Almost all the teachers in our science dept. have a masters degree in their subject area (I have one in biochemistry but teach Physics, the odd-ball) and never intended to teach. They teach because they like the kids and the material and they are good at it, otherwise our principal would not have them here. Our principal scours the landscape for the rare people that can teach and are qualified. The pay just does not draw the best and the brightest. But they are out there, just hard to find.
So my school is just an individual example like your father-in-law, both are oversimplifications and ancedotal. And not all states have teacher's Unions. THis may be a reason a scarce few in our state government acutally know what goes on in schools. They do not want, or take any feed back. And if we gave most of our legislators the Science or Math test that the kids have to take to graduate High School, they would fail it. I know that. So I understand Randall's position.
And if you put the best and the brightest teachers, in a sorry place to teach... you have probably produce a very cynical people who will never step foot in a school again. This has and always will be a very complex problem that mirrors the haves, and the have nots, of our society. And the gap grows.

And GR... throwing money into a failing urban school will not solve the ultimate problem that I dont know how to solve... The family structure. Been there done that in this city. You have a very pretty school with a lot of good teachers to start with that crumbles. This is what I have seen, unless the parents are highly involved.