Freedom and Control

The problems with school discipline

In this author's worthy opinion, 90% of school discipline issues stem directly from a poorly administered environment. The traditional school model of the time of this writing has a number of deep systemic flaws which naturally breed pathological behavior in all kinds in students. Rather than dwell too much on the basis of that assertion, I'd rather just point out the key aspects of the new model which effectively minimize discipline problems at many levels. You'll note that these are fundamental systemic differences and they don't rely on interpretations or methodologies that must be learned and implemented by school staff. In fact, the goal of establishing such a disciplinary model is to eliminate interpretations and methodologies as much as possible from the context of implementation, and shift most of that concern to the realm of design.

School boards should continually debate and maintain an explicit policy regarding the ways in which normalization is both sought and avoided.

School should not be a "proving ground" whereby standardized models are imposed on a variety of kids. Instead we should be employing a variety of models which kids, working with their parents, will choose and apply in their own interest.

Abolish grade levels completely. Replace them with a rich database of courses which have pre-requisite dependencies on each other. Each course has starting and completion criteria.

The school as "daycare", conflicts with the "requirement vs entitlement".

Each school board must set the following in policy:

What is the definition of an entitled student?
What tangible resources should be employed and how should they be managed?
How will the care and welfare needs of attending students be met?
What educational programs will be provided and how will the tangible facilities support those programs' delivery?

There's taxation without representation, but does more taxation imply more representation?

Absolutely not. Representation must always be based on the individual having one vote while taxation should always be based on the amount of individual gain extracted from the system. This is the only way by which democracy can be considered sustainable. For every dollar you wield, pay a certain percentage in taxes. You always get one vote in politics.

Funding schools

Funding is collected according to economic standing and allocated according the rule of equal access for each entitled individual. This funding redistribution process should be carried out at the STATE level, not at the district level. That is, equality has meaning only within the scope of the relevant legislating polity. Think of it like this: The laws a state makes, which govern everything from crime and punishment to the role and taxation of corporations dictate the form of society. The equality that matters for purposes like the provision of education (and probably every other legal kind), is that which stems from this form of society. Thus Texans should reap the benefits and challenges that their laws create, but within that system, all Texans must have equal access to the public resources.
Mandatory contribution via taxation is important to continue. This is the only way to guarantee equal opportunity for all. As with any taxes, the contribution varies depending on how much individual gain one extracts from the society economically, ie. contribution should be based on the types of things it's always been based on, be it property taxes, income taxes, luxury taxes, i.e. economic power.
Each student is individually entitled to the same resources regardless of the contributions made by their families or otherwise on their behalf. The only differentiator among students as regards what they can exploit should be the effort and attention they bring to the endeavor. Students that work hard and learn quickly should find no barriers to accessing more and more materials and resources. Thus we must NOT be using "learning dollars" or "chits" or any other currency-like mechanism which is engaged at any per-course or per-resource level.
There is a moderate form of "use it or lose it" in play for students. The most important one is that their entitlements end at age 18. This does not mean that their access ends then, only that the publicly funded support for that access ends. The other principal form of this concept comes in that access to the resources of the school will be actively held equal to all entitled through policy. For example, any legally entitled student who applies for access must be provided access. As in all questions of equality and variety, there will be a line sought between access and exploitation. That is, the school is expressly NOT responsible to ensure that all entitled students exploit resources equally, only that they have equal access.