Point made.October 30 2003 at 10:15 AM
|Ozymandous (no login)|
from IP address 18.104.22.168
Response to Sorry, you may not understand politics
Yes, at the local level it's the parents and voters who should be involved, but then that beg's the question of why do we have a huge Government agency if everything is pretty much left in the hands of the local people to teach pretty much anything they want???
Wouldn't some of the money that is running this agency be better spent on the local level, or more of the control be given to the national level? Even if parents go to town council meetings, PTA meetings, etc, that does not guarentee that anything will change or get better at the schools because even though public money is spent that does not mean the public can affect a change directly!
With all the layers upon layer upon layers of red tape that concerned people have to go through to get something changed, when there is no guarentee that some "fix" a government stooge implements won't make the situation worse a month later, it is no surprise that parents have resorted to leaving the system.
Now the sad part of all this. The "system" doesn't care if people leave as long as their money stays. Less people = less complaining when the schools implement a stupid rule or cirriculum change. How do you slap a public agency up side the head and make them pay attention? Take the money away. It's funny how that works. Hence why vouchers, IMHO, would work. People in the public sector wouldn't be getting "free" money and they'd have to actually CARE if the parents took their kids out because the school did something stupid.
You say the people bailing deserted the system and caused it's collapse. I say the people bailed because the system collapsed. Either way I think we both agree that the system did or in the process of collapsing. You think that keeping the money flowing to the schools, who have no real incentive to change because they know they will still get paid, while increasing input from parents will change. Sorry, I don't agree because as long as the parents don't have leverage, as they would with being able to withdraw funding, the administrators could give less than a damn.
So ultimately you have to ask the question of what accomplishes more? Input from parents that is actually considered and possibly acted upon because the parents and voters have the power of the pocketbook, or input from the same parents and voters who do NOT have any power? Seems to me that the input that is actually listened to would work better.
It's very hard to be motivated into doing somthing when you know there is almost a zero perent chance that anything will change, so it's not surprising that so many people "ran away" from the situation, when they have no real input to change the process.
- Chickens and eggs - Occhi on Oct 30, 2:16 PM
- Well... - Ozymandous on Oct 30, 9:53 PM