>Yes, there is a wide spectrum of competency/skill amongst all the practitioners of a profession; that's not a remotely novel insight. That's not an argument fo

>Yes, there is a wide spectrum of competency/skill amongst all the practitioners of a profession; that's not a remotely novel insight. That's not an argument for underpaying them. Well the politics are not there currently to support teacher pay raises in many states. Its shitty but that is how it is. If at some point we get a political culture able to reverse that, great! >Which students deserve to get taught by the bottom 25% of shitty, barely-tested software chugging algorithms designed on specious theories? Not your kids, I'd bet. >My daughter is already a guinea pig for this stuff. Her public school uses i-Ready. http://www.curriculumassociates.com/products/iready/diagnost.. http://www.curriculumassociates.com/products/iready/diagnost.... Why do we need to entrust these technology solutions to schools? They are pretty ill equipped to evaluate them except for large districts. The school should just be a data source. The actual software should be parent choice, much like we have school choice in many states. If one piece of software gets a bad reputation the parents can choose to use different software. (Much like paying teachers more, this may not be possible in todays political landscape)