And Exactly Why Does Springfield Operate All Its Own Utilities?

Springfield is a company town, and that company is City Utilities. Later today, the state auditor will be releasing an audit of CU, as it is known. The News-Leader has the preview. So, yes, I will return to this subject later after I have read the audit, but I find it very interesting that City Utilities still operates all the utilities in Springfield, instead of selling off the assets to a private company decades ago, like most larger cities. How big is CU? From the article:

CU employs 1,030 people and provides electricity, water, natural gas and public transit services to the public. The utility also operates the SpringNet computer network facility and a radio communication system for public agencies.

Electricity, water, gas, and the computer network could easily be managed just as well — and probably better — by a private utility. And (this is key) Springfield government would make a fortune selling off its assets to that private provider. That windfall could be used to lower taxes, improve services in other areas, and invest in capital projects such as transportation. Even the public transit part could be competitively contracted out, which is different from privatization but similar. Here is an op-ed I wrote on this subject for Kirkwood.

I will return to this issue after I have a chance to read the audit. That is known in the media as a "teaser." Pretty cool, huh?

“Price Gouging”

David Nicklaus has published some quotes on his blog from Eric Dixon’s op-ed about price gouging. I’m impressed by the economic knowledge displayed by the second comment to the post (I’m not even going to bother addressing the first comment):

It’s also appropriate for government to perform its normal role in assuring that people affected by disasters get the services that they contract for — for example, that if they pay a contractor to repair their roof, he will actually do so for the price agreed upon.

But it’s not necessary or useful for government to attempt to repeal the laws of supply and demand for dealing with disasters. One doesn’t need to be a die-hard libertarian to recognize that that will only slow recovery efforts and cause people to suffer longer.

It’s important to keep in mind that this isn’t a question of whether or not the state should take action after natural disasters. As this comment highlights, the state can either help recovery efforts with wise policies, or it can make things worth through misguided policies like punishing "price gouging."

Return of the Math Wars

I’d like to respond to Justin’s excellent critique of integrated math. I think we are mostly in agreement about integrated math’s faults. My position is that parents should be able to choose integrated math for their children if they want to, not that integrated math is good.

I think Justin is 100-percent correct (see, I can use numbers in real-life situations!) that math classes treating all answers as equally right aim only to fluff up students’ self-esteem, not to teach them anything. And when students go through school without learning math facts and formulae, they miss out on a basic part of education.

But I think parents should still be able to choose integrated math, for a few reasons. First, there’s disagreement about which curricula constitute integrated math. One of my brothers attended an elementary school that used Everyday Mathematics, by the University of Chicago School Mathematics Project. My brother hated this curriculum, and I thought it had several disadvantages. It encourages calculator use at a young age, some of the activities are pointless, and it presents some concepts in a more complicated way than necessary.

On the other hand, the curriculum emphasizes practice and getting the right answer. And although many critics object to it because the algorithms it teaches aren’t the same ones they learned in school, no one could accuse it of foregoing algorithms altogether, or of allowing students to make up answers. Is Everyday Math "integrated math"? This Wikipedia article says yes. Personally, I think Everyday Math isn’t so bad as the other integrated programs out there, and parents who choose it aren’t necessarily dooming their children to ignorance.

Justin’s suggestion to encourage computer programming, which uses set theory, is a good idea. But some people consider teaching set theory before college to be a "new math" scheme itself. I’ve seen traditional math books that eschew set theory entirely, even at the high school level.

Even curricula that are indisputably integrated might not be harmful in the long term. I went to a public elementary school that taught integrated math. We were always doing creative projects that were only tangentially related to arithmetic. But when I switched to a private school that taught only traditional math, I didn’t really miss anything, because the traditional sixth-grade math curriculum was basically a review of third-, fourth-, and fifth-grade arithmetic.

What about my peers who stayed in the public school? They started using a more traditional curriculum around that time, too. Several of them went on to major in science at college. Sure, our time could have been put to better uses in elementary school, but the fact that you don’t learn long division in one grade doesn’t mean that you’ll never learn it in any other grade. If parents choose integrated math for their kids in the early grades, their kids could still study all the traditional topics when they’re a little older.

In fact, given the pressure some parents put on their five-year-olds to memorize lots of facts, study textbooks, and prepare for first grade, I imagine I would request integrated math if I had little kids in kindergarten. I probably wouldn’t choose it for later grade levels. But if parents want to put off teaching traditional math until second or third grade, I think that should be up to them. And as for the parents who want their kids to study integrated math through high school? I think they should be free to choose that, even though I disagree with them.

If everyone sent their kids to private schools of their choice, we wouldn’t have this dispute about what schools should teach. The math wars (and reading wars, and spelling wars, etc.) are a product of our one-size-fits-all public school system, which forces a few educational approaches on all families. Opening up the system to choice would lead to more diversity, and less arguing.

Ready or Not?

Most brainstorming about education reform centers on urban districts. We hear about failing inner-city schools, discipline problems, and social issues. Suburban districts, with their relatively high test scores and upper-class constituents, seem like bastions of achievement in comparison. But we often overlook the rural districts. When I’ve asked people about this, they usually say, "Well, rural communities are satisfied with their schools. They just don’t have the same problems as the city districts."

That viewpoint may be overly optimistic. This article in the Southeast Missourian reports that some students in rural areas have a lot of trouble when they go on to higher education:

At Springfield-based Ozarks Technical Community College, 2,200 out of 3,000 incoming freshman needed a remedial algebra class and another 1,200 needed help in English last year. Only 35 percent passed a remedial math class.

"It’s an epidemic," said Ellen Newby-Hines, director of the academic achievement center at the community college that tutors students who need help in order to pass basic algebra, English and other classes.

The number of students in remedial courses isn’t necessarily an indication of a problem. Sometimes, students want to review after a summer away from school, or are unsure they’ll do well in college-level courses and take a remedial course during the first semester, just in case. But if large percentages of them can’t even pass the remedial courses at a community college (which employs tutors to give them extra help), that’s scary.

The article notes that a new state program that pays tuition for some community college students has attracted students who wouldn’t have gone to the schools otherwise. Maybe those students aren’t as well prepared. But failing remedial courses doesn’t only mean students aren’t ready for college — it means they aren’t ready for high-school-level coursework, either.

Math Lexicon

I have to respectfully disagree with my colleague’s tacit approval of "integrated math," which is not an "intuitive or interesting" approach to mathematics. Rather, it’s a tool to justify falling academic standards and low test scores, and the district should seriously consider abandoning the program.

The same logic was used to justify the teaching of Ebonics in several California school districts in the late 1990s. Whatever your opinion may be regarding the defining characteristics of a lexicon, I think it is safe to argue that teaching Ebonics as the primary form of English in urban schools did a disservice to students. Teachers marginalized their students’ opportunities for success by teaching them a language with dubious credibility and zero applicability to the world in which they lived.

Mathematics is a language just like any other language, and it is imperative that students learn how to speak that language correctly if they want to be able to communicate effectively in society. The language equivalent of "integrated math" would be teaching Spanish that emphasized hitting the "high points" of the language, with no regard to grammar, conjugation, or syntax. As long as the basic message was clear, that would be all that was important.

Yes, mathematics can be a difficult subject, just like learning any language can be. But the idea of a "flexible" math curriculum invites the criticism that the curriculum is focused more on student self-esteem and higher test scores than actual learning. And as an article in today’s Southeast Missourian suggests, the fact that Missouri students are increasingly unprepared for college-level mathematics courses implies that academic standards have dropped. Students that sail through grade school with high grades from well-meaning teachers find themselves completely unprepared for college. Shouldn’t we be more focused on whether students are learning than whether they make straight A’s?

In my opinion, a far more effective approach to making math more accessible is to encourage and expand the pursuit of studies in math-heavy subjects, such as physics, statistics, and even computer programming (which relies on logic and set theory), rather than teaching "integrated math." Although students may fail to see the value of learning traditional algebra by itself, if they view algebra as a tool for understanding a subject which they enjoy, they will be more likely to excel in it.

Integrated math is not about "kids learning in different ways." It is a deliberate attempt to inflate math test scores by dumbing down the subject in the interest of "accessibility." And while that may be a short-run gain for school administrators focused on the metrics of individual school success, it is a long-run failure for their students’ future academic progress.

Property Taxes in the News

The Kansas City Star has an interesting article on why property taxes keep going up despite the downturn in the housing market, which would presumably lead to assessments going down. The reason is that property values are supposed to be set at their January 1 value, so the last 11 terrible months in housing values don’t count. Also, the comparable sales method used to set values can come from any time since Jan. 1, 2005. The hope would be that the 2009 assessment would capture much of the housing downturn of the past year, but how much do you want to bet it doesn’t?

On the same subject, the Sunday Joplin Globe had a very reasonable editorial on the assessment situation in Jasper County and around the state. While I don’t agree with the Globe that we should replace property taxes with higher income or sales taxes (particularly income taxes), it was nice to read their well thought-out editorial. I do agree with them on the importance of having a general debate about how we tax and spend here in Missouri. We have not agreed with the Globe’s editorials much here at SMI, with their opposition to toll roads and support of Internet taxation, but this was a good one.

For my own ideas on how we can change the assessment system in Missouri, here is my recent article on the subject. Also, don’t forget that your property taxes are due by December 31! And the above links came from Combest, so let’s give him a Christmas shout-out!

Gun Buyback Program Provides Seed Money for New Guns

The one-day flowering of peace and safety in St. Louis city has ended, with the city police purchasing 540 guns from its citizenry as part of a one-day gun buyback program. At least, it might have been citizens of St. Louis; it could well have been people from anywhere who had a worthless gun to unload and found a way to get $50 for it. The Post-Dispatch story is here. It would appear from the totals that they got very few, if any, assault-type weapons off the street. The budget was $20,000, with a price of $100 per assault-type weapon and $50 for handguns and shotguns. A total of 540 guns at $50 each is $27,000, so that did not leave much money for any assault weapons. And what about the guns that were bought with taxpayer dollars? From an article that originally appears in the Chicago Tribune:

The weapons turned in during buy-backs overwhelmingly are older guns, such as revolvers, which in some cases don’t even work. A Harvard study of buy-back programs in Boston in 1993 and 1994 found nearly three-quarters of the guns recovered were made before 1968. In Seattle, one-quarter of the guns collected were inoperable.

Basically, the city is doing nothing more than giving people tax money to go purchase newer, better guns. If the city is trying to become the living embodiment of Robert Heinlein’s statement that "An armed society is a polite society," than I would call the buyback program a success. Somehow, I think the city was going for something else — mostly stemming from a delusional belief that this program was going to improve safety in the city.

The best thing to say about this program is that it only lasted for one day. A study I linked to in last week’s post on this subject found that long-term programs actually increase gun ownership as they lower the overall costs of gun ownership. Among the ways it would do this is by creating a floor value of $50 for any gun, no matter how low the market value, if any, for that gun. Come to think of it, if we could change all stupid government programs from permanent fixtures to one-day events, that would be real progress!

Math Wars

What are "contextual and situational situations"? It has something to do with integrated math, the latest topic of discussion at Schoolhouse Talk:

Integrated math allows students to learn the same content that is taught in algebraic math, but in a different context, with an emphasis on contextual and situational situations rather than formulas and algorithms.

Integrated math (or "new math," or whatever you want to call it) provokes heated discussions in Missouri and around the country. Edspresso has published an essay titled, "Traditional Math Means Never Having to Say You’re Sorry." There’s even an entire website, Weapons of Math Destruction, which has published 85 cartoons on the topic of integrated math.

Anyway, the latest development in Missouri is that some parents are complaining about the Columbia Public Schools’ integrated math curriculum. The district uses integrated math at the elementary level and gives high school students a choice between integrated math and a traditional math track. I haven’t been able to find out whether the middle schools use only one program, or both. Some Columbia parents supplement their kids’ schoolwork with Singapore Math, one of my favorite math curricula. (Yes, I actually have favorite math curricula.)

I’m sympathetic to parents’ objections about new math, but that doesn’t mean the district should necessarily get rid of it. Kids don’t all learn the same way; for many, an integrated approach could be more intuitive or interesting. Columbia Public Schools already give parents a choice about math at the high school level. If they allowed parents to choose traditional math at the elementary level too, more people would be satisfied with the curriculum. Some elementary schools allow parents to choose between single-sex and coed classes; a choice between traditional and integrated math should be even easier for schools to offer, because it affects just one subject rather than the entire school day.

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