[Amelia]

It would have market efficiency, but probably not educational efficiency. Kids whose parents couldn't afford the $25,000 a year for a good school would probably get short changed. Talent may not be spotted at the lower end, so you'd get some inefficiencies (waste) of potential.

As you point out in an earlier post, that is largely the way it happens now...the worst schools get the least expensive (least experienced) and worst teachers, thus perpetuating the cycle.

[durasell]

the worst schools get the least expensive (least experienced) and worst teachers, thus perpetuating the cycle.





Well yeah, that's one of the things that needs to be fixed.

[Gabz]

..........the worst schools get the least expensive (least experienced) and worst teachers, thus perpetuating the cycle.

I would agree with to a point, when looking at the entire socio-economic concept, particularly in mahor metro areas

I live in a rural county, that is way down on the totem pole in terms of socio-economics, but the schools in this district (entire county) while not perfect, are far superior to the district we moved from, in another state with a higher socio-economic level. And it was one of the reasons we moved from where we lived in Delaware to where we now live in Virginia.

The Delaware branch of the NEA holds heavy duty clout in Dover, I have not seen the same "power" of the VA branch of the NEA in Richmond, and this is a far larger state.

Of course I live in the "forgotten" part of the state, so forgotten that even one of the candidates in the '05 Lt. Gov primary didn't even bother to include it on the map outline he had on all of his stationary-------and that was a Republican.