![]() Protecting candidates that would not help achieve the specialized mission of the organization harms the other teachers and students in the school. When a school has a specialized mission and focus, it needs to be able to hire specialized individuals. Some types of discrimination are actually beneficial to teachers, students, and the rest of society. Allowing families to choose their schools will only work to eliminate unhealthy discrimination such as racism in hiring. Ultimately, this would lead to a competitive advantage for school Y for not being racist! Families would recognize this advantage, choose school Y, and force school X to face a shutdown condition. If an alternative school, Y, does not practice the same discrimination, they will benefit by having a larger pool of teacher candidates. If they are racist against race 2, they will likely choose to hire race 1, regardless of the actual quality of the teacher. They can choose to hire a teacher of race 1 or race 2. Even if we allow all types of discrimination, the evil individuals in charge of the private schools will financially pay for the act.įor example, let’s assume that the people in charge of school X are racist. For simplicity, let’s assume that people running private schools are indeed racist, sexist, evil individuals. We don’t want public funding to go to schools that are run by malevolent people. Discrimination in enrolling students increases the probability that all students are in a successful, specialized learning environment.ĭiscrimination in hiring employees increases the likelihood that children are educated by teachers aligned with their interests and abilities.We can all agree that the intentions behind this policy are well-meaning. Discrimination in hiring employees increases the likelihood that children are educated by teachers that are aligned with their interests and abilities. While discrimination policies aim to protect employees and children, the result is the opposite. But Washington last night poured scorn on Mr Chretien's veto claim.School choice programs around the world prohibit discrimination in hiring employees and enrolling students.It was this last bit that caused the problem, and critics have poured scorn on the advice ever since.→ scorn Examples from the Corpus pour scorn on somebody/something pour scorn on somebody/something pour scorn on somebody/something ( also heap scorn on somebody/something American English ) to strongly criticize someone or something because you think they do not deserve respect Labour poured scorn on the Tory claim to be the party of law and order. ![]() His complicity, if proved, would be a sensation, but even his critics poured scorn on the accusation.But Washington last night poured scorn on Mr Chretien's veto claim.From Longman Dictionary of Contemporary English pour scorn on somebody/something pour scorn on somebody/something MAKE FUN OF to say that something or someone is stupid and not worth considering → pour Examples from the Corpus pour scorn on somebody/something
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |