I’m not a teacher and never have been, but isn’t part of the point of malicious compliance to make it a complicated matter of intent as to whether someone is breaking the rules in a way that can be punished? It forces the leadership to make “because I said so” rulings that start to raise the question of the validity of the leadership that has placed the unreasonable rules in place originally.
None of that works when “because I say so” is supported by a majority of the electorate. I’m not sure where the numbers come up exactly on Walters and this specific issue, but the Oklahoma electorate is not gonna be as clean cut against this as you might hope.
I’m not a teacher and never have been, but isn’t part of the point of malicious compliance to make it a complicated matter of intent as to whether someone is breaking the rules in a way that can be punished? It forces the leadership to make “because I said so” rulings that start to raise the question of the validity of the leadership that has placed the unreasonable rules in place originally.
None of that works when “because I say so” is supported by a majority of the electorate. I’m not sure where the numbers come up exactly on Walters and this specific issue, but the Oklahoma electorate is not gonna be as clean cut against this as you might hope.
Well as soon as you start talking about enforcement of anything, you do run into the captured judiciary, which means we’re probably screwed.