Do you think the introduction of competition to the complacent system could be what it needs; instead of monetary needs??
i.e. vouchers for either public or private schools...and no "must live in district" requirements.
2006-11-13 21:40:09 · 9 answers · asked by Stonerscientist 2 in Politics & Government ➔ Other - Politics & Government
As long as Academic Standards were constantly pushed higher by the increased competition, I'm all for giving Parents more control over their children's education.
If it means dismantling the least successful school districts in
favor of advancement for the student, I wont shed a single tear for the career bearucrats who have a stranglehold on the current system.
2006-11-13 22:24:47 · answer #1 · answered by Farnham the Freeholder 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Well the privatization of many other services in some parts of the states hasn't really worked out all that well, so not sure right solution for school system. It could lead to schools being closed and no education for those people who cant afford to pay for their education. It would create a greater divide between the rich and the poor.
2006-11-13 22:14:55 · answer #2 · answered by emsie_81 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Competition is usually a good thing. The cost per ca pita of education is higher than it has ever been, but grades are declining. The teachers union has become a monopoly that is bloated and in-efficient.
They rail against any changes in the system when there is increasing evidence that they are failing.
2006-11-13 22:36:33 · answer #3 · answered by opie with an attitude 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Well you got a problem there. I think the nation should remain responsible for the education of it's youth. But competition between institutions is not a bad thing at all. So vouchers etc. and free choice for the students (or their parents) of the institution where they will spend their vouchers is excellent.
2006-11-13 21:45:55 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
one million. greater investment 2. No illegals in corporation systems 3. stop taking originality some distance from teachers. Many ought to do the comparable curriculum the equivalent way year after year. 4. greater day cares in faculties, my college has fairly few unique run applications for toddlers and families. 5. greater academics that easily like young ones, i see many instructors who ought to care much less. 6. much less discrimination via skill of administration, particularly interior the severe faculties. some directors and teachers choose for toddlers via the clothing they placed on. 7. greater projects interior the faculties for toddlers after college. 8. provide up placement tests, those are a worry for academics, mom and pa and scholars. not one of the above in our field approve. 9. greater teachers so they could artwork with pupils with reading matters.
2016-10-03 22:55:59 · answer #5 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Yes. Absolutely.
About 50% of education dollars go to public education bureaucrats.
Our academic rank in the world keeps dropping.
Our public education system is attrocious. Blow it up!
-Aztec276
2006-11-13 21:44:04 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
No, I don' see any benefit to do this. However fond some people are of this idea, it does not benefit anyone beyond a few affluant conservatives.
2006-11-13 23:44:30 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Yes.
2006-11-13 21:44:27 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
It sure is. The teacher's union is ruining schools.
2006-11-13 21:42:26 · answer #9 · answered by tumbleweed1954 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋