http://jaypgreene.com/2008/07/10/learn-to-swim-by-drowning/

Schools in the US must be doing something right, according to the CIA World Fact Book the US has a literacy rate of nearly 100%.

I don’t think I was attacking art/music/pe but simply posing the question: in a state with 44% of 4th graders scoring below basic on 4th grade reading, should we really be having children who haven’t learned how to read taking such courses? You may be right that schools could focus more funds on early reading instruction without having positive results, but schools should not go on ignoring the problem. Time is a limited resource just like money, and a school should have no thought for an elementary school aged illiterate other than getting them to read while they still can, in my opinion. If an arts program can measurably contribute to that, I’m all for it. If not, I’d happily look to use those funds for something that could do so. One thing is for certain: when almost half of your 4th graders can’t read, you can’t afford any sacred cows.

On your point about European social welfare states and education scores, it is true that Europeans score better than Americans on international academic examinations, but it is not necessarily the case that social welfare policy can explain the difference. Eastern European countries often outscore Americans without cradle to grave welfare states. A number of European countries have a per-capita income below that of the poorest American state, but knock our socks off in international scores, while spending less money per pupil.

For a good read on what the Europeans seem to be doing right, and we seem to be doing wrong in education, see this report:

http://www.mckinsey.com/clientservice/socialsector/resources/pdf/Worlds_School_Systems_Final.pdf

My district also paid for a curriculum audit (again, prior to NCLB) to find out that it was very difficult to give any meaningful feedback on lots and lots of programs (that teachers liked and swore were “working” because there was typically no evaluation done.

I am not impressed by bigger, bolder, for many fo the same reasons that you point out (they can’t teach and now they want to be doctors?)–as well as a basic belief that it’s a smoke screen that serves to avoid looking at some things that educators need to take on about what works and what doesn’t. But it is true (and there appears to be some solid research to demonstrate a connection) that in countries where such things and a basic child income, minimum level of health care, parental leave, early childhood education and child care are attended to that the kids on the bottom of the heap are doing better in relation to the ones at the top (and the ones at the top are typically ahead of ours).

http://npri.org/blog/think-gas-prices-are-high-think-again

I found that the inflation adjusted per-pupil spending on public education from 1961-2005 increased 247%. If gas prices had risen that fast we would pay $6.18 today. (Simply used NCES inflation adjusted estimates found here: http://nces.ed.gov/fastfacts/display.asp?id=66).

(Controlling for inflation to 2008 and assuming NCES estimates including capital costs for public education the rise is 293% from 1961-2007 or, $7.34 a gallon for gasoline. So $6.18 a gallon is the very conservative estimate.)