No, Mr. Vice President, it’s long past time

Mike Pence wrote a decent editorial about education. Time to end government’s monopoly on education

[O]nline learning has allowed parents to peek into their child’s virtual classroom, where for the first time, they can see and hear everything their children are being taught. As a result, many parents are now rightly concerned that the primary mission of many public schools is no longer to educate America’s youth but to indoctrinate them with a radical left-wing political ideology.

The COVID-19 pandemic, combined with the growing wokeness epidemic, created a perfect storm in America’s classrooms – forcing countless American families to flee in search of shelter elsewhere. The Census Bureau reports that homeschooling has tripled.

I think the education establishment has come to the conclusion that the American family is too lazy and too addicted to “free” education to do anything serious about the situation.

Some few have pulled their kids out, but most — when faced with the choice of lowering their standard of living to afford their kids a better education — will choose the higher standard of living.

I think the only way to make progress is to change the terms of the debate.

First, from a constitutional perspective, the issue is not ending government’s monopoly control on education, but ending the federal government’s involvement in education. (Many people believe education is a proper matter for state and local government.)

Second, focus on the corruption of the teacher’s unions and break their control.

Third, emphasize a “back to basics” approach and squeeze out all the ideological nonsense.

9 thoughts on “No, Mr. Vice President, it’s long past time”

  1. QUOTE: First, from a constitutional perspective, the issue is not ending government’s monopoly control on education, but ending the federal government’s involvement in education. (Many people believe education is a proper matter for state and local government.)

    There are indeed many flaws within our current public education system and it “should” be much better. Yet, one of the things it “attempts” to do is provide a standard minimum level education for all students. If things go the way you recommend, what would be in place to ensure there isn’t a negative disparate impact on students in economically poorer or remote locations (where they might not have access to some resources without federal funds). Would there be a way to ensure they received a quality education or would it be just one of the sacrifices that would have to be made to gain state/local control of the educational system?

    1. It’s a legit question. Would students from a poor state get a worse education than students from a rich state? Probably.

      They’d probably also get worse health care, worse nutrition, worse after-school activities, worse public libraries, worse sports opportunities, etc. IOW, there will always be haves and have nots, and we can’t cure that. That doesn’t mean we shouldn’t do anything, I’m just saying it’s unrealistic to think we can eliminate all disparities.

      Also, I’m not against national standards per se. There might be a way to do that correctly. But if we’re going to do it, we should do it right and amend the constitution to give the federal government that authority.

      1. QUOTE: I’m just saying it’s unrealistic to think we can eliminate all disparities.

        True but in this case it doesn’t seem like a good plan to solve a problem by creating a problem for a significant portion of the student population. Those left behind would likely end up being a burden on society in other ways, given their lack of quality education.

        QUOTE: Also, I’m not against national standards per se. There might be a way to do that correctly.

        Agreed. Education is far too important to not “try” to ensure it’s a quality experience for all students.

        1. I’m not convinced the evidence shows that national standards = trying to ensure a quality experience for all students. National standards might flatten things out, to some degree, but that means bringing the top down as well as bringing the bottom up. And I suspect there’s a lot more bringing the top down than bringing the bottom up.

          1. So, if you believe national standards won’t help…what would you propose to mitigate poorer populations receiving an inferior education? Or, just accept the “have nots” have to do without so the “haves” can get a quality education?

            1. I don’t think it’s a problem I can solve, or that anyone can solve with a simplistic answer. It’s complicated. If a town doesn’t value education, throwing money at it won’t result in better education. And national standards haven’t helped Baltimore much. Or lots of other areas.

              Kids who want an education — like young Ben Carson — get one, no matter how bad the schools are. So maybe part of the solution is persuading people that an education is a good thing.

              If I were to hazard a guess, I would think that efforts to strengthen the family would give the most bang for the buck.

              1. QUOTE: I don’t think it’s a problem I can solve, or that anyone can solve with a simplistic answer. It’s complicated.

                I agree, it’s very complex. It would be unfortunate to intentionally disadvantage a significant potion of the student population without having some ideas/resources to support those negatively impacted by the change.

                QUOTE: Kids who want an education — like young Ben Carson — get one, no matter how bad the schools are. So maybe part of the solution is persuading people that an education is a good thing.

                Possibly. If so, that same dynamic would likely occur in our current educational system…with continued federal involvement.

  2. Nothing ever becomes quite as good, or quite as bad, as theory predicts: there are always unexpected sources of feedback which prevent things from running away in the direction you hope, or fear.

    That said, I can see us taking a few downward turns on the unhappy spiral of the current moment in education.

    There’s a movement — and it sounds like a parody, but isn’t — to treat things like actually learning things, completing assignments on time, and behaving appropriately in class, as white supremacist, or at least white supremacist-adjacent. (Aside: Americans, IMO because of their history, seem to think mostly in terms of black and white. India alone has as many people as the entire continent of Africa, and China more than either of those. China in particular has had standardised national exams for various types of public service going back more than a thousand years– as you might expect, it was often corrupt and frequently degenerate, but they wanted the form, at least.)

    If you don’t actually help kids to learn — minority or otherwise — they’re going to do a lot worse than they could. This will lead to problems in employment, where attempts at hiring based on skills are going to produce results even less representative of the population than today because fewer people are going to cross the threshold of minimum performance, much less be at the top. This is going to encourage the belief that systemic bias must be even more deeply entrenched than people thought, requiring even *more* efforts to make outcomes independent of anything other than group membership. People respond to incentives, and this isn’t a healthy one.

    TBH, if I wanted to destroy a people while simultaneously receiving praise for my support of them, this would be a pretty slick approach.

    1. There is a twisted feedback loop here.
      Result A exists.
      Use Solution 1 to change result A.
      Result A goes the wrong direction.
      Double down on Solution 1, and add Solution 2.
      Result A goes the wrong direction.
      Triple down on Solution 1, double down on Solution 2, and add Solution 3.
      etc.

Comments are closed.