Rethinking Delivery of Education

[CPCFTW]

It's become apparent for some time that public servants are too detached from economic reality to ever be effectively managed by politicians. I think it's time we re-evaluated how education is delivered to our children.

My proposal is education plan insurance (EPI).

I would suggest a combination of income taxes and consumption taxes to fund the plan.

The plan is to essentially reconstruct the delivery of education in the same way as health care is delivered.

Some of the steps I've thought of so far are:

1. Sell off all public schools to private companies. Disband the teacher's union and lay off all teachers. The provincial government would own non-voting shares in the private companies delivering education, to partake in the profit generation. Profits would go towards EPI costs.

2. Reduce personal/corporate taxes accordingly. Implement new consumption and income/corp taxes to pay for "EPI". This would be a fund which pays for private school tuition (up to a certain price level) if you have a child. The EPI tax portion of your income tax would rise if you had more than 2 children.

3. Provide low interest student loans to parents of students who are accepted into prestigious private schools with higher tuition.

4. Implement regulations regarding metrics such as class size, teacher proficiency and continuing education, licensing, student performance, etc.

It's a work in progress... Comments?

[MiddleClassCentrist]

It's become apparent for some time that public servants are too detached from economic reality to ever be effectively managed by politicians. I think it's time we re-evaluated how education is delivered to our children.

My proposal is education plan insurance (EPI).

I would suggest a combination of income taxes and consumption taxes to fund the plan.

The plan is to essentially reconstruct the delivery of education in the same way as health care is delivered.

Some of the steps I've thought of so far are:

1. Sell off all public schools to private companies. Disband the teacher's union and lay off all teachers. The provincial government would own non-voting shares in the private companies delivering education, to partake in the profit generation. Profits would go towards EPI costs.

2. Reduce personal/corporate taxes accordingly. Implement new consumption and income/corp taxes to pay for "EPI". This would be a fund which pays for private school tuition (up to a certain price level) if you have a child. The EPI tax portion of your income tax would rise if you had more than 2 children.

3. Provide low interest student loans to parents of students who are accepted into prestigious private schools with higher tuition.

4. Implement regulations regarding metrics such as class size, teacher proficiency and continuing education, licensing, student performance, etc.

It's a work in progress... Comments?

Sounds like it would cost more than public education.

Add required profit.

Add Headmasters making 300k/year at each school...

Decrease cost efficiency by increasing number of schools.

Take a look, very very few private schools offer a year of schooling for less than it costs the province to educate students in the public school system. (Public Scholl is <8000 per student last I checked)

Edited August 29, 2012 by MiddleClassCentrist

[CPCFTW]

Remember that the current private schools have to compete with the public system for salaries, and have to market/recruit heavily to compete with a prodcut which is offered for free. The current private school costs are therefore much higher than they would be if education was only delivered through private competition. Also I said that the government would own shares in the private companies so some profits would be captured.

But another regulation for this system could be a limit on marketing expenses as a % of revenues. I'm proposing a regulated market system, rather than a completely socialized system. If you have any concerns, then try to think of possible regulatory responses.

[dre]

I think the key is look at our entire economy.

The cost of services provided by Canadians such as healthcare, education, dentistry etc are increasing faster than the rate of inflation, and for the most part wages in those professions are increasing faster than the wages in other professions. That causes a problem and these services are becoming increasingly hard to afford.

The problem with tweaking the delivery of these services is that the real problem is a macro economic one. The people in industries that face global competition can no longer afford to purchase services from the sectors that dont. The areas where we have exploding costs are industries that are protected from global competition either by their nature or by acts of government.

The costs of things like healthcare and education are not just increasing in Canada they are increasing in the entire western world for the reasons I mentioned. Unless you treat this as a macoeconomic problem then it wont continue. Juggling around the schemes under which these services are delivered will do nothing.

You either need to open up sectors like healthcare and education to global competition or start closing other sectors off, or some combination of both. Otherwise you create an imbalance in our domestic economy where the people who have to compete in the global market can no longer afford to purchase services from the ones that dont. We will basically see two new kinds of economic classes.

[CPCFTW]

That's a good point. Education can probably be provided through global competition if we accept online delivery and self-study (perhaps only for higher grades).

I wouldn't consider most teachers to be as qualified as doctors though. I think that private competition could drive the wages of lower grade teachers way down. There's no reason to pay a grade 4 teacher 90k just because of seniority. A private education system with scarcer jobs in other sectors (due to globalization) could probably drive the costs of teaching the easier grades way down (and thereby allow for more jobs or lower costs).

Teachers could move their way up through grades based on work experience and education/proficiency/performance (eg. An english grad might start at grade 4 teaching basic grammar for 35-40k, and work their way up to teaching high school in 5yrs for 50-60k [depending on the market rate for that skillset]).

[MiddleClassCentrist]

Remember that the current private schools have to compete with the public system for salaries, and have to market/recruit heavily to compete with a prodcut which is offered for free. The current private school costs are therefore much higher than they would be if education was only delivered through private competition. Also I said that the government would own shares in the private companies so some profits would be captured.

But another regulation for this system could be a limit on marketing expenses as a % of revenues. I'm proposing a regulated market system, rather than a completely socialized system. If you have any concerns, then try to think of possible regulatory responses.

But, most don't. Most only hire new teachers for like 35k/year to 45k/year, salary caps out around 60k unless you get into an elite school where the extraordinarily privileged children go. That's cheap for a skilled profession.

The funny thing about education in the private sector. The less difficult your job is, the more you are paid. Brats that don't want to be at school vs someone who will get their arse kicked because their parents are spending extra money.

Private schools now are cushy places to work. No effort required. Tell the kids to do work and they do it. Their parents are pissed if they waste money. Assign all kids a grade of A- or higher and the parents think they are getting what they paid for.

[MiddleClassCentrist]

Teachers could move their way up through grades based on work experience and education/proficiency/performance (eg. An english grad might start at grade 4 teaching basic grammar for 35-40k, and work their way up to teaching high school in 5yrs for 50-60k [depending on the market rate for that skillset]).

Again, that gets tricky. Because you don't just want to pay the low-end or average. You want to pay an above average rate to get above average people. I wouldn't go into teaching because I'd make less and the hours aren't flexible. I can tell my boss that I have an appointment and I'll need to come in 2 hours late but, stay an extra two hours to make up for it. It's difficult to measure the value of that convenience.

Also, english teachers have a very difficult subject to teach. Mostly because of the enormous amount of marking and the kids don't want to be there. History is worth nothing. Phys Ed teachers would get about 35k... but then we'd have to pay them to coach teams in this world because no one gives their time for free... (unless you are a current public sector teacher).

Now, if I ever decided to become a teacher I'd benefit because Computer Engineers are harder to come by in the classroom and they make good money as they progress through the chain.

To be honest, I have toyed with the market realities concept for teacher wages on my own but, effort and difficulty of job don't get rewarded. Phys Ed is piss easy and if we followed the route of the states, they'd get paid more for coaching than teaching. But essentially, phys ed is worthless.

[punked]

Sounds like a solution looking for a problem to me.

[CPCFTW]

Again, that gets tricky. Because you don't just want to pay the low-end or average. You want to pay an above average rate to get above average people. I wouldn't go into teaching because I'd make less and the hours aren't flexible. I can tell my boss that I have an appointment and I'll need to come in 2 hours late but, stay an extra two hours to make up for it. It's difficult to measure the value of that convenience.

Also, english teachers have a very difficult subject to teach. Mostly because of the enormous amount of marking and the kids don't want to be there. History is worth nothing. Phys Ed teachers would get about 35k... but then we'd have to pay them to coach teams in this world because no one gives their time for free... (unless you are a current public sector teacher).

Now, if I ever decided to become a teacher I'd benefit because Computer Engineers are harder to come by in the classroom and they make good money as they progress through the chain.

To be honest, I have toyed with the market realities concept for teacher wages on my own but, effort and difficulty of job don't get rewarded. Phys Ed is piss easy and if we followed the route of the states, they'd get paid more for coaching than teaching. But essentially, phys ed is worthless.

I don't know about you, but I wouldn't classify most of my previous teachers as "above-average".

Do you really need someone "above average" to teach fractions and long division in grade school?

Teachers could be limited in their career growth based on their education, but there's no reason to mandate that grade school teachers be "above average". They should really only need average to below average intelligence, plus above average skills with children. I don't think that being able to manage children is a particularly unique or valuable skill.

For instance, a hard-working high school graduate who is great with children would probably do a better, and cheaper job of teaching grade school history or geography, than would a university grad who sucks with children. If there was a highly competitve private school system, I would think that a natural result would be some "discount" schools hiring such candidates for near minimum wage. That would reduce education costs dramatically.

[carepov]

It's become apparent for some time that public servants are too detached from economic reality to ever be effectively managed by politicians. I think it's time we re-evaluated how education is delivered to our children.

My proposal is education plan insurance (EPI).

I would suggest a combination of income taxes and consumption taxes to fund the plan.

The plan is to essentially reconstruct the delivery of education in the same way as health care is delivered.

Some of the steps I've thought of so far are:

1. Sell off all public schools to private companies. Disband the teacher's union and lay off all teachers. The provincial government would own non-voting shares in the private companies delivering education, to partake in the profit generation. Profits would go towards EPI costs.

2. Reduce personal/corporate taxes accordingly. Implement new consumption and income/corp taxes to pay for "EPI". This would be a fund which pays for private school tuition (up to a certain price level) if you have a child. The EPI tax portion of your income tax would rise if you had more than 2 children.

3. Provide low interest student loans to parents of students who are accepted into prestigious private schools with higher tuition.

4. Implement regulations regarding metrics such as class size, teacher proficiency and continuing education, licensing, student performance, etc.

It's a work in progress... Comments?

Has a similar plan been tried anywhere in the world? If so what were the results?

Why not copy the educational system of a smart country like Finland?

[dre]

Has a similar plan been tried anywhere in the world? If so what were the results?

Why not copy the educational system of a smart country like Finland?

Because we are too stupid to learn from other people and too set in our ways. Attempts to implement a system such as finlands would be immediately shouted down as COMMUNIST, and retards would be trotting out references to Stalin and Hitler.

In fact... after you raised that question I feel like I have to ask you...

Are you, or have you ever been, a member of the communist party?

You are absolutely right though. We should copy Portugals drug policies as well. But that kind of thing just doesnt fly here. People want policies based on ideology and conventional wisdom, not empyrical evidence. And they are more interested in winning the culture war than they really are in good government.

I guess stupid things happen to stupid people.

Edited August 30, 2012 by dre

[wyly]

That's a good point. Education can probably be provided through global competition if we accept online delivery and self-study (perhaps only for higher grades).

I wouldn't consider most teachers to be as qualified as doctors though. I think that private competition could drive the wages of lower grade teachers way down. There's no reason to pay a grade 4 teacher 90k just because of seniority. A private education system with scarcer jobs in other sectors (due to globalization) could probably drive the costs of teaching the easier grades way down (and thereby allow for more jobs or lower costs).

Teachers could move their way up through grades based on work experience and education/proficiency/performance (eg. An english grad might start at grade 4 teaching basic grammar for 35-40k, and work their way up to teaching high school in 5yrs for 50-60k [depending on the market rate for that skillset]).

where the f*** do you get the authority to assign a value to other peoples work and educational experience, what do you know about teaching and what's required to do so?...every age group has particular learning abilities and each group requires different approaches, a grade 4 student is no easier to teach than a high school student, if anything the younger children are more difficult, they do not see the world as adults do...the weakest teachers are those who aren't even trained teachers, those at the highest level of education, post secondary instructors...

intellectual arrogance found on this forum is too much sometimes...

[wyly]

canada is among the top countries in the world for educational standards and we want to change it why?...because we want to find something more expensive and less productive

[CPCFTW]

where the f*** do you get the authority to assign a value to other peoples work and educational experience, what do you know about teaching and what's required to do so?...every age group has particular learning abilities and each group requires different approaches, a grade 4 student is no easier to teach than a high school student, if anything the younger children are more difficult, they do not see the world as adults do...the weakest teachers are those who aren't even trained teachers, those at the highest level of education, post secondary instructors...

intellectual arrogance found on this forum is too much sometimes...

Where the f*** do you or the government or unions get the authority to assign a value to other people's work and educational experience? Maybe if your educational experience involved developing some reading comprehension, you would have understood that I proposed that the market determines the value of an educator's work and education. I only suggested that the market would probably value grade 4 educators less than educators of higher grades, it could very well be the opposite. However, I would argue that janitorial work isn't particularly pleasant, but since it doesn't require any unique skills or education, the market rate of janitorial labour is low. If effectively teaching grade school children is as unique a skillset as you argue, then the market will compensate for the skillset accordingly.

Faith in the intellectual arrogance of government is found on this forum too much sometimes...

Edited August 30, 2012 by CPCFTW

[wyly]

Where the f*** do you or the government or unions get the authority to assign a value to other people's work and educational experience? Maybe if your educational experience involved developing some reading comprehension, you would have understood that I proposed that the market determines the value of an educator's work and education. I only suggested that the market would probably value grade 4 educators less than educators of higher grades, it could very well be the opposite. However, I would argue that janitorial work isn't particularly pleasant, but since it doesn't require any unique skills or education, the market rate of janitorial labour is low. If effectively teaching grade school children is as unique a skillset as you argue, then the market will compensate for the skillset accordingly.

Faith in the intellectual arrogance of government is found on this forum too much sometimes...

local school boards and educational departments who actually know something about teaching and the skill sets required have a good handle on what is fair compensation for teachers...they need your advice as much as cardiologist does on his next procedure...stick to what you know and stop denigrating other professions you know nothing about...the market is not an accurate gauge of intellectual value only supply and demand, the country's future (kids and their education) is to valuable to be risked on a teaching process that is reduced to lowest bidder...

canada is rated by the OECD in the top 5 countries in the world and you see this as a failure???? you to F*** around with it because you think teachers are overpaid and want to save a few bucks... the differences between the top nations are minimal and due as much to culture as educational systems...we're damn good and so are our teachers... ...

Edited August 31, 2012 by wyly

[dre]

local school boards and educational departments who actually know something about teaching and the skill sets required have a good handle on what is fair compensation for teachers...they need your advice as much as cardiologist does on his next procedure...stick to what you know and stop denigrating other professions you know nothing about...the market is not an accurate gauge of intellectual value only supply and demand, the countries future (kids and their education) is to valuable to be risked on a teaching process that is reduced to lowest bidder...

canada is rated by the OECD in the top 5 countries in the world and you see this as a failure???? you to F*** around with it because you think teachers are overpaid and want to save a few bucks... the differences between the top nations are minimal and due as much to culture as educational systems...we're damn good and so are our teachers... ...

The problem is that the cost is rising much faster than inflation, and inflation adjusted costs are expected to double over the next 15 years or so. You dont have to be a math whiz to see why this is not sustainable. If we dont look at ways to stabilize the costs then we WILL wreck the system and/or millions of people will be barred from entry entirely.

[wyly]

The problem is that the cost is rising much faster than inflation, and inflation adjusted costs are expected to double over the next 15 years or so. You dont have to be a math whiz to see why this is not sustainable. If we dont look at ways to stabilize the costs then we WILL wreck the system and/or millions of people will be barred from entry entirely.

now go find research the net benefit of highly educated population and the effect it has on the economy, you can't just look at expenses net profit needs to factored in...canada spends virtually the same per child as the UK, Aus France and Finland all four of those trail the USA and it's underpaid teachers by 2K per child...yet out of those five countries only Finland rates ahead of Canada for quality of education and that difference is very minimal...

just as everyone looks at the cost of healthcare but not the benefits of a healthy productive work force...a house is only as strong as it's foundation you can't cheap out on the base otherwise the entire structure fails...cheap out on education and canada's economy will suffer...

Edited August 31, 2012 by wyly

[wyly]

doublepost

Edited August 31, 2012 by wyly

[CPCFTW]

now go find research the net benefit of highly educated population and the effect it has on the economy, you can't just look at expenses net profit needs to factored in...canada spends virtually the same per child as the UK, Aus France and Finland all four of those trail the USA and it's underpaid teachers by 2K per child...yet out of those five countries only Finland rates ahead of Canada for quality of education and that difference is very minimal...

just as everyone looks at the cost of healthcare but not the benefits of a healthy productive work force...a house is only as strong as it's foundation you can't cheap out on the base otherwise the entire structure fails...cheap out on education and canada's economy will suffer...

No one said to stop educating the workforce, this is a discussion on how to reform the delivery of education to the workforce. You're just arguing with yourself.

The problem is that the costs of our current delivery model are consuming all our wealth. As fun as it is to pat ourselves on the back, our OECD education rank will be meaningless if we're bankrupt.

[dre]

now go find research the net benefit of highly educated population and the effect it has on the economy, you can't just look at expenses net profit needs to factored in...canada spends virtually the same per child as the UK, Aus France and Finland all four of those trail the USA and it's underpaid teachers by 2K per child...yet out of those five countries only Finland rates ahead of Canada for quality of education and that difference is very minimal...

just as everyone looks at the cost of healthcare but not the benefits of a healthy productive work force...a house is only as strong as it's foundation you can't cheap out on the base otherwise the entire structure fails...cheap out on education and canada's economy will suffer...

Nobody is talking about cheaping out. But costs are rising too fast to be sustainable. If we dont do something about it, we are going to face a serious crisis, and if you want to wreck our education system, then ignoring these costs until theres a cris is exactly the way to go about it, and it will eventually destroy it completely.

College tuition, when adjusted for inflation is expected to double in the next 15 years. And you act as if people that want to prevent that are "cheap". But you are ignoring the fact if the price doubles millions of people will be effectively denied access.

You seem to suggest that if we want a good system we will have to stomach these rapidly rising costs, but the problem with this is that affordability is one of the most important factors in whether the system is "good". Allowing the costs to rise unchecked REDUCES quality it doesnt improve it.

Edited August 31, 2012 by dre

[dre]

No one said to stop educating the workforce, this is a discussion on how to reform the delivery of education to the workforce. You're just arguing with yourself.

The problem is that the costs of our current delivery model are consuming all our wealth. As fun as it is to pat ourselves on the back, our OECD education rank will be meaningless if we're bankrupt.

Like I said though... the costs are increasing in the entire western world, and across of variety of different delivery systems.

Its not a matter of tweaking delivery methods we need to look at our entire economic "plan".

[carepov]

Because we are too stupid to learn from other people and too set in our ways. Attempts to implement a system such as finlands would be immediately shouted down as COMMUNIST, and retards would be trotting out references to Stalin and Hitler.

In fact... after you raised that question I feel like I have to ask you...

You are absolutely right though. We should copy Portugals drug policies as well. But that kind of thing just doesnt fly here. People want policies based on ideology and conventional wisdom, not empyrical evidence. And they are more interested in winning the culture war than they really are in good government.

I guess stupid things happen to stupid people.

You may be right but I haven't attained your level of cynicism just yet. After all most of what I know of Finland's educational system came from CNN (Fareed Zakaria) there seem to be some smart people still around...

[wyly]

Nobody is talking about cheaping out. But costs are rising too fast to be sustainable. If we dont do something about it, we are going to face a serious crisis, and if you want to wreck our education system, then ignoring these costs until theres a cris is exactly the way to go about it, and it will eventually destroy it completely.

College tuition, when adjusted for inflation is expected to double in the next 15 years. And you act as if people that want to prevent that are "cheap". But you are ignoring the fact if the price doubles millions of people will be effectively denied access.

You seem to suggest that if we want a good system we will have to stomach these rapidly rising costs, but the problem with this is that affordability is one of the most important factors in whether the system is "good". Allowing the costs to rise unchecked REDUCES quality it doesnt improve it.

hmmm cpc is talking about grade/high school and now you want to switch to post-secondary...

first cpc has no clue...look at this statement

If there was a highly competitve private school system, I would think that a natural result would be some "discount" schools hiring such candidates for near minimum wage. That would reduce education costs dramatically.

ya tell me who is going to go to uni to get a degree in education in order to get a minimun wage job, geez that's got to rate among the dumbest things I've ever read, he has zero concept of what is required to teach, zero respect for the knowledge acquired for an education degree, not a clue...

now you want to go on to a whole new area uni tuition...canadian tuition rates vary from $2,500 to $7,500 per year...USA-rates vary from $12,000-25,000 in state schools, $18,000-35,000 for private schools, Oh ya lets go with a private system like cpc is so hot for ...then we can compare that to Denmark where the state pays for 2 post secondary degrees and spending supplements...hey if tiny denmark can give free tuition to it's students maybe we can too...

Edited August 31, 2012 by wyly

[dre]

hmmm cpc is talking about grade/high school and now you want to switch to post-secondary...

first cpc has no clue...look at this statementya tell me who is going to go to uni to get a degree in education in order to get a minimun wage job, geez that's got to rate among the dumbest things I've ever read, he has zero concept of what is required to teach, zero respect for the knowledge acquired for an education degree, not a clue...

now you want to go on to a whole new area uni tuition...canadian tuition rates vary from $2,500 to $7,500 per year...USA-rates vary from $12,000-25,000 in state schools, $18,000-35,000 for private schools, Oh ya lets go with a private system like cpc is so hot for ...then we can compare that to Denmark where the state pays for 2 post secondary degrees and spending supplements...hey if tiny denmark can give free tuition to it's students maybe we can too...

ya tell me who is going to go to uni to get a degree in education in order to get a minimun wage job,

We wont NEED teachers if nobody can afford to go to school, and the government can no longer afford to to pay for public education.

And Im not advocating privatization, in fact the point of my post was that changing delivery wont do anything to contain costs anyways. The underlying problem is that two distinct sub-economies have emerged, and its getting increasingly hard for workers in one to buy stuff from workers in the other. We also have other macro-economic problems like the gravitational attraction between the our dollar and the price of petroleum.

then we can compare that to Denmark where the state pays for 2 post secondary degrees and spending supplements...hey if tiny denmark can give free tuition to it's students maybe we can too

I think that model has potential and we should look at it. But thats a lot harder here because Western Europeans have an inferior political culture to North Europeans. We dont co-operate well enough to do some of the things they do.

But THAT model can be destroyed by the exact same problem that we face here.

A study by McKinsey conducted for the Danish state concluded that education in natural sciences, health and technical education is underfunded by 60%. So, even if the politicians decided to introduce the lowest fee – which is given to the humanities and social sciences – there is still a long way to go in terms of meeting the real demands. DEA has estimated that if we want to keep the current level of quality and increase the number of students, the politicians are looking at an investment around 4,5 billion Danish kroner in the coming 10 years.

In the current situation where Denmark has a substantial budget deficit, it will be a challenge to secure the needed public funding for higher education.

The irony here is that we both face the same macro-economic problems causing an upward trend the cost of some domestically produced services, and in both cases whats being talked about is "tweaking the delivery". Its silly because costs are going up in both public and private systems, and systems in between.

DENMARK: Tuition fees and private universities loom

Students and a united political opposition are baffled by new proposals from Science Minister Helge Sander to depart from the Danish tradition of free higher education for all. Both groups seemed taken by surprise at parliamentary debates following publication last week of a discussion paper setting out the options for a partial privatisation of higher education.

Edited August 31, 2012 by dre

[CPCFTW]

For instance, a hard-working high school graduate who is great with children would probably do a better, and cheaper job of teaching grade school history or geography, than would a university grad who sucks with children. If there was a highly competitve private school system, I would think that a natural result would be some "discount" schools hiring such candidates for near minimum wage. That would reduce education costs dramatically.

first cpc has no clue...look at this statementya tell me who is going to go to uni to get a degree in education in order to get a minimun wage job, geez that's got to rate among the dumbest things I've ever read, he has zero concept of what is required to teach, zero respect for the knowledge acquired for an education degree, not a clue...

Are you purposely dishonest? Or maybe you just lack reading comprehension? Or maybe you just wrote the new dumbest thing you've ever read?

Edited August 31, 2012 by CPCFTW