Letters to the Editor of School Choices

LETTERS TO THE EDITOR

Home

Overview

List of Letters to the Editor, by Subject

A Reader's Critique of Market Education
With a Response from the Author

Mr. Coulson:

I've read your book now, and it is certainly an ambitious project and a very thoughtful and interesting piece of work. Since you don't have time for ongoing dialogue, I'll only make three brief comments and will spare you specific notes both about what I see as your errors and misconceptions and your creative and helpful insights and conclusions.

-- What I find interesting and most curious is that while you wrote to me that you are not a Republican and not a political person, your book accepts and supports just about every current "right wing" truism about schools and learning and human development. You may see yourself as fair-minded and unbiased, but I can tell you as someone who has studied these issues and the historical debate and record for many years, your
book makes you sound like a conventional "right-wing" ideologue. This identification is reinforced by the fact that you only seem to cite research that supports your conclusions. For example, in all of your critique of progressives, I see no reference to the Eight Year Study. Here is research that contradicts your conclusions; you just omit it.

-- On page 72 you cite "the two civilizations enjoying the greatest
achievements in art, science, and literacy of their times," classical Athens and the early medieval Muslim (Moorish) empire, and note that both had market-driven school systems. Would you claim that there is a civilization in the 20th century that has had greater achievements than the United States in art, science, literacy, and production of wealth? I doubt it. But then you would have to note that this was accomplished by a society with primarily non-market schools. This is the wonderful paradox of the "right-wing" critique. Here are all of these patriots in an historical moment of unprecedented American success (we won the Cold War, we are the only superpower on the planet, we have invented the computer and the information era and the new economy, and on and on) telling us that because of the public schools, the sky is falling and the end is near. I think this is truly weird. You think these people would be celebrating America in her glory.

-- I agree with some of what you identify as the factors that make
schools work. We need different kinds of schools so parents can choose and so can we can have less conflict about school among citizens. We need schools that can develop according to their own ideology and values. I would add that if we want to move beyond industrial models of school, we need schools that are personalized and focused both on the learner AND the curriculum.

I don't see the market and the profit motive as likely to achieve much of this for the largest aspect of the population. I think what's gone on in the health care industry in this decade supports my belief that there are some realms of the society in which the market is not the appropriate vehicle.

Best wishes,
David Marshak

The Author's Reply

Dear Mr. Marshak,

Thank you for your curiosity and interest.

Since you are apparently intelligent and fairly well informed on the subject of school governance, I suggest that your concern with my ideological predilictions is unhelpful. If you are able to judge the arguments and evidence I present on their merits, as you seem to want to, then what difference does it make if I am "right-wing" or "left-wing"?

Focusing on the politics of an author is at best a useful intellectual crutch when you are unable to understand and rationally evaluate his case. At worst, it clouds your ability to rationally evaluate that case. I don't think you need this crutch.

However, just in case you want to continue using it, here are my
non-Right-Wing credentials: I am a pro-choice (on everything) atheist who favors judging people by the content of their character rather than their religion, skin color, gender preferences, sex, or any other spurious measure. I support women's right to abortions, gays' rights to marry, and
families' rights to determine the direction of their children's education free from the tyranny of the majority, whether that majority is comprised of atheist objectivists, Christian conservatives, or statist new-agers.

As a corollary of my epistemology and world view, I evaluate pedagogical methods and school systems based on how well they serve families. For the most part, the methods advocated by "progressives" have done a worse job of serving families than those advocated by conservatives or traditionalists. I don't have to be happy about it, I just have to report it.

The Eight Year Study is interesting, but so far as I can recall I thought they did such a poor job of controlling for factors unrelated to curriculum differences that it wasn't clear what might be causing the measured effects. There's a recent book revisiting the experiment, written by researchers who
staunchly favor the Study's conclusions, and I may have a look at that to see if they make any effort to justify its methodology and controls.

I'm open to the possibility that some "progressive" methods work under some circumstances. In fact, I hope they do. But, on the whole, whether or not you buy into the Eight-Year-Study, the evidence just isn't there. In fact, "progressive" methods have often been so bad that I've nearly become apoplectic in studying their effects. The history of look-say/whole-language _as an early reading instruction method_ and the damage it has done to millions of children over the last eighty years is totally unpardonable given the vast and ever growing body of evidence that it produces more poor readers than other well-understood methods. (Whole language is of course a fine way of arousing interest and enjoyment in literature among children who have already learned the mechanics of decoding print into meaningful language.)

Even if you disagree with my conclusions in this area of pedagogy, the kind of system I am recommending is one that would let you get whatever kind of pedagogy you wanted for your children. I am against government mandated early synthetic phonics, just as I am against government mandated whole language as early reading instruction.

As for the achievements of the U.S. during modern times, you have to ask compared to what? _NO_ developed nation has had a free market in education during the past century. But, when you look at historical periods and places where you can compare societies under both kinds of educational systems, the free markets consistently outperform the centrally planned systems. Given the huge list of profound flaws in our current educational system that are presented in Market Education, it should be obvious that we have been succeeding _in spite_ of that school system, _not because of it_.

Consider: 23.5 percent of 16-to-25 year-old Americans are functionally illiterate according to the IALS (see chapter 6). That's nearly a quarter of our young people who don't have the written language skills to complete a coherent resume, let alone work in a writing intensive profession. Imagine the tremendous boost to our economy if these poorly skilled young people were suddenly brought up to the average level of fluency in reading and writing!

Market Education is full of other examples of egregious short-comings in our educational system that would be vastly improved in a competitive market-place, leading to remarkable improvements in our standard of living and general prosperity.

Regarding the health-care industry: it isn't even remotely a free market. One of the five key market factors I describe in my book, direct consumer financial responsibility, is missing in the health-care industry. This means consumers try to consume as much care as they can and ignore the cost. Third-party payment is a huge problem in every field, and certainly the historical evidence shows the scope of this problem in education.

If you want to see more of how educational markets not only can but actually do serve the whole spectrum of society today, have a look at James Tooley's new book "The Global Education Industry." Many of the world's developing countries have educational service providers far more dynamic and innovative than our typical private schools, and some of these foreign chains are even beginning to open up shop in the U.S. (I talk about the Japanese Juku example in Market Education. The Kumon chain, for instance, has 1,400 locations in North America, and enrolls roughly 2,000,000 students in Japan.)

That's about all I have time for. Thanks for your thoughts.

--Best wishes,
Andrew

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