Somehow during every election an idea emerges that always enourages the better.
That's right make the schools better with good choices, good teachers and a great educational system. But then the election is over and the idea waits for the next election cycle. Every parent wants a good education for their child.
"Today this matter is taken lightly. In general it is the children of high-placed, well-situated parents who are considered worthy of a higher education. Questions of talent play a subordinate role. Taken in itself, talent can only be evaluated relatively. A peasant boy can posess far more talents than a bourgeous child in general knowlege. If the talented peasant boy from his early years had likely grown up in such an environment, his intellectual ability would be quite different. Today, perhaps, there is a single field in which origin is really less decisive than an individuals native talent: the field of art. Here where a man cannot merely 'learn.'
Adolf Hitler, Mein Kampf, State Selection Of The Fit.
In an economically depressed New Hampshire or even a state controlled educational system art is the first field to be financially reduced and/or eliminated. Many schools are down to part-time Art teachers if they have them at all.
And the candidates want to talk about school vouchers.
This is a UTUBE video featuring candidate Ovide Lamontagne who seems to enjoy explaining everything including how the legislature is going to decide how education is run in New Hampshire. I'm wondering if he could save alot of time and energy by a simple educational policy idea that solves everything he is talking about, especially the local control part.
Rich Kids Go To College. Poor Kids Go Into Vocational Programs.