Home » Opinion » Foreign Views
Competition can fix failed US public schools
By Bill Costello |
September 8, 2010, Wednesday
|
Print Edition
Print Edition
AMERICAN spending on public education, adjusted for inflation, has more than doubled over the last three decades. What did taxpayers get for their money?
The average math and reading scores of American 17-year-olds have not improved since the early 1970s according to the National Assessment of Educational Progress long-term trend assessment.
Twice the money. Zero progress.
Yet students in other countries have been improving their test scores.
The Program for International Student Assessment 2006 measured the math and science literacy of 15-year-olds in 29 countries that belong to the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD).
The results?
American students placed in the bottom quarter in math and in the bottom third in science.
US Secretary of Education Arne Duncan said, "We are lagging the rest of the world, and we are lagging it in pretty substantial ways."
The current public education system is not preparing Americans to succeed in the increasingly competitive global economy.
In the US, this will lead to growing unemployment rates, a decline in Gross Domestic Product, unsustainable levels of national debt, and reduced military capability.
In addition to endangering the US' economic and national security, low educational attainment imposes societal and personal costs.
Societal costs include higher unemployment, higher crime, lower income tax revenues, and higher social welfare payments. Personal costs include lower lifetime earnings and life expectancy.
According to the US Census Bureau, estimated lifetime earnings are about US$1.2 million for high school graduates and US$2.1 million for college graduates.
Also, the US Department of Health and Human Services reports that life expectancy increases when educational attainment increases.
Those who argue that the solution is more money for public schools have had three decades to test their theory. Increased spending has not led to improvement.
American test scores have remained flat since the early 1970s even though per-pupil spending, adjusted for inflation, went from US$4,489 in 1970-1971 to US$10,041 in 2006-2007 - an increase of 124 percent.
American per-pupil spending in 2006 was 41 percent higher than the OECD average of US$7,283, and yet American students still placed in the bottom quarter in math and in the bottom third in science among OECD countries. Clearly, increasing spending further is unlikely to improve test scores.
Insanity
"Doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results" is how Einstein defined "insanity."
So now that we know what doesn't work, what should we do?
Television reporter John Stossel argued in his ABC News special report "Stupid in America: How We Cheat Our Kids" that the US public education system is a government monopoly, and monopolies usually fail their customers.
Stossel concluded that competition and choice can improve education just as it improves everything else.
Without the pressure to compete, monopolies have little incentive to serve customers better.
When the US Postal Service was a monopoly, it couldn't deliver packages overnight. But when it had to compete with FedEx and others, then suddenly it could deliver overnight. Competition spurs competitors to innovate and perform better.
Because attempts to achieve substantial reform within the current US public education system have failed for decades, it's time to end the monopoly and develop alternative, competitive systems that give parents the freedom to choose the schools their kids attend regardless of where they live and how much money they make.
School choice empowers parents to remove their kids from failing schools and place them in successful schools. And it gradually forces public schools to improve or risk losing students to better schools.
Embracing policies that give families the freedom to choose the schools their kids attend would not require more money from taxpayers.
Instead, it would require the improvement of resource allocation. For example, resources could be more effectively allocated by allowing parents to use their kids' share of public education funding to choose the best schools for their kids.
There is, of course, strong resistance to school choice from the defenders of the status quo in education whose livelihoods are threatened by alternatives that focus on the best interest of kids instead of adults. The preservation of self-interests is to be expected, but how is it affecting the nation?
America has barely been treading water in terms of domestic and international test scores for three decades despite the fact that spending on public education, adjusted for inflation, has more than doubled.
Where will we be three decades from now?
(The author is president of US-based Making Minds Matter, LLC. He can be reached at www.makingmindsmatter.com. The views are his own. )
The average math and reading scores of American 17-year-olds have not improved since the early 1970s according to the National Assessment of Educational Progress long-term trend assessment.
Twice the money. Zero progress.
Yet students in other countries have been improving their test scores.
The Program for International Student Assessment 2006 measured the math and science literacy of 15-year-olds in 29 countries that belong to the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD).
The results?
American students placed in the bottom quarter in math and in the bottom third in science.
US Secretary of Education Arne Duncan said, "We are lagging the rest of the world, and we are lagging it in pretty substantial ways."
The current public education system is not preparing Americans to succeed in the increasingly competitive global economy.
In the US, this will lead to growing unemployment rates, a decline in Gross Domestic Product, unsustainable levels of national debt, and reduced military capability.
In addition to endangering the US' economic and national security, low educational attainment imposes societal and personal costs.
Societal costs include higher unemployment, higher crime, lower income tax revenues, and higher social welfare payments. Personal costs include lower lifetime earnings and life expectancy.
According to the US Census Bureau, estimated lifetime earnings are about US$1.2 million for high school graduates and US$2.1 million for college graduates.
Also, the US Department of Health and Human Services reports that life expectancy increases when educational attainment increases.
Those who argue that the solution is more money for public schools have had three decades to test their theory. Increased spending has not led to improvement.
American test scores have remained flat since the early 1970s even though per-pupil spending, adjusted for inflation, went from US$4,489 in 1970-1971 to US$10,041 in 2006-2007 - an increase of 124 percent.
American per-pupil spending in 2006 was 41 percent higher than the OECD average of US$7,283, and yet American students still placed in the bottom quarter in math and in the bottom third in science among OECD countries. Clearly, increasing spending further is unlikely to improve test scores.
Insanity
"Doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results" is how Einstein defined "insanity."
So now that we know what doesn't work, what should we do?
Television reporter John Stossel argued in his ABC News special report "Stupid in America: How We Cheat Our Kids" that the US public education system is a government monopoly, and monopolies usually fail their customers.
Stossel concluded that competition and choice can improve education just as it improves everything else.
Without the pressure to compete, monopolies have little incentive to serve customers better.
When the US Postal Service was a monopoly, it couldn't deliver packages overnight. But when it had to compete with FedEx and others, then suddenly it could deliver overnight. Competition spurs competitors to innovate and perform better.
Because attempts to achieve substantial reform within the current US public education system have failed for decades, it's time to end the monopoly and develop alternative, competitive systems that give parents the freedom to choose the schools their kids attend regardless of where they live and how much money they make.
School choice empowers parents to remove their kids from failing schools and place them in successful schools. And it gradually forces public schools to improve or risk losing students to better schools.
Embracing policies that give families the freedom to choose the schools their kids attend would not require more money from taxpayers.
Instead, it would require the improvement of resource allocation. For example, resources could be more effectively allocated by allowing parents to use their kids' share of public education funding to choose the best schools for their kids.
There is, of course, strong resistance to school choice from the defenders of the status quo in education whose livelihoods are threatened by alternatives that focus on the best interest of kids instead of adults. The preservation of self-interests is to be expected, but how is it affecting the nation?
America has barely been treading water in terms of domestic and international test scores for three decades despite the fact that spending on public education, adjusted for inflation, has more than doubled.
Where will we be three decades from now?
(The author is president of US-based Making Minds Matter, LLC. He can be reached at www.makingmindsmatter.com. The views are his own. )
- About Us
- |
- Terms of Use
- |
-
RSS - |
- Privacy Policy
- |
- Contact Us
- |
- Shanghai Call Center: 962288
- |
- Tip-off hotline: 52920043
- 沪ICP证：沪ICP备05050403号-1
- |
- 互联网新闻信息服务许可证：31120180004
- |
- 网络视听许可证：0909346
- |
- 广播电视节目制作许可证：沪字第354号
- |
- 增值电信业务经营许可证：沪B2-20120012
Copyright © 1999- Shanghai Daily. All rights reserved.Preferably viewed with Internet Explorer 8 or newer browsers.
