Flypaper Fail

(Guest post by Greg Forster)

Mike Petrilli argues that tenure reform is better than choice.

Trouble is, he openly admits that the only reason DC got tenure reform is because of the proliferation of charter schools: “Score one for competitive effects!” says Mike.

He also cites tenure reform in Florida and Rhode Island. Both of which have – guess what? – school choice programs.

Mike asks, why bother with choice? Why not go directly for tenure reform?

Uh, maybe because the only possible way to create sufficient pressure for something as “radioactive” (Mike’s word) as tenure reform is the “competitive effects” created by choice? As your own examples show?

Sorry, Mike, your argument has failed.

About these ads

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 2,369 other followers