The worst policy research I’ve ever seen, over nearly four decades in the field, is the OECD’s grotesquely dishonest data on poverty (it even motivated a special page to acknowledge “poverty hucksters”).
But this video from Andrew Biggs suggests that the Economic Policy Institute could give the OECD some real competition.
This video exposing the EPI’s laughable methodology is a perfect introduction to the issue of teacher compensation, which is Part IV of our series to acknowledge National Education Week.
For a closer look at the issue, here are some excerpts from a column published by City Journal that Biggs co-authored with Jason Richwine.
They also addressed the topic in a piece for the Wall Street Journal.
Let’s take a look at what’s happening in some major cities.
The L.A. Times reports on how record levels of spending are enriching teacher compensation rather than boosting student outcomes.
Likewise, a column in the N.Y. Post reveals that record levels of spending in New York are driven by teacher compensation, yet kids are under-performing.
The obvious conclusion is that taxpayers are over-compensating teachers, especially when looking at student performance.
Indeed, many of the contracts are specifically designed to ensure that bad teachers can’t be dismissed.
Let’s look at some passages from a Wall Street Journal column by Cami Anderson, a former school administrator in both Newark and New York.
And here’s some very sobering information from a column in City Journal.
American kids do not get good scores compared to kids in other nations, so the notion that we could close the gap by getting rid of the worst teachers is very encouraging.
But that’s effectively impossible because unions are more concerned with protecting the worst teachers than they are with producing the best outcomes.
Since we started with a video from Andrew Biggs, let’s close with his infographic.
The bottom line is that the government’s school monopoly is doing a bad job in large part because it’s being run for the benefit of teachers unions.
With school choice, by contrast, it would be possible to reward the best teachers. Indeed, there would be competitive pressure for that outcome under a decentralized, competition-based system.