4 ms·
Never assume malice where incompetence would suffice. I've found it to be generally true that when people don't know how to solve a problem, they will ignore it
by darkerside 6y ago
Never assume malice where incompetence would suffice. I've found it to be generally true that when people don't know how to solve a problem, they will ignore it. This would have been a great time to bring in consultants on remote work. A nationally organized program would have been ideal so you could benefit from scale in doing sessions, and avoid patchwork solutions.
Too bad our DoE is completely dysfunctional, led by a person who likely prefers it not to exist, a pattern for this administration.
- briefcomment 6y agoI think it can be a mixture of both. People who don't have the drive, goodwill, and skills (i.e. incompetance) to take on extra work will sometimes willfully ignore problems (i.e. malice). This only increases in an environment where demand is locked in for whatever reason. And it gets even worse when replacing the supply is hamstrung by bureaucracy.
- dchuk 6y agoIt’s both incompetence and complete cowardice in the face of an extreme challenge.
- Polylactic_acid 6y agoThere doesn't seem to be any incentive to do anything different when the failure to deliver doesn't seem to have any punishment. You can just say its inevitable that things are bad and thats good enough.
- xmprt 6y agoI don't think anyone here is claiming that malice is the reason the system is like this. There's so much incompetence from leadership at all levels that the situation we're in now was pretty much inevitable.
- ragebol 6y agoAt what point does being incompetent turn malicious, if you are in a position of leadership? Choosing to continue ignoring a real problem you cannot handle is pretty bad. At least get some advice or allow competent people to take the wheel. Of course in this instance, the blame flows uphill and then falls of a cliff.
- Shivetya 6y agoI know its cliche to blame the administration but let us be honest here. The Department of Education has rarely been a productive resource with regards to educating in the United States. It has been around since only 1979 and for the most part been just another means for the Administrative branch of the US Government to extend its reach; effectively passing regulations and such without Congressional need. These tend to take the form of "significant guidance letters" and are used as a club to change rules on threat of losing Federal dollars. The current budget is 81 billion dollars. We have spent more than a trillion on that department since its founding only to see little to no improvements. If you want to see where most local school systems get in trouble simply look at the lavishness expended on new schools appearances instead of focusing on the needs of students. Where the teacher to non teacher ratio can be upside down yet all funded under the education banner. The DOE isn't the problem you think it is, it is however nearly entirely useless and like other recently created "Departments" are a means to expand the power of one branch of government at the expense of others.
- pnutjam 6y agoAgreed, we need a national standard that states need to meet, and not just some test scores. Suggested standards: max class size max admin to teacher ratio standardized pay rate for teachers in each state standardized credentialing paid school lunches standardized mandatory "recess" standard list of "extras", let clubs handle the non-standard extras no school sponsored sports, let them be PTO affiliated and funded mandatory list of supplies for students and teachers.