Today's post comes by request from Phil James. I will exam the role of the National Education Association in the presidential race. Various state teachers' unions largely backed Hillary Clinton earlier in the campaign, but Barack Obama's positions are substantially similar. John McCain, where he has taken a stance, disagrees.
I have not yet explained the difference between conservatism and liberalism, but I will here, because this issue illustates it nicely. Conservatism is based on society consisting of independent moral agents - those who know right from wrong and are responsible for themselves (those who do not meet these requirements recieve special consideration). The state is best to leave people alone, except when they make dangerous irresponsible choices. Liberalism believes that individuals are a product of their circumstances, therefore, the most productive citizen comes from a situation carefully tailored by the state to ensure irresponsible choices are unlikely to be made.
Below the fold I will discuss merit pay and school choice.
The primary focus of John McCain's plan is the student's family:
John McCain believes
parents should be empowered with school choice to send their children to the school that can best educate them just as many members of Congress do with their own children. He finds it beyond hypocritical that many of those who would refuse to allow public school parents to choose their child's school would never agree to force their own children into a school that did not work or was unsafe. They can make another choice. John McCain believes that is a fundamental and essential right we should honor for all parents.
The primary focus of Barack Obama's plan is the state:
The Obama administration will encourage states to use their [Child Care Development Block Grant] quality set-aside funding and other federal supports to develop strategic plans that better coordinate all state birth-to-five services.
From the cradle to high school graduation parents should be able to turn their child over to the state without blinking. However, Senator Obama would have some parental invovlement:
• School-family contracts. The Obama plan will encourage schools and parents to work together to establish a school-family contract laying out expectations for student attendance, behavior, and homework. These contracts would be provided to families in their native language whenpossible and would include information on tutoring, academic support, and public school choice options for students.• Parental and family responsibility. Barack Obama will call on parents to turn off the TV and
video games, make sure their children are getting their homework done and work to take a
greater stake in their child’s education both in and outside of school.blockquote>Merit Pay
The NEA believes that teachers should be rewarded as a product of their general education and expierence. If they teach special education or English as a second language that can also garner further consideration.
John McCain believes
we should let them compete for the most effective, character-building teachers, hire them, and reward them.By this he means that he would reward teachers who do particularly well on state standardized tests.
Barack Obama supports:
compensation systems that reward teachers for deep knowledge of subjects, additional skills for meeting special kinds of student and school needs (for example special education knowledge or bilingual language abilities), high levels of performance measured against professional teaching standards (such as National Board certification and local standards-based assessments), and a variety of contributions to student learning can encourage teachers to continue to acquire needed skills, enhance the expertise available within schools and improve learning for many traditionally under-served student groups.As you can see this is right out of the NEA playbook. There is no need for any student to achieve anything for the "professional pay".
School Choice
For explanitory purposes, assume that all of the federal money spent on education could be evenly divided within an area, all the state money could be evenly divided, and all the local money could be evenly divided. The result would be that each student in a school would have a dollar figure attached to his or her attendence. If the student decided he or she wanted to attend a different school, that amount of money would be transfered from one school to another. This is school choice, the money is called a voucher. At one point liberals were completely against it, but it is now so popular that even the Brookings Insitute has to find a way to accomodate it.
The NEA notes that school choice causes money from one school to rapidly deteriorate at the expense of another (a zero sum game). The lagging school has no hope of recovering. So the NEA purposes supplemental education services to have the funding restored to the ailing school. Therefore need, rather than performance would govern funding. Neither Barack Obama nor John McCain have supported the bill.
The NEA further frets:
About 85 percent of private schools are religious. Vouchers tend to be a means of circumventing the Constitutional prohibitions against subsidizing religious practice and instruction.However, the Supreme Court of the United States disagrees. States are free to set up any voucher program they desire.