Odds and Ends

March 23, 2011

WordPress was down most of yesterday, preventing me from posting.  Here are some of the topics I was considering for a post:

  • I finally saw The Social Network.  As always, I enjoyed Aaron Sorkin’s clever, rapid-fire dialog, but I couldn’t stop thinking about how creepy it was to write a fictionalized and unflattering account of real, living people.  There is no evidence that Mark Zuckerberg is the status and girl-craving jerk that Sorkin made him out to be, but there is plenty of evidence that Sorkin behaves that way.  I guess the film is really a fictionalized autobiography of Aaron Sorkin, except that Sorkin didn’t create a multi-billion dollar enterprise that tens of millions enjoy using and that has helped topple despots in the Middle East.
  • I saw that my fellow Manhattan Institute-refugee, Walter Olson, has a new book out on how law schools perpetuate a political ideology that gives more power to lawyers and government. Schools of Misrule sounds like it has a fascinating thesis except I suspect that the same argument could be made about almost every department at universities.  I can assure you that the social sciences are filled with people who sit around in their offices dreaming about how the rest of the world should be structured if only the world would listen to them.  I guess the difference is that law school grads are actually more likely to have to power to put their dreams into action.
  • Jim Stergios has a great post over at Pioneer comparing Bill Gates and Steve Jobs on their visions for education.  He writes:

So Bill Gates lets us all know what he really has in mind on standards and the liberal arts. In a speech to the National Governors Association in late February, he suggests that higher education spending be devoted largely to job-producing disciplines.

In his view we should drop funding at the higher ed level for the liberal arts, because there is not much economic impact/job creation impact from the liberal arts.

Compare that to Steve Jobs, who during his release of the iPad 2 (admittedly not the most successful launch I’ve seen of an Apple product), trumpeted the liberal arts.

Be sure to read the full thing because the quotations from Gates and Jobs are illuminating.

7 Comments | higher education, instructional reform | Tagged: , , , , , | Permalink
Posted by Jay P. Greene

Could Netflix Resurrect Cult Hits?

March 21, 2011

(Guest Post by Matthew Ladner)

Lately I have found myself watching more Netflix than television.  Yes the content is limited (but growing) and it is on my schedule (which usually means just before I go to sleep).

Netflix and others are making a series bid to disrupt the lucrative cable television business, with Netflix recently taking the step of investing in original content with serious Hollywood talent.

MG Siegler writes a convincing piece that the Netflix business model could do better by bringing back shows which failed on network television, but have a devoted cult following. The example he uses, and the numbers seem to add up, is Firefly.

<<Editor’s Note: That crash you just heard was Greg diving on to his laptop to subscribe to Netflix.>>

Netflix as a super-on-my-schedule HBO on steroids which allows me to cancel cable sounds great to me. Just please oh please bring these guys back:

Sorry Enlow, I’m still Denny and you are Alan

4 Comments | random pop culture | Tagged: , , | Permalink
Posted by matthewladner

Utah and New Mexico Pass A-F school grading

March 19, 2011

(Guest Post by Matthew Ladner)

The New Mexico legislature approved a proposal to grade schools A-F by a wide bipartisan margin late last night, providing a key reform win for Governor Martinez.  Utah passed a similar measure last week. Governor Sandoval has made school grading a key feature of his education agenda in Nevada, and Arizona passed the measure last year.

The Appalachia of the 21st century prophecy is not taking us here in the Southwest without a fight. At least, outside of California. Someone get Jerry Brown on the line stat!

3 Comments | school accountability | Tagged: , , , | Permalink
Posted by matthewladner

Florida Legislature Passes Landmark Merit Pay Legislation

March 17, 2011

 

(Guest Post by Matthew Ladner)

About 11 months ago, former Florida Governor Charlie Crist vetoed a major overhaul of teacher pay and tenure as a prelude to running for the Senate as an independent. Yesterday, the Florida Senate passed a revised version of the bill, which the new Florida Governor Rick Scott seems anxious to sign.

Stephen Sawchuck at  the Teacher Beat Blog summarized the bill:

Among other things, S. 736:

• Requires 50 percent of a teacher’s evaluation to be based on state standardized tests or other national, local, or industry measures for those subjects not gauged at the state level;

• Requires evaluations to consider four levels of teacher performance;

• As of July 1 of this year, ends the awarding of “continuing” and “professional service” contract status (the Florida equivalent of tenure) and puts all new teachers on annual contracts;

• Permits districts to extend annual contracts only to teachers with good evaluations; those with two “unsatisfactory” ratings in a row, or two “needs improvement” ratings within a three-year period, could not be renewed;

• “Grandfathers” in teachers who now have tenure but allows them to be dismissed for the performance reasons stated above;

• Requires districts to establish performance-based salary schedules by July 1, 2014, for all new hires, and to phase existing teachers onto the new schedules as student-growth measures are developed; and

• Does away with layoffs based on reverse seniority.

Teachers are not interchangeable widgets, and should not be treated as such.  Highly effective teachers deserve greater recognition, and the students of highly ineffective teachers deserve better.  While merit pay is a complex subject, we can do better than simply paying teachers to age.

Florida once again has raised the bar on education reform for the rest of the nation.

6 Comments | teacher pay, teacher quality, teacher union | Tagged: , , , | Permalink
Posted by matthewladner

Douglas County Offers Vouchers to Students

March 16, 2011

The school board in Douglas County, Colorado voted unanimously to offer vouchers worth $4,575 to as many as 500 students who were not previously enrolled in private school.  The measure would save the district between $402,500 and $2.2 million and would greatly expand options for those families, including religious and secular private schools.

The teacher unions and their allies will almost certainly try to tie the program up in court and run their own board candidates in the hopes of rolling back the policy.  But with choice and other ed reforms being pushed all over the country and with the ability of unions to automatically deduct dues from payrolls being eliminated in a number of states, the ability of the unions to fight every battle in every location is limited.

The most effective political strategy for adopting ed reform is to “flood the zone.”  Propose a lot of ideas in a lot of places and the unions find it nearly impossible to block every one.  That’s what Jeb did in Florida and now reformers are adopting that strategy nationwide, enhancing its effectiveness.

7 Comments | teacher union, vouchers | Tagged: , | Permalink
Posted by Jay P. Greene

Georgia Lawmakers Considering Scholarship Expansion

March 15, 2011

(Guest Post by Matthew Ladner)

As Greg noted earlier, school choice is back this year, with major proposals under consideration in many states. Potentially lost amidst the sturm und drang of places like Wisconsin and Indiana, some important pieces of legislation have been introduced and have been advancing through the legislative process.  Georgia lawmakers for instance are considering SB 87, a proposal to expand the highly successful special needs law, to include a number of new and worthy student populations.

The law expands eligibility of the Georgia program to include children with disabilities who do not have an IEP (Section 504) children, the children of military families, and foster care children. One can make a compelling case for each of these student populations to have the ability to exercise parental choice in education.

The case for parental choice for foster care children is extremely compelling. Goldwater Institute Senior Fellow Dan Lips made the case for this program by noting that foster care children frequently move between foster care homes. Changing addresses takes them across school district boundaries, obliging them to transfer between schools. Repeated bouncing between schools fatally disrupts the ability of students to learn.

A scholarship program for foster children creates the possibility creating a school as an island of stability for foster care children. Arizona lawmakers passed such a program in 2006, and then Governor Janet Napolitano signed it into law.

The Department of Defense runs a highly regarded system of schools for military students. Sadly, the demand for spaces routinely exceeds the number of available seats. Georgia lawmakers may see fit to expand the schooling options for our parents in uniform, and I certainly will salute them for doing so.

Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 requires schools to provide to students with disabilities appropriate educational services designed to meet the individual needs of such students. The ability to choose who provides education services to a child must be a part of generating a truly individualized education, and one that has already been extremely successful for children with disabilities.

Stay tuned to this station for further developments…

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

Do As WEAC Says, Not As It Does

March 15, 2011

(Guest post by Greg Forster)

For weeks, Wisconsin teachers represented by WEAC, the state’s NEA affiliate, called in “sick” so they could join the union protest in the state capitol. Schools closed, and parents were left to take care of their kids on no notice – to say nothing of the loss to the kids’ education.

Priceless development: ALELR points out that WEAC has a contract with the union that represents its own employees – the union’s own union – and in that contract WEAC’s employees are forbidden to engage in union activities during normal work hours.

Pot, this is kettle. Kettle, pot.

In other Wisconsin union news, ALELR reports that the Milwaukee union is dropping its notorious Viagra lawsuit. The teachers who want this medication, he observes, are now left to stand on their own.

1 Comment | teacher union | Tagged: , , | Permalink
Posted by Greg Forster

A Union I Like

March 15, 2011

I just want to make clear, given my post yesterday,  that while I am adamantly opposed to public sector unions, I have no problem with worker’s attempting to negotiate over wages, benefits, and working conditions in the private sector.

In the private sector, if unions ask for too much, at least they experience the natural consequences of destroying their own companies or industries (to wit, the auto industry).  In addition, there are owners on the other side of the bargaining table who have strong incentives not to concede too much or they will lose their wealth.  Collective bargaining in the private sector is a voluntary negotiation over how to split the revenue of a company.  No one should be compelled to work for less than they think reasonable and no one should be compelled to pay others more than they think reasonable.  In the end, owners and workers have to reach a mutually acceptable agreement, whether collectively or individually.

But in the public sector, unions are almost entirely insulated from the consequences of making unreasonable demands since governments rarely go out of business.  Unlike in the private sector, public sector unions can drive total revenue for their industry higher without any improvements in productivity simply by getting public officials to increase taxes.  And the public officials on the other side of the table are at least  partially selected and heavily influenced by the unions themselves.  In the private sector, unions can only select the officials with whom the bargain to the extent that they are shareholders.  In the public sector, one only need be a citizen, and the unions are much better organized and financed citizens than is the average taxpayer.

One private sector union with which I am currently completely sympathetic is the NFL Players Association.  First, the owners are asking that owners be allowed to keep the first $2 billion of professional football’s $9 billion in annual revenue.  That assures them close to a 22% operating profit margin, since football teams have few expenses beyond the player’s salaries and stadium costs (some of which are stupidly subsidized by taxpayers).  What industry can guarantee its owners a 22% operating profit margin?

In addition, the owners have always managed to get players to agree to a cap on team salaries as a further way of ensuring their profits.  Anyone who is for the voluntary exchange of labor for pay should oppose industry-wide salary caps.  All that a cap does is prevent excellent workers from bargaining for a larger share of total revenue.  This discourages excellence and guarantees owner profits at the expense of workers.

And for those of you who say that salary caps are needed to promote equity in the competitiveness of teams…

1) Equity is not the prime goal of sports (or most other endeavors).  Excellence is.  If you want to watch contests that are always perfectly matched, I would suggest that you watch people flipping coins.

2) Rewarding more successful teams and players with the possibility of earning more money provides the proper incentives for them to try harder to win.  If you don’t think that revenue sharing with a cap undermines incentives I have two words for you — Cleveland Browns.

3) If you are afraid that larger market teams will always win, just look at baseball which lacks a cap.  Yes, big market teams are more likely to be in the post-season, but they don’t always win.  If you think big markets and big payrolls can guarantee winning I have three words for you — New York Mets.  Besides, what’s so wrong with larger markets more regularly having teams in the race for a championship?  Only a bizarre system would prefer having small markets, like Green Bay and Indianapolis, regularly in the hunt.

And if you think NFL players are a bunch of rich felons who don’t deserve extra money, I would remind you that the average career is about 3 seasons and many players end up as cripples for life.  The NFL is exploiting these workers like crazy and any decent liberal should be on the side of those who are exploited.

Unfortunately, the NFL players union has been awful in the past and failed to do nearly enough to protect their members from this exploitation.  I hope it is different this time.  And I hope that the unions prevail (as long as it is in the private sector and without government subsidies or coercion).

8 Comments | teacher union | Tagged: , , | Permalink
Posted by Jay P. Greene

The Public Funding Perpetual Motion Machine

March 14, 2011

Both the NPR and public-sector union controversies make me think of perpetual motion machines.  In both cases organizations receive government funds which they can use to lobby public officials to receive more government funds.

Most people are familiar with this concern when it comes to public sector unions given that it is well-documented that unions use money automatically taken from publicly paid salaries and benefits to donate to campaigns, organize, and lobby for higher salaries and benefits from which they can extract higher dues to push for even higher compensation, etc… Wash. Rinse. Repeat.

Mind you, I have no problem with private sector unions since they can only negotiate over how to divide profits with management and shareholders and cannot lobby to increase revenues without also increasing productivity.  But public sector unions can lobby for higher revenues from which they can extract a larger share for themselves without having to do anything to enhance productivity.

But people are much less familiar with how NPR utilizes the same Public Funding Perpetual Motion Machine.  As Congress debates de-funding public broadcasting, NPR is making announcements alerting their listeners to this possibility and urging them to visit a web site to organize a push to maintain and increase taxpayer funding of NPR. So, NPR wants money so that it can tell its listeners to organize to lobby so that they keep getting money.  Wash. Rinse. Repeat.

Like all perpetual motion machines, these publicly funded ones are also frauds.  The system is not self-sustaining and requires that resources be extracted from somewhere else — in the case of NPR and public sector unions, it is extracted from the taxpayer.

I should also note that I like a number of programs on NPR.  But it is completely unacceptable for them to take money from me and others by force to pay for their broadcasts.  I’m confident they can generate sufficient funds voluntarily and may well soon have to do exclusively that.

2 Comments | teacher union | Tagged: , , | Permalink
Posted by Jay P. Greene

KHAAAAAAAAAAN!!!!!!!!!

March 12, 2011

(Guest Post by Matthew Ladner)

Salman Khan on using video to improving education, and taking Khan Academy to the next level. Well worth watching.

5 Comments | online learning | Tagged: , | Permalink
Posted by matthewladner

« Previous Entries
Next Entries »