“We are taking a system of quality review driven by cooperation and replacing it with a parent-child relationship,” where the parent (the accreditor) is “controlled by the federal government".
Well. Did he imply that government control is a bad thing?
Let’s say, in the case of government failed the public, we can vote the government out. So. In a way, government is responsible to the public. In the case of other industries, we rely on governments to regulate them through established law. So. I don’t see government regulation as necessary a bad thing.
On the other hand, United State is itself a self-governing entity. So why should we think the self-governing accreditation will not work?
In the case of United State, the goal is to take care of it’s own interest which is publics’ interest. In the case of accreditor, the goal is to take care of accreditors’ interest. Should they care about publics’ interest?
For industries, they wouldn’t interested in publics’ interests unless the public, which they are part of it, requires them through law and government.
==============================
Well. I guess the question is, then, is government controlled education a bad thing?
Let's say, in the case that school fails, how can it be regulated? In the case of government, we can vote it out. In the case of self-governing accreditation... Hm...
I guess, the other way to argue is that schools under the self-governing accreditation will never fail. Will they? United State itself is self-governing by its citizen. So what make you think the self-governing will or will not work?
No comments:
Post a Comment