September 8, 2003
WHERE ECONOMICS STOPS FUNCTIONING:
A test case of GOP's education holy grail? (Dante Chinni, 9/09/03, CS Monitor)
But the bigger issue behind the entire voucher question, the one that its supporters claim is paramount, is that they will improve the public school through competition, like any other industry. There are problems with this argument, however.Competition works in industry because companies compete for the business of consumers who choose to buy or not buy products. If manufacturers choose, they can ignore whole segments of society they don't think will make them money. If General Motors decides it would rather not make a car for the extremely impoverished, it doesn't have to. But what industry does the government mandate to exist and force every person of a certain age to be its customer?
And no amount of competition theory can explain how pulling the better students out of public education will somehow improve the schools. All the competition in the world cannot help overwhelmed teachers deal with kids whose parents, out of neglect or overextension, are not focused on their children's education.
Thus, while the Bush administration is right that vouchers, in theory, might help some individuals (if the amounts are large enough), they miss several larger points. How can you keep good teachers working in increasingly difficult classrooms? How can you teach kids facing extremely difficult environments? These are the questions the D.C. "experiment" will examine.
So economic competition doesn't work on things you have to buy? Say like food, clothing, shelter, etc? Does Adam Smith know about this?
Meanwhile, if competition is the Holy Grail of conservatives, it seems fair to say that class size serves the same role for the Left. So how can reducing public school class size through students with vouchers leaving fail to improve performance? Or is class size reduction just a backdoor way to argue for hiring more teachers--who are not coincidentally union members?
Posted by Orrin Judd at September 8, 2003 7:52 PM"Or is class size reduction just a backdoor way to argue for hiring more teachers."
BINGO!!
OK, let me get this straight. With vouchers, motivated students along with those with pushy parents will get a better education, while those students and parents that don't care will get the same lousy education they already have?
I'll buy that for a dollar.
Someone needs to flip burgers and wash cars for those that paid their dues.
Posted by: Jason Johnson at September 8, 2003 10:39 PMYou have got to give students a reason to want to get educated. An actual, real goal they can understand.
They are just kids. They would not follow such abstract arguments, even if they heard them, which they don't.
When I lecture the ag students, the first thing I do is count noses in the classroom. Then I tell them how many ag jobs will open in the county this year.
These are not high performers on the SAT -- few of them even take it -- but they are smart enough to figure out, "Hey, we're not all going to get hired."
But until I told them, nobody told them. How else are they supposed to know if you don't tell them?
Posted by: Harry Eagar at September 9, 2003 2:50 PM"explain how pulling the better students out of public education will somehow improve the schools"
It may not improve the school from which the students were pulled (but maybe it will by reducing class size, providing some incentive for doing better etc), but it may well improve the school to which the student is taken and, most importantly, it will improve the educational opportunities for the student. And that's the key issue.
The author seems to think the important thing is making sure the public school is better. I think its making sure the kids have an opportunity at a good education. Even if they all end up in charter or private schools.
Posted by: at September 9, 2003 7:35 PM