Missouri Promotes Locavorism in Kindergarten

Posted on by Sarah Brodsky

The University of Missouri Extension runs a program called the Kindergarten Farm Food Initiative. A newsletter to parents from the beginning of the school year states (emphasis in the original):

your child will enjoy locally grown fruit and vegetable snacks three times a week.

It also characterizes locally grown food as “fresh” and “delicious,” and admonishes parents:

If your child asks you for a tasty fruit or vegetable snack at home, we hope that you will encourage this healthy habit.

Serving healthy snacks to a class doesn’t endorse any particular ideology. And, by itself, a visit to a farm isn’t indoctrination. (I applauded when this school took kindergartners to a farm to learn about agriculture.) Where this program crosses the line is in its newsletters, which are based on the assumption that locally grown food is inherently good. I would guess the same attitude toward local food is conveyed to students during class time.

To explain my objection with an analogy, suppose a school, in connection with a unit on China, announced to parents that students would play with fun, high-quality toys from China three times a week. Suppose it sent home newsletters about the toys emphasizing the fact that they are from China. Wouldn’t that be seen as an unfair endorsement? Everyone agrees that kids need to play, but whether toys from China are the best choice is debatable. Even if the school didn’t explicitly tell the kids that toys made in China are better than other toys, a kindergartner could easily form that conclusion if the school made no mention of toys from other places.

It’s fine for a school to tell kids where food comes from, but it shouldn’t focus on one food source to the exclusion of others. Parents can always tell their children that local food is preferable, if that is something that their family values.

“All I Ask Is a Tall Ship and a Star to Steer Her By”

Posted on by Sarah Brodsky

Abby Sunderland, a 16-year-old American, is another sailor who hopes to become the youngest to sail around the world. In a few weeks, she plans to depart for a nonstop six-month voyage.

I haven’t heard about any government criticism of her or any attempts to put her in state custody. That could change before the middle of December, but it seems likely that she’ll set sail without any state interference.

Abby Sunderland, Laura Dekker, and Jessica Watson are three teenagers with similar goals but divergent experiences — and those differences are a result of the actions of their respective countries’ governments. They’re a reminder that policies can change the course of people’s lives.

To learn more about Sunderland, check out her blog.

History Repeats Itself

Posted on by Sarah Brodsky

By way of Edspresso, I see that Pittsburgh is dealing with the same issue that St. Louis did not long ago: Its public school district won’t sell a building to a charter school.

I’m optimistic that this will turn out well for Pittsburgh charters. Districts can dig in their heels and try to hold on to real estate, but when enough people prefer charters, political pressure will force districts to give up the empty buildings.

Technological Double Standard

Posted on by Sarah Brodsky

When online schools in Oregon used technology to compete with traditional districts, legislators responded that the virtual schools shouldn’t accept new students until the state can study the matter further. Yet when an Oregon district uses the Internet for crisis management, it’s celebrated as innovative. No one calls for the district to suspend the program and subject it to scrutiny.

In Missouri, the virtual school teaching academic subjects to a couple thousand students is cut from the budget because it’s seen as an unnecessary cost, but the state plans to distribute more than 24,000 vouchers for an online program that teaches people to use Microsoft Excel. The governor explains why:

“I’m proud that the state of Missouri is teaming up with Microsoft to provide cutting-edge, in-demand training that will help our citizens compete in the 21st-century economy,” Gov. Nixon said.  “The world has gone digital, and it’s vital that Missourians have the knowledge and skills to land and keep the jobs of tomorrow. For folks seeking a new job, or looking to brush up their skills, Elevate America will be a tremendous resource.”

The Vagaries of Scalping Laws

Posted on by Sarah Brodsky

The Wall Street Journal reports on a bakery that experiences a large increase in demand for pies around Thanksgiving.

Although there is nothing she can do to prevent the occasional customer from scalping her treats in the parking lot — a $12 pie can go for more than $20 — she hopes her extra counter help will keep the line moving briskly.

Imagine how different laws might be if bakers sold their wares in large stadiums, and if entertainers performed on a first-come first-served basis in corner shops.

Consumers’ Ignorance of Production Details a Blessing, Not a Curse

Posted on by Sarah Brodsky

One of the things I like best about production in a free economy is that consumers don’t have to think about it. If each of us had to pay attention to the details of how all our things are made — where the materials come from, what knowledge is needed to change or combine materials, how they’re transported to us — we wouldn’t have a moment to devote to our own lives. It would take all day to examine the intricate processes behind even the most ordinary household items. A caveman, on the other hand, had to know where his things came from, because he had to procure them all himself. The fact that we don’t think much about the production of the material goods we use is a sign of economic progress.

A Rhodes Scholarship recipient who plans to study food policy disagrees:

“I think the biggest problem with the U.S. food policy is that we don’t think about it,” Barmeier said. “We don’t have a single food policy strategy. We don’t think about how the food system from the farm to the table is all related […]”

It’s no coincidence that he also wants a single policy to direct food production. The alternative to the price system — in which all the relevant information for consumers is captured in a product’s price — is central planning.

We can’t all think deeply about food policy and coordinate our thoughts, so we’d have to designate one person to do the thinking for us. This economic system is vulnerable to the foibles and mistakes of the central planner. And it’s disastrous for individuals, because the planner’s errors are amplified throughout the economy and cause shortages and waiting lists. If an individual, not thinking particularly hard about where food comes from, goes to the store and buys too few pecans for a pie, he can always go back to the store for more. No one else loses out. But if a thoughtful planner underestimates how much food people in general need, everyone goes hungry.

When this student takes a break from writing Farm to School proposals (yes, he’s really done that) I hope he’ll read “The Use of Knowledge in Society,” or maybe “I, Pencil,” for a different perspective.

School Accountability Favors Subjects Like Math

Posted on by Sarah Brodsky

Tyler Cowen is blogging about a study that found No Child Left Behind to have improved student math scores but not reading scores. Cowen comments:

Math skills are more the result of drill, whereas you have to learn how to love to read and much of that happens within the family, not at school. Math is therefore easier to “teach by central planning,” so to speak.

I do think that children can learn to love reading in school, but I agree with Cowen that skills like reading are not amenable to state control. Math at the K–12 level entails learning a limited number of facts and procedures, in a set order. Although there are different ways to write out the algorithms and explain the concepts, nobody goes very far in trigonometry or calculus without first learning arithmetic and algebra. The government can say, “Teach x, y, and z in math class,” and then give a test to see whether schools complied.

Students’ reading ability does not develop in a linear fashion like math skills. People learn to read by reading widely and building up reading experience over time. There’s no obvious, direct route to a high level of reading comprehension, so it’s harder to legislate improvements in reading skills.

Campaign Enlists “Sesame Street” to Improve High School Education

Posted on by Sarah Brodsky

Do U.S. high school students score poorly on math and science tests because of too many commercials and not enough encouragement from Big Bird? If so, a new federal campaign will remedy that. It’s a hodgepodge of initiatives, ranging from science-themed video games in public libraries to commercial-free science television shows. Scientists will volunteer to help teachers, and “Sesame Street” is getting in on the action.

One thing is clear:

“It has nothing to do with the day-to-day teaching,” said Dr. Schneider, who was the commissioner of education statistics at the Department of Education from 2005 to 2008.

None of the new programs would transform science class. Few would affect schools at all, instead giving children opportunities to learn about science through after school activities. Their success would depend on whether anyone wants to participate in these particular initiatives, and whether the science video games teach as much as they’re supposed to. And there’s a disconnect between the programs and the campaign’s stated goals: high schoolers are too old to care about many of the “hooks” (like Big Bird), yet the campaign seeks to improve high school science scores.

Here are some policies that would have a greater effect on science in school:

  • Alternative teacher certification. If you like the idea of scientists volunteering to work with students for the duration of a single project, just imagine what students would learn if  scientists stayed on as full-time teachers.

  • Science-themed charter schools. Allow the students who are most interested in science to choose specialized schools and devote more time to studying it.

  • No national standards. Schools should strive to offer the best science instruction possible, not conform to a single standard. No matter how good the standard is, it will always be possible to improve on it. We don’t want schools to stop once they reach whatever level that the government finds acceptable — but that’s exactly what standards legislation prompts them to do.

Stay Tuned

Posted on by Sarah Brodsky

The trial for the man charged with terrorism because of a conversation he had with a telemarketer was originally scheduled to take place this month, but it’s been postponed until Jan. 4 (search case no. 0922-CR03091-01).

Getting angry on the phone is only one of many behaviors that can prompt suspicion of terrorism. According to the public service announcement embedded in this post by Jim Harper, anyone who asks for directions or writes in a little notepad is a possible terrorist.

I hope the justice system will turn its attention to real threats and dangers, and go easier on the people who lose their cool over phone solicitations. Put them on the Do Not Call list; don’t put them in jail.

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