Check out this Education Week article for a preview of Charles Murray's latest book, Real Education. Want a glimpse? Referring to college-level textbooks, Murray argues that "We're talking about material that only about 10 percent of high school graduates can understand."

He calls that speaking "truth." We call it fatalism. Yes, Dr. Murray, asking schools to achieve universal proficiency in reading and math is stupid, but so is settling for the results our education system is currently attaining. As a wise philosopher once said, there must be a middle way.

Liam Julian

I'm with the union on this one. Let my weekends go!

Liam Julian

Diane Ravitch, Fordham board member and peerless education commenter, writes:

I find myself getting really annoyed when people rage against the teachers' unions, because they are the organized voice of most of the people who work in schools. The same people who vilify the teachers' unions never complain about the influence of businesses or foundations, both of which try to steer the public schools by the power of the purse.

It all comes down to whether schools??should serve adults or children. Business??interests are aligned with producing schools that serve children--they want well-educated students who will eventually become well-educated workers. (It's true, though, that business-minded school reformers??sometimes forget about the importance of curriculum and instruction.) On the other hand, the interests of teachers' unions directly compete in oh-so-many obvious ways with the interests of students. Furthermore,??unions may technically be "the organized voices of most of the people who work in schools," but they hardly represent the interests of all teachers--especially disadvantaged by union policies are young teachers and good teachers.

What business mostly wants: results-based education,??standards, accountability, innovative management, choice, educational markets. What unions mostly want: more money, more teachers (smaller classes), less testing, less focus on...

The long-anticipated conversion of seven inner-city District of Columbia Catholic schools to charter schools is finally official . No, it's not a perfect solution to the schools' financial ills, but kinda like democracy, it's the least worst option available. Kudos to the D.C. Charter School Board for granting its unanimous approval. Now let this fascinating social experiment begin.

Liam Julian

Diane Roberts--author and NPR commentator--is a fine, fun writer. She's an eighth-generation Floridian, descended from some of the state's foundational families, and often insightful when commenting on occurrences odd and ostentatious, which are quite at home in Florida's past and present. But on education...boy, she's got it wrong.

Liam Julian

The Wall Street Journal's Bill McGurn (and lots of others) wonders: What will Obama do on school choice? Now we know (via The Corner):

TAPPER: You talked about the need to change the status quo in education today.

OBAMA: Right.

TAPPER: But one of the ways that proponents of school choice say that the best way to change the status quo is to give parents, inner-city parents a choice. Why not?

OBAMA: Well, the problem is, is that, you know, although it might benefit some kids at the top, what you're going to do is leave a lot of kids at the bottom. We don't have enough slots for every child to go into a parochial school or a private school. And what you would see is a huge drain of resources out of the public schools.

So what I've said is let's foster competition within the public school system. Let's make sure that charter schools are up and running. Let's make sure that kids who are in failing schools, in local school districts, have an option to go to schools that are doing well.

But what I don't want to do is

Liam Julian

Quick and the Ed writes about the recently released study of D.C. vouchers' effectiveness:

Those who'd like to end the program can point out that the results were, all-in-all, underwhelming, but supporters of the voucher program can point to the positive results among certain subgroups. Most notably, students from the first cohort who used the voucher scored significantly higher in reading - supporters might use this to convince lawmakers to hold out for another year or two in order to see if the effects continue for subsequent cohorts. But will a few positive results be enough to save D.C. vouchers?

In fact, it is possible to support D.C. vouchers without referencing the above-mentioned study at all. Private school choice, in itself, has plenty of powerful arguments to support it, especially when it occurs in a district such as Washington, D.C., where the public schools are less than satisfactory and filled with poor and minority children who haven't the means to leave them. The stat-happy crowd scoffs, but about this statistical evaluation (in which, of course, both sides will find nuggets of support for their positions) I think: Who cares? Certainly parents whose children are enrolled in the schools...

It's a good thing the Red Wings won the Stanley Cup, because otherwise the Motor City would have absolutely nothing to celebrate. With an economy battered by the ills of the automotive industry and??its population shrinking rapidly, it's no surprise that the city's school system is now $400 million in the hole .

But here's a wrinkle. Under Michigan law, if DPS's enrollment dips below 100,000, it will no longer be a "Class A" district. What's special about "Class A" districts (of which Detroit has to date been the only one in the state)? Under the state's protectionist charter school law, new charters aren't allowed to be started in those districts. So come fall, with enrollment expected to plunge further, Detroit will be open for new charter business. (Note to legislators: this is what you get for being cute and not just naming "Detroit" when writing legislation aimed at Detroit. The same thing happens in other states, too.)

With the public school system in disarray, the expansion of charter schools should be seen as a boon. But several local politicians don't see...

Liam Julian

Wall Street Journal columnist Bill McGurn wonders where Obama will come out on the question of D.C. vouchers for poor kids.

Update: Eleanor Holmes Norton defends in the Washington Post her anti-voucher stance.