Parents in competitive school districts also shell out exorbitant sums, both in property taxes and during school fundraisers.

It has given rise to a bargaining mentality.

Schools get money for each student enrolled, so there is a strong incentive to please parents so they don't move their kids (to a charter school etc). That seems fair enough to me in principle, but due to unrealistic demands, it can fail at times. Nonetheless it is better than a one-size-fits-all no child left behind policy. So charter schools create the competition in a district, and at least put pressure to raise the level of all the public schools.

> Children are not stakeholders because they have no power and their opinions are irrelevant

I think I see your point of view, but IMO that is too narrow a definition of "stakeholder".

One of the more commonly-accepted definitions of "stakeholder", at least from a project-management standpoint, would be:

"an individual, group, or organization, who may affect, be affected by, or perceive itself to be affected by a decision, activity, or outcome of a project"

Even in my work, I tend to think of stakeholders as those who stand to lose or gain based on the outcome -- literally, those who have a stake in the outcome. Many of them are active participants, but not always.

Just my 2 cents... I might be far from typical in this viewpoint.