PS. Local school funding is yet another idiocy of the American political system. From the economic point of view, local funding makes no economic sense. Education is the so-called public good i.e. one with substantial externalities, as graduates tend to leave the community in which they were educated- so the local education benefits the nation as a whole. That calls for federal funding, but that will not happen because various religiouscooks, racists, xenophobes, and fiscal conservatives - in a word, populist fascism - will not let it. Yet it is the local school funding that is the main cause of poor conditions of urban schools.
Wojtek
^^^^^^
CB: The bourgeoisie don't really want too high a percentage of the working class to become "educated" beyond a certain level. They never have. The public schools have always been subject to contradictory processes: on the surface efforts to "improve". But they also have as a major function the creation of non-intellectuals, non-professionals, non-predominantly mental laborers - in other words, "producing" people who do _not_ do well academically in school; or _preventing_ a large percentage of their students from succeeding. Yes, you understand me. Public schools have diametrically opposite purposes at the same time.
Think of it this way. Suppose 95% or more of public school students graduated with grades and tests scores good enough to go to college. Imagine the disappointed, disallusioned, academically smart masses turned down for admission to college for various reasons like not enough money; forced to go into working class jobs. They would be ripe for Marxist radicalization - workers who were also history buffs, math and science hobbyists, critical thinkers.
Public schools are designed to "educate" only so many people. For them to succeed beyond a certain level would be dangerous for the system.
The teachers' union is the most radical in Detroit right now, by the way.