You decide: What “works” in education?
The Heritage Foundation’s The Foundry Blog shares: Universal School Choice Prevails – For Sweden. Yeah, you read that right. Sweden.
In socialist Sweden, universal school choice allows every parent to choose the best school for their child. The voucher program, which has been in effect since 1992 and was created to tackle the kind of problems plaguing the U.S. educational system, provides families with the opportunity to send their child to any type of school they like – public, private, religious, or even for-profit. Stuart Butler, Heritage Vice President of domestic policy studies, explains in Washington Times:
“These independent schools, like the public schools, get a voucher payment for each child. They compete vigorously with one other because the money follows the child to the school of his or her choice. Schools must satisfy their customers … or lose them.”
Sure it’s still Sweden, so there are some drawbacks- schools must all follow a national curriculum and testing- but perhaps there is something to be learned from this model. Schools are given control over their programs and teaching styles, and are actually being forced to satisfy customers, i.e. families? Now that is an ed reform that makes some sense.
Meanwhile, back here in the States, we have teacher’s unions and others actually blocking the doors to children at a charter school. As in last week. September 2009! Really? Is that what the world is coming to? Are unions so threatened by competition that they’ll have members yell at children simply trying to get into their school so they can actually learn?!
Pathetic doesn’t even begin to describe it…
What works? You decide.
School choice… for athletes?
The Winston-Salem Journal takes a look at student transfer policy- essentially public school choice- in “A Matter of Choice: Policy that lets athletes pick their high school generally scores well.”
While the article does mention that transfers are not simply limited to athletes, the basis of the article is that athletes are often the ones taking advantage of this provision in order to compete on better sports teams- and how this transfer policy has improved the quality of those sports teams.
In the 12 years before the policy was implemented, the system’s high-school teams combined to win 12 N.C. High School Athletic Association championships. In the 12 years since, they have combined to win 36…
Folks recognize that this competition benefits the students and the sports teams- helping make them better. Even a school board member acknowledges:
“I do think it made teams better,” he said. “The coaches worked hard before, but I think they have to work even harder to make sure teams are competitive and that their players are happy in the school. To that extent, I think it’s made everybody better.”
Exactly. Competition makes coaches work harder to attract athletes. The schools work harder to keep athletes happy in school.
It’s just too bad this article just focuses on athletics. How about academics? Shouldn’t schools also focus on the academic side- working harder to attract students for the academics, not just their athletics? Shouldn’t schools want all their students to be happy in school- not just their all-star athletes? Can’t competition help schools to work harder and do better?
Just asking….
Surprise!
Okay, so maybe it comes as little surprise to those of us who have been advocating for school choice for some time, but in a new study released by the C. D. Howe Institute shows what we have been saying for years- “Competition Improves Performance.”
In the Heartland Institute’s January 2009 edition of School Reform News, it is reported (once again) that “when schools have to fight for funding, students—and taxpayers—get more for their money in the form of improved scores on standardized tests.”
“The study shows that when schools have to fight for public funding by attracting students, those schools compete and students perform better,” said Ben Dachis, a policy analyst at C. D. Howe, which released the study in October.
No surprise for us here, but another nice piece of evidence of how school choice works for students, for families, and for taxpayers, as we get ready to start a new year, and a new Virginia General Assembly Session!
“Shake up failed school bureaucracies with competition”
We are excited to see education- specifically school choice- become a key issue in the 2008 Presidential Election. Last night, Senator John McCain rallied the crowd with calls to radically reform education in this country, raising the question “Equal access to public education has been gained. But what is the value of access to a failing school?”
He went on to state his intentions to shake up the system, introduce competition and empower parents in order to make sure our schools “answer to parents and students.”
Senator McCain is right, education is the “civil rights issue of this century,” and we owe it to all students to do more to provide real reforms, and not simply cover up our problems with old solutions that aren’t working.
Read more on Senator McCain’s position on education reform here.
Competition is key to education excellence
We have said it before, competition is key. Competition pushes everyone to be better.
When it comes to education, the status quo isn’t working. But the good news, more and more are taking up the cause that what we need in education is radical reforms and greater competition.
In this column by US Congressman Tom Tancredo in the Rocky Mountain News, the Congressman makes the case for education reforms.
“I am a former public school teacher, and like it or not, education is a product. As we all know, you don’t get a better product by stifling competition or imposing a rigid regime of government protectionism.
If we want a better product when it comes to education - higher educational achievement levels by our school graduates - our government policies must be geared toward satisfying the consumer: students and their parents.”
Tancredo goes on to challenge the status quo mentality of the unions and urges free market- not big government- solutions to improving educational opportunities for all students.
“If history has taught us anything, it is that solutions to some of the world’s most complex problems have come only when we have unleashed the power of the free market. The answer to the education problem, simply put, is more choices for parents, and more competition by schools for students. It is not another ambitious big government “solution” put together by the same special interests that have a vested interest in maintaining the status quo - a status quo that even Romer and Ritter admit leaves our students lagging far behind youngsters from Seoul and Singapore as they enter a newly competitive global economy.”
Competition is key
As the world watches the best athletes in the world compete in the 2008 Olympic games, it is clear to see that competition makes everyone work harder to be better.
And while certainly education is not the same as sports, the truth about competition remains the same.
The Financial Times of London looks at the state of British education and makes the argument that applying the competitive educational choice model that is proving successful in Sweden would be a positive reform that would benefit British students.
“A great number of young British people leave school lacking basic numeracy and literacy and, even in the recent period of record growth, have tended to drift directly into unemployment. This is a scandal. The British school system needs a radical overhaul.
The leading light in school reform is Sweden. The education system there is funded by vouchers. If parents wish to change school, they have the right to do so, and to take state funding with them. Schools must compete with one another to attract pupils. Any education provider has the right to set up a new school. Competition between schools is the key.”
Competition benefits all schools- public, private and parochial- making everyone work harder to achieve more. And this provides all students a better opportunity to succeed.
“The evidence suggests that adopting the Swedish model would make the average UK school better, and lift weaker schools most of all.”
