danivon wrote:However, my question, which you are trying to avoid answering, is why the model you support would work given the issues you say work against the Finnish model.
I think you may be conflating my views with those of bbauska. I don't believe I've advocated *for* a position.
Would vouchers help in, say, South Central? In some cases, I think so. There is a flaw, however, Now, I have to preface what I'm going to say with this: I think our culture generally has moved away from a good parenting model. Too many parents have their kids on autopilot: the children and the Internet/game machine raise themselves.
However, I think the effect is more damaging in lower socio-economic areas because the outside influences (gangs, drugs, etc.) are more powerful and pervasive. Kids in Beverly Hills are just as likely, if not more likely, to turn out to be self-centered jerks. However, as they will have nannies and others to raise them, their influences are less likely to be felonious.
The social and economic conditions have to be addressed, which is not something government does well, in my opinion.
Because whatever changes you want to make to the LA education system, they will be a factor, won't they?
For the most part.
However, one would not. I believe teachers must be afforded the highest respect. I would institute dramatic discipline for kids who do not comport themselves well. A learning environment cannot be one containing cursing, mocking, etc. Far too much effort is spent on the student's self-esteem and far too little on the esteeming of others.