On the issue of school control, favour a system which has central standards and
guidelines that have to be met by all schools. Certain material that has to be
mastered. Certain principles (such as open access, equality of opportunity,
additional attention to those that need it), etc. But would be managed and run by
local parents, teachers, (again on predetermined democratic principles, with the
ability to appeal local decisions.) This may be a balance that is impossible to
obtain but is a worthy goal.
At present in Ontario there is a move by the conservative government to centralize
control and to homogenize standards and curriculum, while increasing the work load
for teachers.
Rod
Jim Devine wrote:
>
> This captures the essence of the problem with charter schools, IMHO.
> They're illusory "micro" solutions to a "macro" problem (the public school
> budget, the tendency of central school bureaucracies to become hypertrophied).
>
> But we should remember that back in 1968 in New York City, many on the left
> supported local Black parents who wanted to decentralize the school system
> (giving more "local control") against not only the public schools' central
> bureaucracy but also the United Federation of Teachers union (led by Albert
> Shanker). This enmity caused a bitter strike. My feeling (with the benefit
> of hindsight) is that both the parents and the teachers could have
> benefited dramatically from an alliance with each other. (Decentralized
> reform efforts work best if they involve some centralization, while they
> are least likely to hurt workers if workers are involved in the process.)
> But the UFT's racism (and craft-union consciousness) got in the way...
>
> Jim Devine [EMAIL PROTECTED] & http://liberalarts.lmu.edu/~jdevine
--
Rod Hay
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
The History of Economic Thought Archive
http://socserv2.mcmaster.ca/~econ/ugcm/3ll3/index.html
Batoche Books
http://Batoche.co-ltd.net/
52 Eby Street South
Kitchener, Ontario
N2G 3L1
Canada
