Log in

View Full Version : Public School De-funding



Capitalist Lawyer
24th January 2006, 14:25
Cheating the children
Jan 11, 2006
by John Stossel ( bio | archive )

A A Last week, Florida's supreme court ruled that public money can't be spent on private schools because the state constitution commands the funding of only "uniform . . . high-quality" schools. How absurd. As if government schools are uniformly high quality. Or even mostly decent.

Apparently competition, which made even the Postal Service improve, is unconstitutional when it comes to public education in Florida.

Remember when the Postal Service said it couldn't get it there overnight? Then companies like FedEx were allowed to compete. Private enterprise got it there absolutely, positively overnight. Now even the Post Office guarantees overnight delivery sometimes. Competition works.


Why can't education work the same way? If people got to choose their kids' school, education options would be endless. My tiny brain can't begin to imagine the possibilities, but even I can guess there soon would be technology schools, cheap Wal-Mart-like schools, virtual schools where you learn at home on your computer, sports schools, music schools, schools that go all year, schools with uniforms, schools that open early and keep kids later, and, who knows? If there were competition, all kinds of new ideas would bloom.

This already happens overseas, and the results are good.

For "Stupid in America," a special report ABC will air Friday, we gave identical tests to high school students in New Jersey and Belgium. The Belgians trounced the Americans. We didn't pick smart kids in Europe and dumb kids in the United States. The American students attend an above-average school in New Jersey, and New Jersey kids' test scores are above average for America. "It has to be something with the school," said a New Jersey student, "'cause I don't think we're stupider."

She was right: It's the schools. At age 10, students from 25 countries take the same test, and American kids place eighth, well above the international average. But by age 15, when students from 40 countries are tested, the Americans place 25th, well below the international average. In other words, the longer American kids stay in American schools, the worse they do. They do worse than kids from much poorer countries, like Korea and Poland.

This should come as no surprise since public education in the USA is a government monopoly. If you don't like your public school? Tough. If the school is terrible? Tough. Your taxes fund that school regardless of whether it's good or bad.

Government monopolies routinely fail their customers.

Kaat Vandensavel runs a Belgian government school, but in Belgium, school funding follows students, even to private schools. So Vandensavel has to work hard to impress the parents. "If we don't offer them what they want for their child, they won't come to our school." That pressure makes a world of difference, she says. It forces Belgian schools to innovate in order to appeal to parents and students. Vandensavel's school offers extra sports programs and classes in hairdressing, car mechanics, cooking, and furniture building. She told us, "We have to work hard day after day. Otherwise you just [go] out of business."

"That's normal in Western Europe," Harvard economist Caroline Hoxby told me. "If schools don't perform well, a parent would never be trapped in that school in the same way you could be trapped in the U.S."

Vandensavel adds, "America seems like a medieval country . . . a Communist country on the educational level, because there's no freedom of choice -- not for parents, not for pupils."

In kindergarten through 12th grade, that is. Colleges compete, so the United States has many of the most prestigious in the world -- eight of the top 10 universities, on a Chinese list of the world's top 500. (The other two are Cambridge and Oxford.)

Accountability is why universities and private schools perform better. Every day they are held accountable by parents and students, and if they fail the kids, school administrators lose their jobs. Public school officials almost never lose jobs.

Government schools are accountable only to their fellow politicians, and that kind of accountability is virtually no accountability.

The public schools are cheating the children.

Here's more from Stossell: (and please refrain from the stupid ad-hominems.)


The NEA says public schools need more money. That's the refrain heard in politicians' speeches, ballot initiatives and maybe even in your child's own classroom. At a union demonstration, teachers carried signs that said schools will only improve "when the schools have all the money they need and the Air Force has to hold a bake sale to buy a bomber."

Not enough money for education? It's a myth.

The truth is, public schools are rolling in money. If you divide the U.S. Department of Education's figure for total spending on K-12 education by the department's count of K-12 students, it works out to about $10,000 per student.

Think about that! For a class of 25 kids, that's $250,000 per classroom. This doesn't include capital costs. Couldn't you do much better than government schools with $250,000? You could hire several good teachers; I doubt you'd hire many bureaucrats. Government schools, like most monopolies, squander money.

America spends more on schooling than the vast majority of countries that outscore us on the international tests. But the bureaucrats still blame school failure on lack of funds, and demand more money.

In 1985, some of them got their wish. Kansas City, Mo., judge Russell Clark said the city's predominately black schools were not "halfway decent," and he ordered the government to spend billions more. Did the billions improve test scores? Did they hire better teachers, provide better books? Did the students learn anything?

Well, they learned how to waste lots of money.

The bureaucrats renovated school buildings, adding enormous gyms, an Olympic swimming pool, a robotics lab, TV studios, a zoo, a planetarium, and a wildlife sanctuary. They added intense instruction in foreign languages. They spent so much money that when they decided to bring more white kids to the city's schools, they didn't have to resort to busing. Instead, they paid for 120 taxis. Taxis!

What did spending billions more accomplish? The schools got worse. In 2000, five years and $2 billion later, the Kansas City school district failed 11 performance standards and lost its academic accreditation for the first time in the district's history.


http://www.townhall.com/opinion/columns/Jo.../11/181913.html (http://www.townhall.com/opinion/columns/JohnStossel/2006/01/11/181913.html)

Hegemonicretribution
24th January 2006, 17:48
I don't know what you are saying with this piece. Personally I don't support public schooling in America, or any nation, but it is a neccessity in the prevention of an even more extreme underclass. I don't think you are saying there should be no public education right? I mean having a litterate and numerate workforce is benificial to everyone?

However I would say that the vast majority of what is taught after the age of ten is propoganda and little else. In state schools this is rigidly prescribed because the tax dollars have to be accounted for. This is the failing of American state schools in later tests, not the lack of funding as prime factor, but what is taught. At least in other countries an analytical mind is at least perceived, even if not acted upon, as a neccessary precondition for achievment in life. In America the acceptance of dogmatically held subjective "truth" is, or at least that is my understanding.

Focus, and not just in education, but society as a whole, should not so much be on right and wrong, but the skills required to ascertain your own conception of this, and from my less than solid experience this is not the case in America. I am not claiming it is in Europe, but it is to some greater extent. So whilst a nationalist ideology does not permeate to the same extent the minds of the populace, the analytical skill and sceptical approaches of acadaemia do. A more open press is also useful, not that there are statute restriction determining this as such, but the fact that financial restrictions do, and this is affecting non American students now also.

What is the answer? Well I know you would probably like to justify spending on private schools, although I think that would be throwing money at the wrong part of the problem, just as it would be with state schools. Change the social conditions in which the students exist, and change the emphasis of what is considered education and "right."

I could see rightwing and what would be called "leftwing" (pro statist) responses to this, and I think both would miss the point. The system in America will shoot itself in the foot eventually, and the creation of an unintelligent and docile workforce will mean that workers of the nation will miss out. Only the elite which can be elevated from this can continue to succeed, on a new, global scale.

Re-visionist 05
24th January 2006, 18:48
of course its the schools. The way that public schools are structured is not necessarily the greates way to acadmeicly challenge the public. We dont need more fundign either, we need re-structuring. The current model is quite similar to the one that arose in Prussioa, after their defeat by Nepoleon, and those schools were meant to beak down the individual to create a useful citizen for the state ( the word kindergardten literally means "childrens garden, and not the 1 they play in, either)

First of all, we should get rid of mandatory attendence, its what makes those who do not wish to attend show up in the first place. There are plenty of ways to get them doing something productive (E.G industrial schools, service job training, or just plain going t work) this would help lower student populations, increase the amount of money that could be spent per student, and better the financial status's of the school districts.

Also we need to change the way we teach students. Obedience, practicality, punishment, and pointing out failures, while overpraising sucess are not what's needed to learn and learn well, in fact their just the opposite. I really think that we should apply montessouri methods to all levels of public education; they enourage creativity, and let students excell greatly at what their good at, and what they like. We need to stop giving out grades...period. There should not be a status quo a student is forced to meet, and if they dont, they are told that they've failed, when has that ever helped anyone learn, and besides, we might be teaching individual students in a style that they do not benefit from. This would require teachers to receive training in various styles of teaching techniques, instead of their own preferred method. They should be the ones graded upon their preformance, after all, failure to learn, is only an indicator of the instructures failure to teach something in a method that is understandable to the student. But what we are dping is creating millions of little clones, to uphold the interests of the state.