That's simply not true. If I am paying someone to educate my children, they better succeed or I will get someone else to do it. The government hides its funding of schools in the overall tax burden. The people think they are getting a free education, so they don't expect as much. And, the government schools have gladly allowed themselves to become daycare centers, so the great unwashed masses are happy as clams.
"It is the sole responsibility of the student to take advantage of that priviledge."
Oh well then! That explains it. It's all the kids' fault. Makes perfect sense to me. The schools are there, those kids need to march in a demand to get their knowledge. Or maybe it would be more Dickensian: "Please sir, I want some more."
Government schools must operate in the collectivist model. Therefore, all children of all citizens must attend. We end up with the absolutely loopy concept that we'll make criminals out of parents for not forcing their children to get an education. Of course that fills the government classrooms with people who don't want, need, or deserve an education. Hence the teacher must pander to the lowest common denominator. In your world it is the fault of the students that they are uninterested in an education and must alter their behavior to suit everyone else. I have a better idea, how about if we don't force anyone not interested in learning to go to school? Or is that too much a "radical ultra-conservative idea?"
"...King and Tobaccoville need to be annexed by Winston-Salem!"
Your predicate is slightly faulty, but your conclusion has merit.