Jay P. Greene's Blog

My former students and sometimes co-authors, Dan Bowen and Collin Hitt, have a superb piece in Phi Delta Kappan Journal on the history and evidence on sports in schools.  They demonstrate convincingly that sports improve academic outcomes and play an important and positive role in K-12 schools.

They also successfully rebut claims by Amanda Ripley and others that sports should be taken out of schools and instead be provided by club teams, as is common in Europe.  As it turns out, the rigorous research contradicts the casual observations based on journalistic tourism.  In particular, Dan and Collin debunk three commonly made claims about sports in schools:

#1. Sports participation has no role in academic development; in fact, sports might undermine academics.

#2. Adopting European-style sports club programs would enable adolescents to participate in sports while eliminating any negative influences that school-sponsored athletics have on academics.

#3. Eliminating school-sponsored sports will increase student participation in other extracurricular activities.

Be sure to check out their piece in the Kappan.

(Guest Post by Jason Bedrick)

Yesterday I noted that Louisiana Gov. John Bel Edwards was planning to cut the state’s school voucher program for low-income students, despite promising during his campaign that he wouldn’t take vouchers away from students. The American Federation for Children (AFC) released a stinging ad (video below) and now the governor has struck back:

In a statement released after the ad debuted, Edwards attacked as a”special interest” AFC and the parents who are upset that their children might not be able to attend the schools they did last year, and shifted blame for the spending cut in the voucher program to White. Edwards said he delegated authority to each department head to make necessary cuts to balance the state budget.

“Every agency head did their best to prioritize their funding based on their mission,” Edwards, a Democrat, said in the statement. “It is important to recognize that every student currently receiving a scholarship will continue to receive one. This out-of-state special interest should direct its criticisms at the small group of legislators who failed to do the necessary work in the special session to fill the largest deficit our state has ever seen.”

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mz7kXBDrsUI

It’s pretty rich for Edwards to accuse a public interest organization like the AFC of being a “special interest” when he’s going after the voucher program primary because of his special interest allies, like the Louisiana Federation of Teachers.

AFC isn’t taking any guff, however:

“Now, Gov. Edwards claims that $36 million will cover all the kids in the program, but without taking into account tuition increases at private schools, at the very least, the state would need to fund the program at the same level it funded the program at last year — $42 million,” said Frendewey. “Edwards’s budget was at $36 million – that $6 million cut equals an estimated 1,000 children or more who would lose their scholarship and be sent back to their underperforming public school.”

Frendewey said Edwards, who also cast some blame toward Republican former Gov. Bobby Jindal, should take responsibility for his administration’s budget. White, an independent, was appointed by Jindal.

“This is pure rhetoric,” said Frendewey. “But, I can tell you it’s offensive in terms of Gov. Edwards wanting to balance the budget on the back of poor families.”

As Matt Ladner would say: BOOOOOOOOOOOOM!!!!!

(Guest post by Greg Forster)

OCPA’s Perspective carries my article on why we should restore final authority over education to parents, particularly in light of the Louisiana debacle:

Tests are not neutral. If you control the test, you control the curriculum. What gets taught is determined by what gets tested.

Allowing the state to test the schools gave politicians power over the schools, and the schools refused to accept it. Private schools don’t like limitations on what students they can take or what they charge, and rightly so. Such limitations damage education. But schools will typically put up with that to participate in a choice program, because they want to serve kids.

However, most schools absolutely will not allow outsiders to tell them what to teach. That’s surrendering the essence of the school. Admittedly, there are exceptions…Absent such unusual conditions, however, private schools rightly reject the extension of state power into the content of the classroom.

I also enjoyed doing a delightful radio interview this morning on the same subject, focusing more on why parents are the right repository of power over education – not only because they know their children best and are most motivated to seek their good, but also because parental authority is the only way to ground education in a holistic and coherent understanding of what education is for – what is the good life that we want children educated into.

As always, your comments are very welcome!

It’s been nearly a decade since Brian Kisida, Jonathan Butcher, and I produced our study on trends in names given to schools.  In it we documented a stark decline in the naming of schools after people.  Instead, schools are increasingly given inoffensive nature names, like Hawk’s Bluff or Mesa Vista.  New school names are more likely to sound like herbal teas or day spas than to honor accomplished leaders, educators, scientists, or artists.  There are now more schools in Florida named after manatees than George Washington, and more schools in Arizona named after road runners than Thomas Jefferson.

We lament this decline in naming schools after people because we see these names as civic education opportunities.  Communities can use school names to convey to their children the values they hold dear and to provide models of people who embodied those values.  Of course, no person is perfect, so controversy may erupt over the flaws in school honorees.  In addition, communities may fight over which values they hold most dear and which people best personify those values.  We suggested in our report that the decline in naming schools after people stemmed from school boards becoming increasingly unwilling to expend political capital over school names to serve civic goals about which they increasingly don’t care.  Basically, they have abdicated their civic responsibility to avoid anything that rattles their smooth political control.

If you were unpersuaded by this explanation for why school boards shy away from naming schools after people, I’d like to refer you to an article in today’s Arkansas Democrat Gazette about the naming of two new schools, Osage Creek Elementary and Creekside Middle, in the Bentonville School District, which is home to the Walmart headquarters.  A few of the board members objected that neither school was named after a person:

Quinn also argued in favor of naming at least one of the schools after a person, which gives students and teachers someone to celebrate and rally around. He cited former teacher Mary Mae Jones, after whom an elementary school is named.

“I thought, she’s a powerful example of someone who has done something meaningful for the fastest growing and hopefully best district in the state,” Quinn said.

Lightle agreed, saying there are people who would provide good namesakes. He mentioned Hattie Caraway, an Arkansas woman who was the first woman elected to a full term in the U.S. Senate.

But the majority sided with Board President Travis Riggs:

Riggs, the board president, said he generally opposes naming schools after people.

“I just think when you do that, you are going to offend somebody,” Riggs said. “I just don’t want to offend people.”

Well, at least he’s honest.  But with comments like this Riggs and his majority on the Bentonville School Board are sounding like Capt. Beatty in Fahrenheit 451 when he tells Montag:

The bigger your market, Montag, the less you handle controversy, remember that! …

Colored people don’t like Little Black Sambo. Burn it. White people don’t feel good about Uncle Tom’s Cabin. Burn it. Someone’s written a book on tobacco and cancer of the lungs? The cigarette people are weeping? Burn the book. Serenity, Montag. Peace, Montag. Take your fight outside. Better yet, into the incinerator. Funerals are unhappy and pagan? Eliminate them, too. Five minutes after a person is dead he’s on his way to the Big Flue, the Incinerators serviced by helicopters all over the country. Ten minutes after death a man’s a speck of black dust. Let’s not quibble over individuals with memoriams. Forget them. Burn them all, burn everything. Fire is bright and fire is clean.