[Winona Online Democracy]
On Jan 2, 2006, at 12:45, Bothuns wrote:
"> I would add to Paul's comments the following: When shareholders
begin
to hold boards responsible for bad decisions by declining to rubber
stamp all proposals and elections, boards may then become cognizant
of whom they represent."
This actually leads me to the underlying motivation of my post. For
too long we have been told that our education system is failing and
that it must be recast in the mold of our business model. I believe
this is exactly the opposite of what needs to happen. A strong and
vibrant middle class has been the backbone of the US economy and the
bedrock of that middle class has been public education. The ethics of
business just don't work that well in the classroom (and I would argue
that our current business ethic doesn't even work that well for
business). I don't think ANY public school has ever failed as
miserably as Enron did and we simply cannot afford to allow our
schools to fail. If anything our businesses model needs change to try
and replicate the almost unprecedented success of our public education
system from the end of WW II until the very recent past. It is a
system that was once the envy of the developed world. I don't think
it is simply coincidence that our attempts to apply business practices
in education have fairly nearly coincided with the deterioration of
our public schools. The dynamics of a free market just aren't
appropriate for a system that is as diverse, challenging , long term,
and essential as our system of education.
What is wrong with creating a business model in an educational setting?
"A description of the operations of a business including the components
of the business, the functions of the business, and the revenues and
expenses that the business generates."
"Business Model", http://www.investorwords.com/629/business_model.html
In an educational environment there are components such as counseling,
special education, band, history, chemistry, and et cetera. They have a
common goal to work together for the welfare of the student; this is
the function. There are also expenses such as supplies and sources of
income such as the school lunch program. Perhaps there is attached
meaning to your comments that I cannot speak without more knowledge of
your definition.
--
What do you mean that the opposite of a business model needs to occur?
Perhaps the intention is to say that business leaders are not the best
sources for information about the direction of the educational system.
I can agree with that to a limited extent. During the Clinton
Administration pages of notebooks were filled with commentary decrying
that however, business leaders also should not be excluded.
--
There are more than seven thousand public companies and few declare
bankruptcy yearly. Some of these are the product of bad decisions;
others are the product of market pressures. Yet, because of a few high
profile bankruptcies we equate that to the educational system blowing
up with a business plan? The criminal actions of a few are equated to
the entire sector or an idea being insidious yet when compared with the
majority rather than the minority, the concept of a bad ethic is hard
to see. The squeaky wheel gets the grease and attention, however, most
wheels are greased well before the squeak and attention.
--
I can find many examples of educational systems blowing up worse than
Enron and WorldCom. I do not think any business as failed as badly as
some educational systems have. These systems have failed so badly the
results are mapped by the US Census. To equate business ethics as bad
and the source of problems ignores the problems that other education
systems have. Most previously segregated educational systems arguably
blew up and the repercussions continue to effect the populations of
these areas, although theoretically with a diminishing effect yearly.
The following link is a picture of the Pont du Gard aqueduct, a Roman
masterpiece.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Pont_du_gard.jpg
The impairment of segregated school systems and unjust laws worked to
harm individuals similar to playing a game of Jenga with the Pont du
Gard Aqueduct. Perhaps you can abbreviate in a few cases; this will
however increase the pressure on another area to perform. To apply a
Vygotskyian spin to this metaphor and extend it, the top "shelf" of the
aqueduct represents the pupil, the little arches represent the friends
and peers of the pupil, the middle arches represent the educators, and
the bottom arches represent the family. Since the Jenga game was
multi-generational, each layer is affected, one now removes blocks from
each successive arch and quickly finds that the structure can no longer
do its required task. With the missing blocks, the scaffold can no
longer accomplish the goal of providing sufficient support for the next
challenge.
I'm just not willing to trust the future of my children to some
"unseen hand".
IMHO
Bryon Bothun
The unseen hand is the involvement that parents and the child place
into the system. People get as much out of a classroom as they are
willing to interact with it.
********************************************
David Dittmann
From: "David" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Online Democracy" <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, January 02, 2006 12:18 PM
Subject: Re: [Winona] School Administrators/NPR bias
On Jan 2, 2006, at 10:49, Paul Double wrote:
[snip]
Bryon, I think most if not all of us would agree that there are a
few CEO's
whose cost clearly does not represent a good value for the
corporations they
represent. Until Boards of Directors become responsible to their
stockholders and not to the CEO little if anything will change and
more and
more disclosure information will help stockholders stop some of the
games.
No individual, in my opinion, is worth or worthy of any compensation
for
their work, not ownership, beyond 40 percent of the people they
directly
supervise. In the case of very large corporations which will
involve many
layers of employees that will by the organizational tree generate
more for
those at the top. But the abuses of boards for many very large
corporations
to enable this to continue, not in the interest of good management
but
rather, the politics of retaining a good old boy network.
For most, CEO's and owners, the poor examples of the big boy's greed
is not
a model that we respect or want to copy. We have enough outside and
foreign
competition to fight without having to deal with internal rapist of
our
corporate assets.
[snip]
I would add to Paul's comments the following: When shareholders begin
to hold boards responsible for bad decisions by declining to rubber
stamp all proposals and elections, boards may then become cognizant
of whom they represent.
Currently there are few examples of boards being challenged,
credibly. The current high-profile example of a board being
challenged involves Carl Icahn and his idiotic attempt to protect
AOL-Time Warner's shareholder value. Where was Carl Icahn when AOL's
Steve Case was ripping off Time Warner shareholders? The point
remains that shareholder activism needs and boards of directors need
improvement.
********************************************
David Dittmann
_______________________________________________
This message was posted to Winona Online Democracy
All messages must be signed by the senders actual name.
No commercial solicitations are allowed on this list.
To manage your subscription or view the message archives, please visit
http://mapnp.mnforum.org/mailman/listinfo/winona
Any problems or suggestions can be directed to
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
If you want help on how to contact elected officials, go to the Contact page at
http://www.winonaonlinedemocracy.org
