There would be less emphasis on symbolic politics, such as this project, if we could make material progress on social inequity. It does not cost any money to change language. It would be difficult and costly to seriously reinvest in people who have been left behind.
For example, if it was politically possible guarantee schools in poor neighbourhoods were funded just as well as schools in wealthy neighbourhoods, do you people would organize around education equality, or would they organize to change language?
The problem with schools in poor neighborhoods has nothing to do with funding. You can see charter schools in the same neighborhood which get less funding radically outperform.
High performing schools usually achieve their results by kicking out the idiots and disrupters. Not only does this obviously boost averages by removing the bottom results, but everyone else is able to learn better by having disruptions removed.
Of course then some public school has to be the one to attempt to educate these people.
NYC averages for public schools:
$32,757 per pupil
The only reason there aren't more charter schools is because there is a cap on the number of them.
We should attach the funding to the pupil and their needs, and then let the parents choose the school for them to attend. This is commonly referred to funding students and not systems, or backpack funding.
There will alway be problems with education - challenges with parents, children, faculty, curriculum.
The state can provide funding and provide testing, let the parents choose the school that they want.
For example, if it was politically possible guarantee schools in poor neighbourhoods were funded just as well as schools in wealthy neighbourhoods, do you people would organize around education equality, or would they organize to change language?
Also the website doesn't work in Firefox.