Submitted by fred stopsky, May 12, 2007 17:43

The endless debate about how much money goes on and on. Actually, New York City educational expenditures are at least 25% greater than the national average of expenditures per pupil. Go into New York City schools, as I do, and you find bored students, frustrated teachers, and an administration that does not have a clue as to what is the meaning of education in the 21st century. More money in itself will do nothing to alter graduation rates. However, more money geared to a process of education that focuses on economic and social 21st century needs, that is freed from the irrelevant testing system which stifles teacher attempts to create education experiences that have meaning will be beneficial. I am not advocating pandering to "student interests," whatever that means, but to "student needs." Perhaps, if the bureacrats who run schools would cease wasting millions on consultants who hop in, offer pontifications, hop out, and leave in a wealthier situation, significant change might occur. Only in New York City would a mayor and school leader, after spending hundreds of million dollars extra, boast they now have graduation rates up to 56%! Simply stated, freeze any extra allocation of money for education until Klein-Bloomberg empower teachers to offer alternative schooling models tied in with new assessments that measure learning, and allow parents and children real choices. And, by the way, force teachers to elect principals and assume complete responsibility for success or failure. Success can easily be measured -- if parents send their children to your school, you are a success.

Note: Comments are screened, and in some cases edited, before posting. We reserve the right to reject anything we find objectionable.