Education RSS feed for this section

School choice sentiments simmer in Rhode Island as politicians go about business as usual

In Rhode Island, the school choice issue is emblematic of the insider nature of politics and the mounting public frustration with it.

Look in any direction, and the demand for school choice is clear:

  • Asked in a survey how they would educate their children if given the option, 68% would choose something other than district public schools.
  • In College Board data, Rhode Island is second in the nation in the percentage of private school students, and first, by a long shot, in religiously affiliated private schools, which tend to be less expensive.
  • Every year, the applicants for charter schools exceed the available seats by many times, and only a fraction of businesses that would like to provide tax credit scholarships are able to do so.

Yet, asked about school choice on Thursday, the day of a School Choice Week rally at the State House, the Speaker of the House, Nicholas Mattiello (D, Cranston) told a political reporter from the Providence Journal, “Even though [school] choice sounds like a good idea, it’s very impractical and something I am not going to be looking at very favorably.”

Continue reading on



Take It from a Teacher: Unions are Activist Organizations Doing Harm

Hopefully this petition from schoolteachers, asking the Supreme Court to decide whether teachers can be forced either to join unions or to pay them “free rider” fees is an indication that truth is dawning on the profession.  Here’s one teacher making the case that I’ve mentioned around here before:

“I don’t have a problem with unions,” she says. “I understand a lot of people want to have that collective voice. That would be ideal where you have a choice; [you’re] not coerced, but you’re also not bullied or called a freeloader or some other name-calling because you choose not to pay for that.”

In decades past, particularly after the Great Depression, Friedrichs says the idea of labor unions made more sense. But with the increased political nature of policy discussions, unions have “morphed into something very different now.”

“They’re more a political activist,” Friedrichs says. “They’ve done more harm than good.”

Wherever there’s far-left progressive activism, the unions are right in the middle.  As Allie Bidwell’s U.S. News report suggests, there isn’t a clear line between their activism on a range of progressive issues and the advocacy that they’re able to present as focused on their members.

Nobody should be forced to belong to or fund an organization like that.

(via Instapundit)


Pearson’s School Construction Bill: General Assembly Still Not Getting It

The latest example of Rhode Island legislators’ not understanding the problems of the state comes via Senator Ryan Pearson (D, Cumberland, Lincoln) and his legislation to allocate a percentage point of the sales tax to school construction:

“No state has figured out how to do this,” Pearson said, referring to the financing of school construction. The Rhode Island plan is similar to one developed by Massachusetts, which dedicates 1 percent of the state’s sales tax to help pay for school facility improvements.   In fiscal 2016, this proposal would generate $81.4 million, according to Pearson. The annual increases would add an additional $5.7 million.

Another variable that Pearson doesn’t take into account, which I’ve noted recently, is enrollment.  By the Dept. of Education’s own report, Rhode Island schools already have 19% too much space, with projections for a continuing drop in enrollment.  How many millions of dollars are we going to spend maintaining schools that face inevitable consolidation?  How many more millions of dollars in economic activity are we going to forego in order to keep our sales tax rate so high?

If our state legislators really want to help cities, towns, and school districts, they should do two things.  The first is to start easing the burden that they place on the people of Rhode Island in taxes and regulations and let the economy grow, improving local tax revenue.  For example, Pearson’s plan would add $81.4 million at first, increasing to somewhere around $143 million over a decade, but the RI Center for Freedom & Prosperity’s dynamic projections for eliminating the sales tax showed around a $149 million increase in local tax revenue with an elimination of the sales tax ($109 million if it were reduced to 3%).

The second is to alleviate the burdens that state law places on schools and on the municipalities that house them.  A huge majority of local budgets goes to labor costs that are exacerbated by laws designed to push everything in the favor of the unions.  A more fair regime of labor laws would allow cities, towns, and school districts flexibility to finance infrastructure.

Anybody who pays attention knows the score, here.  Elected officials (often elected with union support) set up regular budget processes as a battle between labor and taxpayer, with the labor side parading children and the elderly as the victims of fiscal restraint, and let capital needs fester until they reach a point of such expense that there’s no choice but to borrow the money, which simply notches the labor-taxpayer battle up to a higher and higher level of expense, each year.  That can’t go on, no matter how many gimmicks elected officials pass into law.


Involved Parents and School Choice

One of the myths thrown about to push back on calls for school choice is that parents won’t make good decisions for their children.  It’s not true.  Relatedly, excuse-makers for the government school system periodically claim that the teachers and other professionals can’t be blamed for student performance because it’s the parents’ fault (or that of the students themselves).

That one probably has a little more truth to it.  Involved parents ensure that learning never stops, and involved parents who are also reasonable hold their children accountable to the authority of the teachers, and involved, reasonable parents who are also assertive demand accountability from the schools.  It may be the case, therefore, that such parents find ways to send their children to private schools, with which they’ll have more leverage, at a higher rate.

Into the mix, throw this tidbit of research:

A new piece of research, which was conducted by Bristol University, has refuted the idea that parents from a poor background are less involved in their children than those from a wealthier background.

The findings revealed that poorer parents are as likely to help with homework, play and read with their children, as those who are better-off financially.

Next week, the RI Center for Freedom & Prosperity will release a brief study of mine suggesting that Rhode Island parents are using lower-cost religiously affiliated schools as a means of school choice.  The number of families vying for charter-school slots, as well as survey results, reinforces the point, as illustrated in this graphic:

A strong school choice policy would merely empower parents to make the decisions that they already know are best for their children.  That’s what scares the special interests vested in a near government monopoly in education.


Fix-the-System Education Reform Hits a Ceiling in Rhode Island

Although the division between them has not yet hardened into antagonism, there are two branches of the education reform movement.

One seeks to fix the system that is currently in place, with minimally disruptive reforms to make government-run schools more accountable and responsive, prodded through competition from charter schools, over which government maintains a strong hand.  The other favors stronger competition through school choice, with the funds allocated for students’ education being directed by their parents to any schools that they choose.

For the better part of the last decade, Rhode Island has pursued reforms of the fix-the-system variety.  In both its politics and its test results, however, the Ocean State may now be proving that such reforms have a ceiling.

Continue reading on


Credibility for an Online Poll

Yes, a lot of people responded to the Department of Education’s online survey, but something about the reporting feels off — irresponsible even:

Nearly 82 percent of Rhode Islanders said the quality of public education is of the utmost importance to the state’s success, according to a recent survey of roughly 10,000 local residents.

It’s not correct to extrapolate the results of this survey as representative of “Rhode Islanders.”  This wasn’t a random sampling; it was no better than an online poll that any news organization (or blog) might post.  If anything, those surveys are probably more representative, given the narrow field of people likely to come across an online survey from a government education agency.

Providence Journal reporter Linda Borg goes so far as to play coy with the survey participants: “The majority of survey participants — more than 70 percent — said they were parents, guardians or educators.”  Parents/guardians and educators are quite different groups, so lumping them together doesn’t tell the reader much.

Looking at the survey results, 35.34% (3,003) of respondents stated that, above whatever else they are, they are “educators.”  Of course, some of the 40.01% (3,400) who said that they are “parents/guardians” may also be teachers, but consider their status as parents to be primary.  It isn’t surprising what this group chose when given the opportunity to pick three “future priorities [that] will best ensure that PK-12 schools meet future student and state needs.”

Want to guess the number 1 choice, with 4,435 votes?  You got it: “Adequate funding and resources.”  Number 2, with 3,957 votes? “Training and supporting quality teachers.”

It feels almost like a scam that this survey would be considered a guide for the state’s strategic plan for education, but it’s somewhat worse to report the results as if they aren’t shaded by the input of people who stand to gain professionally from that plan.


RI Education: Big Bucks, Small Achievement

Dan McGowan has a short summary, on the WPRI Web site, of Education Week’s review of education among American states.  Rhode Island comes in as average, overall, at C+.  Education Week considers spending on schools to be a positive factor, and Rhode Island is seventh highest in the country by that measure, but actual student achievement (27th in the nation) dragged the Ocean State down.

One paragraph from McGowan, in particular, caught my eye:

Even though it has made some of the largest gains in the country on the math and reading sections of the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) exam, Rhode Island earned a D+ for student achievement, in part because the state has some of the largest poverty-based achievement gaps in the country.

Compared with much of the nation, Rhode Island has, indeed, made slight gains on the NAEP, although the real story is that the national average has made even-slighter gains, setting a low bar for Dan’s claim of “some of the largest.”  Here’s some perspective: Averaging 4th and 8th grades and math and reading tests, from 2003 to 2013, the average state saw an increase of 6.3 points, reaching 245.  For Rhode Island, the gain was 8.8, to 244.  But other areas have done significantly better.  Washington, D.C., which began a high-profile school choice program in 2003 increased 21.5 points, to 237.  Other states that are often mentioned in conversations of school choice and reform outpaced Rhode Island significantly (like Florida and Indiana, for example).

I’m getting these numbers from a new online application on which the RI Center for Freedom & Prosperity is working that will soon be available for the public.


Implications of the Gist Limbo

In addition to the points I emphasized here, when I was on the Matt Allen Show on New Year’s Day with Jay Martins, Jay asked me for my prediction about the pension lawsuit.

In a nutshell, I think the law will stand.  This is Rhode Island, so the legality of the thing is secondary to the politics, and the cost to the state of seeing the pension lawsuit invalidated, now, would be catastrophic.  However, there’s likely to be a backside payoff to the unions.

Seeing Elizabeth Harrison’s RIPR report that the State Board of Education hasn’t chosen to renew Education Commissioner Deborah Gist’s contract (which only means that renewal isn’t guaranteed, but might be negotiated) makes me wonder if that’s one such backside.  Rhode Island’s education reforms under Gist haven’t been anywhere near what Rhode Island needs — or what its students deserve — but they’ve definitely been beyond what the teachers unions will willingly tolerate.

Gina Raimondo’s signature reform has a direct budget implication that will make the politicians’ lives more difficult if it doesn’t stand.  Gist’s educational reforms have no such immediate pain for politicians, so it’s possible that they may be sacrificed (along with her job) for the reform that does.


The Accountability Spin

Here’s the headline from a Rhode Island Department of Education press release about science NECAP scores, out today: “Science assessments show statewide improvement over six-year span.”  The average reader can be forgiven for taking that to be great news, and the average cynic can be forgiven for wondering what happened through those six years to make the department reach back so long for its headline.

You can decide for yourself what group Governor Lincoln Chafee falls into.  Here’s his statement in the release:

“Proficiency in science plays an important role as we prepare Rhode Island students to succeed in the workforce of tomorrow,” said Governor Lincoln D. Chafee. “I am pleased to see this improvement over time in the results of our science assessments. With continued excellent instruction, our students will make progress in future years as well.”

My vote is that Chafee should receive the cynics’ crown, because he’s surely aware of the year-to-year data.  As a matter of fact, overall science NECAP scores have fallen for two years in a row, in Rhode Island.

  • 11th graders are stuck at 30% proficient, after hitting a high of 32% in 2012.  (As if that’s an acceptable percentage…)
  • 8th graders have fallen from last year’s high of 30% down to 23%, losing all gains made since 2010.
  • 4th graders managed to hit 46% in 2012, but now they’re stuck at 41%.  That’s a mere 1% improvement from 2009.

Overall, 25 Rhode Island school districts saw declines from last year’s scores.  Middle schools were particularly bad, with even Barrington’s score dropping 16.7 percentage points.  Narragansett middle school led the list of regular districts, with a 30.1 point drop, although The Compass School’s middle schoolers dropped 49.1 points.  Some high schools saw gains, particularly North Smithfield, at 19.9 points, but they were exactly canceled out by losses, such as Tiverton’s 18.2, Jamestown’s  19.3, and Smithfield’s 19.5.

It takes a cynic, indeed, to tell the people of Rhode Island that these are encouraging results.  At least Education Commissioner Deborah Gist expressed “concerns about the one-year decline in percent proficient in our middle schools,” although  one wonders why longer-term drops and stagnation at the elementary and high school levels aren’t matters of concern, as well.


School Building Costs and School Choice

An op-ed by Brown English graduate student Aaron Apps in today’s Providence Journal drew my attention to an FY13 report put out by the Rhode Island Dept. of Education (RIDE).  Here’s Apps:

 Last summer, I wrote a Commentary piece (“City’s schools require immediate repairs,” Aug. 29) describing the conditions I witnessed inside Gilbert Stuart Middle School in Providence’s West End. To reiterate: The paint is peeling off of the walls, the roof is leaking, ceiling tiles are falling down, the water is non-potable, and there is a giant curtain in the main auditorium made of asbestos. Not to mention probable mold, exposed rusty pipes, and piles of unattended-to bird droppings. …

The Rhode Island Department of Education’s 2013 “Public Schoolhouse Assessment” gave Gilbert Stuart a rating of 2 in its scale that ranges from 1 to 4, where 1 is “good” condition and 4 is “poor” condition. The report rates 304 public schools. Of these, the average rating was 2.05, meaning that Gilbert Stuart, in its appalling, unacceptable condition, is slightly better than average, according to the state’s own rating scale.

One important caveat on the study is that conditions are self reported.  That means the ratings are subject to the  perspectives and biases of the people in each district, as well as their political calculations.  A district that’s pushing for more state and local tax dollars might exaggerate its buildings deficiencies, while a district that’s truly concerned about backlash based on deteriorating schools might downplay the problems.

Be that as it may, RIDE estimates almost $2 billion in expenses to bring all schools up to “good condition.”  In contrast, it foresees a continuing drop in enrollment — by more than 13% in the suburbs, for the 2021-2022 school year (compared with 2011-2012).  That’s on top of an excess capacity already calculated at 19% (meaning that much space is available for more students).  So, that huge expense would be to maintain increasingly empty buildings across the state.

The report makes the obvious recommendation of closing schools and consolidating, which leads to the strategy of regionalization.  Whenever either of the steps of that suggestion come up in reality, however, they become the subject of push-back, both from parents and from labor unions, making them very difficult to execute.  As long as there’s a chance that other people can be made to pay the bulk of the cost, nobody wants to give up their neighborhood school or their job.

The solution (as the RI Center for Freedom & Prosperity will be laying out over the coming months and years) is a broad program of school choice.  For one thing, empowering families with options changes the politics from a necessity of taking away money and local convenience to a policy of granting opportunity.  For another thing, initial estimates by the Center suggest that school choice would create billions of dollars of flexibility, both in public dollars freed up and in new private dollars invested in tuition.

The question of the near future is going to be whether entrenched interests, including unions, can explode common sense and rational policy for their own benefit.


Keep the Education Scandal on Your Radar

As we pay justified attention to attempts to infringe on our property rights and to take our money to pay for a government healthcare system, let’s not lose track of the travesty that is our education system.

Specifically, I have in mind Linda Borg’s recent Providence Journal article:

About 98 percent of Rhode Island’s teachers in their latest evaluation were rated as effective or highly effective by their principals, a number at odds with student performance in a number of districts. …

“If everyone here was at 98 percent, Rhode Island would be leading the nation” in student achievement, “not Massachusetts,” said Tim Duffy, executive director of the Rhode Island Association of School Committees.

Let’s put it plainly: The evaluations are a fraud designed to ensure that government schools and their employees have no real accountability. A few data points in the article reinforce this aggressive conclusion:

“Central Falls and West Warwick have high percentages of teacher effectiveness but student performances that lag behind state averages.”
“The Blackstone Valley Prep charter schools in northern Rhode Island report less than a third of their teachers are highly effective yet they show the most growth in student achievement.”
In last year’s edition of the review, a survey reported the embarrassing findings that fewer than half of teachers thought the evaluations were measuring anything, and two-thirds of principals admitted rating teachers too high.
So according to the evaluations, schools that are performing poorly (or even more poorly than the rest of Rhode Island’s government schools) ought to be doing well, and schools that are performing relatively well ought to be doing poorly. And if evidence emerges that the evaluation system is being gamed, well, they just stop asking the questions that had the embarrassing results.

The conclusion, here, is that government cannot evaluate itself, mostly because it doesn’t have any make-or-break incentive to improve. In education, it’s a veritable monopoly that has a huge amount of emotional leverage and political power to continue taking more and more resources on the premise of solving problems that are never fundamentally addressed.


Question #4: In-State Employment Rate of URI Engineering Grads Does Not Justify $125 Million Tab for Taxpayers

This Tuesday, Rhode Island taxpayers will be asked if they are willing to pay an eye-opening $125 million, excluding interest, to construct a new building and renovate existing buildings at URI’s College of Engineering. Proponents claim it will improve Rhode Island’s workforce, but how many URI engineers are actually staying to work in the state, right now?


Government School Enrollment Over Time

Somebody asked me, recently, whether there’s any way to know how many students leave Tiverton High School for private schools. It’s an interesting question, and the short answer is “yes,” but in a sense, “no.”

The RI Dept. of Education (RIDE) keeps records of the students from each district who attend private schools, including the schools that they attend. The problem is that the way the state keeps the numbers makes it time consuming to pare them down to a usable form.  Even when that work is done, though, I don’t think such records go back for a very long time.  Since what we really need are cohorts (tracing grade levels from year to year), and because factors like the economy can affect the data, all of the work cleaning data might produce useless results if they only cover the last few years.

Nonetheless, I thought the question interesting enough to kick off a new feature on Tiverton Fact Check, for which readers can email us questions about Tiverton (about statistics, about process, about the law, or about whatever) and we’ll do our best to answer them.  In this case, I looked to RIDE’s October enrollment data, which goes back to the 1998-1999 school year.

Specifically, I compared Tiverton to North Smithfield (because similar) and Barrington (because dissimilar in a way that Tiverton should work to change), and found:

To answer the reader’s question as directly as this data allows, for the twelve years that we can compare the number of students starting eighth grade in Tiverton with the number starting twelfth grade, the average number of students lost is 30.  That’s an average of a 17% drop in high school seniors from the start of eighth grade.

For comparison, North Smithfield lost an average of 20 students, or 13%, while Barrington actually gained an average of 8 students, or 3%.


David Brussat Diagnoses a Source of Opposition to the Common Core

In today’s Projo, David Brussat explains the intellectual roots of at least one major strand of opposition to the common core (the one coming from the political left) and to school testing in general…

During the 1970s and ’80s, deconstructivists in schools of law, departments of literature and other academic fields sought to use [Jacques Derrida’s] ideas to undermine legal, literary, sociological and other knowledge. If better social and political systems were to be built, they claimed, society’s intellectual structures had to be dealt with first. The main method was to destabilize meaning.

What’s that you say, Brussat’s column is actually about architecture? Well, the ideas he describes have deeply impacted education too.

After all, how can students be expected to pass basic reading and math tests, when there is no common meaning to anything that anyone can be expected to learn?


The Problem for Public School Buildings…

is that they don’t have a union:

Rhode Island’s 276 public schools are aging rapidly, and, at the current rate, it would cost $1.8 billion to bring them up to good condition, according to a state study.

The General Assembly in July extended a three-year moratorium on new construction until May 2015, to give leaders time to devise a way of paying for major school renovations. But superintendents say that every year the moratorium is in place, crucial maintenance and repairs go undone, driving up the cost and making bond referendums less palatable to voters.

In any given organization, the people who implement the budget will look at the revenue that they expect to bring in versus the needs of the organization (the expenses).  That includes long-term planning, estimating the life of buildings and planning for improvements.

When it comes to government schools, though, the law requires that some money be siphoned off in order to pay a labor union to be constantly advocating to increase the cost of personnel.  Because they are public-sector unions, their advocacy extends to getting people who are sympathetic to their cause in office — both on the school committee that is supposed to negotiate on behalf of taxpayers and in the state legislator and executive roles that set the larger framework in which the government schools operate.

This practice corrupts the ability of school departments and the public to prioritize anything other than higher pay for employees.  Things like ensuring that a century-old building isn’t going to fall apart around the students must be accomplished in addition to the unions’ demands.  Either the extra costs for buildings must be hidden within state-level taxes, or the dollars must be borrowed.

Inevitability is difficult to prove, but it seems likely that Rhode Island’s current predicament — falling into a downward spiral when it comes to building maintenance while also failing to get satisfactory results despite high spending on employees — is inevitable when employees are required to organize to control all sides of every negotiation.


Education Rhetoric from the Unions’ Candidate

It’s disappointing that — at least in Linda Borg’s Providence Journal presentation — none of the candidates for Rhode Island governor even mentioned support for school choice beyond the entirely intra-government variety, charter schools.  A silver lining, though, is that the teacher unions’ hand-picked candidate, Clay Pell, offered a perfect example of what he means when he rebuffs attack ads by claiming the campaign should be about ideas.

Borg places this after a question about teacher evaluations, which means either Pell skirted a direct answer or she wanted to make sure he got an irrelevant talking point toward the front of her article:

“As governor, I will provide strategic direction and strong leadership to ensure a world-class education for all Rhode Islanders. I will support our classroom educators and make sure they have the flexibility to innovate and embrace students’ creativity. I do not support a charter school system that erodes the quality and sustainability of public schools. I believe it is critical that we invest in our public schools to ensure equity and high-quality education for all students; no matter their ZIP code.”

That’s by far the longest quotation in the article, so Borg must think it’s important, yet it appears to be nearly substance-free, with respect to the policies that the candidate supports.

  • It’s nice that Pell would have a “strategic direction,” but what would it be?
  • What will he do to provide “strong leadership”?
  • How will he measure a “world-class education”?
  • What sort of “flexibility” will he ensure for teachers, and how will he make sure they aren’t abusing it?  (It was a question about evaluations, after all.)
  • Is “students’ creativity” really the singular trait of children on which schools teaching basics should focus?  What about the varying degree of creativity found among a diverse student body?
  • Does he support a charter school system that does not “[erode] the quality and sustainability of public schools”?
  • Does an “investment” that “ensure[s] equity… no matter their ZIP code” mean anything other than redistributing wealth to the union-operated schools in urban areas?

One gets the impression that Pell has memorized — like prayers — some of the meaningless, sound-good phrases that the people who’ve brought us a failing state drape over the rot of their ideas.


How We Run Education in Rhode Island

Ladies and gentlemen, I give you government control of education:

Eva-Marie Mancuso, chairwoman of the state Board of Education, said Tuesday she was appalled that a cornerstone of the department’s high school graduation policy, one that was years in the making, was discarded by the legislature in the waning hours of the session.

“Maybe everybody should trust the professionals rather than running behind our backs and going to the legislature,” Mancuso said. …

But Rep. Gregg Amore, D-East Providence, the NECAP bill’s sponsor, said he is “shocked” by Mancuso’s misunderstanding of the graduation process. He said the waiver process was introduced because RIDE recognized that the NECAP was an inappropriate measure of student performance.

Linda Borg doesn’t mention it in her article, but Amore is a government-school teacher in East Providence, making him a bit more interested than your average well-meaning legislator.  This is what our state’s schools have come to: Government officials, one appointed and one elected, the latter representing the state’s most powerful special interest, arguing about whether it’s a sign that the system did or didn’t work because school districts were able to hand out diplomas to students whom they failed to educate.

We’re so many steps from a working system that this front page story might as well be about tweens arguing who was a Bieber Belieber first.


Many Threads Together in D.C. Schools

It’s not often that so many threads of topics about which one has been writing come together in a single story as in James Richardson’s USA Today essay about government schools in Washington, D.C., trying to salvage their client base:

Here, where traditional public school enrollment has dipped by 30,000 students in just the last 18 years, administrators believe the key to stemming the exodus of public school refugees lies in diverting precious resources from improving instruction to marketing.

To augment the hard sell being made door-to-door by principals, the school system even retained the pricey data miners who twice won the White House for President Barack Obama.

As noted in this space, recently, Rhode Island schools are starting to worry about competing with alternatives like charters and private schools, and our local and state governments are taking steps to change the competitive environment.  The experience of St. Jude Home Care at least hints at the risk of government’s abusing its hydra heads to give itself an advantage.  Meanwhile, D.C.’s use of Obama’s team for manipulating the public with intricate data and big money raises the same questions about whether it’s appropriate for government to be operating this way.

In plain terms, the government is taking money from taxpayers to pay for expensive tools for manipulating the public in order to make up for the competitive disadvantage that comes with prioritizing labor unions (whose mission is ultimately progressive activism).


United Nations Calls for Total School Choice

Commenting on my “education is a right” post, SGH points to the United Nations’ Universal Declaration of Human Rights, article 26:

  1. Everyone has the right to education. Education shall be free, at least in the elementary and fundamental stages. Elementary education shall be compulsory. Technical and professional education shall be made generally available and higher education shall be equally accessible to all on the basis of merit.
  2. Education shall be directed to the full development of the human personality and to the strengthening of respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms. It shall promote understanding, tolerance and friendship among all nations, racial or religious groups, and shall further the activities of the United Nations for the maintenance of peace.
  3. Parents have a prior right to choose the kind of education that shall be given to their children.

While it may be the case that the typical “education is a right” activist would point to this Declaration as the authority for his or her claims, it seems to me they’d be incorrect to do so.  If parents’ right to choose the manner of their children’s education comes before any implied requirement for government to provide for education, and yet elementary and (maybe) secondary education must be cost-free to the family, the only option is total, voucher-driven school choice.  

Progressives and other statists like statement number 1, which justifies their confiscation of money in order to pay for the education that they’d like to provide. They’re also apt to like statement number 2, which gives them license to indoctrinate children into their own moral and ideological framework, on the grounds that their worldview objectively benefits students’ “full development” and respect for rights.

Perhaps the progressives’ copy of the UN’s declaration has a typographical error that leaves out statement number 3.  More likely, though, they gloss over it by stuffing “parents” into a collectivist box and claiming that they collectively choose their government and therefore the type of education that the government wishes to impose on them.


What They Should Mean by “Education Is a Right”

This photograph, which appeared in the Providence Journal in the July 20th Sunday edition has been bugging me.  In case you don’t feel like clicking the link, it’s of a group of college-age-looking folks marching down the street.  Four of them are holding a sign that reads:

education is a right!


It was apparently taken from a documentary movie called Ivory Tower, about the state of higher education.  Without looking into the movie (or the insinuation behind the letters “USSA”), the meaning of the assertion necessitates the question, What do they mean?  If I assent to the proposition that “education is a right,” what, exactly am I agreeing to?

In terms of the founding documents of the United States, a right is something that cannot be taken away.  It isn’t something that others must provide to an individual.  A right to life doesn’t mean that every American must have free access to the most innovative technology that can preserve even a moment of life.  A right to speech doesn’t mean that every American is entitled to a national podium for anything they might want to say.  Rather, these are things that the government cannot actively prevent citizens from acquiring.  If you’re alive or if you have a national podium, the government cannot act to take it away from you.

So what does it mean for education to be a right?  Progressive activists mean that government schools have a right to confiscate money away in order to provide whatever educational opportunities they declare necessary.

Some activists seem to believe students have a right to absorb a certain amount of baseline information.  This view is typically targeted at the institution of public schools, to force them to prove that they’re providing a baseline education and to invalidate practices (like teacher tenure) that prioritize something else at the expense of students.  But a right to be imbued with knowledge would also imply a right to be forced to become educated, which doesn’t sound like what most people think of as “rights.”

It makes more sense — and will produce a better result, I’d argue — to understand education in the same way as life, speech, and the pursuit of happiness.  We have a right not to have the government thwart us in our pursuit of education.

As a society, we also have a strong incentive to ensure individuals achieve their potential, so we should allocate public resources to the cause.  However, the way we’ve been doing it, by setting up government school systems that have proven to be ineffective and unresponsive, can stand as a barrier to actual education, which is against students’ rights.


RI Education: High Cost, Low Results

The left-wing Center for American Progress is out with a report lamenting the low pay of America’s public school teachers.  (Imagine what they must think of private school teachers’ even lower pay!)  In some states, teachers in government schools are eligible for up to seven social service programs if they are the “head of household” sources of income for families of four.

Given the source, I’m sure plenty of arguments against the report are possible, but being from Rhode Island, my interests go in another direction — namely, the appendix table on page 6 that shows the “average teacher base salary (bachelor’s degree and 10 years of teaching experience)” for all of the states.  Wouldn’t you know it, Rhode Island leads the nation, at $67,700.

That’s 15% more than second place Massachusetts, which comes in at $58,800.  It’s 51% higher than the national average of $44,900.

When it comes to the “highest possible step on the salary schedule,” Rhode Island’s $78,200 comes in fifth, after New York, New Jersey, Connecticut, and Maryland.  By that measure, Rhode Island is 20% higher than the national average.

Yet, as the RI Center for Freedom & Prosperity’s Competitiveness Report Card shows, the Ocean State’s median household income is fifteenth in the nation.  Our unemployment rate is worst.

Despite all this spending (which Rhode Islanders can’t afford), our students’ scores on the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) tests are generally below average for the nation and, under the current governor and Board of Education, reversing some progress from the last decade.

At the very least, paying teachers beyond taxpayers’ means is not proving to be a benefit to our students, and one could plausibly argue that such the pay scale is actively harming the quality of education in Rhode Island.


Mayor de Blasio’s Very Reasonable Rate

Here’s a good example of what communities across the country are facing if they look to reform public education in such a way as to achieve good results without bankrupting themselves — by Chris Bragg:

Less than a month before Mayor Bill de Blasio struck a major contract agreement with the United Federation of Teachers, its parent union, the American Federation of Teachers, gave $350,000 to a nonprofit run by de Blasio advisers, which lobbies on behalf of the mayor’s priorities, newly released records show.

The AFT’s donation, on April 9, was the largest donation to the de Blasio-affiliated nonprofit, Campaign For One New York, since it was founded after the mayor was elected last November. Its timing raises questions about the ability of outside interests to advance their agendas before the city by supporting a nonprofit close to the mayor.

Glenn Reynolds suggests, “It doesn’t raise questions, it answers them.”  But I’m not sure that the question being answered is actually whether the mayor can be bought off.  After all, teacher contracts in New York City are counted in the billions, so $350,000 would indicate a very reasonable payoff rate.

More to the point, though, as Jim Epstein indicates, the progressive de Blasio’s affection for the union doesn’t require payoffs as an explanation.  Consider the involvement of both the American Federation of Teachers and de Blasio with Democracy Alliance — a dark-money group tasked with shuffling the money of wealthy individuals and organizations (like teachers’ unions) to progressive activists.

In short, what we’re looking at is a movement that controls both sides of negotiations to take money away from the private sector and advance the cause of government control of everything… by which I mean the progressive movement’s control of everything.