Education

Press, 11 July 1988, Page 20

Education

. Sir,—lvan Snook (July 5) strikes the heart of the issue when he targets inequality in education. The crying need is support for children with parents unable to support them educationally; naturally concentrated in schools in poorer areas. Some parents are “bussing” their children (even at primary level) to avoid such schools’ problems. Picot’s structure simply does not address this need. It would make it worse in at least two ways. First, by allowing schools discretion over salary bills, the structure allows wealthier schools to attract the higher-graded teachers, or hire more teachers, using locally raised funds. Secondly, the proposed zoning system will encourage educationally conscious parents to take advantage of such disparities, further accentuating them. If Picot’s structure is modified, incorporating national guidelines on teacher-student ratios, removing teaching salaries from discretionary grants, and maintaining the current zoning system, then its advantages could be gained without greatly worsening inequality. But the most desperate need — to attack inequality — would still not be confronted. — Yours, etc., BILL ROSENBERG. July 8, 1988.