[rauljara]

"Over 120,000 people apply every year, according to the state Legislative Analyst's Office, but the academy only enrolls about 900."

I could only think about how if California spent a similar amount of money on teachers, they could (apparently) attract some serious talent that they could be very selective with. Such a talented pool of teachers might be able to produce a generation with a much lower crime rate (reducing the need for California's insane prison system) and much higher productivity (tax base). Countries like Singapore have proven what a valuable investment education is. It is maddening to see how much more we invest maintaining the highest incarceration rate in the world (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_incarceration_rat...).

[xiaoma]

Singapore does invest heavily in education and with great results. Since the discussion is about prison population and expenses, though, it's worth mentioning that Singapore's correctional regularly employs executions rather than paying to for the housing and correctional officers necessary to hold a prisoner for decades. Also, unlike the US, where executions are extremely difficult, controversial and expensive, they're efficient and cheap.

It's hard to dispute the economic success of Singapore's model, but it's not one that any western countries could or would emulate.

[SnowyEgret]

Indeed Rauljara, if California introduced a system that rewarded teachers with a higher salary based on merit by targeting markers such as the quality of their teaching abilities, their ability to inspire their students, improvement in test scores and grades, etc., then California could attract and keep some highly talented and inspriring teachers.

One big caveat is that parenting standards in the home need vast improvement as well.

Thanks Rauljara