originally posted in:Secular Sevens
I am skeptical of centralized control, because I believe programs are most effective and accountable to the people they affect when they are closer to those people. I have no real knowledge of how education funding works, and here is what makes sense to me.
-Federal standards. A loose set of standards ensures that students across the nation meet minimum requirements. Any federal funding should be in the form of a block grant, rather than open-ended matching.
-State oversight. The state should enforce the standards. It should also have the flexibility to experiment with its own programs, and provide assistance to low-income areas.
-Local control. Schools are run and funded by their communities, and the administration are easily accessible to parents and teachers.
I honestly think the problem is more about how we view education as a society.
English
-
[quote]-Federal standards. A loose set of standards ensures that students across the nation meet minimum requirements. Any federal funding should be in the form of a block grant, rather than open-ended matching.[/quote]We already have what's called the 'Common Core.' There's only three states that don't follow it (including Texas). [quote]-Local control. Schools are run and funded by their communities, and the administration are easily accessible to parents and teachers.[/quote]Almost all state funded schools are ran locally. But when you fund it locally, you create a huge disparity among the quality of education the poor, middle class, and rich receive.
-
Edited by Bistromathics: 12/31/2013 4:10:01 PMSounds good to me. State funding could make up for the lack of money in low-income areas. Perhaps it would also help to subsidize the cost of private school education for low-income students or those in underperforming public schools.