SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Pastimes : THE SLIGHTLY MODERATED BOXING RING -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: Lane3 who wrote (3370)3/18/2002 2:19:03 PM
From: J. C. Dithers  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 21057
 
I would like to gnaw on that Karen, but...

right now I am busy gnawing on an insult I received two weeks ago. Plus I am up to my ears in several toorabout contracts that I am negotiating. :-(

All seriousness aside ... that sounds like a damn good plan to me, which I can't understand seeing as how it's from San Francisco. Notwithstanding, I think we all intuitively know that class and socioeconomic factors count for more in achievement than race does. I like the fact, too, that a certain fair measure of school choice is still preserved. I guess implementation will tell the final tale.

JC



To: Lane3 who wrote (3370)3/18/2002 2:26:13 PM
From: thames_sider  Respond to of 21057
 
Sounds sensible to me. I'd suspect the main problem would be that - as in the UK - parents who can afford it opt out of the state system, pay more to send their children to a private school (with therefore better resources and a very pre-selected background). Hence those students most likely to succeed, and parents most likely to push them (and resource the schools) have little or no interest in public schooling, and if anything an incentive to vote for lower taxes and public cuts...

which is especially awkward if you also (as I do) believe that parents have the obvious desire to have the best for their children, and some right at least influence and select that...