The Democrats’ War on Education Science

March 17, 2010

“I keep my brain in this pickle jar for safe-keeping.”

It was perfectly predictable but still sad to watch.  The U.S. Senate voted 55-42 yesterday against continuing the DC voucher program.  Among Republicans only Olympia Snowe voted against the program.  Among Democrats (or Independents), Feinstein, Lieberman, Nelson, and Warner voted for the program.

Normally we hear that Republicans are engaging in a war on science — opposing stem cell research, questioning global warming claims, etc…  But judging from the arguments that opponents made in yesterday’s debate, Democrats are also engaged in a war on science, at least a war on education science.  They couldn’t be bothered to fully or accurately reference the U.S. Department of Education’s evaluation of the program that found significant benefits for voucher recipients after 3 years.

Instead, the quality of the opponents’ scientific reasoning was exemplified by Sen. Byron Dorgan of South Dakota.  As you can see in this link to CSPAN coverage (starting around minute 21), he argues that there is no need for vouchers because our public school system is doing a great job.  And we know this because graduates of American public schools were the people who put a man on the moon.  I’m not sure what public school Wernher von Braun attended.

Dorgan goes on to reference the U.S. Department of Ed evaluation, but he leaves out the positive main finding and focuses only on a sub-group analysis of students who came from very low performing public schools.  The point estimate for that sub-group analysis is positive but the sample is small and so the effect is not statistically significant.

I know I’m using big words that may be a little hard for the likes of Sen. Dorgan to grasp, but the blatant disregard for scientific evaluations of government programs demonstrated by Dorgan, Durbin and the rest of the program opponents shows that they are the ones engaging in a war on science.

UPDATE — Maybe my brain has been picked because Dorgan is from ND, not SD.  Oops.

(corrected for typos)

7 Comments | politics, vouchers | Permalink
Posted by Jay P. Greene

Slam Dunk in the Trib

March 3, 2010

(Guest post by Greg Forster)

The lead editorial in yesterday’s Chicago Tribune endorsing school vouchers is a rock solid slam dunk. My favorite of the many critical hits it scores:

This week, President Barack Obama announced a $900 million plan to reward school districts that overhaul or close failing schools and send kids to new public schools.

We’re encouraged by the Chicago effort and applaud Obama’s aggressive approach to school reform.

But we ask: Why not do more of this, at less cost and with a much larger universe?

That silence you hear in response is the sound of the blob’s moral and intellectual bankruptcy.

7 Comments | vouchers | Tagged: , | Permalink
Posted by Greg Forster

Izumi and Clemens: Emulate Canadian K-12, not health care

February 23, 2010

(Guest Post by Matthew Ladner)

Sounds like a good idea to me. After all, the Canadians were the first ones nerdy enough to wed Ayn Rand inspired lyrics to epic drum solos. Oh, plus they spend much less than we do per pupil, get much better results, don’t have a central national education bureaucracy, and have lots of parental choice. Izumi and Clemens could have added that the Canadians get these superior education results despite a national per capita income that would land them among the least wealthy American states, roughly equal to that of Alabama on a PPP basis.

Beauty, eh?

2 Comments | economics, vouchers | Tagged: , , , , | Permalink
Posted by matthewladner

Notre Dame Leaders to Duncan and Durbin: Killing DC Opportunity Scholarships “Unconscionable”

February 17, 2010

(Guest Post by Matthew Ladner)

We and others have been making the case that killing the Washington DC Opportunity Scholarship Program, despite the highest possible quality evidence showing academic gains for students, was going to raise objections from more than just those of us on the right of center side of the spectrum. Americans believe in equality of opportunity, and no one should be more upset about the actions of Congress to kill DC Opportunity Scholarships than those with a sincere commitment to the interests of the disadvantaged.

Today we have yet more evidence of the revulsion concerning the shameful actions of the Congress in slowly killing the DC opportunity Scholarship Program. Leaders from the University of Notre Dame released a letter sent to Secretary Arne Duncan and Senator Durbin today. They don’t pull their punches: 

Dear Senator Durbin and Secretary Duncan,

Warmest greetings from the University of Notre Dame.  We hope this letter finds both of you well, and that the new year has been filled with grace and blessings for you and your families.

We write today because we are all deeply disappointed by the turn of events that has led to the imminent demise of the Washington DC Opportunity Scholarship Program (OSP), and we are gravely concerned about the effects that the unprecedented gestures that have jeopardized this program will have on some of the most at-risk children in our nation’s capital.   

For the past decade, the University of Notre Dame, through its Alliance for Catholic Education (ACE), has served as the nation’s largest provider of teachers and principals for inner-city Catholic schools.  Since 1993, we have prepared more than 1,000 teachers and hundreds of principals to work in some of the poorest Catholic schools in the nation.  That experience, along with the research that we have sponsored through our Center for Research on Educational Opportunity, leads us to an unqualified conclusion: the DC Opportunity Scholarship Program provides an educational lifeline to at-risk children, standing unequivocally as one of the greatest signs of hope for K-12 educational reform.  To allow its demise, to effectively force more than 1,700 poor children from what is probably the only good school they’ve ever attended, strikes us as an unconscionable affront to the ideal of equal opportunity for all.

Three decades of research tell us that Catholic schools are often the best providers of educational opportunity to poor and minority children.  Students who attend Catholic schools are 42 percent more likely to graduate from high school and are two and a half times more likely to graduate from college than their peers in public schools.  Recent scholarship on high school graduation rates in Milwaukee confirms that programs like the OSP can, over time, create remarkable opportunities for at-risk children.  And after only three years, the research commissioned by the Department of Education is clear and strong with regard to the success of the OSP, as you both well know.  This program empowers parents to become more involved in their children’s education.  Parents of OSP students argue that their children are doing better in school, and they report that these scholarships have given their families an opportunity to break the cycle of poverty.  If this program ends, these parents will be forced to send their children back to a school system that is ranked among the worst in the nation, into schools they fought desperately to leave just a few years ago. 

At Notre Dame, we have recently witnessed the painful but logical outcomes of your failure to save the OSP.  For the past three years, the University of Notre Dame has worked in close partnership with Holy Redeemer School, a preK-8 Catholic school community located just a few blocks from Senator Durbin’s office on the Hill.  In fact, Senator Durbin visited the school and expressed his deeply favorable impression.  We too have witnessed the transformative capacity of Holy Redeemer, a place where parents report feeling a sincere sense of ownership in their children’s education for the first time in their lives.  Indeed, over the past three years strong leadership, excellent academics, low teacher turnover, and committed parents have all contributed to truly outstanding gains in student achievement.  The children at Holy Redeemer were, unlike so many of their peers, on the path to college. 

So we were deeply saddened to learn that the impending termination of the OSP has put the school in an untenable situation, leading the pastor to conclude that the school must be closed.  Families are presently being notified that their children will have to find a new school next year.  The end of the OSP represents more than the demise of a relatively small federal program; it spells the end of more than a half-century of quality Catholic education for some of the most at-risk African American children in the District.  That this program is being allowed to end is both unnecessary and unjust.  

We—and many others in the Notre Dame community—are wholeheartedly committed to protecting the educational opportunity of these children.  We encourage you to reconsider protecting the OSP and the children it serves from this grave and historic injustice.  You are joined by Notre Dame’s Alliance for Catholic Education, by the faculty and students on Notre Dame’s campus, by tens of thousands of Notre Dame alumni nationwide, and by millions of Catholic school families across the country in a steadfast commitment to ensure that these children continue to receive the educational opportunity that is their birthright.

Please know of our deepest appreciation for your consideration of this request.  We hope and pray that we can work together with you to save this program. 

 

Yours, in Notre Dame,

Rev. John I. Jenkins, CSC 

President, University of Notre Dame                          

Rev. Theodore M. Hesburgh, CSC

President Emeritus, University of Notre Dame                            

Rev. Timothy R. Scully, CSC

Director, Institute for Educational Initiatives

University of Notre Dame                           

6 Comments | politics, vouchers | Tagged: , , , , , , | Permalink
Posted by matthewladner

Yes, Vouchers Make the World Safe for Charters

February 17, 2010

(Guest post by Greg Forster)

Yes, vouchers really do make the world safe for charters.

One of the follow-ups to that rockin’ IPI event in Chicago was a special-feature debate over vouchers in the Chicago Tribune.

The anti-voucher guy can’t even be bothered to rise to the usual level of non-thoughtfulness. Apparently he thinks it’s somehow a problem if taxpayer dollars even indirectly support a religious institution. Well, next time someone sets fire to a church, I guess we’d better let it burn down. Sending the fire department would be an indirect taxpayer subsidy to religion! And don’t call the cops if somebody spray-paints swastikas all over the synagogue.

But you know what’s really interesting? He gets the final word, and here’s how he chooses to end:

Is there a compromise approach? Sure. Let’s continue to expand charter school programs and try out the most innovative ideas from private schools. But let’s not give up on public education.

Vouchers make the world safe for charters.

And since vouchers are by far the best-proven way to improve public schools, it’s only a matter of time before people realize that vouchers aren’t “giving up on public education,” they’re the only serious hope for saving it.

1 Comment | vouchers | Tagged: , , | Permalink
Posted by Greg Forster

Greg in PJM Keeps ‘Em Honest With Choice

February 14, 2010

Greg has a great post today on Pajama’s Media about how school choice is the secret sauce that keeps all other reforms honest.  Think of it as a love letter to education reform. : )

Here’s a highlight:

… the biggest political winner in education by far in the past year has been charter schools. I’ll admit I was skeptical at first, but the Obama administration’s pro-charter rhetoric has been more than just talk. Charter caps are being lifted because the administration really does support charters.

Why? I think it’s mainly because a critical mass of their political base on the left has embraced the principle that parents should be put in charge through choice, and I think that has happened precisely because they want a reform that will keep the system honest. More and more people on the left are sick and tired of the empty promises they’ve been peddled for decades: that this time, throwing another huge chunk of money at the blob will fix the schools — and this time, we really, really, really mean it, cross our hearts and hope to die.

The social justice folks on the left just don’t buy it anymore. They now see that the blob has been pulling the wool over their eyes for generations. You can imagine how they’re feeling about that right now. And woe betide you if the wrath of the social justice folks falls upon you; they’re not known for being gentle with those whom they perceive as enemies of social justice.

Case in point: Did you know that the same team of scorched-earth, take-no-prisoners, scruple-at-nothing propagandists who produced An Inconvenient Truth has now made a hard-hitting documentary bashing teachers’ unions and advocating charter schools? And it was the very first film picked up for distribution at the Sundance Film Festival?

… The recent surge in the political fortunes of charter schools has been fueled by the less dramatic but steadily growing success of private school choice: school vouchers and similar policies that allow students to attend private schools using public funds. There are now 24 private school choice programs serving 190,000 students nationwide, up from just five programs in 1996. And private school choice is continuing to gain ground every year with the creation of new programs and expansion of existing programs, even in tough years like 2009.

As my friend Jay Greene likes to put it, vouchers make the world safe for charters. That is, it’s because of the more modest success of vouchers that charters have exploded. As long as vouchers are on the march and are thus a credible threat, triangulating legislators who need the blob’s support can embrace charters without paying too high a price for doing so. If the blob cuts off its support for legislators who back charters, it won’t have anyone on its side when vouchers are on the agenda. Because vouchers are out there, the blob has no choice but to suck it up and pretend to be OK with charters.

The next question, though, is whether charters alone are going to be sufficient to keep the system honest. Charters have ridden to success with the help of a lot of new supporters, but those supporters are a demanding constituency. The social justice folks expect results.

4 Comments | charter schools, vouchers | Tagged: , , , | Permalink
Posted by Jay P. Greene

Coulson on Brookings Report

February 14, 2010

Over on the Cato blog, Andrew Coulson has a thoughtful post on the recent Brookings report on school choice which I  helped craft.  For the most part I agree with what Andrew has to say.  I agree that there is considerable international and historical evidence that could have been included in the Brookings report but was not.  I also agree that certain compromises on school choice can be counter-productive, particularly over the long run.

The disagreement I have with Andrew is that he is treating the Brookings report as if it were a piece of scholarship rather than the political document that it really is.  I do not say this to disparage the report, which I helped craft and endorse.  We self-consciously viewed our task in writing the report as trying to present policy options on school choice that would be viable in the current political climate and potentially attractive to the Obama administration.

Once you understand that, it is easier to understand why we would leave out most international evidence — it is generally considered irrelevant or unpersuasive by most current policy elites.  They may well be mistaken in dismissing this set of evidence, as Andrew argues, but that is their view so we didn’t waste their time or ours by reviewing that evidence.

It is also easier to understand why we didn’t advocate unregulated education markets.  That simply isn’t going to happen in the current political climate, so we didn’t bother with it.  Instead we advocated for a variety of compromises on expanding choice and competition within a regulated framework.

Of course, then we are left vulnerable to Andrew’s point that these compromises may be counterproductive, particularly in the long run.  My only response to that is that incrementalism is our only feasible strategy for getting the kind of choice and competition we really need.  While we must always be vigilent about the dangers of certain compromises, I think we have no choice but to try to build on incremental reforms.

1 Comment | charter schools, vouchers | Tagged: , , | Permalink
Posted by Jay P. Greene

DC Vouchers Will Not Go Quietly

February 4, 2010

Obama, Duncan, and Durbin would love this issue to just go away but it won’t.  From the Washington Post editorial page today:

SENS. JOSEPH I. Lieberman (I-Conn.) and Susan Collins (R-Maine) haven’t given up on their bid to save the federally funded voucher program that allows low-income families in the District to send their children to private schools. We would like to see them succeed, but it’s clear that President Obama and the Democratic leadership in Congress have already written the epilogue to this worthy program. Their disregard for how vouchers have helped children is so complete that it seems that the best chance, perhaps the only chance, for the program’s survival is for local officials to step in….

The best solution, of course, is the one sought by a bipartisan coalition lead by Mr. Lieberman for Congress to reauthorize the program. He is set to announce plans Thursday to offer the reauthorization as an amendment to legislation moving in the Senate, and he’s hoping for help from Sen. Richard J. Durbin (D-Ill.), majority whip and chairman of the subcommittee that funds the program. Mr. Durbin gave lip service to his possible support but has been content for Congress to let the program go down the tubes.

And from the Washington Times this week:

A letter sent to the White House on Wednesday was appropriately circumspect, but in effect, it boiled down to this: “Dear Mr. President, when it comes to educating America’s children, please, just this once, live up to your own words.”

The subject was the popular and successful D.C. Opportunity Scholarship Program. The letter writers were Sen. Joe Lieberman, Connecticut independent, and Rep. John A. Boehner of Ohio, the House minority leader.

The president touched on education during his State of the Union address last week. “The idea here is simple: Instead of rewarding failure, we only reward success,” he said. “Instead of funding the status quo, we only invest in reform. … In this country, the success of our children cannot depend more on where they live than on their potential.”

Mr. Obama’s words sound nice, but in public education today, the reality is that most children are assigned a school based on where they live. Most families don’t have the opportunity to choose their children’s schools. The D.C. Opportunity Scholarships – which are funded by Congress – change all that without taking a dime from the public school system by helping children (more than 3,000 so far) attend non-public schools that are safer and more effective.

Mr. Boehner and Mr. Lieberman say the program works and that young lives will be lost if educational opportunity is sacrificed for political expedience. “According to Patrick Wolf, the principal investigator for the study conducted under the auspices of the Department of Education’s Institute of Education Sciences, this program has met a tough standard for efficacy,” the lawmakers wrote. “Dr. Wolf found that ‘the D.C. voucher program has proven to be the most effective education policy evaluated by the federal government’s official education research arm so far.’ ” Based on Mr. Obama’s own words about investing in reform and rewarding success, Mr. Boehner and Mr. Lieberman argue that D.C. Opportunity Scholarships should not only be reauthorized but expanded to serve additional students.

The program is wildly popular in the District, including among Democrats who are strong supporters of Mr. Obama. According to the letter, the scholarships enjoy “the overwhelming support of D.C. residents, parents, D.C. Mayor Adrian Fenty, [D.C. Public Schools] Chancellor [Michelle] Rhee, former D.C. Mayor Anthony Williams and a majority of the D.C. City Council.”

Instead of listening to those closest to D.C. students and their challenges, the Obama administration has backed plans to pull the plug on the scholarship program. This is transparent pandering to school workers unions that don’t want the competition provided by such scholarships.

While Mr. Obama sends his daughters Sasha and Malia to private school, he ignores heartfelt pleas from parents and children to allow more youngsters a chance for a quality education. The scholarship program is an unambiguous test of whether or not this president means what he says. If he allows the program to die, the hopes of many D.C. children will die with it.

Do not go gentle into that good night.
Rage, rage against the dying of the light.

UPDATE — Andy Smarick agrees over at Flypaper.

3 Comments | vouchers | Tagged: | Permalink
Posted by Jay P. Greene

Robert Enlow on Vouchers and School Safety

February 3, 2010

(Guest post by Greg Forster)

Robert Enlow, my boss at the Foundation for Educational Choice, writes in this morning’s Chicago Sun-Times that school vouchers are a safety issue:

When Attorney General Eric Holder and Education Secretary Arne Duncan visited the community in October, Holder said the Albert murder was “a call to action” and that youth violence had to come to an end…

In October, Holder said, “We are not going to protect any sacred cows. The status quo is not acceptable.” If that is truly the case, if Chicago parents, community leaders and politicians have had enough bloodshed, justice will no longer be delayed.

If you’re in Chicago Friday morning, or can be, don’t miss the big event the Illinois Policy Institute will be putting on. Rev. Senator James Meeks will be giving a barn-burner of a speech, from what I’m told. You’ll want to hear it.

(Oh, and yours truly will be on stage as well, to talk about this. But come anyway.)

Leave a Comment » | vouchers | Tagged: , , , , | Permalink
Posted by Greg Forster

Brookings School Choice Task Force

February 3, 2010

I’m a co-author on the Brookings School Choice Task Force report that was released yesterday in DC, following briefings on the Hill.  Andrew Coulson has already raised concerns about the report because he fears expanding the federal role in education even if it is in expanding choice.

I’m sympathetic to Andrew’s position but I should note that he wrote his post prior to the release of the report.  After reading it he might have a lot less to be concerned about.  The Task Force did not recommend a large federal program on school choice.  Instead, we emphasized improving the quality of information and providing incentives for states and localities to expand choice.  And we conceived of choice broadly, including vouchers, charters, virtual learning, magnets, inter-district, etc…

These measures are nowhere near the kind of choice that Andrew and I would ultimately like to see, but we have to understand political realities and embrace incrementalism.  I think there are a lot of sensible ideas in the report but you should read it and judge for yourself.  It can be found here.

3 Comments | charter schools, vouchers | Tagged: , | Permalink
Posted by Jay P. Greene

« Previous Entries
Next Entries »