… but they do allow us to construct a line.
Point one: Over at the Gormogons, Ghettoputer reports the following passage from his local school district’s recent budget presentation:
“The educational paradigm has shifted from guaranteeing universal access to guaranteeing universal performance.”
Now, I suppose that even a poor performance is in fact some kind of performance, and that as long as everyone does something, then the guarantee is fulfilled, but I suspect that isn’t how “universal performance” is meant here. To make it work in the (politic/educational romanticist) way in which I suspect it is meant, we either have to lower the bar substantially, commit a variation of the “No True Scotsman” fallacy (Bobby is a hopeless dunderhead, and therefore isn’t included in the universe of our “universal performance.”), or just plain lie.
But eventually, facts get in the way, and that brings us to
Fabrizio [the principal] also said he decided to make the change because academic success can be influenced by the amount of support a student receives at home and not all students receive the same level of emotional and academic support at home.
Ah, the “You didn’t build that” argument.
As I said, not necessarily a trend, but enough for a line. The slope of said line is left as an exercise for the student. But if not everyone can construct the line, let’s just ignore the result, OK?