Letters to the Editor of School Choices

LETTERS TO THE EDITOR

Home

Overview

List of Letters to the Editor, by Subject

On the Motives of Ed. Reformers

Dear Sir:

I'm glad to see your team taking advantage of the tools of democracy to put forward your ideas on improving education in America.

You are fortunate that you have the resources to create a forum for presenting your beliefs. But your process actually exposes the root of the problem. Those who have resources are able to buy a voice in the public forum, whereas if you have no resources available then you have no voice.

In an age of mega-media and editorial consolidation the corporations control the information that they want the public to hear. This information hardly ever, ever contains substantive criticism or hard data that may have a negative impact on the goals of the corporate entity.

You make it seem that these private ventures are created to benfit the children and increase the quality of education. But the real, true and basic motives behind the groups bent on destroying public education have a lot more to do with profit and idealism than altruism.

According to your plan, a lottery determines the educational path of a child. Those who are chosen are given excellent educational opportunities while those who are not chosen... do what? They languish in a neglected, forgotten public education system. Why wouldn't these "altruitic" entities take the money and fix the schools so that ALL children have an opportunity for excellent education.

I'll tell you why. Because the goals of these entities are to fuel the partisan ideal of privitization by exlpoiting the emotional subject of a sub-standard American public education system. I'm sorry but that's really the way that the action comes across. It will be interesting to see how many of these children actually end up in parochial schools, and in the end carry on to perpetuate and support education with a twist of religion.

If you can "look me square in the eye" and swear on the bible that there are no alterior motives for pulling thee children out of public education, for spending this money on private, partisan, religious entities, and that your ONLY concern is educating children, then I will ask you for some more discussion to convince me of your altruism.

Sometimes one has to look beyond the face value of things. Your editroials critisizing research that supports public education is rather tell-tale of your agenda to promulgate privitization. You know, its funny too, because as much as these indivduals and entities continue a diatribe about the evils of government, they sure to stand in line licking their chops when the tax dollars are handed out.

Respectfully,
[name withheld]

The Editor's Reply:

Dear [name withheld],

Thank you for your mail. I should begin by clarifying a few points. They may not affect your argument, but it makes sense to work from the facts whenever possible.

SchoolChoices.org is not an example of corporate or wealthy interests controling the media. It was created and is maintained on a purely voluntary basis. No salaries are paid to those who contribute and no income is generated. School Choices neither solicits nor accepts tax-payer funding. The cost is quite low, and could be born by any community group, and a great many private citizens.

Now, on to your message.

Personally, I have dedicated my life to improving the educational prospects of all children. I wouldn't describe my motives as altruistic, though. Altruism implies an indiference to one's own interests, and perhaps self-sacrifice as well. But I have chosen my present profession specifically because of my own abiding interest in education and the welfare of children. Of all the activities in which I could engage, this is the one I find the most personally satisfying. So, while I don't have any of the ulterior motives you're wondering about, I'm not really an altruist either. It would not be meaningful for me to swear to this on the bible because I am not religious. All I can give you is my word, and since we do not know each other you would be justified in treating that word with caution.

As for other advocates of privatization, it's hard to generalize. Certainly there are some businessmen who are just as concerned about making money by running schools as they are about improving the lives of children.

So the real question is, given the fact that some (perhaps many) private educational businesses would be run by self-interested entrepreneurs, would the public be better or worse off than it is now? Having spent the last four years studying this issue, my answer to that question is Yes. You're perfectly justified in being skeptical, however. I wasn't convinced until I'd gone through the evidence, so there's no reason you should be either.

On a factual level, I have researched the experiences of about a dozen school systems throughout history and the ones that best served families were essentially free educational markets. This research will be published in the fall of 1998 as the book, "Market Education: The Unknown History." When it comes out, you may judge for yourself whether or not the evidence is convincing. If you would rather not buy a copy, it will probably be available at larger public libraries.

But, from your message, I gather that you are at least as interested in the motives behind the actions of educators as you are about the actions themselves. You want to know how self-interest can coincide with fair and effective service to families. There is one important observation that helps to explain this fact: Public school educators are self-interested too. Almost everyone is self-interested to some extent. Given that reality, we have a choice between a market system, which unites the interests of educators and families, and a government system that puts those interests at odds with one another. The way that educational entrepreneurs make money is by serving families better than their competitors--their interests are furthered by advancing the interests of their clients. The way that public school employees make money is by lobbying government officials and taxpayers--in many cases, the interests of families are thus ignored or even trampled. In the end, it turns out that the incentive structure of private markets produces better, more efficient schools than the incentive structure of public schooling. As stated on the Overview page, government is a tool for achieving certain ends, and in the case of education it has simply turned out to be the wrong tool.

This conclusion may seem hard to swallow, but then it's difficult to summarize an entire book in one paragraph. Pending the release of "Market Education," you can find a cursory overview of these ideas in the second half of a talk I delivered in 1997.

Thank you again for your very thoughtful message.

Best wishes,
Andrew

Andrew J. Coulson
Editor, School Choices
Editor@schoolchoices.org

Buy Xenical Buy Xanax Buy Phentermine mp3 players Buy Phentermine mp3 player Buy Cheap Phentermine Penis Enlargement Cialis Buy Cialis