Education.

On ESPN, the cable sports network, there is a show at the moment called Rise Up.  It is a show where a high school is picked (almost always a school in a deprived inner city) and the network arrives, examines the sports facilities and then does an "extreme makeover" of the facilities, leaving them in an astonishing state.  The high school is left with running tracks, a full weight room, brand new equipment, one had a climbing wall.  It really is amazing stuff.  What is consistently said from teachers and the show is that poor, run down equipment engenders a sense of low self-esteem, that going to a ratty school means that children don't care, and this effects their expectations and results in their schooling.

The first part of the show consists of an earnest woman (who really needs to eat a cheeseburger) touring the facilities with a look of concern on her emaciated face.  My reaction to this "before" section has consistently been, "What nice stuff they have."  All of these high schools, specifically chosen for their degraded state, are nicer than the school I attended.

I went to Bishop Wordsworth's Church of England Grammar School For Boys.  This was part of the old fashioned system in England in which an examination was given to children at the age of ten to determine which school they would attend for at least the next five years.  The top 25% went to my school, the other went to a different school.  Since this was old-fashioned the local council had decided to break the system by sending most of the funding to the other school and letting my school starve. 

My home room was a twenty-five year old temporary building on breeze blocks (cinder blocks in the USA).  I did not have a text book less than five years old at any point while I was there.  Institutional paint from decades ago peeled off the walls.  There was no piece of sports equipment from within the last decade.  However, the educational achievement at this school is among the best in the UK.  When I went to the University of Michigan I found that I was about two years ahead in terms of what I knew (and how to think) than most students.  U-M is a really good school.

Looking at the record of US students (and UK students are actually worse in some respects) against other countries we find the US lagging behind in basic skills, the three 'R's.  By my count the US is seventeenth on that list despite spending the fourth most amount of money of any country.  However, US students score the highest on self-confidence of any country.  One of the primary goals in US education is being met, ahead of the money spent on the problem, American pupils are self-confident.  However, this does not seem to translate into education success.

During my schooling I cannot remember receiving any positive statement about my performance, character, work ethic, basically anything at any time.  This is from both my teachers and parents over thirteen years.  I remember telling my father once that about my good grades and his reply, "You should be getting all A's on everything."  Now, as far as I can tell, all A's in US high schools is relatively easy, with correct test scores somewhere in the upper 90% range.  In my school, and in the public examinations at the time, an A was somewhere in the 80% range, and few students, even good students got them.  Passing grade was around 50%.  Remember, I knew more arriving in college than my American peers.  Self-esteem wasn't encouraged to achieve success, success was assumed, was difficult, and you were not ever going to get everything right.

So, Americans spend lots of money, work on self-esteem, encourage their students, have good facilities, and have relatively poor results.  My school had no money, worked to reduce self-esteem, expected good results and had no encouragement, had awful facilities and achieved great results.  What is the difference?  The difference is that I was taught by good teachers who demanded success and discipline, in an environment where it was assumed that you were there to learn.  I'm sure it also helped that the students had been pre-selected based on prior achievement.

This means that I am entirely unsurprised at the findings of the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation that teachers are by far the most important factor in the education of children.  Furthermore, teachers in the USA have not been effectively taught how to teach, or been measured on the effectiveness of their teaching.  In the USA more money is spent on education than most wealthy countries but less on teachers.  Teachers also spend more time teaching than most countries.  I think a cursory look around at the news will tell you to what regard teachers in the USA are held.  So, lower pay for more work and less respect with poor instruction and poor measurement means you get a lower quality of applicant, with less skills, poorer improvement, and motivation to perform.

The Left think education should be improved by greater investment in schools, fee-form education emphasizing a love for learning and led by the initiative of children.  They hate tests. The Right think teachers are lazy, good-for-nothings, who are paid too much for what they do.  Both are wrong.  There is no need for more money in US education.  It should simply be redistributed in educating, measuring, and paying teachers who should be treated as respected professionals.  These teachers should spend less time teaching and more time improving themselves and preparing their classes.  You should be able to teach a high level of reading, writing and maths to kids by the age of ten.  Seriously.

The rest of the time children should be playing, outside.  You don't need hours of repetition on the same subject or problem.  You need to do it enough to get it, be retaught in a different manner if you don't understand and then tested later to see if you retain it.  Hours of similar math problems, or compulsory reading, or page after page of essay writing are done simply to fill the hours of schooling.  There is an obesity epidemic among children, even a promotion by the National Football League to get children to play a full hour hour a day.  An hour?  How about six hours?  It is supposed to be fun being a child.  Homework is useless and not fun.  All you need to do to supervise children playing is one adult who can watch it.

Sometimes it really is as simple as it seems.  Respect and pay teachers and you will get good applicants.  teach good applicants and you will get good teachers.  Good teachers mean educated students.  Educated students make good employees.  Good employees make a good economy.  A good economy produces good revenue.  Good revenue produces good services.