Stossel, Wrong again

       About the only absolutely valid assumption  may make about  a John Stossel op-ed piece is that somewhere in it, the apostle of free market greed will shoot himself in a body part. This Sunday's column is illustrative of that point.

         In a column headlined "School Inc." Stossel makes the childishly simplistic statement that all that is "wrong" with American public education is covered by two or three simple factoids. Factoid 1: "The US should emulate Chile, Japan, Korea, the UK and Sweden in Education planning and control." Factoid the second: What is wrong with Education is government control and curriculum setting efforts. Finally: The system is a monopoly and resists change.

        Let's start with the second and third assertions combined first. Yes, every single organization has within its rank and file those who hate change "for the sake of change."   That said, there are, admittedly many of those in education at the grass roots level (where I toiled happily for 20 years) who will, and do,  eagerly embrace meaningful change with actual student positive outcomes as the objective. At this juncture, it needs to be shown that Stossel (intentionally?) fails to differentiate between levels of government. This is probably because he wants the reader to believe that most of what fails or has failed in US Public Education is top down directed.

        Other than the moronic "No Child Left Behind" effort of Bush 43, who I guarantee doesn't read on grade level (listen to any speech and recall he has an MBA, courtesy of daddy's legacy at Yale), there is little classroom day to day influence from Washington other than the odd small infusion of grant monies here and there. Why call NCLB "moronic?" Because it essentially imposes  the statistically impossible mandate that all children will be at least "average," regardless of actual ability. This ain't Lake Woebegone! (deep NPR reference)

       Most actual legislative educational impact comes from the State capitol and is implemented at the county or similar subdivision level, even to the "town" in some New England states. This insures that most real law related to schools in any state is enacted by politicians. It is proper to point out that for many of these elected politicos, education is analogous to the way the Hall of Fame pitcher Jim Palmer used to describe his occasional spats with his equally great Hall of Fame manager, Earl Weaver. He said, "All Earl knows about pitching is that it's hard and he can't do it." Such it is with just about all state legislators. As an aside, many of these persons also have relatives who would love a bigger slice of the charter school pie!

        By the time it gets to the District (using the Florida model which is county based as most are) this one size fits all model and funding is spread over such divergent political entities as Miami-Dade (profoundly metropolitan) and  Sumter County (mostly agricultural). While there may well be great teachers in both regions, they also may be, as in Orange County, handcuffed by the edict from on high to adopt whatever "flavor of the month" method of teaching/lesson planning/ thoughtful reflection/etc which was popular in California five years ago. To cite most recent examples, this could well mean being mandated to follow  a system which is being sold at a price by one or another of an army of traveling educational hucksters who don't teach, but sell "how to" books.   Perhaps The most egregious example, a fraud named Marzano, has never taught a year of school, but is willing to tell you exactly how to do so. Undoubtedly, there may well be the odd good piece of  advice/structure/guideline/pedagogy hidden in the greater mass of such copyrighted and expensive material, but it is usually shoved wholesale down the throats of good or outstanding teachers who already get excellent results with finely honed skills derived from the actual classroom experience. The best thing to do to help a good or great teacher is get the hell out of their way. This has nothing to do with standard curricula and is invariably locally driven.

        Second factoid: and the place where Stossel's hypocrisy shines like the sun

        "The US should emulate Sweden, Korea, Japan, Chile, and India."

       First issue: In all those countries, the vast percentage of the students are fluent in one language, which is the language of instruction, in several, most students take separate, at cost English" classes as well. I taught in a school with more than ten different languages as the home or birth language of a student.

        Next: Stossel, in classic "ignore the facts if they're contradictory" fashion, fails to mention that all these nations except India have very strong, centralized governmental control of education. Remember, "Government control baaad!"  They all have cabinet level Education posts and except for India, all those positions are held by qualified educators with advanced degrees!

        Then, let's individually consider what Stossel compares to US education:

        Korea:

Teachers make, on average, 1/3 more than their US counterparts. (Stossel says we spend too much here).     

National education funding per pupil as a percentage of GDP is 3 times that of the USA! (yeah, three times)

        Korean parents stress education and pay huge sums for tutors. Many pay an average of $8000 annually for tutoring. One, a TV tutor and on line math guy makes about $4 million annually! 

When Stossel in the column says "Some Korean teachers make millions." he isn't (but he wants you to think he is) referring to classroom teachers, but more like Bill Nye or the guy mentioned above. Golly, I tutored for free, who knew?

How does this work for these lucky Korean kids? Here are some things Stossel would rather not discuss.

   • The Korean Educational Development Institute reports that the majority of university students lack the ability to ask questions to instructors primarily  due to an education system that promotes examinations and instructors having too many students to handle.

  •  While an international educational poll ranks Korean students at the top for academics, they're at the bottom for happiness.

   • A 2014 poll found that over half of South Korean teenagers have suicidal thoughts, with over 40% of respondents reporting that school pressure and future uncertainty dismayed them the most.

 • Suicide is currently the leading cause of death among South Korean youth.

Be careful what you wish for, John.

 Sweden:

Again heavy handed government control. Cabinet level minister with education degree.

Homeschooling frowned upon as national policy.

All curricula state mandated and regulated.

        Japan:

Nationally established curricula, attendance requirements

All students (99.9%) speak one language (Japanese) fluently

University costs only about $10,000 annually

Curricula and years of attendance are nationally set and enforced.

Again, huge parental emphasis on education, student resultant stress.

7,000 teachers or more are assaulted annually by students.

  

      Chile:

Curricula and attendance government run and enforced

1/3 of universities (about 25) are Government run/regulated. They outperform private universities and that gap is increasing.

Cabinet level minister, Master's in Education

College admissions tests government controlled and written

Student loans 2%, 15 yr. payoff for University

       India:

Almost 30% of schools private, expensive, stratified by class/money. 

Tuition many times the amount spent per student in government schools. Calling them "Public Schools" doesn't make 'em public if your parents have to go into big debt to get you there.

Very much like the British system (on whom modeling was done)

Regulated by the state (Indian political subdivision)

        So, what have we learned? we learned that once again Stossel has bullshat the reader, by alleging that the above  nations' schools are better, when in fact all have far more stringent national government controls, which he says is the reason US schools underperform. This is of course a set up for speaking glowingly of charter schools - you know those schools  to which we send state dollars into the black hole of private and largely unregulated educational spending? These schools are also frequently run by religious groups or entities. This is odd, considering almost 200 years of rock ribbed opposition in America to sending any public monies to Catholic schools , even though they actually teach.

       What doesn't Stossel get? He has apparently not really looked hard at the mediocre overall record of Charter schools, choosing instead to cherry pick those who are very successful for many reasons having to do more with a select student body than any other single factor.

        Here's my op-ed take on the subject:

        The factors which separate high performing schools from those who do less well are several, and curriculum is a mere nit in the group. Likewise, where the regulators live is not really very important either, but they should be people who are at least conversant with their client base and the issues surrounding their lives. Example, when Jeb Bush was running for Governor of Florida he visited Boone High School, where I taught. This was a prep school, trust fund child of privilege, nodding and smiling as if he could identify with public school students. He could not and cannot, nor could his brother Alfred W Bush.

        The countries Stossel compares to the US except for India,  have some truly monumental advantages. They are relatively compact, relatively homogeneous in population and students and their parents have a strong understanding of the critical importance of effort in education. Teaching is a highly paid and respected profession, and most educators in all the countries mentioned do so as a career. Compare that to the "stepping stone" which many US college graduates seem to feel Public Education represents, since most won't last past five years. 

       When  trying to make a great blueberry pie, the baker must start with top notch fruit. We in public education get our fruit (in many cases) bruised, hungry, even under ripe; but we take them, love them and do what can be done to teach them. The students who don't thrive in our system are, in the great majority, students whose  families cannot afford, and in too many cases, have little regard for the value of, a tutor, private school, or whatever. Additionally, those of us who love the profession deserve to be paid as professionals and given the tools , but not have the skill set dismantled by the edict of some "expert" with a briefcase who has never faced our challenges.

         If you read this and feel, as some will, that I am in error here, do this. Go be a volunteer in a Title I school and watch and learn. Walk a mile or two in the shoes of a dedicated teacher whose students come to school hungry and with little or no parental encouragement. Then consider the messages which advertising sends, from every electronic medium available, regarding what's important and who's important to success in life.  Contrast the impact of a Kardashian with that of a Dickens or Roosevelt in the minds of the media/money/me generation. Then reread what I have written  and what others have written about the Korean, Swedish, Japanese  and other nations' systems. Of course  they also have, at the top of that government food chain, educators, not Tupperware ladies.