Science Teachers

Today the State of Minnesota released the test results of a "new, interactive, online science exam, the first of its kind in the nation.........." according to our Pioneer Press newspaper. This exam was given to 5th graders, 8th graders, and high school students.

Overall only 40% of students tested -- 185,000 students total -- in Minnesota met the state science standards for proficiency. No doubt when the 2009 legislature convenes there will be a collective call for "fully funding our schools.............investing in our children............so we can compete with India and China....................."

The tax and spending never stops my friends. Yes President Eisenhower warned us about the "military-industrial complex" but he overlooked the "education-spending complex" which now consumes nearly 50% of our state government budget. So how much should we "invest" in education -- 70, 80, or perhaps 90% of the budget?

How about instead of throwing more money at the problem we demand comprehensive reforms such as:

• Differential salaries -- if we need more and better science teachers then let's pay such teachers premium salaries which are higher than their peers. It is time we used market forces versus collective bargaining.
• Income tax reform -- to encourage new recruits to the teacher profession let's declare teacher salaries to be exempt from all federal, state, and city income taxes. Thus a teacher getting paid $60,000 per year (9 months of work with 3 months of summer off in most cases) paying a combined rate of 20% would see a $12,000 salary increase to $72,000. This salary annualized (9 months converted to 12 months) would then total $96,000 which is getting near the pay scale for Members of Congress :-)

So there you have it -- some innovative education reform ideas that do not cost us taxpayers one penny beyond what we are taxed today.

Reform on MacDuff and damned be the bureaucrat that says, "hold enough!",

Todd

ACT scores and Education Reform

Well the college entry ACT test scores state rankings were released yesterday so here are the top three states for highest average scores:

Minnesota
Iowa
Wisconsin

Nationally the report noted that the average ACT score dropped from 2007 to 21.1 (36 is the highest possible score) for the class of 2008. Clearly that is not a good trend but more importantly I believe is that even though Minnesota's average was the highest in the country the report noted that a full 67% of students going on to college require remedial education!! So if Minnesota is number one I would hate to raise my children in whatever state ranked dead last. This is not a good sign for the USA as we try to compete in the global economy.

Solutions? No need to spend more taxpayer dollars, instead we should pursue:

1.) Phase out the US Department of Education and send all the savings to the 50 states via education vouchers to families with school age children for spending on tuition, tutors, etc.

2.) Turn parents into consumers by having their current schools invoice families for education expenses so we all know the actual costs so then we can do some comparison shopping.

3.) Enact right to work legislation in all 50 states so teachers are not required to join their teachers' unions.

4.) Enact merit/performance pay for teachers

5.) Change/modernize teaching licensing requirements to help recruit working professionals from the math and science fields.

6.) Make teacher salaries exempt from all state and federal personal income taxes to help recruit new teachers to the career.

Read more and spend less,

Todd

Teaching Obesity

Well between a family vacation to my home state of Iowa last week and an unplanned business trip to Washington DC on Sunday and Monday this week I have not focused on posting on this blog but wonders of all wonders -- the nation's capital inspired me to write!!

As I sat in a hotel lobby between meetings in Washington DC a group of very large/clearly obese people were gathering near me during a break in the conference they were attending. What conference? The National Education Association (www.nea.org ) which is the largest labor union for America's teachers and perhaps our greatest roadblock to full blown school choice that empowers parents and students to act as consumers of education services instead of recipients (dare I say - "victims" ?) of the education establishment.

This group's obvious obesity status caught my attention because for years I have seen the media coverage of "childhood obesity, lawsuits against McDonald's, and vending machines selling junk food in our schools to raise money for the school because we completely selfish tax slaves aren't spending (sorry - "investing") enough on the education establishment..............."

The other thought that hit me was a research study released to the public a few months ago that concluded -- "if you have obese friends you too will likely become obese......" So who made these teachers obese -- McDonald's , their students, or perhaps did they get obese because they are not competing for their jobs since they work in a protected monopoly known as the public school?

Beyond the obvious obesity my other observation was the language/grammar used by these "teachers" -- my God, had Bill Cosby attended this NEA convention he would have no doubt delivered an entire speech on how these teachers are harming their students' futures via their use of ebonics/hip hop lingo/etc. It clearly was not the King's English that I heard in that hotel lobby.

Investments should produce returns not protected monopolies,

Todd

More math classes and fewer press releases please

Growing up in Northwest Iowa we always had a nice laugh when we heard the "poor" local farmers complain about crop prices, the weather, etc. while they were driving around down town in their brand new vehicles.

I had a flash back to this childhood memory tonight as I read our local newspaper here in Minnesota. Tucked inside the Local Section was a small story about the Stillwater, Minnesota public school district (today's "poor farmer") which announced it was able to hire a new "Communications Coordinator" (today's "new vehicle") which was a job eliminated earlier due to budget constraints. The article went on to note that this position's annual salary was $70,820.

Personally I would rather see my local school focus on hiring an additional math teacher or perhaps a Chinese language instructor to better prepare students for our global economy if it was able to find an extra $71,000 (plus that excellent benefits package including health insurance, public pension, etc.). No doubt school administrators would defend this hiring by stating -- "we need to develop communication tools (newsletters, website, etc.) to communicate with our students and parents.................." -- but I have to believe a current Stillwater student could easily manage the school's website better than any communications coordinator they hire and a student newspaper could be started in partnership with the local community newspaper. Such a partnership would provide the school with trained students able to produce any required newsletters but more importantly these students would develop tangible job skills needed after graduation from high school. Any money spent in this area would be a better expenditure than adding one more FTE (full time employee) via the Commuications Coordinator job.

There are better uses for this $71,000 at Stillwater Public Schools if the education establishment truly believes in putting "students first" as the Education Minnesota teachers' union TV ads want us to believe.

Then again perhaps I should apply for this Stillwater job (insert laughter here!),

Todd

Basic Education

One aspect of my career that I simply LOVE is that I get exposed to a wide range of issues and perspectives -- which primarily remind me that government is failing us taxpayers. Today was no exception since I attended the annual meeting and issues conference of the Minnesota Chamber of Commerce (http://www.mnchamber.com).

During the presentation of the polling results for the "Business Barometer" sponsored by the chamber I read through the handout to discover the results to a question posed to a scientific sample of the Minnesota business community - "How do you spend your training resources (for employees) ?" The results were -- 87% on specialized skills and 12% on REMEDIAL SKILLS!!

Yes, once our students graduate from our school system Minnesota businesses must spend even MORE MONEY to teach basic skills like reading and math. One executive from a radiator manufacturing company noted that her company has to teach some of their workers how to "count to 8 so they can complete their time sheets...............and how to use fractions during our manufacturing process................" Wow, even my big government friends out there (Holstein Girl???!!!) have to be very troubled that we have to pay for basic education twice -- first via the school system and then again with company money (the money the government hasn't taxed away yet!!).

Now today's presentations were disturbing enough but then I re-read this article from today's local newspaper - "Minnesota holds ground in math, reading tests". This article noted that "only 29% of the nation's eighth graders (14 year old students for my non-American readers) are proficient in reading -- that's remained unchanged since 2003." Let me pose a question -- if you worked in a sales job but had not increase your sales levels in the last four years don't you think you would get fired? But that is not the case with teachers and school administrators -- they simply tell us they need more money.

So in the last four years the American education system has made ZERO progress in terms of improving reading levels. Is it any wonder that only 25% of American adults read even one book last year? (for details see my posting "25%" at -- http://erasmusbookclub.blogspot.com) Perhaps even more troubling the Big Government advocates in our country look at poor performance like these test results and declare we need to "invest more" which of course means taking more of our income for their grand schemes. I would much rather keep my money in my family budget so my wife and I can hire a private tutor to work with our children in the same way the aristocrats/nobles did in European history.

Now I know why home schooling is not growing rapidly -- too many parents can't read and write thus they are unable to teach their children.

Time for more school choice.

Todd

School Supplies

Last week my local newspaper published an article, "School Supply (On) Line" , focused on the central theme that "teachers (in the White Bear Lake, Minnesota school district at least) are turning to the Internet to land donations or classroom supplies." The article went on to name a few websites that teachers have been using to secure donated classroom supplies which include these URLs:

http://www.classroomwishlist.org/

http://www.adoptaclassroom.com

http://www.iloveschools.com

Now who doesn't "love schools" or who wouldn't want to "adopt a classroom" ? These are all noble ventures and perhaps more importantly -- these are private, non-governmental initiatives as far as I could tell from the article I read. Three cheers for personal initiative!!!

The first website listed above provides some interesting background notes we should all pause to consider:

Did You Know?
Only 2.8% of dollars spent on education go toward classroom supplies.
The average teacher spends $400-$500 of their own funds each year to purchase classroom supplies.
100% of every dollar donated to Classroom Wishlist for classroom supplies is used to deliver goods into the classroom.
Donations to Classroom Wishlist are tax deductible.

What -- only 2.8% of "dollars spent on education go toward classroom supplies" ? Instead of writing checks to right this wrong why don't taxpayers ask a very relevant question -- so where is all the money going if it isn't going to supply the tools our children need?

Isn't this failure to arm teachers with the supplies they need to teach/engage the children in the classroom the equivalent of sending local police officers into the field without ammunition and sending fire fighters to extinguish fires without water hoses?

If our mayor/city council managed our police and fire operations in this manner they would be thrown out of office yet our school boards enjoy VERY high re-election rates for sending teachers into the classroom without the tools they need.

Education spending should go directly to teachers and parent associations to equip our classrooms versus the current system where the dollars simply get lost in the education bureaucracy. Perhaps my readers would like to know why I am so confident money is being lost in this way? I have first hand evidence courtesy of an elementary school teacher in Iowa I talked to at a fraternity brother's football tailgate last season. I asked her how much money she had to spend on school supplies each year to which she replied, "about $400 each year.........but I wouldn't have to if the school would eliminate the monthly car allowance payment it pays to administrators..................."

Don't tell me we don't have enough money!!!!

Priorities need to be set not higher school levies,

Todd

Bell Canada

Via the Associated Press and the New York Times this week I learned that Bell Canada (telephone company) agreed to sell itself to become a privately-held company. A partnership - led by the Ontario TEACHERS Pension Plan - is acquiring Bell Canada for $48.5 billion (the article did not specify Canadian or US Dollars -- sloppy editing I say) . If completed this transaction would apparently be the largest ever in Canadian history.

What I found of most interest in this news story was the fact that a group of "under-paid and over-worked......" (not my words but it is the constant theme we hear in the corridors of government) teachers are purchasing this company via their pension funds. Not a bad way to retire if you can do it!! Similar to their American colleagues, Canadian teacher salaries are paid via a system based on --

http://www.ctf-fce.ca/en/teaching/teaching.htm
"Teacher salary schedules in Canada are generally based on a combination of years of post-secondary education and years of experience......"

Assuming the Bell Canada purchase is completed by the Teachers Pension Fund I have to ask if the teachers/retirees -- as the new owners -- plan to pay Bell Canada's management based on "years of experience" or perhaps via a system of incentive bonuses, pay for performance, management by objective, etc. ?

An injection of free market capitalism into the education establishment would be a welcome departure from the status quo we have in education today. Our current system allows the teachers' unions to determine salary rates simply based on a teacher's ability to OUTLIVE THEIR COLLEAGUES not TEACH EFFECTIVELY. If readers want to explore teacher salary reform a bit more please see one of my original postings on this very subject from September 2005 entitled, "Bob Plunkett" --

http://spacebeaglenotes.blogspot.com/2005_09_01_archive.html

Pay for performance not longevity,

Todd

Teacher Salaries

Via this blog I have consistently called for more consumer choice in the USA education system -- a theme that some of my readers have mistaken for an "attack on teachers." Now this perception that I am somehow "anti-teacher" is completely wrong. I honestly want teachers to be paid higher salaries and want them to have students who actually want to be in their classrooms.

Throughout my academic career I have had a number of teachers who have been a very positive force on my life including my grandmother who taught in a one room school house (no, I was not a student but she taught me a lot about life) and Mr. Bob Plunkett, a high school teacher who played a major role in preparing me for college. I paid tribute to Mr. Plunkett's career via one of my first blog posting from September 2005 --

http://spacebeaglenotes.blogspot.com/2005_09_01_archive.html

I have also consistently blogged here with the statistic that "most state government budgets already allocate at least 50% to their public school systems so the SCHOOLS do not need more of our tax money.............." But we can improve education substantially without adding one more dollar to school budgets by simply paying teachers more for the work they do today.

By now my readers (yes both of you!!) are probably wondering -- "how is that possible, how can we pay teachers more without spending more tax money on schools?" The very simple solution of course is for state governments to exempt teacher salaries from all state personal income taxes --- there you go, an instant salary increase for teachers!!

So why should we implement such a state law?

• Having higher teacher salaries would attract more talented workers from private sector jobs to become teachers thus creating a larger labor pool for schools to interview.
• Such a tax reform would help new college graduates who want to become teachers pay off their students loans much faster.
• Such a tax exemption for teachers would help the rest of us achieve tax reform on personal income taxes since this tax exemption for teachers would be discriminatory which is something we have to eliminate in society of course!!! :-)
• This tax reform would ensure that more money gets to teachers NOT to the "school-administration complex" which is what happens today.
• Teachers would have more money to buy classroom supplies so we don't have to read the annual media accounts in September of each year depicting teachers who have to spend personal funds to buy classroom supplies.

Almost the perfect combination here -- improved schools without spending more tax money -- so hopefully interested readers can pursue this kind of tax reform at the state and federal level.

Stop taxing teachers,

Todd

Global Economics

While working this week in Texas and New Mexico I am attending the 5th annual legislative briefing event hosted by the Texas Public Policy Foundation (www.tppf.org) in Austin. Tonight's dinner speaker, John Stossel of ABC, ( http://abcnews.go.com/2020/Stossel/) gave an excellent speech focused on how poorly run government monopolies are especially in our public school system comparing it to many of the Soviet Union's relics that are now in the dust bin of history (my wording here not his).

The overall message of the speech that the "elites and central planners" can not understand nor serve consumers well, consumer choice and competition are the things that provide us with a high quality of life. Stossel's focus on education reminded me of the guest lecturing I did for an MBA class at St. Mary's University in Minneapolis a year ago. The topic of the lecture was the political economy issues involved in international business. As I talked with the students I offered my own observation that "there is just too much focus on China which makes me believe the US business community is overlooking a much better market -- India................"

I made this comment based on the following elements:

• India's population is set to surpass China's in the near future
• India is the world's largest democratic nation thus it share a political heritage/culture closer in nature to the USA's versus China's politburo/Soviet political economy.
• India and the USA both speak version of the English language :-)
• India is a key regional/nuclear power which borders Russia and China thus a strategic ally for the USA
• Indian food is tastier than Chinese food (laugh a little!!)

Thus I was happy to read last week's news in Minnesota that our Governor Tim Pawlenty will lead a trade mission to India in October 2007 so let me congratulate his office on recognizing the importance of this market for Minnesota businesses. It is an exciting market the justifies the creation of a program to rival our current "Minnesota-China Partnership".

As Mr. Stossel noted in his special on education in the USA, "Stupid in America", American high schoolers "did their butts kicked by Belgian students.........." so clearly we need competition in our public schools if we fully intend to compete in the global economy.

The world may be flat but public school budgets are not,

Todd

Babs

My wife and most close friends encourage me to "full the glass as half full not half empty" so today I clearly saw the glass in my life as nearly full!!

Why?

My local newspaper reported that none other than Barbra Streisand -- champion of big government and limousine liberal public policy solutions -- contributed $10,000 to a charter school - a baby step for consumer choice in education -- in St. Paul, Minnesota. Indeed, the Streisand Foundation provided this grant to the St. Paul Conservatory for Performing Artists which serves students in the 9th through 12th grades.

If readers don't know a charter school is a form of school choice however in Minnesota it is half-pregnant reform since our charter schools are still run by the education establishment for the most part. I am happy to be "educated" by my readers if I mis-stated anything regarding charter schools. For more on school choice/reform issues please visit these entities:

www.spn.org

www.heartland.org -- for their "School Reform News" newspaper

www.ij.org

One final comment about Ms. Streisand's generosity is the fact that she held a concert in St. Paul's Xcel Center where she charged up to $450.00 per ticket. Now I understand why the big government types like her want governments to mandate "living wages" -- because if we had living wages it would allow those Americans living in poverty to afford Babs' concert tickets!!

A concerted effort for students,

Todd

Wanted: Rich Uncle

Yesterday I listened to Governor Tim Pawlenty give his annual State of the State speech for the State of Minnesota so today's newspaper coverage of this speech caught my attention given the Pioneer Press's headline --

"Money for Schools, strings attached"

Now this is clear media bias! I have to believe that most readers would view this headline as having a negative connotation wouldn't you? Based on a pie chart graphic I received from the National Association of Industrial and Office Properties for the 2006 elections I would note that just over 50% of the State of Minnesota's general budget goes to the K-12 education system today. I just have to ask -- how much is enough for the "children" in our education system? Perhaps we should give the schools 80 or even 90% of the state budget?

I realize it happens more than I want to admit but how many parents simply give money to their children when one of them says, "hey mom, give me $20.00..........." without asking something like, "so what do you plan to do with this $20 if I give it to you?"

Governor Pawlenty's speech noted that he is "willing to spend hundreds of millions of ADDITIONAL dollars on education over the next two years, but only if schools reform and meet performance standards." I agree with the Governor and most parents I know -- we aren't giving out more money without some performance expectations. One expectation the governor has is that students need to complete one year of college level courses while in high school for the school to be certified a "3R" school thereby qualifying for more funding.

Personally I would focus on increasing school choice, returning tax dollars to parents to spend on education options (such as hiring a private tutor for their child), and allowing school districts to compete with each other by giving them the autonomy to set their own school year calendar and perhaps to designate themselves as "English only curriculum" schools so they can standardize classes and save money.

The state government should not be viewed as a rich uncle handing out cash.

Todd