Below is my column in the Hill on the education cartel and how it is destroying our K-12 school system. After decades of bloated budgets and failing scores, our school system is now less popular than Cuba and communism. It is a particularly telling comparison in Chicago where union members went to Venezuela to praise the worker’s paradise of the Maduro regime while the school system dumped U.S. bonds in opposition to the American “regime.” Generations of inner-city children are being left without a future due to the failure of our school system, which prioritizes its own survival over its students.
Here is the column:
“In the first place, God made idiots,” Mark Twain once wrote in an 1879 travel book. “That was for practice. Then he made school boards.”
It appears that most Americans now agree with him. New polling shows that K-12 education has now reached a record low in the number of people who are even “somewhat satisfied” with the state of education in the U.S.
What is most troubling is that the near-total contempt for our school system does not make a bit of difference. Families and students have become largely irrelevant to an education cartel, a self-sustaining, self-perpetuating political alliance of unions and politicians.
According to Gallup, only 32 percent of American adults say they are “completely” or “somewhat” satisfied with the quality of K-12 education. That is the lowest figure in Gallup’s 27 years of asking the question. Public satisfaction with the school system has dropped almost 20 points since just 2024.
The collapse comes at a time when universities are reporting that college students are entering higher education without basic math and other skills.
We have also seen the dismal decline in standards at elite universities like Harvard, where faculty have been compelled to teach high school-level math classes to students.
In May, faculty in the University of California system (which eliminated standardized testing to achieve greater equity in admissions) reported an alarming lack of math knowledge among new students.
Most recently, a University of California, San Diego, faculty report found a nearly 30-fold increase since 2020 in incoming students whose math skills fell below a high-school level.
For many of us, neither the drop in skills nor public support is surprising. For generations, the public school system has failed students in major cities. Despite massive budget increases, actual test scores continue to fall or remain at subpar levels.
In a prior column, I was particularly moved by the frustration of a mother in Baltimore who complained that her son was in the top half of his class despite failing all but three of his classes. Her story led to my changing my view of school vouchers. Despite my long support for public schools, I believe vouchers may be the only way to wrest control away from the education cartel by introducing real competition based on academic performance.
Faced with low proficiency scores, teachers’ unions and school administrators have continued to lower proficiency requirements. They are simply pushing students out the door without basic skills, robbing these kids of any chance to break out of cycles of poverty and unemployment. When confronted with their poor performance, school board members have declared meritocracy to be a form of “white supremacy.” Gifted and talented programs are being eliminated in the name of so-called “equity.”
In any other field, such generational failure would be unthinkable. No business or enterprise could sustain itself. However, that is the point. There is little competition in this system. Blue states have largely blocked voucher systems while protecting teachers from performance-based standards.
Actual students have become irrelevant to budgets. In Chicago, there are schools that remain open despite 80 percent vacancy rates. One school, Frederick Douglass Academy High School has only 27 students, or 2 percent of its building’s capacity. The school system spends $55,000 for each student at Frederick Douglass Academy.
Overall, 35 percent of Chicago schools are half full or less. But that did not stop the schools from spending a couple million on transcendental meditation sessions or giving teachers and students days off to join May Day protests (with city-subsidized buses).
According to a recent study, in 2025, Chicago Teachers Union spent a record $4.2 million on politics and lobbying but less than 18 percent on representing teachers. This included massive contributions used to elect former teacher and union organizer Mayor Brandon Johnson, a former organizer for the union. Johnson, in turn, has effectively turned over his office to the far-left union.
In economics, there are few scourges older and more damaging than the cartel, which uses its power over an area to create “higher prices, lower quality, and stifled innovation.” There is a natural tendency for people to form such groups to stifle competition and feather their own nests. Adam Smith warned that “People of the same trade seldom meet together, even for merriment and diversion, but the conversation ends in a conspiracy against the public.”
The Education Cartel is becoming one of the greatest and most insidious forms of such anti-competitive conduct. Teacher unions have used hundreds of millions of dollars in campaign contributions to acquire unchallenged power in blue states where they can dictate ever-increasing salaries, pensions, and budgets. One estimate found that, since 2015, the nation’s two largest teachers unions — the National Education Association and the American Federation of Teachers — spent $669 million on federal campaigns and another $336 million on state and local campaigns.
Figures such as Randi Weingarten with the American Federation of Teachers effectively made their unions piggy banks for the Democratic Party and appear at far-left rallies to support Democratic causes. In return, Democratic leaders give this cartel most everything that it demands, including barring competition in the form of public vouchers or tying budgets to improving the education of actual students.
It is a closed circuit. Democratic leaders increase school budgets and salaries and the unions then send back hundreds of millions to fund Democratic campaigns.
If you want to understand the priorities of the unions, just watch one of National Education Association head Becky Pringle’s unhinged speeches.
Her declarations that the union will “win all of the things” clearly did not include educational improvements for students.
A recent study found that blue states with strong teachers’ unions overwhelmingly have worse student literacy scores than red states. At least eight of the ten states with the worst literacy scores were liberal districts with politically powerful teachers’ unions, according to the Progressive Policy Institute.
For example, in New York, more than half of third- to fifth-grade students failed their reading proficiency exams this year. And it isn’t about money: The state spends almost $37,000 per student to fund this bloated, poor-performing bureaucracy. But the unions also pump political contributions into the campaigns of Democratic leaders in every election, and nothing changes.
In the meantime, historically poor states like Mississippi and Arkansas, with relatively new voucher and performance-based systems, are showing major improvements in scores among their students. Yet when these same policies are proposed in blue states, they are routinely blocked by the powerful teachers’ unions.
Many liberals instinctively support unions and schools despite their costs. Recently, former New York Times journalist (and now Howard University Journalism Professor) Nikole Hannah-Jones drew criticism over an exchange with her daughter when she discussed her disappointment that her daughter would not stay at a majority-black, inner-city school despite its poor conditions and resources. Her daughter finally insisted on going to a private school out of concern for her own future as opposed to what Jones called supporting “her life’s work.”
Most families do not have the resources of Jones to make that choice. They are captives to a system that appears entirely detached and unresponsive to their same concerns as Jones’s daughter.
The mark of a cartel is that it controls competition while inflating profits or costs. However, the education cartel makes you long for the old oil or even drug cartels. The difference is that the education cartel actually charges cartel prices while producing diminishing products. It is like OPEC watering down the gas at the pump while pumping up the price. Everyone is getting windfall profits, from the unions to the politicians. Only the kids are being shortchanged by America’s school system.
Jonathan Turley is a law professor and the New York Times best-selling author of “Rage and the Republic: The Unfinished Story of the American Revolution.”
#. I haven’t tried it but I’m guessing a 4 year old can be taught phonics in a very brief time using fun computer programs with responses, 2 weeks for basic reading skills.
An average child is like a sponge soaking up most everything that’s presented and reinforced. The problem is maturation. Are the children ready for that much information. They may begin to twitch.
I don’t get it…PS: Pringle looks like a cute baby bird with head upturned wanting to be fed. ☺
The Democrat Party has come up with some brilliant new candidates for President of the country that used to be called Amereica or the United States:
The Babylon Bee is a comedy show for sadists.
Wrong, troll. The Babylon Bee journalists always do thorough investigations in their stories and they have solid reputation for producing “Fake news you can trust”.
In stark contrast, such media outlets as The New Yorik Times, The Washington Post, ABC, NBC, CBS, CNN, and MS NOW (MSNBC) only have a solid reputation for producing “Fake news you can’t trust”.
Babylon Bee merely takes the truth to a new level.
It’s labeled AI. Isn’t it all evil AI? Most people watch none of it.
It’s a little like an emergency room after a train wreck , isn’t it.
Oops, I must have been politically incorrect. Censored.
K-12 is Democrat education and unions are controlled by democrats.
Ta ta
Excerpt from the article: “A recent study found that blue states with strong teachers’ unions overwhelmingly have worse student literacy scores than red states. At least eight of the ten states with the worst literacy scores were liberal districts with politically powerful teachers’ unions, according to the Progressive Policy Institute.”
My two cents: Most parents of dyslexic children as well as private Orton-Gillingham practitioners know the truth about the public school SYSTEM (not faulting individuals, faulting the SYSTEM but some individuals are certainly complicit) setting the bar low for neurodiverse children – many of whom are quite capable of achieving on par or above their neurotypical peers with appropriate identification (say dyslexia) and support.
In most cases, support is simply a matter of providing Orton-Gillingham training for K-2 teachers and allowing them to use it to help not only dyslexic students but ALL students K-2 become better readers and writers. Instead, the SYSTEM’S plan is to set the bar low not just for dyslexics but for all students now.
The public schools have known how to properly teach reading for literally years and years and years. The problem is that a truly educated population doesn’t fit the left’s agenda. They keep taking more and more tax dollars and misusing them to dumb down the children they hope to control in the future.
The term “education” is used pretty loosely in the USA🤣
Public schools are our largest, long-term bet on socialism. Where they have been successful, they depended upon the good will and the energy of a few dedicated teachers. Without significant competition (except from pricey private schools and the church schools) they have become jobs-programs and targets for public grifters. Time to give up and start over.
Trump bribing voters with $5,000 is election fraud. This is the same guy who cried about rigged and stolen elections.
How Trump is destroying the election system by his brazen bribery is a topic worthy of an article.
Absent the shenanigans the left pulls it is impossible to bribe someone for their vote in the US.
Secret Ballot voting – which is required by the constitutions of 38 states, and is why it is critical that the law is followed scrupulously during voting – because after the ballots are deposited it is impossible to tell who voted and how they voted.
That means that you can not bribe someone to vote for you – it is impossible for a voter to prove how they voted, so they can not collect a bribe for their vote. But it also means that even if you identify a person who voted fraudulently once their ballot is cast you can not remove that illegal vote.
Not Trump is not bribing people for their vote.
If you are offered money connected in anyway to an election – take it, and vote however you please.
If you are offered money if one party wins – that is exactly the election promises that democrats have been making my entire life.
Regardless, Bribing voters (except mail in voters) is impossible in the US.
We should do as those who last faced massive election fraud did in the 19th century – follow the constitutions of 38 states and ban all mailin voting.
All voting must be done in person in secret at a polling place. Personally I would prefer it was on election day. But that is not a requirement.
This does not preclude early voting or absentee voting of even the millitary voting overseas – soldiers go to the equivalent of a poll receive the correct ballot for their home location fill it out at the poll, and it is sealed and shipped back.
What is critical is that the ballot never leaves the polling place and the voter has no ability to prove to anyone how they voted.
But the left has shackled us with the most fraudulent form of voting their is, and we are likely stuck with it until a major election fraud occurs and is caught beyond any doubt.
With certainty that is just a matter of time. The claim that election fraud is rare is nonense.
The same people who commit welfare fraud, social security fraud or any other form of public fraud will commit election fraud.
Trump is doing more than a bribe – he is rewarding the potential for an attack on the voting system itself. His requirement is that Republicans win. That can be achieved both by voting for Republicans and stopping people from voting for Democrats.
Think firebombing polling places, calling in SWAT, calling in bomb threats. Drive-by shootings. Mass destruction. As long as the Republicans win those who are motivated to do this damage will be paid.
Just like Trump set aside a giant fund for those who attack the government on his behalf and pardoned those who did attack the vote, Trump has built a reward for mass destruction, for terrorism, and a promise that those who perform that terrorism will all be pardoned.
#. John, voters have feet to travel. Does anyone track voters by interstate? Vote and travel registering at the last legal minute and using early mail in ballots?
Off topic. If you want to rant tandomly about your pet peeves start your own blog and see who comes.
Trump The Gas Bag
At his rally in Nebraska, Trump claimed that high prices due to the war with Iran are a “small price to pay for keeping the world safe – keeping our country safe”. He went on: “They can take out a city. Let them take out Los Angeles. Let them take out San Diego.” The crowd clapped.
From Today’s The Guardian
……………………………………
Does Trump know that San Diego is a major military town? Or is he just a sputtering gas bag?
^ Chinese propaganda slop ^
Are you saying that a nuclear weapon on a ICBM can not strike San Diego ?
Iran had sufficient 60% enriched uranium to build 11 atomic bombs. Unlike plutonium weapons – the only significant technological issue with a U235 bomb is obtaining enough U235. Once that is done there is nothing complex about making it into a bomb.
How long would it have taken for Iran to convert that 60% enriched uranium to a working bomb ? Weeks ? Months ? maybe a year ?
The Iranians have been building a nuke for decades – it only took the US 2 years to build the Hiroshima bomb.
It is likely that it would have taken Iran longer than most fearful estimates. But working nuclear bombs was inevitable.
Delivering a nuclear bomb via ICBM would take longer – but Iran can already reach much of Europe. Reaching San Diego is only a matter of time.
No a nation whose leaders are h311 bent on genocide and have no problems murdering 50,000 of their own people to hold power should not be allowed to get nuclear weapons.
Iran built zero nuclear weapons and has zero ICBMs capable of delivering any.
Trump supports letting Iran, encouraging them, to attack Democratically held cities. Then he would not only see his opposition decreased, he would then be supported in a retaliatory nuclear strike – the second President to order nuclear weapons used against another nation. He loves nothing more than being the bully.
OT
“IS PARIS BURNING?” Hitler famously asked after looking on the ruins of Berlin and ordering his generals to destroy Paris.
It wasn’t.
Even Nazi generals didn’t want to destroy Paris, and so it survived.
Now Paris IS burning and the globalists, EU and reckless politicians have accomplished what even Hitler could not do by opening Europe’s borders to hordes of savages who, like globalists, despise civilization.
Maybe tomorrow will be even worse because these savages may ‘celebrate’ the October 7 atrocities which, in themselves, exceeded Nazi depravity. The Nazis tried to hide their evil. The October 7 monsters filmed them, published them and gloated over them.
Evil is loose in the world again.
Young, tell us which European country has the highest birth rate. (Spoiler alert: They all have low birthrates).
They are getting a lot of babies named Mohammed.
Young, that’s nature. It’s happening here and all over the developed world. And interestingly Russia is trafficking third worlders into the European Union just out of spite.
Immigration from backwards countries is being used as a weapon by hostile states.
The old concerns about “The Population Bomb” turned out to be a dud, but the new version using illegal immigration as a weapon is proving to be genuinely explosive.
Anonymous – it is not happening in Russia, Japan or China – the 3 nations in the world with the lowest birth rates and the worst demographic problems.
Trash bins are burning, not cities. Get a grip.
More than trash bins. Also schools and buildings, troll. I have watched lots of videos.
Teachers have been attacked and injured as well as ordinary French citizens .
One good thing is that Le Pen’s party is soaring in the polls and others are beginning to flat line.
It may be too late for France. I like Le Pen but she may not be strong enough. This is how you get a Franco or Cincinnatus or even a Sulla. If they are lucky they may get another Napoleon.
Poor France.
It is good that the french left is disempowered.
But it is dubious to assert that La Penn is a solution to anything except the power of a failed french left.
National Rally is just a different form of statist socialism.
France is screwed one way or the other.
John,
Likely true. That is why I said this is how a country gets a Franco or Sulla.
David Betz seems convinced things are about to get much worse.
I think Spain would be better off now if they still had Franco.
Meloni is holding fast?
I too have watched lots of videos; no schools are burning. The only ones attacking teachers are the police.
Indeed, it is that time. If you think it you’ve done it as in the UK? Prophecy of JC denotes a time period and AI knows it plugging all holes?
Idiots
Double dip: I’m beginning to think the trolls are right about one thing: many here are armchair retirees with zero first hand experience with any of this and no direct skin in the game. This is not an intellectual exercise, and the world you keep debating already no longer exists. 🤷🏽♂️ It ain’t coming back. Acquaint yourselves with the present.
There’s truth to that. 85% of world nations are 3rd world or developing nations as its called now and some nations without any government at all. The US was an island of sorts.
10/6/2026
There are 29 school districts in Erie County, New York encompassing a total of 227 schools.
See: https://publicschoolsk12.com/school-districts/ny/erie-county/
Each one has superintendent paid via a very lucrative, private contract along with the bureaucracy that goes along with it that is similar in management structure to that of a business corporation.
What does a superintendent do?
“A school superintendent is a professional educator who is responsible for the overall management and administration of a school district. They are responsible for the development and implementation of policies, programs and procedures that support the district’s mission and goals. This includes the supervision and evaluation of school administrators and staff, as well as the management of the district’s budget and resources.
The superintendent also serves as the chief executive officer of the school district and is responsible for communicating with and representing the district to the community, the school board and other stakeholders. They also work closely with the school board to develop and implement long-term plans for the district, and to ensure that the district’s policies and practices align with state and federal laws and regulations.
In addition to these administrative responsibilities, school superintendents also play a key role in ensuring that all students have access to a high-quality education. This includes working with teachers and other educators to develop and implement effective instructional programs, and to ensure that all students, regardless of background or ability, have the opportunity to succeed. Overall, the school superintendent is a critical leader in the education community, responsible for managing and leading the district, and ensuring that all students have access to the resources and support they need to succeed.”
See: https://careers.ncea.org/career/school-superintendent/job-descriptions
A primary school curriculum for mathematics, science, social studies, language, music, physical education, health, practical trades, etc. should not be any different across all school districts.
See: relay.libguides.com/new-york/standards
Please tell me why we need 29 superintendents for the county and the associated administrative costs when they all basically do the same thing in each district?
Why not:
1. Abolish school boards since they are easily manipulated by a school district superintendent.
2. Create a county schools superintendent elected on a political ballot and voted on by all the
residents of the county. The county schools superintendent makes standardized education policy
for the county.
3. A committee made up of the school district principals propose sharing facilities for extracurricular
activities such as sports, music and fine arts as well as common administrative costs such as
computer technology to reduce expenses and school budgets are adjusted to reflect the savings.
4. Each principal of a school in its district makes up the budget for the school. The budget is
submitted for approval or amendment to the county schools superintendent.
5. The principal of a school should respond to the media about any administrative or safety issues
with a school instead of hearing “damage control speak” from a district superintendent as is done
today.
6. The school district budget is still voted on by the residents of the district as is done today.
It’s quite simple, really. It’s just another example of Socialism not working anywhere it’s ever been tried, including and especially in our education system.
Democrats are DEI/Socialists at heart, which is why their teachers unions and college professors oppose competition/Capitalism/School Choice.
They will dumb down the materials and lower/eliminate standards/goals in order to get more of the students barely-passing while none are allowed to excel (because that’s “racist”). This leads to students starting college while reading at an 8th-grade level (if they’re lucky).
School Choice should become the FEDERAL law of the land if we want this education Titanic to avoid the iceberg.
If parents keep voting for Democrats in those blue states, they deserve what they get, even though it will be their own children who suffer. And, like Nikole Hannah-Jones, they will never blame themselves for “da’ gubmint” not educating their kids.
Parents who really care should sue the $hit out of teachers unions and colleges for (1) bribing public officials and (2) preventing competition via School Choice.
Why don’t conservatives lead by example and cut teacher pay by 90% while demanding the entire graduating class be accepted to every Ivy League school, but decline full ride scholarships to go to a conservative religious school where students are required to have chastity devices locked to their genitals for the full term?
They can be like Speaker of the House Mike Johnson and have a chastity app on their phone that reports any access of pornography or leftist websites and tattles on them to their parents and the school administration for immediate, no-tolerance policy expulsion.
Make it easier and make it illegal for girls to be educated beyond 6th grade so that all-male education can Make America Great Again! Can’t have rape on college if women are forbidden to have contact with students. Except for the boys raping each other with their junk locked up.
There are teachers’ unions and then there are unions for bargaining representatives such as the AFT. The AFT retirement package is full salary, full benefits, life insurance included and whatever else they’ve bargained for there contracts. Pringle might need a car every 2 years?
Teachers are paid via taxes and teachers pay the AFT. Teachers are the middleman. Quite lucrative…
Just a note of no significance…
^^^^ . The unions are definitely an arm of the democrats. Any republican teacher can withdraw membership partially or in whole. The least Republicans should do is withdraw money for political action, in part. They should do this as a mass effort.
There isn’t a republican union representative in education. This effects the election of State superintendents. California has removed state superintendent because a republican was elected. All decisions have been placed with the governor. The super exists but hasn’t meaningful work.
😂 . It deserves a sardonic laugh.
^^^. The saga of Sonya Shaw, she declares she has 1A freedoms, too. The audacity…
😂
^^^ A tip–organize republican teachers. Withdraw political action money.
The catch may be liability insurance provided by unions. Liability coverage is expensive. This too can be organized if a republican organization is large enough.
Bust it up…
The Founders feared not merely dictatorship by a single ruler, but the tyranny of the majority—the power of a dependent majority to confiscate the property and liberties of the minority.
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
“But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.”
– Declaration of Independence, 1776
“… One estimate found that, since 2015, the nation’s two largest teachers unions — the National Education Association and the American Federation of Teachers — spent $669 million on federal campaigns and another $336 million on state and local campaigns.” – JT
Yeah OK, but what did the same Unions draw-in ($) on Union Dues? Lets see the Union Book’s Balance Sheet. What ($) do the Union Bosses take home? What are the Other and Off-Sheet Expenses ($) for?
Privatization.
This constant whining that schools are failing to educate our kids just makes me want to puke.
It is not the job of schools to educate kids. It is the job of parents and family to educate. Schools provide a source of knowledge to help in education, but as the old saying goes…. You can lead a horse to water but you can’t make him drink.
If children are not willing to learn, then no amount of teaching in schools can educate them. The burden falls to the parents to instill in their children the desire to learn. Only then can the education system succeed.
The failure lies with the parents, not the schools.
The proof of this lies with Asian families. Asian parents and families instill in their children the desire to learn and succeed. Asian children are taught by their parents, as well as their extended family, to value education and succeed in school. Without this encouragement it is simply not possible for teachers to educate children.
It is no coincidence that Asians dominate in the highest levels of our universities and research centers. Karl Deisseroth, MD, PhD, a professor at Stanford has just won the Nobel Prize. Look here at the webpage for his lab.
https://dlab.stanford.edu/group-members
More than half his students are Asian, yet Asians are less than 10% of the population.
Anonymous, you’re actually making part of my formation argument for me.
A child doesn’t walk through the schoolhouse door as a blank slate. He brings with him habits and expectations formed at home. Does learning matter? Do I finish what I start? Do I respect the teacher? Do I keep working when something is difficult? Parents and family have an enormous influence on those things.
Your Asian families example makes the same point. What you’re describing is a family culture that forms habits and expectations around learning. That’s formation, not ethnicity.
Where I lose you is the claim that it isn’t the school’s job to educate. Of course it is. We built schools, hired teachers and spend a great deal of public money specifically to educate children. A school can’t guarantee that every child will learn, but it can certainly be held responsible for whether it teaches effectively.
That’s why I don’t think this is an either/or question. Family forms the child. School forms the child too. So do church, community and eventually work.
And that’s the point I’ve been making. Formation doesn’t begin and end at the schoolhouse door, but neither does the school’s responsibility.
OLLY
What I actually said, if you read carefully, is that schools are a part of the education process in that they provide a knowledge base. The responsibility for educating children does not fall entirely to schools and teachers. The ultimate responsibility for educating children falls to the parents and the extended family. They have a responsibility to instill in children the desire to learn.
Schools and teachers have a role to play in education, but it is secondary to the role of the parents and family. The role of parents and family is the most important.
If children have no desire to learn because their parents have failed to instill that desire, then no amount of teaching in schools can educate them. Parents who fail to instill this desire in their children and simply expect schools to educate their children are the ones who have failed.
Teachers cannot educate children who refuse to learn and have no desire to learn.
No amount of “effective teaching” can educate a child who refuses to learn.
The fact that Asian children are so successful is proof that by and large the vast majority of schools provide “effective teaching” as you put it.
Parents cannot simply blame teachers for their own failures.
Anonymous, I did read carefully. You wrote, It is not the job of schools to educate kids. It is the job of parents and family to educate.
That’s the statement I responded to.
Now you’re saying schools and teachers do have a role in educating children, but that the primary responsibility belongs to parents. That’s a different statement, and on that we’re a lot closer.
I agree that parents have the first and probably most important formative role. A kid who arrives at school with discipline, curiosity, respect for learning and the expectation that effort matters has an enormous advantage. And parents shouldn’t get to hand their responsibility to the school and then blame the teacher when things go badly.
But the school still has a responsibility for what happens during the seven hours a day it has that child. And I don’t think the school’s role is limited to providing a “knowledge base.” A good teacher can awaken curiosity, strengthen discipline, build confidence and sometimes reach a kid whose home didn’t provide much of any of those things.
That’s why I keep resisting the either/or. Parents form. Schools form. The fact that one gets there first doesn’t mean the other doesn’t matter.
OLLY
You are correct that my original statement was too generalized and not artfully worded. I meant to say that it is not entirely the responsibility of schools to educate.
However, I still disagree with you that a teacher can or should be held responsible for “awakening curiosity, strengthening discipline, building confidence”. That responsibility relies entirely with the parents. If a child comes to school with no internalized desire to learn and succeed, then a teacher may attempt to develop that sense, but in no way can they be held responsible for failing in that endeavor if the child refuses to learn.
The primary role of the teacher is to provide a knowledge base that builds on the child’s desire to learn, as instilled by the parents and family. The fact that Asian children do so much better in the same schools as Caucasian children is testament to the fact that the vast majority of schools are succeeding, and it is the children that are refusing to learn.
The only failure lies with the parents of those children who refuse to learn.
Anonymous, I think there’s an important distinction in what I actually said. I said a good teacher can awaken curiosity, strengthen discipline, build confidence and sometimes reach a kid whose home didn’t provide much of those things. I didn’t say a teacher is responsible for making sure every child develops them.
Those are two very different claims.
I agree that parents carry the primary responsibility. A teacher can’t undo years of bad formation, and I wouldn’t hold a teacher responsible because a student simply refuses to learn.
But responsibility and formative influence aren’t the same thing.
A child spends roughly seven hours a day at school. That’s a huge portion of his waking weekday, and arguably more sustained time than many parents get with him. Then add homework, extracurricular activities and everything else connected to school.
There is simply no way that environment isn’t forming him.
A demanding teacher who expects students to come prepared, finish what they start, defend an answer and try again when they’re wrong is forming something beyond knowledge. So is a teacher who tolerates disruption, accepts excuses and expects very little.
Teachers don’t replace parents. But spend seven hours a day with a child and you’re going to have a hand in forming him.
So yes, parents have the first and greatest responsibility. But if we put children inside an institution for thousands of hours during some of the most formative years of their lives, we can’t reasonably say that institution is only transferring knowledge.
It’s forming them too.
I am not saying that teachers do not have a role in “forming” students. They have a role, but it is secondary to the parent role. Their role is to build on what the parent has started. If the parents have failed to start this process then it imposes unreasonable expectations on the teacher, who is now expected to make up for the parents failure.
The point I am making is that if a child refuses to be formed, and refuses to learn, then there is not much that anyone, including teachers can do to correct that. The teacher cannot be held responsible if a child refuses to be formed. You do not explicitly say that teachers have a duty to form students, but you imply that when a child is not formed appropriately, then the teacher bears some degree of responsibility and at some level has failed in an implied duty. If that is what you actually mean than I reject that.
A teacher can certainly try to “form” a child, but that formation is a two way street. The child must be willing to be formed. If there is no willingness to be formed or to learn, there is nothing to be done, and the teacher bears no responsibility.
The duty of formation falls to the parent.
The failure of a child to be educated is the failure of the parents.
The example of Asian students doing well in the same schools where Caucasians fail is evidence of this.
Anonymous, I think the problem is that each time we narrow the disagreement, you concede the qualification and then return to an absolute that the qualification doesn’t support.
You’ve now said teachers do have a role in forming students. We agree.
You’ve said formation is a two-way street. We agree.
I’ve said a teacher cannot be held responsible when a student simply refuses to learn. We agree.
But then you conclude, “The failure of a child to be educated is the failure of the parents.”
That’s the part I can’t follow.
I think your Asian student example gets to the heart of it. You keep pointing to students who come from homes that place a high value on education and then succeed in the same schools where other students fail.
Fine. Let’s accept the example exactly as you present it.
What does it prove?
It proves that formation at home matters enormously. I’ve never disputed that. If one kid arrives at school with discipline, curiosity, responsibility and an expectation that learning matters, while another doesn’t, of course they’re going to respond differently to the same school.
But that doesn’t prove formation begins and ends at home. It proves that earlier formation affects what happens in the next environment.
And the school is still an environment.
The teacher’s expectations matter. The other students matter. What gets rewarded matters. What gets tolerated matters. Success and failure matter. Spend seven hours a day there and that environment is going to have some hand in forming you.
That’s why I keep separating primary responsibility from formative influence.
Parents get the first crack at us, and probably the most important one. But they don’t get the last.
School follows home. Work follows school. Marriage, military service, churches, communities, government, friends and culture keep acting on us.
Formation accumulates.
So I don’t think your example contradicts what I’ve been saying. I think it demonstrates it.
I think you are missing my point.
My point is that some children who arrive at school are not formable, and are simply not willing to learn. There is very little to be done about that. There is a fundamental failure of the parents to initiate formation. And that duty to initiate formation falls exclusively to the parents before school.
These children are not educable and are therefore not appropriately educated in the school system. The prevailing view here is that this somehow means that the school system has failed. It has not. The fact that many students, including Asians, do well in the system belies that notion.
It is all too easy for those parents who have failed to form their children to then try to shift the blame to teachers and the school system that they believe have failed their children. This is a failure of the parents, not the schools. One could even say that this failure of the parents is a failure of their own formation. They have not been appropriately formed for the duties of parenthood and therefore fail to form their own children.
The failure lies with the parents, not the schools or teachers.
Anonymous, I think “unformable” is where your argument loses me.
If a child arrives at school unwilling to learn because of what happened, or didn’t happen, at home, then that child isn’t unformable. He has already been formed.
He may have been formed to resist authority, avoid responsibility, expect little of himself or see no value in learning. But those are still formed habits and expectations.
And if a child can be formed into those habits, he can also be formed away from them.
That doesn’t mean it’s easy. It doesn’t mean every teacher can reach every child. It certainly doesn’t mean the teacher is responsible when a child refuses to learn.
It simply means “difficult to form” isn’t the same thing as “unformable.”
In fact, a child formed to be unteachable is evidence that formation has already occurred. The question is whether later experiences can strengthen what was formed at home or begin changing it.
That’s why I can’t accept that formation begins and ends with the parents. What happens at home matters enormously, probably more than anything else early in life. But it isn’t necessarily the last word.
If formation can take us in one direction, formation can also move us in another.
You are twisting yourself into a pretzel to rationalize a preconceived belief that the school system has failed. You have decided that the system has failed and you are not listening to alternative views.
In these gymnastics of rationalization you are actually contradicting yourself.
Above at 5:49 you said, “A teacher can’t undo years of bad formation”. Now you say that a child that has been formed to resist learning and not value education has actually been formed badly, and since he is therefore formable, it must be possible to form him away from bad habits. You can’t have it both ways.
The bottom line is that some kids arrive at school with no sense of the value of education. That is a failure of the parents to instill those values. It is not a failure of the school system if that child refuses to learn. It is a failure of the parents.
My position is that children who have not been formed to value education have not been formed at all in this regard. There is an absence of formation. You are trying to say that these children have been badly formed.
You are trying to equate absence of formation with bad formation, and that simply will not fly. You are engaging in post facto rationalization
I come back to the observation that most kids do well at schools where many fail. Although Asians tend to be the most obvious example of this, the fact is that most kids succeed. The kids who fail are the ones whose parents have failed in their duty to instill in their children the importance of education. And when their kids fail, they blame the school.
Anonymous, the irony of the “pretzel” comment is that I’ve spent this entire exchange untwisting yours.
Each time I’ve challenged one of your absolutes, you’ve qualified it.
You eventually agreed that teachers do have a role in formation. You agreed formation is a two-way street. You agreed teachers can influence formation. And I’ve repeatedly agreed with you that a teacher should not be blamed when a student simply refuses to learn.
My position hasn’t changed.
Parents have the first and greatest responsibility for forming their children. Teachers and schools also have formative influence. And a teacher is not responsible for every child he cannot reach.
Now you’re telling me I’ve “decided the school system has failed” and I’m rationalizing my way toward blaming schools.
I never said that. Not once. In fact, I’ve repeatedly said the opposite.
So disagree with my actual argument if you want. But don’t invent a position for me and then accuse me of twisting myself into a pretzel trying to defend it.
I’ve spent most of this exchange getting you to qualify yours.
Well, let’s simplify the situation.
My position, contrary to the prevailing view here, is that the school system does not fail students who want to learn. Students who have a sense of the value of education invariably succeed.
The school system has not failed.
The blame for the failure of some students lies with parents.
What is your position?
You have not made your position definitively clear, but you have implied that the school system is not doing its job.
Is the school system failing in their role to educate?
Anonymous, my position has been clear from the beginning. Go back up the thread and read it.
Parents have the first and greatest responsibility for forming their children. Teachers and schools also have formative influence. And a teacher should not be blamed simply because a student refuses to learn.
I’ve said all of that repeatedly.
What I have never said is that “the school system has failed.” You keep assigning that position to me and then asking me to defend it.
So let me answer your question directly.
Do schools sometimes fail in their role to educate? Of course they do.
Do parents sometimes fail to prepare their children to learn? Of course they do.
Do students sometimes refuse to learn despite having capable parents and capable teachers? Of course they do.
Those things can all be true.
That’s why I reject your absolute that if a student fails, “the failure lies with the parents, not the schools or teachers.”
We actually have evidence of students changing schools and having very different academic outcomes. Students can struggle in one environment and thrive in another. That fact alone should tell us that the school environment matters.
And your statement that students who value education “invariably succeed” is another absolute that simply can’t carry the weight you’re putting on it. A student can value education and still encounter poor instruction or a poor school environment.
This is the same problem we’ve had throughout this exchange. Every time I challenge one of your absolutes, you qualify it. Teachers had a role after all. Formation became a two-way street. Teachers could influence formation after all.
My position hasn’t required those corrections. Yours has.
And here’s the bigger problem with where you’ve ended up:
Successful student? The parents succeeded.
Failed student? The parents failed.
If that’s your test, the school can never succeed or fail because you’ve defined every outcome as evidence about the parents.
That’s not evidence that schools don’t matter. It’s a conclusion you’ve built into the premise.
Parents matter enormously. Schools matter too. Students themselves matter.
I’ve been saying that from the beginning.
“The blame for the failure of some students lies with parents.”
Of course, the parents are the greatest influence on children in a primary manner. However, they also have tremendous influence on the political power Democrats wield over the school system based on money (donations) and power (the teachers’ unions).
The answer to the problem is competition and parent choice.
I agree, and I think you’re making the strongest argument possible for school choice!
It’s not just a matter of “school choice”. This is a canard, an easy and comforting distraction to avoid the reality that most parents fail in their responsibility to educate their children by instilling a desire to learn.
The desire to learn is the most important factor in educating a child. Without it, a teacher’s job is futile. You cannot teach a child who refuses to learn.
Simply saying that “school choice” is the answer is a soothing platitude that denies reality. If a child does not have the desire to learn, then no school, public or private, can overcome that failure of the parents.
I have two additional comments for this. First, who is ultimately responsible for the curriculum that our public school teachers are required to deliver? It seems to be mandated by people ho have never stepped foot in an actual classroom. Additionally the problem I see with how private schools are showing successes, is that they are completely allowed to pick and choose who they allow to attend. It becomes exponentially easier to show success and progress with a cherry picked class of students. Any public school could easily show improvement in leaps and bounds if they were afforded the same opportunity to hand select the students they wanted. But the role (and law) of the public school is to educate every student and provide the accommodations for them that private schools can deny. We are being regulated at a level that makes it expensive and nearly impossible to meet the ever changing requirements that are mandated.
NYC proves the case for Charter Schools and other competition to the Public School system. I’ve mentioned this many times, so you should read the addendum to the book Charter Schools and Their Enemies. The addendum shows the study with a direct comparison of randomly chosen students. NYC Charter schools left the Public Schools in the dust.
“allowed to pick and choose”
That’s your argument that fails, since randomness eliminates hand-selected students. This comparison can compare twins, brothers, and sisters where one is in the public system and the other in the charter system.
Any more complaints about an unfair comparison? I’ll add one more. Charter Schools were paid 75% of the public school’s per-capita costs.
Studies have shown that there are improvements by selecting a small group for special attention, with positive gains in response to either positive or negative changes. In the case of NY charter schools, I expect the charter schools were in new buildings with new books and new desks, cutting the spending on heating and cooling and maintenance.
I also expect that the random choices were among those who applied to be in the charter schools, showing parental involvement with the child’s education.
You are missing one of the two job responsibilities of a good teacher: Inspiration — to instill intellectual curiosity in the subject. If you don’t convince students to *value* what you’re teaching them, if you don’t *sell* them on the importance of that knowledge — you haven’t done your job. The best teachers do motivate students to learn. The mediocre ones merely try to convey a body of knowledge. The hacks do neither.
Your example of Asians proves nothing about k-12 education in general. What it does prove is that many of their parents make up for the lack of education in schools, by teaching them at home and via buying courses and tutoring outside the school.
How do I know this? Thirty years as a professional educator, including k-12, 25 in academia — which included teaching the type of Asian students you’re talking about, and years of teaching teachers how to teach.
How did you inspire students who had drug crime as the major employer in their neighborhood? Who had one small meal a day because that’s all their parent could afford? Who had seen a friend in the hospital ER for a gun shot? Who passed a dozen drug addicts on the way to school everyday?
Must have been an exciting career turning every one of those students around and sending them off to a full ride scholarship.
“How did you inspire students who had drug crime as the major employer in their neighborhood?”
NYC conducted a study on Charter Schools, including those in drug-crime-infested areas. Charter Schools caused a tremendous shift in proficiency in math and reading. The policies of the left are like drugs poisoning our youth