Throw money at it. A 'solution' from a teachers' union.

Editorial

Arkansas Democrat-Gazette

Friday, December 23, 2005

Who you going to believe, me or your lying eyes?

That's what Reg Weaver is telling Arkansas.  Believe him.  Trust him.  Agree with him.  Despite all the evidence to the contrary.

Reg Weaver is (sigh) the president of the nation’s largest teachers’ union. He was in North Little Rock the other day saying, well, anything and nothing at the same time. 

Mr. Weaver had this advice for Arkansas: “We can begin to introduce legislation that talks about closing the loopholes” in corporate taxes. “We can begin to make sure that Arkansas school districts have what they need . . . if these children are going to be able to be successful. And let me tell you that if in fact the achievement gaps that exist here are going to be closed, it is not going to be done with charter schools, and it is not going to be done with pay for performance.”  Crack down on corporations? So that, we assume, government will have more money to spend on schools? 

First, are we sure that’s going to work, Mr. Union President? Corporations issue pay checks (and sometimes mighty big ones) to people who pay taxes on those paychecks, then go out and buy stuff, and pay taxes on that, and so the public coffers are already benefitting—more than once—from corporate profits. Do we really want to crack down on Golden Goose, Inc., in hopes of raking in even more? Because said corporations might decide they could do better elsewhere, taking their jobs, folding money, and investment out of the state. And how would that benefit Arkansas? 

But, okay, even if the state did somehow collect more money from tax-paying businesses, what makes Mr. Weaver so sure the state would spend it wisely? Or would it wind up just throwing still more money at the problem? Without holding teachers and schools and school districts accountable, how be sure? Haven’t we done that before? Like for approximately forever? This country already spends more than any other industrialized society on basic education, but keeps showing only mediocre results. 

And let me tell you . . . it is not going to be done with charter schools. . . . 

Mr. Union President, meet a charter school at Maumelle. 

The Academics Plus Charter School has had some trouble at the top of late, but you can’t argue with its academic success. It offers a rigorous college-prep curriculum. It’s not a magnet school, but kids in third grade are learning Latin in Maumelle. And also logic. 

In the third grade. 

And what about the KIPP school in Helena-West Helena? Before that charter school opened, kids were getting scores around the 17th percentile in language and 18th percentile in math on the Stanford Achievement Test. Only a few years later, those same kids are averaging around 75th and 81st, respectively. 

Maybe the best thing about charter schools is this: When they don’t work, they can be shut the heck down. Ever heard of a public school being shut down because of poor test scores and general incompetence? Only now is the state getting serious about taking over school districts that consistently fail our kids. See the public school district in Helena-West Helena. The state has just had to take it over, it was so scandal-scarred. Compare its tried-and-failed approach to the KIPP charter school there. Can you imagine what the Reg Weavers of the world would be saying if the charter school had rung up the kind of record the Helena-West Helena school district did? 

It is not going to be done with pay for performance. 

Mr. Union President, may we present Meadowcliff Elementary in Little Rock? 

A foundation connected with a newspaper publisher somewhere around here paid for a little experiment last year. Meadowcliff’s teachers were promised bonuses—significant bonuses, too, in the thousands of dollars—depending on how many of their students improved on standardized tests from the start of the year to the end. Meadowcliff’s students improved their test scores by 17 percent. In one academic year.  Amazing how incentives work. Performance improves as incentives do. Isn’t human nature something? 

Not so strangely enough, the union president’s comments contrast mightily with the recommendations from the Koret Task Force released last week that call for more charter schools. And for basing teachers’ pay on the progress of students. Which seems to improve students’ test scores. 

Not that Mr. Weaver seems to care much about how well students do on tests. (He’s certainly not like the teachers we had, bless ’em, each and every one.) No, what Mr. Weaver seems to care about most is spending. Or, as he calls it in pure educanto, inputs. 

“In many instances they want us all to focus on outputs,” he says. “An output is nothing more than a test score, and as long as they get us focused on a test score, then they cause the public and many legislators not to deal with the inputs.”  Inputs? We bet that means higher teacher pay—regardless of performance. Remember when teachers had professional associations, not unions? And spoke of investing in education, not Inputs? 

Maybe Reg Weaver didn’t stay in Arkansas long enough to get all the facts and visit those great charter schools, or do anything much except repeat the union line. After all, he’s a busy man. Too busy for new ideas.