Quote:
Originally Posted by betenoire
Just....no.
It seems to me that a system like Aj described above would eventually make the need for such a system obsolete. As I'm sure you're aware poverty is usually generational, as is education / access to higher education. By helping Lynn out you're creating an environment for her where her children will require less of a leg-up than she did, her grandchildren even less, until eventually the playing-ground is level in terms of access. It's controlling the things that -can- be controlled.
This would be WORSE for low-income neighborhoods than it already is. You're aware of how poorly the "healthcare for profit" debacle has gone in your country, I presume?
How do you expect low-income families to pay to run the schools that their children will go to?
Interestingly enough, Finland has free education for everybody. This includes post-secondary education. It is, as I'm sure you would have deduced, run by the government. And guess what else? Finland is tied for the number one spot on the Education Index portion of the Human Development Index that the UN does every year. Looks like government involvement in Education has gone -very- well for Finland.
|
First, we've had affirmative action and the leg-ups for several generations, and we still have generational poverty, maybe more entrenched now than before. Schools are not making the mark. How long do we keep up such an experiment before we say "Enough. Here are the standards; do it or not".
As for my school idea, I had in mind something like the Finland model. It's still far less expensive than all the fads that America wants to try.