make people learn and can develop, however, this is not the goal, if so, you could study with real freedom, which does not happen. An example of this is that when the response the student gives to a teacher is not what the teacher wants to hear, the system simply considers the answer to be wrong, which may be true in many cases, but there are also many others in the that the answer of the student contradicts what is taught by the program of study, but that in any case, it is equally discarded because it does not adhere to the system. This usually happens constantly to those who study history, because the story varies according to who tells and interprets it, however, if you are a history teacher, you will stick to what is said in the books and in the educational program, regardless of what think really, and he should teach that to the students.

So, this system yields the following result: suppose that a student has achieved the highest qualification, this could mean 3 things.

1. The student has been totally indoctrinated, because he adheres perfectly to the instructed, and is probably able to add more arguments in favor of it.

2. The student is a complete corrupt, who has achieved the highest qualification through cheating, whether copying, bribing professors, or doing any other unethical act.

3. The student reasons perfectly, he knows that he must not accept as totally true what he has been taught, but nevertheless, he decides to tell the teacher what he wants to hear to get the highest qualification.

In any of the three previous cases, the system will be getting people trained to naively perpetuate the belief system that already exists, these people are often known as "useful fools", in addition to generating corrupt or people who are willing to be dishonest to get the long-awaited reward, which in this case is a qualification, but which will subsequently be money, or important position in the private or public sector, or any other similar alternative. But in any of these cases, the individual depends on the pre-existing system, because the system is made so that people like him are successful, besides being inherently dependent on the system, in conclusion, if the process is successful, the individual is converted to will of the authority in a product.

Reflection

As long as the State or anyone else decides centrally, authoritatively and by force, what should be taught and what should be learned, education will be no more than indoctrination, regardless of whether what is taught is the right thing to do or not. The education system is designed to turn people into products, which function as a cog in a complex machine of social engineering, forgetting their own criteria, and becoming part of the collective. The only way to escape from this nowadays is by questioning our surroundings, being critical, and studying by all possible means, but always in freedom, taking our own positions based on our analysis, not what others say or want impose, in fact, you have no reason to believe that what I have said here is true or even moderately valid. While I finish writing this, I am still dreaming of an education system in which the interested parties can decide what to teach and what to learn in complete freedom and without any type of coercion, attending only to their interests and not to those of a complex organization of authority.