3 ms·
> Richer parts of California often actually have less money in their schools I’ve heard people say that, but as somebody that switched schools in California a
by braingenious 4y ago
> Richer parts of California often actually have less money in their schools
I’ve heard people say that, but as somebody that switched schools in California a lot in high school, public schools in nicer neighborhoods were categorically always much, much, MUCH nicer.
Like “had an on-site computing museum and shared latin and ancient greek teachers with the nearby UC campus” and “had a couple decade-old pcs for a desktop publishing class taught from a binder by the PE teacher” different.
- s1artibartfast 4y agoOne explanation that I've heard is parent-teacher associations and non-governmental funding. At some point in the past, maybe the 70s, California move from a model of locally supported schools two state allocated funding. I think this was a mistake and had a number of negative Downstream consequences. One was the passage of Prop 13 because homeowners and even parents are unwilling to pay more to fund schools if their children in community will see only a fraction or possibly no benefit. Given human nature and self-interest, I think people need to see significant benefit for their dollar. I think it would be a lot better to roll back this law and replace it with something that siphons off a maximum percent of school funding to be dispersed Statewide. You might see more money going to schools in for neighborhoods.