Bacon's Rebellion

Democracy Thrives in Sunlight

An Opportunity for Choice

—

by

James A. Bacon
in

The Wall Street Journal’s William McGurn makes a case for school choice this morning inside the the framework of the presidential race. The point he makes could just as easily apply to Virginia’s 2009 gubernatorial contest:

There’s a good opening here for John McCain. As a senator, he has been a forceful voice for giving lower-income moms and dads the same options for their children that wealthier parents already enjoy. What if he took this campaign into the heart of our cities – and gave a little straight talk about the scandal that their public-school systems represent in this great land of opportunity?

Hillary Clinton can’t do it for the same reason that Barack Obama can’t: They cannot offend the teachers unions that are arguably the most powerful constituents in their party. John McCain can.

Of course, McGurn questions whether McCain will actually do this. And it’s a good one, because McCain can be…mercurial…on some issues. But the opportunity is very real.

Now substitute some Virginia political names for the national ones in McGurn’s piece: Bob McDonnell — not Creigh Deeds or Brian Moran — has the opportunity to become a forceful advocate for school choice in the next election. He’s already friendly to the idea and if he chose to push it, he could very well force the Democratic nominee to choose between constituencies. Granted, some of the political pitfalls McGurn outlines will come into play. Finding a way to overcome them won’t be easy.

But first, the effort has to be made. And rest assured, there are plenty of folks who will be willing to listen to — and even support — a candidate who puts fundamental education reform ahead of interest group politics. (Cross-posted at Tertium Quids)

Share this article

ADVERTISEMENT

(comments below)

ADVERTISEMENT

(comments below)

Comments

  1. Larry Gross Avatar
    Larry Gross

    I actually would support injecting competitiveness in education with four major provisos:

    1. – EVERY provider MUST be certified in meeting SOL benchmarks

    2. – EVERY provider MUST accept every student who wishes to attend and/or a random lottery if demand exceeds space.

    3. – EVERY child – regardless of parental circumstances – especially with regard to income must have the same access – with his/her costs incorporated into the school costs.

    The State would pay for those kids educational costs… in full – not a limited “voucher” that only works at some schools… and not others.

    4. – the transportation costs are included.

    There are many different ways to achieve the above.

    One way would be to model it after Medicare but with a BIG PROVISO – a full-competitive demand model where every provider is strictly rated in terms of performance benchmarks and “customers” are truly free to “shop” for the best deal – for them.

    So.. “on the ground”…it “works” this way.

    A parent goes to a website – a Consumers Report Website that shows the schools and shows the costs and shows the performance and would INCLUDE a parents rating score.

    And they choose their top 3 ..

    and the access is exactly the same no matter your income…

    The cost – is means tested for the core services and ala carte for “extra” services for advanced courses, extra-curricula, and “creative” curricula

    The fundamental goal would be equal access and a fully competitive environment for services.

    and it’s something along these lines – comprehensive and competitive that I would EXPECT from those who claim Fiscal Conservative credentials – no knuckle-draggers need apply.

    Either come up with an intelligent proposal or go fish.

  2. Jim Bacon Avatar
    Jim Bacon

    Norm, I agree with you, it would be nice if a Republican candidate picked up this idea and ran with it. As Thomas Sowell has pointed out, if the Rs want to make inroads in the African-American electorate, they can’t do it by espousing Democratic Lite proposals — African-Americans will go for the real thing every time.

    The Rs have to attack the Ds from a radically different approach. The Dems, who are joined at the hip with the teachers unions, are opposed to reforming public schools. *Dem* policies are responsible for the sub-standard education that too many African-American students receive. (God knows, the recent revelations of massive waste in the Richmond public schools could provide ample fuel for this argument).

    Secondly, the Rs should hit the affordable housing issue hard. What have the Dems done to create affordable housing? Build crime-ridden projects in the inner city while supporting zoning controls and restrictions against “affordable” housing in the suburbs. (Of course, that argument might risk angering suburban voters who don’t want poor people living near them.)

    If the Rs want to be a majority party, they have to find ways to peel off a significant percentage of African-American voters. The fact that they haven’t tried this approach does make me wonder how committed they are to the principles of free markets and economic opportunity.

  3. Anonymous Avatar
    Anonymous

    Mr. Gross,

    Let’s remember, the SOLs were created for public schools because they were FAILING to teach our children anything. And also remember that it was the teachers and the teachers unions that fought the SOLs every step of the way.

    Private schools, because they have to compete against a FREE system, have to actually educate our children in order to remain an option. Why would anyone pay for a lousy education at a private school when they can get one free at any public school?!

    The “private schools must meet SOL requirements” is a red herring and exposes those who float it as public school monopoly protectionists.

  4. The Logician Avatar
    The Logician

    Larry

    1) What you propose sounds frighteningly like an effective nationalization of the private school system. I’m all for imposing minimum standards for accreditation, but beyond that, those schools are private for the sole function of providing its member families exclusivity (whether the motivation be class or religion driven).

    2) The government (local or national) has ZERO authority over a private school. The state is obligated to provide all its citizens with free access to good education. If a group of families wants to start up their own school outside the framework of the public school system, that is their right as free citizens, and the state cannot make them accept anyone they don’t want, fair or not.

    3) Just to throw some gasoline on the fire: Tax dollars have no place whatsoever providing an education that very likely will be indoctrinating kids with the faux science of Creationism, or religiously minded revisionist history, which many of these parochial schools will shove down kids throats. And yes, I know what you’re going to say: parents will have a choice of whether to send their kids to a secular or parochial school. My response: great, do it with their money, not mine. Tax dollars for parochial education constitutes government promotion of religion, and shortchanges young students of a fair and balanced education based on science, fact, and reason.

    Sorry, but what you’re proposing is a full abandonment of the public school system. Instead of fixing what’s broken, we put it on blocks in the front yard and go lease a shiny new education system.

    Besides, it’s all moot anyways. Inner city schools don’t fail because of the school systems. Inner city schools fail because of the community the kids live in. Fix the family dynamics in the lower classes and get the parents to place value on education in their households, and then those kids will stand a fighting chance.

  5. Larry Gross Avatar
    Larry Gross

    re: “…it was the teachers and the teachers unions that fought the SOLs every step of the way.”

    Indeed. I am no defender of the current “stay out of our business” education institution approach.

    but I would point out that it is the administrators and those who control the programs and funding who are MORE opposed to accountability and transparency and that teachers and their unions fear sanctions and reprisals …not for not doing their job but for not being able to correct the more systemic of the problems that are beyond their abilities to do.

    re: education, subsidies, public benefit… aka – is the concept of Public Education what transformed Ammerica into a middle-class economic powerhouse?

    open question. You’ve got my “tilt” on the value of Public Education.

    So .. opponents should – be opposed , in my view, first and foremost on the concept of whether the State has a legitimate interest in a Public Education.

    If you don’t believe this, then I’d respect your point of view and consistency of same ..even though I’d not agree.

    But if you think Public Education is in the mission statement of America – then you’d not want a separate system .. funded by tax dollars that did not have to meet the same requirements that Public Schools are … SUPPOSED to meet but have not until NCLB and even now are twisting and turning to continue to wiggle out of public accountability and transparency.

    so.. make the first choice -public schools or not…

    then if you believe in the Public School concept.. then propose a fair and equitable way that all kids can have an equal opportunity at .. the ability to support themselves and not joint the entitlement society…

    I .. see .. giving vouchers to the same parents who ..say might sign up for a sub-prime loan … to educate their kids and not a good thing.

    We need to have standards – for ANY tax money expended on the theory that such expenditures will ultimately “benefit” society…

    otherwise.. vouchers are, in my mind.. an entirely sneaky way to have taxes pay for private education.

    … and geeze.. use Larry …NOT Gross with or without a Mr.! 🙂

  6. Larry Gross Avatar
    Larry Gross

    re: using tax dollars to teach faux science and religion… and for that matter “enhanced” curriculums at public schools.

    I’m fine with tax dollars used to pay for the core education that is specified by the SOL standards – as long as it results in the required scores. I’d actually prefer that Virginia’s SOLs BE, in fact, the NAEP standards for proficiency.

    I think if a parent wants their kids to learn or not learn something that has virtually nothing to do with becoming a self-supporting citizen who does not need entitlement support – that I’d go along… as long as that kid can make a living when they grow up even with weird ideas about faux science and religion.

    but I won’t go along with using tax dollars to teach such stuff INSTEAD of the core knowledge.

    In other words – I support tax-payer support of the Core part of education and further without competition on providing a core education – we end up with the system we have now.. which is remarkably similar to VDOT’s oft-cited use of tax dollars – “our way or the highway”.

    Our current education system works the same way to a certain extent.

    They coerce taxpayers then deliver to to society THEIR idea of what an education should be which results in many children being left behind.

    Basically… tax dollars to pay for the education needed to earn a living be self-supporting.. and private dollars for “extras” whether they be weird religion or a UVA high-school “resume”.

  7. Groveton Avatar
    Groveton

    Larry, Larry, Larry…

    “Basically… tax dollars to pay for the education needed to earn a living be self-supporting.. and private dollars for “extras” whether they be weird religion or a UVA high-school “resume”.”.

    Is it Calculus or the second year of Biology that constitites a UVA high-school resume? The government should pay for home economics or car repair but not AP English?

    The faux-liberalism of your argument is scary. I can only summarize it as:

    Poor kids are too dumb to take AP classes and rich kids can afford to pay for it themselves.

    I know a number of poor kids who have gone on to Stanford, Princeton and UVA who would beg to differ.

    In the bizarre world of your argument advanced math, science and language education are window dressing. In the real world of global supply chains and international competition they are pre-requisites to national economic health.

  8. Larry Gross Avatar
    Larry Gross

    “Is it Calculus or the second year of Biology that constitites a UVA high-school resume? The government should pay for home economics or car repair but not AP English?”

    short answer – yes – if you have to choose.

    yup.. I figured that since the dialog stopped that folks thought I was too far gone… 🙂

    I’m not opposed to higher/better/more advanced/creative education at our public schools UNLESS it is done at the expense of a basic education for those who WILL grow up and WILL become entitlement beneficiaries if they cannot be employed.

    And that’s the better outcome if somehow they manage to not become end up with time on their hands that leads ultimately to incarceration.

    UNLESS.. we want to believe that we must graduate as many as possible with the maximum education levels possible.. in anticipation ..that we’ll need them to make enough money to not only support themselves but to pay horrendous taxes to support those who did not get enough education to be employable.

    This is what No Child Left Behind was/is about from a policy perspective.

    The NCLB numbers don’t lie and the biggest problem with NCLB is that those dang numbers won’t go away…
    and the result is.. that more money is needed to deal with the kids that will be left behind if we don’t address their needs – which are very different from the needs of kids who have high quality 24/7 parenting – but the same parents who would advocate for Calculus instead of remedial reading.. if funds have to be prioritized.

    That’s where we hear the “dumbing down”.. “boring curriculum” comments AND.. I feel .. in part.. the voucher movement.

    Some folks want much better schools for advanced subjects.. and don’t want their money spend on remedial programs that THEIR kids don’t need.

    It’s perfectly understandable but it also works against the rationale for public schools to start with – which is.. to uses taxes – whether you are a parent or not – to insure than any kid with a normal IQ, has a legitimate opportunity to grow up and get a job.

    The 24/7 parents are politically potent and if not impeded by laws like NCLB would continue to evolve schools away from basic education and towards more advanced education – at the expense of the kids of parents who are not politically potent.

    So.. in many schools (not Fairfax), “at risk” kids are clearly identifiable. It’s not rocket science. They almost always sit in a group that the numbers show are “economically disadvantaged” .. shown “on the books” as qualifying for subsidized or free lunches.

    We KNOW that these kids need specific curricula… already defined by what the Feds call “Chapter Reading”… but the Feds only fund a smaller segment of the total pool … and leave it up to schools to fund the money for the others.

    In some schools – clearly seen in the NCLB and NAEP stats – they do the right thing and the at risk kids grow up able to compete for jobs.

    But in other schools, clearly seen in the same stats.. those kids are not delt with.. even those the school has lots of advanced programs and graduates very high quality students.

    Vouchers without appropriate safeguards will result in more kids being left behind…

    they’ll “promise” a better path for at-risk kids, but they won’t deliver – unless – we require the voucher programs to do so.

    and that means that if you’re gonna offer a parent of an at-risk kid – a voucher – and the school has no SOL standards and it’s programs are actually even more advanced than public schools that they’ll take the voucher money and flush the kid.

    That’s why I’m opposed to vouchers as currently proposed and that’s why I would accuse those who advocate vouchers without appropriate safeguards as being disingenuous in their claims that vouchers will “help” those kids “trapped” in “underperforming” schools.

    .. and THAT is why I think that ANY tax dollars used to pay for education – public or private should REQUIRE NCLB/SOL standards.

    Otherwise.. it’s just a ruse to use tax dollars for private benefit – not public.

    now.. don’t go ask me what I really feel… 🙂

    seriously.. it is a debatable issue and my opinion is changeable as long as I see the issue that is of concern.. adequately addressed in any voucher scenario…

  9. The Logician Avatar
    The Logician

    Larry, I think we’re more on the same track than I originally believed.

    You’re right. Different kids with different capabilities and different needs require different educations. Shoehorning 99% of America’s children into one educational system is a fundamentally bad idea, and that’s exactly what NCLB does. It puts unrealistic pressure on the low end and at-risk students, and restrains the elite.

    In any society you’re going to need your mechanics, your carpenters, your cooks, and your farmers, just as much as you need your engineers, your doctors, and your macro economists. Everyone deserves an education that will make them functional adults in American society and the ever-more global economy.

    Unfortunately the technical and trade educations have become stigmatized by the mainstream. Aside from some basic shop courses taught in middle and high schools, NCLB precludes offering functional educations to those who would indeed be better off learning to weld or cook, rather than giving them unhealthy doses of Joyce and Latin.

    AP classes are great. I took quite of few of them, which better prepared me for the rigors of a top-notch engineering school. They were for me. They weren’t for everyone. That’s not elitism speaking, it’s realism. Some people are at the high end of the bell curve, some at the low, and most within a sigma of the center.

    Getting back to the original point, the same applies for most private schools. They may be for some, but they aren’t for everyone. To expect a kid who pulls C’s at an “underperforming” school to suddenly excel once given a uniform and dropped in IB program at Holy Mother of Sam Academy is ludicrous. Private school is not a magic wand. Nor should it be.

    A better solution may be tracking kids once they get to high school. Optionally, of course. I hesitate to take it to the point that some European countries do, where you’re given an aptitude test and slotted for a particular career at age 11. I’ve seen that backfire in a few of my European friends. But most localities already offer magnet programs in high school, if not middle school. Why not take that concept further?

    Identify the bright and the motivated, and get them the academic program to build them into scientists and statesmen. De-stigmatize technical educations (and remove the associated NCLB regulations) and offer schools for those who will one day become our tradesmen. Leave the general public school system in place for that center 66%.

    It’s better than watching half of inner city students drop out because they can’t find the relevance in the current curricula.

  10. Larry Gross Avatar
    Larry Gross

    Good! I’m not unfamiliar with the issues.. I have a wife who teaches.

    A first grader is totally innocent regardless of his parental situation.

    He/she does deserve an equal chance at life even if his/her parents are not the best….

    Education is their ONLY chance to better themselves.

    NCLB is a ham-fisted approach.

    Prior to NCLB.. virtually everyone was more than happy to watch these kids fail.

    That is unacceptable.

    If not NCLB.. then show me a better path but don’t make NCLB the messenger that we shoot because we don’t like the data.

    Anyone who just looks at NCLB (and NAEP) data and does not see the problem.. makes me wonder just how much they want to “see” the problem.

    and it’s not like NCLB is anal about things we cannot change.. the Europeans and Japanese are cleaning our clocks on this issue…

    Their kids are going to be employed.. and our kids are going to be getting welfare .. if we are not careful…

Leave a Reply

Read More