Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

FIXME: zero ideas in the dept. of education's open government idea board

openeducation.ideascale.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 42 posts

Re: FIXME: zero ideas in the dept. of education's open government idea board

#21

Post by tsally »

natrius wrote: post #17
tsally wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Education is guaranteed under article 26 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, which the US signed and helped author. Not providing a public option for education would mean redefining what we believe to be fundamental freedoms. How are you going to provide education to the poor without public schools? Will the government give the poor money for education? Will you subsidize the "private" schools with governme…

In reply to your edit: Your entire argument rests on the assumption that private schools that poor students attend will be worse than public schools that poor students attend. You haven't presented any evidence for that, and it is contrary to what a naive analysis would suggest. Today, poor students have absolutely no choice when it comes to schools. They live where they can afford, and they go to the schools they ar…

Consider this. Money is directly related to the quality of education. New Trier is a school in the area where I grew up. It is one of the best high schools in the nation. New Trier spends more than $15,000 yearly per student, compared the the state average of $8,786 [1]. Now in a private system we could just provide vouchers to everyone for $15,000 and everyone would have an excellent education. Except this would cost way more than the current system and no one is willing to pay it.

Now, you would suggest that though free market forces, New Trier's figure of $15,000 could be brought down. But these free market forces are already operating on New Trier! New Trier already has all the characteristics of an elastic good! (1) Many substitutes - families are rich so they can move or send their kids to private school, (2) Low percentage of family income - families are rich, (3) Breadth of definition - there are public and private schools in the area with similar prestige, and (4) Necessity - the kids of rich and educated parents are the least likely to need a degree. To be honest, $15,000 per student is probably a pretty accurate figure for what it takes to give a kid a top notch education. A private system wont lower this figure. The cost of education wont be reduced.

So my claim is that free market forces are already at work. Why then not just convert to a private system if the net effect would be the same? After all, the government is evil and the invisible hand is a force of good and prosperity for the human race. The answer to this question comes from wisty's comment [2]. It is the market failure I refer to several times. The underlying learning will take a back seat to the profit in a private system. Ever notice how some really expensive cloths aren't the ones that look the best? It's because prestige can trump quality. This is inevitable in the private system. It may happen in the public system as well, but the government has the power to try to stop it. No such body exists in the private system to look out for the quality of education.

[1] http://sitemaker.umich.edu/dompierre.356/new_trier_high_scho...

[2] http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1111503

Re: FIXME: zero ideas in the dept. of education's open government idea board

#22

Post by tsally »

jcnnghm wrote: post #20
wisty wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Calling education a product is tricky. Do you mean degrees or other attainments, or do you mean the underlying learning? Because it's damn hard to separate the two, and private providers have a big incentive to half-ass the second, especially if they are targeting the mass market. Education is even harder than health to privatize, because you are trying to target kids, not parents, but the parents will be making all…

If private providers half-ass the underlying learning, why do private schools consistently outperform public schools?

Well there is no good way to compare them by ranking. Here are the public school rankings:

http://www.usnews.com/articles/education/high-schools/2009/1...

But where are the private school rankings? They don't take the accountability tests which are mandatory public schools.

I'm curious where you are getting your facts from. Claiming that private schools consistently outperform public schools suggests you must have some strong facts. So let's see them please.

And while we wait for your facts, consider this. Current private schools don't have to deal with kids that have learning disabilities. Current private schools don't have to deal with as much diversity. Current private schools don't have to deal with underfunding. Current private schools have strong alumni networks. The private schools of today are not your average private school of a 100% private system.

Re: FIXME: zero ideas in the dept. of education's open government idea board

#24

Post by natrius »

tsally wrote: post #21
natrius wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In reply to your edit: Your entire argument rests on the assumption that private schools that poor students attend will be worse than public schools that poor students attend. You haven't presented any evidence for that, and it is contrary to what a naive analysis would suggest. Today, poor students have absolutely no choice when it comes to schools. They live where they can afford, and they go to the schools they ar…

Consider this. Money is directly related to the quality of education. New Trier is a school in the area where I grew up. It is one of the best high schools in the nation. New Trier spends more than $15,000 yearly per student, compared the the state average of $8,786 [1]. Now in a private system we could just provide vouchers to everyone for $15,000 and everyone would have an excellent education. Except this would cos…

Changing the education system will inevitably have a tiny effect on the people who can already throw as much money as they want at education. They have choices. Poor people don't. Giving them choices will likely improve their educations.

My school district spends ~$7000 per student. I'd say I got a pretty good education. Vouchers would not have to be ridiculously high to provide a quality education as you imply. Not everyone is going to get a gold-plated education, but the minimum could be far higher than it currently is at the same price.

It seems like you just don't like profit-seeking entities. This concern could be accommodated just fine in a voucher system: choose a non-profit school. Profit isn't necessary for privatization to improve quality. Competition is what creates the incentive to improve.

I think the lack of direct incentives for public schools and their employees to improve is a greater negative than any corrupting influence of profit would be.

Re: FIXME: zero ideas in the dept. of education's open government idea board

#25

Post by wisty »

natrius wrote: post #16
wisty wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Calling education a product is tricky. Do you mean degrees or other attainments, or do you mean the underlying learning? Because it's damn hard to separate the two, and private providers have a big incentive to half-ass the second, especially if they are targeting the mass market. Education is even harder than health to privatize, because you are trying to target kids, not parents, but the parents will be making all…

Public providers half-ass the underlying learning as well. The concept of "teaching to the test" didn't come from private schools. Whatever we choose to measure schools by will generally be what teachers and principals optimize for, whether public or private.

That's true, as well. But I think it would be worse under a voucher system. Private providers would be a lot quicker to race to the bottom of "teaching the test" if the voucher system included bonuses for good test performance.

Re: FIXME: zero ideas in the dept. of education's open government idea board

#26

Post by tsally »

natrius wrote: post #24
tsally wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Consider this. Money is directly related to the quality of education. New Trier is a school in the area where I grew up. It is one of the best high schools in the nation. New Trier spends more than $15,000 yearly per student, compared the the state average of $8,786 [1]. Now in a private system we could just provide vouchers to everyone for $15,000 and everyone would have an excellent education. Except this would cos…

Changing the education system will inevitably have a tiny effect on the people who can already throw as much money as they want at education. They have choices. Poor people don't. Giving them choices will likely improve their educations. My school district spends ~$7000 per student. I'd say I got a pretty good education. Vouchers would not have to be ridiculously high to provide a quality education as you imply. Not…

My school district spends ~$7000 per student. I'd say I got a pretty good education. Vouchers would not have to be ridiculously high to provide a quality education as you imply. Not everyone is going to get a gold-plated education, but the minimum could be far higher than it currently is at the same price.

So you are basically ignoring the market failure I point out then? Take your pick of any celebrity clothing line to see first hand evidence of this market failure.

It seems like you just don't like profit-seeking entities.

I love profit seeking entities, but different contexts require different definitions of profit. Your average business person lacks an investment in society and in the long term that is necessary to define profit in education.

EDIT: Anyway... I've entertained the idea of education being delivered as a private good for long enough. Truly it's my belief that it's a public good, but I'm forced to argue as if it were a private one in order to make any progress. I'll read your next reply, but cramming education into the context of a private good has worn me out.

Re: FIXME: zero ideas in the dept. of education's open government idea board

#27

Post by wisty »

mhb wrote: post #19
wisty wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Calling education a product is tricky. Do you mean degrees or other attainments, or do you mean the underlying learning? Because it's damn hard to separate the two, and private providers have a big incentive to half-ass the second, especially if they are targeting the mass market. Education is even harder than health to privatize, because you are trying to target kids, not parents, but the parents will be making all…

What argument are you making that doesn't apply if you replace education, schools and vouchers with food, supermarkets and food stamps?

I bet people buy crappy foods (chips and soft-drinks) for the children when they use food stamps. So there is some similarity.

The difference? People have a fair idea as what good food is.

Also, education is vulnerable to getting derailed by optimization for tests. And the testing will most likely be controlled by the state. I would worry that big mass-market voucher schools will specialize in marketing, cutting costs, and gaming the state-run tests.

Re: FIXME: zero ideas in the dept. of education's open government idea board

#28

Post by natrius »

wisty wrote: post #25
natrius wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Public providers half-ass the underlying learning as well. The concept of "teaching to the test" didn't come from private schools. Whatever we choose to measure schools by will generally be what teachers and principals optimize for, whether public or private.

That's true, as well. But I think it would be worse under a voucher system. Private providers would be a lot quicker to race to the bottom of "teaching the test" if the voucher system included bonuses for good test performance.

A voucher system doesn't need bonuses. If a school improves its reputation in the eyes of the public, it will be able to charge more money. Allowing customer choice lets people take into account less concrete metrics of school performance instead of the government punishing and rewarding schools. If customers don't want schools that teach to the test, they'll actively observe other metrics to come to their decisions.

Customers who don't put in as much effort into picking schools will be no worse off than they are today. Schools already teach to the test, especially schools in poor areas that are trying to raise their test scores. However, a functioning market allows them to benefit from the choices their more responsible peers make. Fewer underperforming schools will survive.

Re: FIXME: zero ideas in the dept. of education's open government idea board

#29

Post by dhume »

jcnnghm wrote: post #20
wisty wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Calling education a product is tricky. Do you mean degrees or other attainments, or do you mean the underlying learning? Because it's damn hard to separate the two, and private providers have a big incentive to half-ass the second, especially if they are targeting the mass market. Education is even harder than health to privatize, because you are trying to target kids, not parents, but the parents will be making all…

If private providers half-ass the underlying learning, why do private schools consistently outperform public schools?

1. Selective admissions

2. Self-selected applicant pool

3. Easier time removing disruptive students

In short, private schools have better students.

Re: FIXME: zero ideas in the dept. of education's open government idea board

#30

Post by natrius »

tsally wrote: post #26
natrius wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Changing the education system will inevitably have a tiny effect on the people who can already throw as much money as they want at education. They have choices. Poor people don't. Giving them choices will likely improve their educations. My school district spends ~$7000 per student. I'd say I got a pretty good education. Vouchers would not have to be ridiculously high to provide a quality education as you imply. Not…

My school district spends ~$7000 per student. I'd say I got a pretty good education. Vouchers would not have to be ridiculously high to provide a quality education as you imply. Not everyone is going to get a gold-plated education, but the minimum could be far higher than it currently is at the same price. So you are basically ignoring the market failure I point out then? Take your pick of any celebrity clothing line…

The vast majority of the benefits of an education accrue to the person who gets the education. That makes it a private good in the economic sense, but that doesn't necessarily mean it should be provided privately.

I had already replied to the "teaching to the test" issue in the thread you linked to. Public schools already do this, yet somehow that's what we should fear private schools doing? From the very beginning, I've stated that these schools should be certified by the government in some form, so if you're satisfied with the public schools the government deems acceptable, I don't see why you'd have an issue with similar private schools.

I don't understand how you can think you're doing poor people a favor by forcing them to attend their crappy neighborhood schools instead of giving them choices.

Post reply on HN