Home / education
Showing posts with label education. Show all posts
Showing posts with label education. Show all posts
Headline from The Economist magazine: "Charter schools raise educational standards for vulnerable children"

Headline from The Economist magazine: "Charter schools raise educational standards for vulnerable children"

From the Economist magazine:
charter school performance is not so “mixed” if you look at the data on a state-by-state basis, rather than across the country as a whole. States with reading and maths gains that were significantly higher for charter-school students than in traditional schools included Arkansas, Colorado (Denver), Illinois (Chicago), Louisiana and Missouri. . . . Since 1993 15% of charter schools have shut their gates, most because of low enrolment, a sign that the market is working. . . .
The national results would seem to work a lot better if they used fixed geographic effects.
The revolution in Louisiana's education system

The revolution in Louisiana's education system

In a couple of years Louisiana will have a pretty amazing educational system. The Milton Friedman Foundation put this out:
Louisiana will be home to one of the nation’s largest school voucher programs once Gov. Bobby Jindal signs legislation that recently passed his state’s legislature. Today, by a vote of 60-42, the Louisiana House of Representatives approved Gov. Jindal’s voucher expansion, which passed the Senate last night 24-15. “This is a momentous day for the families of Louisiana,” State Superintendent of Education John White said. “All students deserve a fair chance in life, and that begins with the opportunity to attend a high-quality school. These policy changes are aligned with that central belief, and Gov. Jindal and state lawmakers have demonstrated a clear commitment to prioritize the educational rights of Louisiana’s next generation above all else.” The expansion of the Student Scholarships for Educational Excellence Program will allow low- and middle-income students in Louisiana public schools graded “C,” “D,” or “F” by the state accountability system to receive government-funded vouchers to attend private schools. Currently, that option is available only to children in New Orleans and students with special needs in eligible parishes. . . .
More evidence on Education Voucher Programs

More evidence on Education Voucher Programs

From the WSJ's Political Diary:

According to the study, by Patrick Wolf of the University of Arkansas, enrollment in the [Milwaukee] program continues to grow. It doubled in size 11 times between 1997 and 2007 and grew by another 18% between 2007 and 2011. Today, more than 23,000 children participate. On average they score higher in reading and do no worse in math than similar students in Milwaukee public schools. They are also more likely to graduate from high school, enroll in college and make it through the first year -- an indication that the program is preparing students to succeed at the next level. . . .
NJ Public Teachers Union Chief makes embarrassing comment about vouchers for the poor

NJ Public Teachers Union Chief makes embarrassing comment about vouchers for the poor

The life's not fair comment surely implies that the poor would have been better off with vouchers. Possibly life shouldn't be fair for the well paid union members. From Fox News:

New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie called Wednesday for a state teachers union chief to resign, after the union boss said in an interview that "life's not always fair" while arguing against vouchers to send poor students to private schools.
Christie, who has clashed repeatedly with the union over his education proposals, called the remark "outrageous" at a town hall meeting.
The call from the governor was the latest fallout for New Jersey Education Association Executive Director Vincent Giordano, whose own salary tops $300,000.
Giordano made the comment on the local "New Jersey Capitol Report" program over the weekend. During the interview, he was challenged by the host on why low-income families should not have the same options as other families when their child is in a failing school.
"Those parents should have exactly the same options and they do. We don't say that you can't take your kid out of the public school. We would argue not and we would say 'let's work more closely and more harmoniously,'" Giordano said.
When told some families cannot afford to finance the shift to private school without government help, Giordano said: "Well, you know, life's not always fair and I'm sorry about that."
The interview clip swiftly spread on the web, along with reminders about Giordano's healthy salary.
The Newark Star-Ledger reported in 2010 that his salary was nearly $422,000, and total compensation roughly $550,000 when deferred compensation and other benefits are counted. . . . .
Will Obama be helping public colleges at the expense of private ones?

Will Obama be helping public colleges at the expense of private ones?

The key here is how the government defines colleges as being "too costly." Will it simply be tuition or the amount spent? Obviously public colleges cost much more than they charge. I also hate to think of how the federal government is going to determine quality. The article below also has a discussion about possible price controls. From Bloomberg Businessweek:

Saying “we just can’t keep on subsidizing skyrocketing tuition,” President Barack Obama proposed to have the government, for the first time, link federal aid to a college’s ability to control tuition costs and maintain education quality.

“We are putting colleges on notice -- you can’t assume that you’ll just jack up tuition every single year,” Obama said today at the University of Michigan in Ann Arbor. “If you can’t stop tuition from going up, then the funding you get from taxpayers every year will go down.”

For institutions that control costs, the administration is proposing to increase campus-based aid to about $10 billion a year, up from $1 billion. The bulk of the money, about $8 billion, would be devoted to Perkins loans for students, with other aid set aside for work-study grants and Supplemental Educational Opportunity Grants.

Obama said higher education today is “an economic imperative” instead of a luxury. “College is the single most important investment that you can make in your future,” he said.

The administration’s proposal calls for $1 billion to entice states to help keep costs down at public colleges while encouraging an overhaul of state programs that help finance education.

Obama is also proposing $55 million for individual colleges as an inducement to improve education quality. . . .


Apparently, the public colleges are pretty upset all on their own.

Fuzzy math, Illinois State University's president called it. "Political theater of the worst sort," said the University of Washington's head.
President Obama's new plan to force colleges and universities to contain tuition or face losing federal dollars is raising alarm among education leaders who worry about the threat of government overreach. Particularly sharp words came from the presidents of public universities; they're already frustrated by increasing state budget cuts.
The reality, said Illinois State's Al Bowman, is that simple changes cannot easily overcome deficits at many public schools. He said he was happy to hear Obama, in a speech Friday at the University of Michigan, urge state-level support of public universities. But, Bowman said, given the decreases in state aid, tying federal support to tuition prices is a product of fuzzy math.
Illinois has lowered public support for higher education by about one-third over the past decade when adjusted for inflation. Illinois State, with 21,000 students, has raised tuition almost 47 percent since 2007, from $6,150 a year for an in-state undergraduate student to $9,030.
"Most people, including the president, assume if universities were simply more efficient they would be able to operate with much smaller state subsidies, and I believe there are certainly efficiency gains that can be realized," Bowman said. "But they pale in comparison to the loss in state support." . . .
WSJ: "The Year of School Choice"

WSJ: "The Year of School Choice"

This WSJ piece is overly optimistic about some of the educational choice changes, but it is still a useful summary. For example, Tennessee removed the limit on charter schools, but it means nothing since none of the state's school districts are even close to the limit and the vast majority have almost no charter schools. The problem is that the teacher unions control the school districts and the districts determine whether there are any charter schools. The law should have instead concentrated on making easier for charter schools to get approved. As it is, the law accomplishes nothing really.

. . . No fewer than 13 states have enacted school choice legislation in 2011, and 28 states have legislation pending. Last month alone, Louisiana enhanced its state income tax break for private school tuition; Ohio tripled the number of students eligible for school vouchers; and North Carolina passed a law letting parents of students with special needs claim a tax credit for expenses related to private school tuition and other educational services.

Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker made headlines this year for taking on government unions. Less well known is that last month he signed a bill that removes the cap of 22,500 on the number of kids who can participate in Milwaukee's Parental Choice Program, the nation's oldest voucher program, and creates a new school choice initiative for families in Racine County. "We now have 13 programs new or expanded this year alone" in the state, says Susan Meyers of the Wisconsin-based Foundation for Educational Choice.

School choice proponents may have had their biggest success in Indiana, where Republican Governor Mitch Daniels signed legislation that removes the charter cap, allows all universities to be charter authorizers, and creates a voucher program that enables about half the state's students to attend public or private schools.

Florida, Georgia and Oklahoma have created or expanded tuition tax credit programs. North Carolina and Tennessee eliminated caps on the number of charter schools. Maine passed its first charter law. Colorado created a voucher program in Douglas County that will provide scholarships for private schools. In Utah, lawmakers passed the Statewide Online Education Program, which allows high school students to access course work on the Internet from public or private schools anywhere in the state.

Even in the nation's capital, and thanks largely to House Speaker John Boehner, Congress revived the D.C. Opportunity Scholarship Program, a voucher program for poor families that the Obama Administration had wanted to kill at the behest of teachers unions. . . .
Liberals are upset about the victories for vouchers this year

Liberals are upset about the victories for vouchers this year

The Left wing "Nation" magazine claims that they know why conservatives support vouchers: "the Friedmanites seem to have concerns that are less about children and good education than about privatization, small government and the blessings of the free market." Apparently left wingers don't understand that the reason some people support the market is that they think that it does a BETTER JOB providing products, including education. That means a lot better education for the children.

Early in May, Indiana Governor Mitch Daniels signed what is probably the broadest voucher law ever enacted in this country. A few days later Oklahoma approved tax credits for those who contribute to a privately funded private school “opportunity scholarship” program. In New Jersey, on May 13, a voucher bill was approved by a Senate committee with bipartisan support. In Washington, DC, the voucher program, which was killed by the Democratic majorities in the last Congress, is all but certain to be restored. In Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker, famous for his attack on union collective bargaining rights, is pushing hard to broaden Milwaukee’s voucher program to other cities and many more children.

Altogether, according to the Foundation for Educational Choice, a pro-voucher organization that lists Friedman as its patriarch, more than fifty-two bills have emerged this year, some passed, some still pending, in thirty-six states—among them Arizona, Florida, Ohio, Oregon and Pennsylvania—providing funding for vouchers, tax credits or other tax-funded benefits for private education. . . .

And early in April, using a procedural dodge, a bitterly divided Supreme Court further heartened the movement by upholding Arizona’s law providing tax credits for contributions to “school tuition organizations”—scholarship funds for private and religious schools. . . .
NJ Public School costs didn't count huge range of important costs

NJ Public School costs didn't count huge range of important costs

Do payments to teacher pensions and Social Security taxes count as part of the cost of running public schools in New Jersey? You would think so, but up until this week they weren't counted. How about school facilities and equipment costs? Or how about expenditures to send the student to public school in another school district outside of the one that they live in? Or the payment of debts by either the school district or the state? Is this even a serious question? If you pay for schooling costs immediately it is a cost but if you borrow the money, there is no cost to running the school?

The Christie administration has recalculated the amount it says New Jersey public school districts spend per pupil, increasing the state average rate by several thousand dollars to more than $17,800.

The figure, from the 2009-10 school year, has been adjusted to include costs such as transportation, federal funding, debt payments and legal judgments that can vary greatly from district to district. In the 2008-09 school year, using the previous calculation, the state average was $13,200 per student.

The Christie administration says the new figure is more transparent and complete. . . .
Teacher Unions fighting having competition between schools

Teacher Unions fighting having competition between schools

This is an extremely biased article, but it shows how insane that public teachers get about any discussion about competition between schools for students.

Protestors from Philadelphia, Bucks County and Harrisburg made their way to Washington, D.C., this morning to protest at an education-related conference where Gov. Corbett was scheduled to speak.
About 200 demonstrators gathered shortly before noon outside the Washington Marriott Hotel, chanting "Save Our Schools," and holding signs, such as "Vouchers Aren't the Answer." . . .
Corbett's budget "is a sure-fire way to send the city back into more poverty," said former city middle school teacher, Lisa Haver, 55.
"Education is a human right, and this is an assault on public education," said Azeem Hill, 17, a student at West Philadelphia High.
Senate Bill 1, expected to come up for a vote soon, would "strip money from public schools," diverting hundreds of millions of dollars away from already hard-hit districts statewide, said Marc Stier, head of Penn Action, the group behind the protest.
Parent Tim Brown, waiting for the bus to D.C., said he saw vouchers as "cynical maneuvering" by "right-wing billionaires," who want to privatize all education in America.
"If they're complaining there's a budget problem, why are they turning around and subsidizing private schools?" he asked. . . .
Where is the consistency in the NAACP strongly opposing school choice but then taking this legal case?

Where is the consistency in the NAACP strongly opposing school choice but then taking this legal case?

The NAACP "vigorously opposed" the pilot voucher program for DC. Fighting against it as recently as this past March. The NAACP has condemned Charter Schools. Now the NAACP is taking what could best be called a school choice case. The only difference that I can see to vouchers is that this case involves government schools. I can't really see the difference with charter schools. The problem is that the NAACP will never see the logic here.

Tanya McDowell, 33, was arrested April 15 and charged with first degree grand larceny for allegedly stealing $15,686 in educational services from Norwalk Public Schools. Her 6-year-old son was enrolled in Brookside Elementary School in Norwalk, Conn., from September of last year until January of this year.

"The NAACP doesn't like that they're trying to attack somebody whose poor and doesn't have a good support system," said Scot X. Esdaile, president of the Connecticut State Conference of the NAACP. "This is discrimination."

McDowell claims that she's homeless and was floating between a homeless shelter, a friend's apartment in Norwalk and a home in Bridgeport when she registered her son for school. McDowell registered her son under her babysitter's address in Norwalk. McDowell told The Daily Norwalk that she simply wanted the best education for her son. . . .

Authorities were alerted to the alleged illegal enrollment when McDowell testified at an eviction hearing for her babysitter, Ana Rebecca Marquez, in January.

"This particular tenant, Ms. Marquez, was accused of allowing Ms. McDowell and her son to live with her," said Donna Lattarulo, an attorney for the Norwalk Housing Authority. "During that hearing, Ms. McDowell testified under oath that she did not reside at the premises where Ms. Marquez lived, but she resided in Bridgeport... She never testified that she was homeless."

Lattarulo said that she told the Norwalk Prosecutor's Office about Marquez's testimony, but did not file a criminal complaint. Officials from Norwalk Public Schools said that they did not initiate the eviction hearing or file a criminal complaint against McDowell. . . .

"We think that this is a major case of abuse of power by the mayor. We just found out that his daughter is head prosecutor in the case. There's also some foul play with police officers in town of Norwalk," said Esdaile from the NAACP. . .
.
My son Roger tries to explain some basic economics to Dartmouth students

My son Roger tries to explain some basic economics to Dartmouth students

Roger's latest piece for the Dartmouth school paper is available here. To me the points seem obvious: 1) the large aid programs impact incentives to save and 2) the subsidies are going to the future well to do (even if students come from currently poor families). It starts this way:

Thanks to Dartmouth’s outstanding financial aid program, my family and I pay only a small fraction of the College’s sticker price. While I’m grateful to have been handed the world’s finest undergraduate opportunities at so little personal cost, it’s unsettling to realize that in one year I’m sponging tens of thousands of dollars of other people’s money. As much as I like Dartmouth, I can’t say I value being here enough to justify the massive burden the College is bearing on my behalf. It may be time to make selfish free-riders like myself assume more financial responsibility for their educations.

Dramatic increases in grant-based financial aid have led to widening disparity in the prices students pay to attend Dartmouth. The growth in spending on need-based undergraduate scholarships from about $30 million in 2000-2001 to a projected $80 million in 2011-2012 has led to greater assistance for some, but has presumably contributed to the simultaneous rise in cost of attendance from $33,210 to $55,365. As noble as it is to want to help those with less, the College wouldn’t need to charge students from wealthier backgrounds so exorbitantly if others had to carry more of their own weight.

Those who pay full price have valid reason for resentment. . . .
Private Education Tax Credits Upheld by U.S. Supreme Court

Private Education Tax Credits Upheld by U.S. Supreme Court

This may not be the final decision on this question since it just dealt with the question of standing to bring the lawsuit, but it is still a big step in the right direction. It was another very narrowly decided decision that continues to show how the loss of one conservative or moderate justices will have a big impact.

. . . The justices, voting 5-4, today said opponents lacked “standing” to challenge the 14-year-old program, which gives tax credits for donations to organizations that provide private- school scholarships. The opponents faulted the program for relying on religious organizations that require their recipients to enroll in sectarian schools.

The ruling marks the second under Chief Justice John Roberts to insulate government programs from church-state challenges. The court in 2007 threw out a suit over then- President George W. Bush’s faith-based initiatives office.

The case split the court along familiar lines, with the court’s five Republican appointees -- Roberts and Justices Antonin Scalia, Clarence Thomas, Anthony Kennedy and Samuel Alito -- in the majority. . . .

The Arizona tax credit applies after taxpayers have computed how much they owe for the previous year. At that point individuals can send as much as $500 to so-called school tuition organizations, reducing their tax liability by the same amount.

The court ruled in 2002 that tax-funded school vouchers are constitutional so long as parents have a “genuine choice” not to send their children to religious schools. . . .
Why isn't the Constitution read in schools any more?

Why isn't the Constitution read in schools any more?

This survey is pretty depressing, even if it is not surprising.

A wide majority of Americans know the U.S. Constitution is important, but less than one-third of them say they've taken the time to read the entire thing. . . . only 28 percent say they've read all of the document, and 14 percent say they've read most of it . . .


Given how short the constitution is, how is it possible that schools can only justify people reading secondary discussions and never the original document?

So the US spends more per student in K-12 than any other OECD country, but they

The US sure spends a lot on education per student.

But it is pretty hard to see much of a return from that money. Education test data for 2006 is available here and the raw data for 2009 is available here. Data for 2000 and 20003 are available here.



Huge percentage of college students in New York unprepared for college classes

Huge percentage of college students in New York unprepared for college classes

Quite a depressing change in necessary remedial instruction over just the last five years. From the New York Times:

About three-quarters of the 17,500 freshmen at the community colleges this year have needed remedial instruction in reading, writing or math, and nearly a quarter of the freshmen have required such instruction in all three subjects. In the past five years, a subset of students deemed “triple low remedial” — with the most severe deficits in all three subjects — has doubled, to 1,000.

The reasons are familiar but were reinforced last month by startling new statistics from state education officials: fewer than half of all New York State students who graduated from high school in 2009 were prepared for college or careers, as measured by state Regents tests in English and math. In New York City, that number was 23 percent. . . .

Newest Fox News piece: So How Much Do Public Union Workers Really Make?

My newest Fox News piece starts this way:

President Obama lashed out at Republicans Monday for having "denigrated or vilified" public union employees. Without collective bargaining and the ability to go on strike, he said we wouldn't be able to attract "the best and the brightest to public service." Are public employees simply the best and the brightest? Or are we simply lavishing them with much better employment deals than their private counterparts?
To measure how attractive a job is, economists study how employees vote with their feet -- that is, comparing the rate at which different categories of employees voluntarily quit their jobs.
Over the last six months, private workers have been 3.4 times more likely to quit their jobs than either state and local or federal workers. Indeed, no private industry comes close to the low "quit rate" for government employees. Manufacturing, which has the lowest rate, still faces twice the quit rate as the government. . . .


So how much more are public school teacher paid over private ones?


Click on figure to make it bigger and more readable.
With over 41 percent of state and local workers working in public education, if there is going to be any attempt at controlling government spending, it is going to have to be in public K-12 education. The National Center for Education Statistics is the source of the data. The smallest difference between public and private teacher salaries exists for those with a Ph.D. (about 13%) and the largest difference appears for those who are black or who work in towns (public teachers make about 57 or 58 percent more).
The first concern of teacher unions is about "employee rights and collective bargaining"

The first concern of teacher unions is about "employee rights and collective bargaining"



National Education Association’s retiring top lawyer, Bob Chanin, speaking at the NEA’s annual meeting in July, 2009: “This is not to say that the concern of NEA and its affiliates with closing achievement gaps, reducing dropout rates, improving teacher quality and the like are unimportant or inappropriate. To the contrary. These are the goals that guide the work we do. But they need not and must not be achieved at the expense of due process, employee rights and collective bargaining. That simply is too high a price to pay.”
Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)