Did I miss something or did this article never define what it means by:<p>>We Should Fund Students<p>The article bags on public school systems, but I don't see any alternatives being suggested. Overall this looks to be a propaganda article by a libertarian think tank that is all fluff but no substance.
History has shown that "defined contribution" scales and works, and "defined benefit" bankrupts institutions. Public school systems in the US all currently work on "defined benefit" funding, under which municipalities are held hostage to pay out more and more in tax funds to school districts. This money would be much better off invested, on a per-student basis, in a quality fund and pay out portable dividends that students could then take to any school district.<p>I envision that this would solve a lot of problems that currently plague public education in the US. More desirable school districts could maintain their quality by charging more for instruction, so that only the most motivated students would want to invest their time and funds there. Districts could offer more "electives" like art or music by charging for them a la carte, requiring students to "budget" their education funds wisely. Do I want to get through with minimum fuss by taking only the required courses, or do I want to spend more money on fun, but ultimately unremunerative detours?
This article blames teachers unions on school closures. I am not pro or against unions. But where I live teachers unions do not have any decision making power. Some leverage? Yes, but only a little and even then only around negotiating basic things like salary. The choice is with the school board and superindent. School districts are staying virtual because they don’t have enough staff. Teachers, yes, but more so support staff—bus drivers, classroom aids, custodians, food services, etc. parents are being told, “sorry there will be no bus today, you will have to drive your kid to school.” Schools are closing because they can’t keep staff and half the students and teachers are sick and virtual anyway. Try teaching 15 8 year olds virtually and 10 more in person at the same time. It doesn’t work. The jobs were not great before and they are awful now. Not a lot of people are excited to become a teacher these days.<p>Now, if you want to talk about school choice, and, in this model I suppose you are given a tax credit, you will create the exact same situation we have in higher education that everyone complains about being too expensive and a scam, and price gouging, etc, etc. because schools will compete to create the biggest and flashiest school to attract the best and brightest, but more importantly richest students. The other schools will be impovershied and facilities will get worse and worse.