3 ms·
Think about what you're saying: "It's a red herring! We know that schools spend money they get on dumb things!" Yes, that's my point. :) If we could magicall
by ahh 10y ago
Think about what you're saying: "It's a red herring! We know that schools spend money they get on dumb things!" Yes, that's my point. :) If we could magically fix that, it might--in principle--become a good idea to give them more money. Giving them money does not actually magically fix that.
It's worth noting that Maciej forgot that the tech barons he hates actually tried this: https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/how-newark-schools-partially-squandered-a-great-prize/2015/10/20/ffff660c-7743-11e5-a958-d889faf561dc_story.html?utm_term=.9600b32b3e7b https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/how-newark-schools-p...
- fapjacks 10y agoWhat I'm saying is that presenting a report which shows more money getting spent on not the students, but some side thing which doesn't actually benefit the students... That is the red herring. That report isn't actually about money spent on students. It's money schools are spending on "administration". If the money given to schools isn't spent on students, it is useless. Spending money on educating actual students (and not ballooning administrations) actually does improve student education, just ask any teacher and ignore the principal.