Richard Posted: Oct 1, 2006 8:28 PM >Haim, I think this is where we left off before. You are >critical of school spending in urban environments and I >provided evidence of shortages in suburban and rural >districts. > >Now let's talk about math teaching and learning, eh?
Urban and suburban schools account for more than 3/4 of all school-age children
making them the natural focus of a national debate on school funding.
Although I have not studied rural schools, it seems natural to suppose that funding, i.e., the sheer availability of money as opposed to profligacy, is a real problem for them. All the more reason, I should think, that you, with your special concern for rural schools, should want to see the urbs and suburbs spending money more circumspectly. This might free up some state money for the rural schools.
More so than at any time in the past, a few extra dollars could make a world of difference in the rural schools. I am thinking of "distance learning" and the world of possibilities that technology opens up. But for that to happen in the rural schools, the urban districts are going to have to stop using $20 dollar bills to light their cigars.
At any rate, I see you have no stomach for this discussion. I brought it up again only to point out that when it comes to waiting for evidence, not everyone is waiting only for Wayne.