Libertarian candidate for Governor of Maryland Spear Lancaster had a rough time on the Marc Steiner show on October 28, 2002 when it came to the subject of education. As a friend of mine wrote in about half way through, "Comparing teachers with waiters? OK, if Lancaster can bail himself out of that rhetorical hole, he's a brilliant enough politician and deserves to be governor."

I wish he had done just that. Unfortunately, the final twenty minutes of the show were just spent apologizing for giving the wrong impression and phrasing things the wrong way, and rehashing his conviction that education was the key to our future. It was five sad minutes of frenzied ass-covering that made him sound like any Republicrat I've ever heard on the media speaking in "defense" of education.

I admire both the Libertarian ideal and Mr. Lancaster quite a bit, and I want to back him up here. As soon as this topic hit the airwaves, I started surfing through the web site to find if he's made a more solid statement on education. All the web site talks about, however, is empowerment and competition in the school system without a solid plan of any sort. There, he sounds hauntingly like the sort of corporate buzzword bingo I hear every day.

I do see the essence of what Mr. Lancaster was trying to express. Just as there are good, dedicated individuals in the public school systems with 30 years of experience and a masters degree who are dedicated teachers and deserve fair payment, there are those teachers who continue from year to year because they simply haven't screwed up noticably enough to call enough negative attention to themselves. As a fairly recent graduate of public education, I can honestly say I've had my fair share of both.

Bureaucracies at their best and worst provide a cushion against direct consequences to the actions of those inside the organization. This happens in large corporations, school systems, the military and even large organized religions. As the size of the organization increases, the specific goals and focus of small groups within it can become very unfocused. As a member of any bureaucracy, you can lie low and do a mediocre job for years and as long as the larger wheels of the organizion keep turning and the money keeps flowing in, you stay employed.

Mr. Lancaster comes at this from the perspective of a salesman on a relatively small team. If you don't carry your weight in a sales force, the company doesn't earn potential revenue which is directly accountable to your effort. It's true that in a small company with a tight-knit management system, the unproductive people are weeded out. Sales work employs one of the most basic "management by metric" systems in the business world. If you don't make the sales, you don't make the money and a more skilled salesman comes along to sell their inventory to those customers instead.

Management by metric is the simplest way to run a company. In fact, it works very well in situations like outsourcing, where you define a project, its boundaries, and what you're willing to pay as a manager, and then rate the result on some predetermined criteria. In sales, your goal is to sell the product to as many people as possible, and the salesman's metric becomes simply the number of sales. At the end of a month, a manager is presented with a list of salesmen and their sales. The most valuable salesmen have the highest number of sales, and the manager make decisions on who to eliminate from the company by starting at the bottom of the list.

The Libertarian point of view (as I understand it) that this just works. And in business it does, provided that the manager can define the requirements and boundaries of scope in the project as tightly as possible.

Education may or may not work this way. I have no idea whether it's possible to arrange a system in which the merits of an individual teacher can be tied to an equitable metric. What outputs do you measure to put a number on effective teaching? Such a system would work if there were a fair and consistent set of formulas that the citizens of Maryland trusted to guide their school choices, and that the market for schools is elastic enough that parents would not be severly limited by other factors such as transportation to a more distant school, or limited enrollment.

There are a dozen supermarkets within 2 miles of my house, with a wide selection of offerings at competing prices. If there's a way to put a dozen schools with very similar (and easily comparable) product with the capacity to serve everyone who comes in their doors, then Mr. Lancaster has a great idea that would make tax dollars go further in the education system. If he can't present a solid plan for it, then the best anyone can do is take the metrics of a whole school or system as a whole and let the administrators evaluate the performance of the school. And that's exactly what we do now.

Even though his ideas could have solid theory behind them, the way that they were presented on the radio show will make Mr. Lancaster the enemy of all teachers and education professionals as soon as the word gets out. Before Election Day, I hope that he can clarify his stance with a solid position paper and a thorough analysis of how a school or school system can be fairly evaluated to re-inspire my faith in his ability to make our Maryland government more efficient using market forces.

--

Here are his words:

From: Spearlib@aol.com
Subject: Schools
Date: Thu, 31 Oct 2002 11:26:34 EST
To: rob@vees.net

As you all know I was on the Mark Steiner show and blotched it. You hear of folks with bad hair days I had a bad head day.

I won't take your time to explain what happened but I am aware of how I got off tract and confused. I will tell you that I will not make the same mistake twice.

On to how I feel about taxes, schools, teachers etc.

First taxes are money taken from the citizens. Mostly working citizens struggling to pay their bills and raise their families. Taxes should only be levied for legitimate government functions. It is not the right or privileged of politicians to confiscate the citizens money to fund their pet projects or buy votes for their elections. Taxes are never justified to pay for unconstitutional functions.

When you speak of cutting taxes you are posed as cruel, indifferent, non-caring, or perhaps worst. You are never thought of as someone who respects the citizens and their right to their labor. Never as someone who feels that involuntary servitude is immoral. No, you are portrayed as someone who wants to take food out of starving peoples mouths. I only wish that taxes only went for good and necessary causes. It would lessen the pain considerably. I want and will cut taxes not by eliminating or restricting legitimate functions but by cutting waste, duplication, corruption, dysfunctional systems etc. I can assure you that this is over 50 percent of our total taxes. Maybe even 60 to 70 percent. If I cut the waste the taxes will automatically be reduced. Why did we have a tax rate that was 50 to 70 percent lower for 90 percent of our existence? Why do we have a tax rate in peacetime that is higher then it has ever been?

As I said, poorly I might add, I can go into any city, no exceptions, and sign a contract to replace the city sanitary department with a private service for 25 to 30 percent less without even looking at their books. And make a profit. I was involved in this type of activity and the out sourcing of contract cleaning for years and I am very familiar with the numbers.

Schools are no different. We have doubled the amount of money spent for government education on a per student bases the last thirty years. Thirty years ago they were teaching Latin in high schools now they teach remedial English in college. The SAT test have been dumbed down recently and rewritten to allow women to score higher. They have decreased the math portion and increase the language part. Yet the SAT scores still drop.

The number of students who don't graduate climb. The level of accomplishment drops. The violence within the schools is so great in many schools that parents will go to great sacrifice to get their children out of the government schools. Roughly 75 percent of the teachers in Washington, DC send their children to private schools or home school. I bet the other 25 or so percent are the ones in the North West section where the diplomats live and they do have decent schools.

Someone once asked Andrew Carnage what was most important labor, capital or management. He thought for a moment and said the question was a lot like asking which leg on a three leg stool was most important. He said if take out either leg you have an unsteady seat. Teacher, students and parents make up the three ingredients in successful education programs. Without the support and cooperation of either one the results will suffer. If you have a mandatory, dictatorial, top down command and control education program run by and for the elite who have social engineering as their main goal the teachers, students and parents will be sacrificed.

In spite of al the money we spend for education, and I am primarily speaking of K through 12 not college, the three main players are all short changed. The students don't have the opportunity to develop their maximum potential, the parents are over taxed and made feel useless, and the teachers who really want to teach are made to teach in a system that has an environment which makes it not only unattractive but in many cases impossible. They are also subjected to system that rewards teachers in a manner that is based on how long you have been in the system and how many academic toll gates you have been through. The principals, parents and students have no say. They are pawns to be used and exploited by the elite who has control. And they will not go quietly in the dark. To change this will mean that you have to be dedicated and tenacious. There are too many uncreative politicians who run year after year wrapped in the "more money for education" mantel and who are allied with! the teachers union to expect change to be easy.

I came across as being indifferent to teachers. Nothing could be further from the truth. I want to restore choice and power to the teachers. I want them to have a say about what goes on in their classroom. I want their input on what the students need. I want them to have a say in how things are done. I also want them to have a bigger share of the educational dollar. If you take a class of 30 students in a prosperous school district you will have a total expenditure of over $200,000. Most likely even more. How much does the teacher receive? If they are young with a basic degree they get maybe $30,000. Where does the other $170,000 go? Who gets it? Why does a young teachers who is full of energy and loves children get $30,000 and some dysfunctional teacher down the hall with 20 years of experience and some advanced degrees get $90,000? This is fair? Would this be tolerated in a free and open system? No, this is possible because we have taken the control from the teachers, pare! nts and principals and placed it into the hands of the politicians and the teachers union. The elite who feel that they are entitled to live like royalty at the expense of society.

What can be done? Simple break up the government monopoly. Open up the system. Empower the teachers, parents and students. Give them a say in how things will be run. Putting more money in a system that has an unbroken record of waste and failure is foolish. To stand by and let people say we are working on the problems while poorer students are being dropped through the cracks by the thousands is close to criminal negligence in my opinion.

I hope this clears up how I feel about teachers. How I feel about education. If you have any questions please let me know and I will attempt to answer them

Spear

No Comments | #1846

Unless noted, all content on epistolary.org is © Copyright 1999-2008 to Rob Carlson with all rights reserved. All information is verified when possible, cited as appropriate and applied in the real world at your own risk. Send all feedback to rob@vees.net.