Some States Making Large Reading Gains Post-Pandemic

Posted on by Avery Frank

The hit game Wordle is something I look forward to doing every day. While the prestigious and crowning achievement of completing it on my first guess still eludes me, I have learned how much the game is rooted in the science of reading. The English language is comprised of 44 word sounds (phonemes), and understanding how sounds and words are connected (phonics) can help you minimize your guesses. For example (no, I am not spoiling today’s puzzle), if the fourth letter of a five-letter word is “p,” this can help you eliminate some letters for the last spot without having to guess—such as “w,” “m,” and “j.”

In a few states around the nation—particularly South Carolina, Tennessee, and Mississippi—dedication to the science of reading (explicit phonics instruction) has done more than solve Wordle puzzles. It has helped English/language arts (ELA) scores in these states surge past their pre-pandemic levels.

If you’re wondering if other states are experiencing a similar surge in scores, the answer is no. Researchers at Brown University have examined scores from nearly 30 states (data are not available for all states yet) and only Iowa, Mississippi, South Carolina, and Tennessee have exceeded pre-pandemic performances in reading.

With Missouri’s ELA scores continuing to decline post-pandemic (29% of Missouri 3rd graders had a below basic understanding of ELA), I believe that our new science of reading program, LETRS, will help our students, and I am happy that DESE is using it. However, I also think there is reason and opportunity to further commit to the science of reading.

For background, Missouri’s new LETRS program provides optional training opportunities for teachers in “evidence-based reading” and requires comprehensive reading examinations for K-3 students. Any student who is diagnosed or at risk for dyslexia must be provided evidence-based reading instruction. While this in itself is a good program, there is a key lesson from South Carolina, Tennessee, and Mississippi that we could adopt: Fully commit to the science of reading—for all students.

As I have discussed in previous posts, commitment to explicit phonics instruction could be key to making Missouri a leader in reading. Phonics instruction has a proven track record in independent research, in other states, and even in our own backyard. Back in 2019, the Greenville School District in South Carolina, with 77,000 students (largest in the state), failed to meet state literacy standards. Due to this, teachers in the district had to receive two years of training in the “science of reading” and use a new curriculum rooted in explicit phonics instruction. However, this “punishment” actually turned into a blessing: district scores on the SC READY state assessment have risen past pre-pandemic levels.

All three of these states have committed to the science of reading being the core of literacy instruction, while Missouri appears to emphasize it only after a struggling student is identified. When breaking out the scores by demographics, the data show that the science of reading was useful to all groups. While data were not available for Mississippi, ELA scores for every ethnic group improved at a near-equivalent rate in Tennessee and South Carolina.

In Tennessee, school districts with poverty levels between 0–10 percent and 15–25 percent saw the largest gains. In Mississippi, districts with poverty levels between 10–15 percent and more than 25 percent saw the largest gains. In South Carolina, districts with poverty levels between 15–25 percent saw the most improvement. These numbers demonstrate that students of all different backgrounds benefit from the science of reading, and it should not be compartmentalized into one particular group.

These states understand that our institutions of higher education are not adequately instructing our teachers how to teach reading. Mississippi requires that all prospective elementary school teachers pass a test in the foundations of reading (which largely includes phonics). Tennessee requires that all K-5 teachers complete at least one approved foundational literacy skills course. South Carolina requires classroom teachers to use evidence-based reading instruction that includes phonics. These states have also tied the science of reading to their third-grade retention strategy, which may be valuable for Missouri to evaluate. Missouri should strengthen LETRS by creating a requirement for all elementary teachers to participate in the program, and further commit by targeting science of reading instruction to all students, not just the ones struggling.

 

Why Family-friendly Metros Matter with Robert VerBruggen

Posted on by Susan Pendergrass

Susan Pendergrass speaks with Robert VerBruggen about his latest report Making Metros Family-Friendly: Rankings and Suggestions.

Read the full report here: bit.ly/3QoHgcQ

Listen on Apple Podcasts 

Listen on SoundCloud

Robert VerBruggen is a fellow at the Manhattan Institute where he provides policy research, writes for City Journal, and contributes to special projects and initiatives in the President’s office. Having held roles as Deputy Managing Editor of National Review, Managing Editor of The American Conservative, Editor at RealClearPolicy, and Assistant Book Editor at The Washington Times, VerBruggen writes on a wide array of issues including economic policy, public finance, health care, education, family policy, cancel culture, and public safety. VerBruggen was a Phillips Foundation Journalism Fellow in 2009 and a 2005 winner of the Chicago Headline Club Peter Lisagor Award. He holds a B.A. in journalism and political science from Northwestern University.

Produced by Show-Me Opportunity

A Thin Veneer of Protectionism

Posted on by David Stokes

Across the country, people are starting to realize that occupational licensing has gone too far. Slowly but surely, we are recognizing that far too often, government has been making decisions about who can do what in areas where customers and employers should be the ones making that choice.

Occupational licensing increases costs to consumers and people entering the workforce, favors politically influential groups, and serves, in most cases, as a protectionist measure designed to benefit incumbent practitioners of the licensed occupation at the expense of future practitioners and the public. Show-Me Institute analysts have long written about the harms of occupational licensing in Missouri.

While we may finally be moving in the proper direction of less licensing, there remains a bureaucratic minefield of licensing apparatchiks who have to justify their positions on the public payroll. They do so by filing absurd cases like this one involving dentistry in Bridgeton. (For the record, one study found that dentists’ incomes and dental prices were 12 to 15 percent higher in states with more restrictive dental licensing rules.)

In Bridgeton, we have someone replacing rubber bands on braces—which many people simply do themselves. My son does it with his braces every day. You don’t need a dentist to replace a rubber band any more than you need an orthopedic surgeon to autograph an arm cast.

The second part of the case is, I admit, more complex. This person being sued has also apparently been applying cosmetic veneers to teeth.  They are, as the link describes, entirely cosmetic procedures. Why can’t this person apply veneer to a willing customer? Provided that her customers are fully informed that she is not a dentist, I see no problem with any of this. The article gives zero indication that anyone has been harmed. It simply appears that someone—possibly a dentist with nothing better to do—came across the ads and filed a complaint.

There could also be a middle ground here. Perhaps a basic license similar to those required for nail salon technicians could be required for cosmetic veneer sales instead of a full dentist license. That is another thing about occupational licensing: even in cases where it may be beneficial, the government goes way beyond what it needs to do in order to get the other aspects (usually protectionism), into the mix. Taxi cab licensing is a perfect example of this.

This lawsuit seems to me to be another overreach of licensing boards in Missouri. I hope the lawsuit gets tossed, but I also hope this goes the way of hair braiding laws and the legislature fixes the licensing rules here.

Wrong Then, Wrong Now—the Post-Dispatch and School Choice

Posted on by James V. Shuls

It will come as no surprise to the readers of the Show-Me Institute blog that the St. Louis Post-Dispatch gets it wrong every now and again. As I was digging through some historical archives, I found a terrific example of this that still has much relevance today.

In the April 23, 1960, editorial “Twin Principles,” the paper declared, “There cannot be any real question that payment of tax funds directly or indirectly to support private church schools would violate the principle of separation between church and state.”

Responding via a letter to the editor five days later, James Bick, the president of Citizens for Educational Freedom, noted the error in this claim. He wrote:

When tax-provided educational benefits are given to all children for the non-religious elements of their education there is no violation of the separation of Church and state principle. Aid is given to the parent and child. The parent has the freedom to expend his benefits at the school of his choice. This is the principle under which tuition grants were made under the “G.I. Bill.” The United States Supreme Court used the same principle in deciding the Everson vs. Board of Education Case (1947) concerning school bus transportation.

It took more than 40 years, but the U.S. Supreme Court used exactly the logic laid out by Bick when deciding the Ohio voucher case of Zelman v. Simmons-Harris. There is no violation of the separation of church and state when parents are provided the opportunity to choose their children’s school, even if it is a religious school.

In a recent Post-Dispatch article, you’ll find another mistake. The reporters writing the article label the MoScholars program a “voucher.” Undoubtedly, they know this is the language used by those who stand against school choice. A voucher implies that the state is giving direct aid, in the form of a voucher, to pay for private school. This is not the way the MoScholars program works. It is supported by donations, and those making the donations are then eligible for a state tax credit. These donations provide education savings accounts to parents who may choose to use them at private schools—but parents can also use the money for a variety of other purposes, such as tutoring, online classes, or special education services, to name a few.

To find out more about the MoScholars program and how you can make a tax credit donation or apply for a scholarship, visit the Missouri State Treasurer’s website.

WATCH: Stopping America’s Slide to Socialism with Kevin A. Hassett

Posted on by Show-Me Institute Staff

On Tuesday, October 24, 2023, Kevin A. Hassett discussed his compelling memoir and analysis, “The Drift: Stopping America’s Slide to Socialism” at The World Chess Hall of Fame in St. Louis, Missouri.

Event presented by: Show-Me Institute, National Review Institute, 97.1 FM Talk, and Show-Me Opportunity

Listen to the presentation as a podcast:

Listen on Apple Podcasts 

Listen on SoundCloud

0 out of 5—What a Score

Posted on by Susan Pendergrass

The Reason Foundation just released a new report on how (or if) states are letting families choose their public school—a policy that 73 percent of parents support—rather than be assigned to one based on their address. Open enrollment in any public school, regardless of district lines, allows students to find a better fit within the public school system. Most surveys find that students use these programs to move from lower-performing to higher-performing schools

The Reason report identified five best practices for open enrollment policy. Numbers one and two are that students should be able to choose any school within their district or in a different district. Number three is requiring the state education agency to maintain and report all open enrollment-related data. Number four is requiring districts to transparently report how many open seats they have for transfer students. And number five is ensuring the program is free to all participating families.

Missouri has struggled to pass even a watered-down version of open enrollment. In the 2023 legislative session, an open enrollment bill made it through the House and through the Senate committee level, but never made it to the governor’s desk. This bill would have created an open enrollment program that districts could opt out of, limited student movement, and allowed districts to deny transfers to students with disabilities. It was not an ideal bill, but it was still too controversial to pass.

The Reason report graded each state on a scale of one to five depending on how well the state had implemented each best practice. Not surprisingly, Missouri got a whopping zero out of five on the Reason scale. The only real cross-district option for Missouri parents is to pay tuition to another district. Last year, Missouri families spent $1.6 million of their own money to do just that. If parents try to lie or falsify their address—for example, claiming that their child lives with a grandparent—they face up to one year in jail and a $10,000 fine. Not exactly family friendly.

Our neighbor, Kansas, does much better. In fact, the Reason report calls Kansas “an outstanding example of robust open enrollment.” District participation is mandatory and districts must report their open seats by June 1 of each year. The Kansas Department of Education must report the number of transfer applications accepted or rejected on its website and must annually audit school capacity and non-resident student enrollment and report findings to the legislature.

I wonder if a parent in the Kansas City metro area would prefer to live on the west side, where their right to choose a public school that fits their child is protected by the law, or on the east side, where they could be incarcerated sending their child to a school in a different district?

Good Ideas Done Poorly in Jefferson and Perry Counties

Posted on by David Stokes

A version of this commentary appeared in the St. Louis Business Journal.

As systems evolve and become more complex over time, certain things that used to be commonly provided by cities and counties have moved beyond the realistic capacity of local governments. Two such examples are sewers and hospitals. The last public hospital in St. Louis closed in 1997, and municipal sewer systems in Arnold and Eureka have both been privatized recently. Not all of these changes result in the private sector taking over service provision. For example, in the City of St. Louis and most of St. Louis County, the Metropolitan Sewer District (MSD) is a large, independent public agency with the resources and expertise to manage the sewer system for our region. Local governments in two areas in our region are currently preparing to hand over responsibility for major services to outside providers, and in each instance the prospects for beneficial transformations are being put at risk by a process that is not being managed in the best interest of the public.

First, the sewers. Festus and Crystal City are considering selling their shared municipal sewer system to the Jefferson County Public Sewer District (JCPSD). Like MSD, this larger, regional system has more resources and expertise than the cities do. However, the leadership of both cities have missed an opportunity to get the best deal for their residents. Earlier this summer, both councils approved a plan to consider only JCPSD’s proposal for a $5 million sale of the sewer system—that is, to exclude any other potential applicants from participation—after quietly negotiating only with JCPSD for months. This is despite the fact that representatives from both Missouri-American Water, which has recently purchased systems in Jefferson County, and Central States Water Resources, which operates sewer systems throughout Missouri, expressed interest in making a proposal once the idea become public. Those private utilities have been denied the opportunity to participate thus far.

Leaders in both cities deserve credit for their willingness to consider major changes to their sewer system. JCPSD’s $5 million offer may well be the best overall proposal the cities receive. But how can the cities know it is the best deal for their residents if they don’t even take any other offers?

The hospital example is even more troubling. In Perry County, located between St. Louis and Cape Girardeau, the county hospital board is planning to sell county-owned and operated Perry County Memorial Hospital (PCMH) to Mercy. Such a deal is almost certainly necessary and likely beneficial for the county and its residents, but the manner in which it has been conducted would make former Kansas City political boss Tom Pendergast blush. While they probably don’t have smoke-filled rooms for politicians in Perry County hospital, they might as well have. There are two boards that run the hospital—one elected and one appointed—and the boards have gone so far as to deny vital financial information to elected members of the hospital’s own board who have had the audacity to ask tough questions about the deal. You read that right. Elected members of the hospital board who aren’t falling into lockstep are being shoved aside as the board majority forces the deal through. Things like the Sunshine law and open records requirements are not suggestions; they are the law, and someone needs to inform the Perry County hospital boards of that.

In general, I strongly support local government changes such as outsourcing services to the private sector or other, larger public bodies. Divesting entities like the Perry County hospital and the Festus–Crystal City sewer system could benefit both communities. However, elected officials in both places have a responsibility to go through the process in an open, transparent fashion. They have utterly failed that test in Perry County, and they aren’t off to a good start in Festus and Crystal City. Residents of Perry County, Festus, and Crystal City should demand better from their local leaders.

Show-Me Energy: Today’s Energy Sources

Posted on by Avery Frank

Energy is a very complicated topic, and policy debates around energy often involve confusing jargon along with terms and concepts that are not familiar to the average person. Therefore, I have decided to begin a blog series explaining energy topics with the goal of setting a foundation for understanding energy policy in our state and our nation.

The United States is known for its diversity: from our landscapes, to our immigrants, and to the different states across the nation—the United States truly has a wide range of interests, individuals, and industries. Our energy sources are no different, and as shown below, we use a diverse assortment of energy sources to power our nation.

Created with mapchart.net; Source: Nuclear Energy Institute (NEI)

In order to better understand energy policy for Missouri, it is important to know some background about each energy source.

Natural Gas

According to 2022 preliminary data from the U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA), natural gas generated 39.8 percent of electricity in the United States—the largest generator in our country. Natural gas is a fossil fuel, meaning it is formed from decomposing plants and animals. Companies use seismic surveys to determine where to drill for natural gas, similar to the process used for oil. The captured natural gas is then processed, and a chemical called Mercaptan is added. Mercaptan adds the smell that makes natural gas smell like rotten eggs so leaks can be detected. This now smelly natural gas is then used for combustion turbines or steam turbines to generate electricity. In recent times, combined-cycle natural gas plants have greatly increased efficiency by using both processes together. Natural gas is burned to power combustion turbines, and the heat byproduct from the combustion turbine (think of how a car engine releases heat) is used to heat water, create steam, and turn a steam turbine.

Coal

At 19.5 percent of electricity generation, coal is the second-largest energy source in the United States. Once used primarily to power locomotives and heat homes, coal is now mostly used to generate electricity by heating water to turn steam turbines. Coal, like natural gas, emerged as an electricity generator in the 1950s and grew quickly in the 1970s and 80s. However, coal emits much higher emissions than natural gas, and thus its usage is shrinking in modern times as natural gas continues to capture more market share.

Hydroelectric

Speaking of old energy sources, hydroelectric (or hydropower) is one of the oldest forms of electricity generation—with 1880 marking its first year of industrial use. President Franklin D. Roosevelt was a big proponent of hydropower, which uses moving water to spin turbines. By 1940, it generated 40 percent of our nation’s electricity. However, in 2022, it only generated 6.3 percent. American hydropower has largely fallen out of favor due to safety and environmental regulations, legal obligations to Native American tribes, and the economic costs associated with them. For example, two hydroelectric dams on the Elwha River came under attack due to environmental and legal concerns over the salmon population. The owners would have been forced to add expensive fish ladders, and continued legal pressure from the tribes persisted until they decided the dam was not worth the cost.

Nuclear Energy

Making up 18.2 percent of electricity generation, nuclear is the largest clean energy source in the United States. The first commercial reactor was built in Shippingport, Pennsylvania in 1958, and the nuclear industry grew rapidly in the 1970s, 80s, and 90s. With nuclear fission, uranium atoms are split, which causes a chain-reaction and generates an immense amount of heat—which boils water and creates steam that turns a turbine. As time has passed, stringent regulations have slowed down the construction of nuclear power plants; the average age of a reactor for the remaining 93 reactors in the United States is 42 years old. Currently, the industry is regaining momentum as it transitions from large plants built during the Cold War to safer and cheaper small-modular reactors.

Wind

Wind energy makes up 10.2 percent of electricity generation. The mechanics of wind energy are relatively straightforward. The cycle of wind is used to turn turbines which generate electricity without creating greenhouse gas. In the olden days, windmills were used to cut wood, pump water, and grind grain—but now wind turbines are used to generate electricity. Financial incentives and requirements to use renewable energy in the 1990s spurred the development of wind power, with similar incentives continuing today. These wind turbines can also be located offshore in the ocean—such as ones taller than the Statue of Liberty in Rhode Island.

Solar

Enough energy from the sun hits the planet every hour to power the entire world for a year. Comprising 3.4 percent of our electricity generation, solar energy is a relatively small source of energy in the United States. Solar energy can be harnessed in two ways—through solar thermal or solar photovoltaic. Solar thermal technology is like the hot metal slide on the playground that would make you pay for foolishly venturing down it during recess. The sun heats up metal, which heats water—creating steam and turning a turbine. Solar photovoltaic is what most people think of when they think of solar energy—panels made up of a great number of cells turned towards the sun and capturing light energy to charge up like a battery. America’s largest solar photovoltaic farm is the Solar Star Farm in California.

Petroleum

Oil is typically used in transportation, but it can also be used in electricity generation—although it makes up only a tiny 0.9 percent of generation in the United States. The process to create electricity from petroleum is similar to the process for natural gas, as it can be used in steam, combustion engines, or in a combined-cycle power plant.

Biomass

Biomass is a fancy term for burning wood or using biofuels created with corn, soybeans, etc., to turn turbines. Although it is a large U.S. export commodity, our nation only relies on biomass energy for 1.3 percent of electricity generation. Developments are in the works for converting municipal solid waste (paper, shirts, furniture), animal manure, and human sewage into electricity sources.

Geothermal

Accounting for only 0.4 percent of electricity generation, geothermal is the smallest energy source in our nation. Since the earth has an inner core, outer core, mantle, and crust (where we live), heat from pressure and magma in the outer core and mantle produce heat that we can harness for electricity. Wells are drilled into the earth’s surface (some going 2 miles deep) and the heat is used to boil water and turn a steam turbine.

Now that we have a foundation on all of America’s top energy sources, we can further explore how energy is produced and transmitted and consider what would be the best energy policies for our nation and Missouri.

Kansas City and Jackson County Do Two Things Twice

Posted on by David Stokes

I am several weeks late on this, but it is worth stressing how Kansas City and Jackson County have missed a great opportunity to save tax money and improve services with their recent decision to each build a new jail.

Having both Jackson County and Kansas City build their own new local jail is ludicrous. The Jackson County jail is going to cost $301 million (at least). There was discussion of sharing facilities and some resources (such as food service) but now Kansas City is moving ahead with its own facility at a to-be-determined cost.

In the “up-is-down” government universe, the county’s jail contractor told the city council that:

J.E. Dunn, the construction company working on the new county jail, told city council last week that a shared jail would cost more in the long run, because the city would have to pay for services like food and laundry.

Will Kansas City not have to pay for food or laundry at the new facility they are going to build by themselves? Because I don’t think that is going to be a very appetizing or ambrosial jail without food or laundry.

Local governments sharing jails can absolutely work to save tax money and still provide the necessary safety and justice functions jails are there for. Regional jails are common in Virginia, and the U.S. Justice Department released a very favorable report on this practice a while back.

I don’t know who or what to blame here. Contractors running amok and running the show? Political disputes between the two bodies? Quietly disruptive employees who actively oppose service sharing and cost savings because they reduce the number of government jobs? One local elected official is putting the blame squarely on the latter, and I commend him for his blunt comments:

Jackson County Legislator Manny Abarca IV said it’s ridiculous the city and county couldn’t work out an agreement. “It’s a waste of taxpayer dollars to build two facilities that are naturally gonna have similar shared services that we could’ve combined,” he said. “As a taxpayer I’m very upset that this is the outcome.”

Abarca said it seemed like city and county staffers stalled on the project, “long enough to make this impossible to move forward.”

I am delighted that both Kansas City and Jackson County have all of this extra tax money to throw around. Now I don’t have to take the city seriously when it says it can’t afford to operate without an earnings tax.

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