Wednesday, February 13, 2008
Look at the Evidence
by Ken Houghton
To make it local-ish (for Tom, at least):
and this is not exactly coming from one of the Milwaukee experiment's detractors:
The opposition fails Economics 101:
When you reallocate funds from the school system to the vouchers, you limit the monies available for curriculum changes.
Amazingly, school vouchers work as a transfer mechanism for money, but don't improve education.
To make it local-ish (for Tom, at least):
To support his idea, Mr. [Sol] Stern pointed to Milwaukee’s experiment with school vouchers.
"Milwaukee’s public schools still suffer from low achievement and miserable graduation rates, with test scores flattening in recent years," Mr. Stern wrote. "Violence and disorder throughout the system are as serious as ever. Most voucher students are still benefiting, true; but no 'Milwaukee Miracle,' no transformation of the public schools, has taken place."
and this is not exactly coming from one of the Milwaukee experiment's detractors:
[Stern's] 2003 book, “Breaking Free: Public School Lessons and the Imperative of School Choice,” relied on his own trips to Milwaukee to measure the impact of the voucher system on public schools there. In the book, he found much to praise about vouchers, saying they would give needed competition to the failing schools. But now he says more recent evidence has fallen short.
The opposition fails Economics 101:
In his online opposition, Mr. [Jay P.] Greene [like Stern, a Fellow at the Manhattan Institute] said he was particularly bothered because the essay was being widely interpreted as setting up a choice between vouchers and curriculum changes.
"There’s no reason you can’t have both — just like you like brownies and ice cream," Mr. Greene said. "You shouldn’t be made to choose."
When you reallocate funds from the school system to the vouchers, you limit the monies available for curriculum changes.
Labels: education, public v. private
Saturday, April 14, 2007
My Last (I hope) word on Imus
by Ken Houghton
My last word follows from Mark Cuban's:
And I fully expect that Imus (and, unfortunately, 'The I-Man') will end up on HBO or Sirius or XM or some other non-public airwave.* Which is fine; there are enough straight white males on the public airwaves trying to make other SWMs feel superior to others as a substitute for accomplishing anything themselves.
Let's see him survive in the private sector. As with the comedians Mannion and Mahablog were discussing, there's probably a demand; the question is whether it will produce a return on capital, or is already mature and declining. I know which way I would bet.
Let's see if Mark Cuban decides to put his money where his mouth is.
Note to readers: I've deleted several comments in the thread below by mutual agreement between Gary Farber, Bill Patterson, and me. If you've arrived here via a link at alt.fan.heinlein, I commend Patterson's forthcoming Heinlein bio for all the information provided in the deleted comments and much, much more.
*Assuming he doesn't just decide that, at age 67, he can take some time for his charity and his second family. (He appears to have forgotten his first, a la Robert A. Heinlein.)
The basketball team has continued to be the only classy thing about the whole episode, and it may well have cost us a governor, though that can't be blamed on Imus or Rutgers, but rather...well, let Jim MacDonald at Making Light explain.
My last word follows from Mark Cuban's:
Now for one last comment. If the Imus show was on HDNet would I have fired him ? Hell no. I would have expected him to apologize, but he would have kept his job. Firing him would just get him a job on HBO.
And I fully expect that Imus (and, unfortunately, 'The I-Man') will end up on HBO or Sirius or XM or some other non-public airwave.* Which is fine; there are enough straight white males on the public airwaves trying to make other SWMs feel superior to others as a substitute for accomplishing anything themselves.
Let's see him survive in the private sector. As with the comedians Mannion and Mahablog were discussing, there's probably a demand; the question is whether it will produce a return on capital, or is already mature and declining. I know which way I would bet.
Let's see if Mark Cuban decides to put his money where his mouth is.
Note to readers: I've deleted several comments in the thread below by mutual agreement between Gary Farber, Bill Patterson, and me. If you've arrived here via a link at alt.fan.heinlein, I commend Patterson's forthcoming Heinlein bio for all the information provided in the deleted comments and much, much more.
*Assuming he doesn't just decide that, at age 67, he can take some time for his charity and his second family. (He appears to have forgotten his first, a la Robert A. Heinlein.)
Labels: commonweal, Imus, Mannion, public v. private, Rutgers
