Kids, homes

[Max B. Sawicky]

I'll abstain on the issue of parent responsibility --
my hunch is that its importance is understated more often
than not, but that's just a feeling.  But there
is an important point here for which I do know of evidence:
the extent to which non-school factors influence education
outcomes (i.e., income, poverty, housing, etc.)

Too much is put on schools by all-around critics of the public
sector, and also by the Blairs' country cousins -- Clintonoids
in the U.S.  Not that the latter were on much of a crusade to do
much about it, but the elevation
of education is a stock response to demands to redress imbalances
of power -- class war, if you will -- that suppress the advancement
of labor.  Rather than address job loss due to assorted factors,
including trade, the Clinton mantra was education is the answer
to everything.  More education is usually better than less, but
education is not the answer to the stagnation of working class
living standards.  Suggestions in this vein are founded on the
insupportable premise that the U.S. is a meritocracy.   ==mbs

The WEEK
ending 24 March 2002

WHO'S AFRAID OF THE KIDS?

British education secretary Estelle Morris turned on the 'feckless' and 
'yobbish' parents of supposedly delinquent children, in an outpouring of 
spleen that is becoming characteristic of the government's attitude to 
the public. Morris blames parents bad behaviour for the bad behaviour of 
children, and demands to know why local authorities have failed to use 
the 'parenting orders' that empower them to send adults to 'anger 
management' classes. . . .