Let Parents Choose Their ‘Education Professional’

Posted on by James V. Shuls

Avid education blogger and former U.S. Assistant Secretary of Education Diane Ravitch yesterday posted a letter from a teacher titled “Do Parents Always Know What is Best?” The author was writing in response to Louisiana Commissioner of Education John White’s statement that parents know what is best for their child and therefore should be able to choose the best school for their child. The author takes umbrage with White’s statement and writes:

I am tired of this attitude about parents knowing what is best for their children . . . If their child broke his leg they would not try to fix it themselves even if they did not have health insurance. They would take the child to a health care professional. So what in God’s name is wrong with taking your child to an Education Professional?

On its face, this argument seems valid. Parents cannot be expected to have an expertise in all areas and in fact, they do consult with a variety of professionals to help take care of their children. Why, then, should education be different?

The problem with this argument is that in other areas of life, including the medical field, parents have some sort of choice. This is not always the case in education. In most areas, students are assigned to schools based on where they live. Some local public schools are wonderful, while some schools are woefully inadequate. We would not accept this type of system in other fields, so why do we allow it in education?

To answer the question that the author posed — “So what in God’s name is wrong with taking your child to an Education Professional?” — nothing is wrong with entrusting your child to the care of another. But let parents, not the government, make the decision on which “Education Professional” their child will see.

Let’s Not Throw Taxpayer Money Down The Well

Posted on by Michael Rathbone

Missouri has been dealing with some harsh weather conditions. Drought conditions in some parts of the state are “exceptional.” Needless to say, the impact on the state’s livestock and crops has been quite detrimental. Thus, it should come as no surprise to anybody that the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) declared the entire state of Missouri a disaster area.

In response to this emergency, Missouri Gov. Jay Nixon issued Executive Order 12-08, which will:

” . . . authorize the State Soil and Water Districts Commission to implement an emergency cost share program for water source development and/or water distribution practices to assist landowners engaged in livestock or crop production adversely impacted by the current drought.”

I am no fan of government handouts to agriculture. While this particular program does not strike me as an egregious waste of public money, I am still inclined to think that it is a bad idea. Droughts harm farmers by reducing their income, and harm consumers by reducing the available food, which increases prices. Farmers’ crops should be — and are — insured, however, with federally subsidized crop insurance (which has its own issues). Thus, losses suffered due to this drought can be mitigated. International free trade would allow providers worldwide to supply demanded goods to consumers at the lowest possible price. Government barriers need to be removed. Impediments to more effective water pricing should also be changed.

Water sources need to be developed and the governor’s order is an attempt to do so, but I have yet to see a reason why these sources cannot be developed privately. If there is a law preventing private water development, get rid of the law. If the private sector cannot do it economically, then why should non-farmer taxpayers subsidize a government project that cannot be justified economically?

Extending The School Year: Good Strategy, Bad Public Policy

Posted on by James V. Shuls

On Tuesday, American Enterprise Institute Director of Education Policy Rick Hess discussed extending the school year during his appearance on Fox News. Hess, who wrote a policy study for the Show-Me Institute on another topic in 2007, noted that an extended school year could be quite beneficial for some kids, but not others. Yet in Hess’ estimation, implementing this type of policy at the federal or even the state level would be a “horrendous mistake.” Instead of mandating an extended school year from on high, Hess suggests allowing families to choose.

The National Center on Time and Learning reports that more than 170 schools around the country have extended their school year to more than 190 days, including at least two schools in Missouri. Both schools in Missouri and the majority of schools across the country that are opting for longer days or longer years are charter schools. For example, the renowned national charter network Knowledge Is Power Program (KIPP) lists “more time” as one of their strategies for delivering a high-quality education to their students. Students at KIPP Inspire Academy in Saint Louis attend school from 7:30 a.m. to 5 p.m. on weekdays and 9 a.m. to 1 p.m. every other Saturday. Additionally, students are required to attend summer school. Having visited several KIPP schools, I commend their efforts to improve education outcomes for disadvantaged students. Nonetheless, I do not believe their strategy should be mandated everywhere.

As Hess notes, many families are able to provide enriching activities for their children in the summer, like vacations and summer camps. For these families, summer school may stifle their learning. On the other hand, some students may benefit from the additional learning time. Too often, researchers and policymakers develop a “we know best” mentality. When they believe a program or solution will benefit individuals, they attempt to mandate that strategy for everyone. In reality, people are different and need different solutions.

When we mandate solutions, we stifle innovation. Rather than dictate how, when, and where students must attend school, we should give families the ability to choose the school that best meets their needs.

School Choice and Individual Freedom: Advancing the Ideas of Milton Friedman

Posted on by James V. Shuls

Once again, the Show-Me Institute joined with other organizations in celebrating the life and legacy of Milton Friedman on the anniversary of his birth. Friedman dedicated his life to promoting freedom and individual liberty and was a vocal proponent of educational choice.

In this video, Show-Me Institute Education Policy Analyst James Shuls discusses some of the problems with public schools as they are now, and how school choice can help improve student education and parental satisfaction.

Why Enhanced Enterprise Zones Are A Bad Deal For Missouri Cities

Posted on by Joseph Haslag

Sometimes acronyms are designed to create a false impression. That is the case with Enhanced Enterprise Zones, or EEZs, which make it sound as if the task of an EEZ board in selecting worthy projects for stimulating a city’s economic development are dead E-A-S-Y. Nothing could be further from the truth.

Speaking as a professional economist, the likelihood that an EEZ board could outperform the marketplace in redirecting taxpayer money to selected enterprises is about as high as the chance that I could pick the Jack of diamonds from a pack of playing cards on my first try.

These reflections are prompted by what I have observed in following the sometimes heated debate about Columbia’s Enhanced Enterprise Zone. Some citizens are worried that the application of an EEZ in Columbia could lead to indiscriminate use of blighting and eminent domain confiscations. Others question whether EEZs work.

Let me tackle the second of those two issues first. Supporters treat the EEZ as a kind of free lunch for city economic development in conferring benefits on selected developers. But the benefit or subsidy has to come from somewhere. If the subsidy is a state tax credit then the resources are coming from all Missourians who pay taxes. Alternatively, in the case of property tax abatements, resources that would normally go to local schools or local services are redirected to benefit a particular company or developer.

Once we agree that the benefit or subsidy is a redirection of resources, the question becomes whether we can expect a better result from the proposed EEZ subsidy/investment than we would get through the ordinary working of the marketplace, with no subsidies.

The short answer to that question is “No.” On economic grounds, it is impossible to make a convincing case that EEZs work. No matter how well-intentioned and how smart the members of an EEZ board may be, the deck will always be stacked against them.

For one thing, the set of projects that they will be asked to consider will be too small. For another, the incentives are not lined up; the EEZ board does not have any skin in the game and therefore the careful vetting that occurs when people are spending their own money will be missing.

What then of the fears of eminent domain abuse?

I submit that Columbia officials are being truthful when they answer these concerns by saying that widespread eminent domain abuses are the farthest thing from their minds. I do not see the current group wielding power willy-nilly to drive residents from their homesteads just to make property available for some startup from California. However, once on the books, there are no restrictions on those in future city governments that see opportunities. Time inconsistency is what economists call this lack of a commitment by current government on future governments. And there is no way to impose anti-abuse conditions on these future city governments.

Thus, in order for a Columbia EEZ to be a net positive for the city’s economic development, the board members would have to be at the top of their game (channeling Warren Buffett and no Mamteks), there has to be a strong enough multiplier effect (from a discredited economic theory), and the future governments must be no less noble and forbearing than current government. If any one of those three conditions fail (and the odds are that all three will not be satisfied), then the EEZ is a bad economic deal for Columbia.

Of course, the same is true for other Missouri cities considering EEZs.

Joseph Haslag is chief economist at the Show-Me Institute, which promotes market solutions for Missouri public policy, and a professor of economics at the University of Missouri-Columbia.

McGraw Milhaven – David Stokes on KTRS

Posted on by David Stokes

David Stokes has a recurring spot on McGraw Milhaven’s KTRS radio program.

In this appearance, Stokes and the host discuss topics such as the recent supreme court decision overturning Missouri’s legislatively imposed cap on non-economic damages in lawsuits, the cost of malpractice insurance, the back-to-school sales tax holiday, the state’s uniquely low cigarette tax rate, and the imminent primary election.

 

Technology And The World Of Educational Possibilities

Posted on by James V. Shuls

My first PhD-level course at the University of Arkansas was math for economic analysis. I entered the course with two degrees in elementary education, but the highest math course I had taken was college algebra for educators. As you can imagine, I was not prepared for the course.

I spent hours studying content that it was assumed an econ PhD student would already know and regularly received help from classmates. The most help, however, came from a former hedge fund analyst and professors at MIT. While I completed my math for economic analysis course, I also watched MIT lectures on linear algebra. I visited Khan Academy regularly to learn how to use the chain rule or product rule when finding derivatives. The videos were more effective in teaching me than my professor, because I could pause the videos, re-watch them, and practice as they played. I am sure the professor would have been quite frustrated if I demanded that he repeat what he said as much as I replayed those videos.

Recently, one of the founders of Coursera, a free online program that delivers free, high-quality college level courses to people around the world, gave a TED Talk on the ability of technology to reinvent how we deliver education (see also Salman Khan’s TED Talk).

High-quality education programs are increasingly being provided for free. There is a real opportunity for schools, especially K-12 schools, to see tremendous benefits from these programs. Imagine a high school student taking introduction to finance, while the student at the computer next to him or her takes Greek and Roman mythology. The technology is available, so what is stopping us from utilizing the power of technology to change how we educate students? Tradition and government regulation.

Online Learning: When More Is More

Posted on by James V. Shuls

In higher education, distance learning has been around for a very long time. In fact, the University of London began offering degrees through a correspondence program in 1858. Modern technology is allowing the spread of distance learning programs at a rapid pace. Universities across the country are developing programs to compete in the growing online learning market. In K-12, however, traditional public schools have been much slower to adopt distance learning programs or to use technology to transform how they deliver instruction. Rather than using technology and distance learning to change how schools operate, many programs targeted at K-12 students are used to supplement traditional learning that a student’s local school offers.

One such program is the University of Missouri-Columbia’s (Mizzou) K-12 online learning program. Yesterday, the Columbia Daily Tribune reported that the program is adding additional courses for the 2012-13 school year. The university now offers 11 online courses for Missouri high school students at a cost of $350 each. This program will certainly be beneficial to many students throughout the state, but it is just one way to use technology to improve options for students.

For more information on digital learning in Missouri and how technology can help transform education, check out former Show-Me Institute Policy Analyst Audrey Spalding’s case study.

Making The Most Of The Weekend

Posted on by Daniel Ritter

Missouri’s annual back-to-school sales tax holiday officially started last night at 12:01 a.m. Until midnight on Sunday, thousands of fashionistas, shopaholics, and back-to-school shoppers will be out in force capitalizing on the opportunity to purchase certain items without paying state sales tax.

Items exempted from the sales tax include school supplies under $50, clothes less than$100, software under $350, and computers and devices less than $3,500. There is no limit to the amount of items that can be purchased, but each item must be under the price threshold. For instance, if one purchases five shirts that are each under $100, then the discount is available for all five shirts.

This appears to be a win-win situation for everyone. Parents, students, and teachers can save money on most things that they need for the school year. And local businesses will experience an increase in sales as shoppers come over from Illinois, which is not participating in a sales tax holiday.

But as prior posts have pointed out, the sales tax holiday is far from perfect. First, it does not necessarily lead to more consumption because consumers often postpone certain purchases until the tax holiday weekend.  Second, some governments, including the state, lose out on millions in revenue because people wait to purchase certain items on the tax holiday.  Third, it puts some vendors within certain municipalities at a disadvantage because their cities opt out of the tax holiday, which means they still have to collect the local sales tax. Savvy consumers will shop at stores in municipalities where there is both a state and local sales tax exemption.

But do not feel bad.  Go out and buy what you need. It is your money and you have the right to take advantage of the sales tax weekend.  It would be great if the tax holiday led to more spending, but in tough economic times like these, I would rather see people keep more of their money than have the state waste it on some ridiculous economic development project. Just make sure you make the most out of this weekend by avoiding the cities, counties, and special districts that have opted out of the sales tax weekend.

Support Us

The work of the Show-Me Institute would not be possible without the generous support of people who are inspired by the vision of liberty and free enterprise. We hope you will join our efforts and become a Show-Me Institute sponsor.

Donate
Man on Horse Charging