Added to VDARE.com on April 12, 2007
'The Worm In The Apple' Of American Education
By
Ilana Mercer
WorldNetDaily, February 20, 2004
Mention standardized testing for
high-school pupils and teachers, or dare suggest that a
core curriculum be enforced in the nation's schools, and
the educational establishment goes on the offensive.
There is nothing that riles these
politicized special interests—led by the largest union
in the country, the National Education Association—more
than the threat of performance-based evaluation
(testing) and compensation (merit pay). The latest
muscle-flex by this mafia has come in response to the
not exactly exacting requirements of Mr. Bush's No Child
Left Behind initiative.
As best-selling author Peter
Brimelow points out in his pathbreaking,
The Worm in the Apple: How the Teacher Unions Are
Destroying American Education, union officials
invariably respond to the deterioration in the schools
by seeking to abolish the gauges of decay: tests, for
one. Another signature rejoinder is the "M-O-R-E"-money
motto. So you have to know that if the rapacious
educrats would sooner forego federal funds than comply
with an Act, they are feeling the heat.
The point here is not to debate the
dubious merits of Mr. Bush's plan to improve
accountability in the nation's failing schools. As
Brimelow proves, the perverse incentives in this
socialized system don't allow for much latitude. The
thing to observe, however, is how masterful the educrats
are at mounting a noisy, well-masked offensive at the
slightest threat to their Soviet-style status quo.
Be they standardized tests, charter
schools or vouchers—any attempt at tweaking
"government schools" affects the "hydra-headed"
monster that is the NEA like kryptonite affects
Superman. Or so says the author of the "The Worm in
the Apple," having taken on a mighty but sinister
Superman—the NEA has 2.6 million members and collects
$1.25 billion in annual revenues.
Together with the smaller American
Federation of Teachers, the NEA holds hostage parents
who are, invariably, desperate to educate their
children. Its power lies in the monopolistic nature of
public education. The essence of any labor union,
explains Brimelow, is the attempt to "monopolize the
supply of labor in their particular industries, in order
to increase its price in the form of wages."
Compulsory-attendance laws prevent parents from opting
out of the system. Which is why, in a bygone and more
just era, the public sector was prohibited by law from
engaging in collective bargaining. Back then, the unions
were mere "tea and crumpets" professional
societies. They turned into rogue organizations around
the time politicians allowed the public sector to
unionize.
This was also when the "Great
Decline" in education commenced. (Yes,
"correlation is not cause," but, as our author
reminds us, it is "suggestive.") Brimelow cites
Harvard economist
Caroline Hoxby's studies on the effects of
unionization on the school system. She has found that,
over the decades, it "raised inflation-adjusted per
pupil spending, increased dropout rates, and ensured
stagnant student performance" (p. 37).
Let us count the ways, then:
The unions set rules about hiring,
firing, layoffs and promotion—rules about how teachers
are to be evaluated and paid, and how the evaluations
are to be used; rules about the assignment of teachers
to classrooms, and their non-assignment to yard duty,
lunch duty, hall duty and after-school activities; rules
about how much time teachers can be required to work,
how much time they must get to prepare for class; rules
about class schedules; rules about how students are to
be disciplined; rules about homework, class size, number
and use of teacher aides; rules about handling
grievances, time for professional meetings, who can join
the union ... ad nauseam (p. 38).
Before moving on to the book's
prodigious achievement, a word about Brimelow's
stylistic panache (and, hence, punch).
The description of the National
Education Association's annual 1999 meeting or
"Representative Assembly" is delicious. The
attendees "wobble and waddle through the teeming
crowds of teachers ... thighs like tree trunks, bellies
billowing, jowls jiggling," leaving us with a
lasting mental image of our children's
over-sated role models.
The exhibitors and NEA
political-interest group booths are "as colorful as
the hucksters and jugglers at any medieval fair."
From the Gay and Lesbian Caucus, to the Women's Caucus,
and Black Caucus, to the
free-Mumia-Abu-Jamal motions, the Assembly is a
veritable "coven of cranks."
In this microcosm of American
school culture, there is, tellingly, a "paucity of
textbook exhibitors," although pizza is plentiful. A
delivery arrives just as the delegates "were quietly
beginning to starve." (Characteristically, some
dry-as-dust reviewers took issue with Brimelow's
brimming-with-personality pizzazz.)
The teacher unions, of course, are
flabby not merely in chins and bellies. Brimelow sets
about assessing the effects of this politburo on
pedagogy with reference to the efficiency of the
education system, as expressed in its output and
input. His first journalistic pincer closes in on
the system's qualitative output.
Evidence of how stupid American
students (and teachers) are has been slowly amassing.
The creeping cretinism is confirmed by reports like
"A Nation at Risk." Especially indicative are
the below-international-average scores of 17-year-olds.
One out of four children is dropping out and not
graduating. High schools have been so dumbed down that
even average students sit bone idle. Fully 50 percent of
students with IQs that border on mental retardation
manage to pass. Unlike our European counterparts,
American universities, colleges and even corporations
spend a fortune on teaching students elementary things
they should have learned in high school. College
professors attest to a decline in the quality of
students entering colleges.
Fair to a fault, however, Brimelow
draws surprisingly cautious conclusions. True, there are
schools in
Miami Dade County that make the madrasas of
Indonesia, Turkey, and Tunisia look promising. But,
equally, there's a school in Illinois that outperforms
the excellent schools of Taiwan and Singapore. American
schools are producing very mixed results.
But don't be fooled by Brimelow's
charitable conclusions—this is only the halftime mark.
With his second pincer—assessing the input or
quantitative aspects of the system—Brimelow swoops
down for the kill.
The education system is a hog of
huge proportions. In 1890, "annual current spending
per pupil was $275." In 1999-2000, it was $7,086.
"Adjusted for inflation and expressed in year 2000
dollars," that's "25-fold." If GDP has since
increased on average by only 1.9 percent per year, the
spending on education has outpaced it, increasing 3
percent per year (p.26).
Simultaneously, the
student-to-teacher ratio has been declining—there are
ever more teachers compared to the number of students.
One of the union's goals is to pile on the
personnel—this means more members and more union dues.
Consequently, the teacher-to-student ratio is now down
to an astonishing 1:16.5. (Include non-teaching staff,
and there is now one adult for every eight or nine
children in government schools.)
To this end, class-size reduction
initiatives have been used to defraud taxpayers of
billions, even though there is no consistent
relationship between smaller class size and student
achievement. There is, however, a solid connection
between teacher quality and student accomplishment. But
the teacher unions thwart any market process that would
help separate good from bad teachers and reward them
differently.
So what have we so far?
From an economist's point of view,
says Brimelow, an ever-increasing number of teachers
relative to the number of pupils can only mean one
thing: declining productivity. "To produce at
the very best, the same results, the system is consuming
more and more by the year." Since costs only ever go
up, and results are at best the same, the education
system is without a doubt in decline.
Case closed: By page 38, Brimelow
has proven what he set out to prove, and brilliantly so.
One of Brimelow's 24-Point,
thoughtful recommendations is to use antitrust law to
bust the "Teacher Trust" (monopoly). There's
poetic justice to this. Since the "Teacher Trust"
is a "creature of legal privilege"—and a form of
legalized thuggery—laws against a conspiracy to
monopolize trade or commerce should indeed be brought to
bear on the union. Giving teeth to anti-strike laws and
passing more right-to-work legislation are also good
ways to smash this guild of goons.
Try as I did, I could only come up
with minor quibbles: I probably disagree that John D.
Rockefeller's Standard Oil Company was a monopoly.
Unlike the "Teacher Trust," it brought a cheaper,
better product to market. Nor can I bring myself to
think about vouchers as anything other than another
distribution scheme which will thoroughly co-opt private
schools. But since Brimelow is not one to plead his case
without careful attention to all sides, he has this
covered.
Neither is Peter Brimelow about to
let us forget that, "The problem with America's
government school system is socialism." And the
cure—as always—is capitalism and freedom.
Ilana Mercer is the author of "Broad
Sides: One Woman’s Clash With A Corrupt Culture."
She is also an analyst and blogger-at-large for
Free-Market News Network. To learn more about her
work, and to contribute to
Barely A Blog, visit
IlanaMercer.com.