I have two links on the state of education today - I'll still be here when you're done reading them. My rant is mainly concerned with the second, but the first explains why there are less stellar teachers, so I decided to include it. (NYTimes registration required for the first).

The theme that I see in these zero-tolerance policies is that it is easier to enact a one-size-fits-all policy than to think. And every one of the stupidities that result are because the administrators don't want to work hard, don't want to have to think hard, don't want to deal with thinking or working.

But they still want to be the primary guardians of our children! If you scroll down on the referenced page, you will see at least two cases where schools punished students for legally smoking cigarettes off school grounds, not during school hours. (I don't think it's a good idea to take up smoking, myself. That having been said, anyone who takes up smoking at this late date is well aware of the risks).

I have become firmly convinced that the worst petty tyrants in our Republic are school administrators and school boards. Actually, let me change that to "anyone who is involved in setting policy" for schools. Our textbooks are watered down predigested pap; held hostage to the remote chance that someone somewhere might be offended. Many of our teachers are more interested in indoctrinating their students in political correctness than teaching the facts. Our children are getting poor educations. And the solution proposed is the same one that has been proposed for the last 50 years - the schools need more money. As a nation, we spend more on education that almost any other Western country, and get some of the worst results at the primary and secondary levels. (Our colleges and universities are still unmatched). And yet we throw more money at the problem rather than think about the solutions. Part of it is self-interest on the part of teachers and administrators - if more money is put into the school system, more money is put into their pockets.

Parents need to fight back. They need to force the schools to be accountable. They need to push back when the entrenched special interests in education blow smoke to make school systems less accountable. They need to fight back when the school system wrongs their children because it is easier to harm one student than to punish several miscreants. And the beneficiaries of the school system, the entrenched special education interests (the NEA, the school administrators, the people who see their chance to mold the students' minds in their own politically correct ways), make it hard for parents to fight back. They have the power of law and custom on their side. They have insurance that makes it cheap for the school system to fight lawsuits - insurance paid for by the taxpayers. They have lobbyists at all levels of government to encourage legislatures to pass laws that benefit them. After all, "it's for the children!" And because the opposition is not focused, because the harm is not seen, dismissed, or covered up, it is an uphill battle to get reforms enacted and complied with.

To see this in action, look at all the vitriol spewed by the educational special interests against school vouchers. They say it will take money away from the public school system. They say it is an unconstitutional violation of church and state. They say there have been scams to get the money without giving an education. I say that if the money spent on public schools is supposed to be spent for the student, it doesn't matter that the money isn't going to the school - since the school no longer has that student. I say there are secular private schools. I say there are already scams to get the public money in schools - prosecute the scammers and make them give the money back. I went to private school, at great expense to my parents (for which I say thank you, since I know they read this). It was a religious school, but not terribly so. And I was forced to get a good education there - the teachers wouldn't allow me to slack off. There are many public school systems that allow the students to get a good education - many fewer that force them to.

We already have a system that more or less functions the way vouchers are supposed to - our higher education system. The system of federal student loans, grants, etc that we have now works, more or less. More people than ever before have gone to college. Many people who perhaps oughtn't to are going to college, even. (Myself included - for what I do and want to do, I'd have done much better to go to a trade school like DeVry or Chubb, and maybe get an associates. I wouldn't change things, though, because it was at college that I met my wife.) There will be people that say our children's education is too important to be left to market forces. I say it is too important not to. Governments should set standards of accountability; the way they do for colleges. But they should measure output, not prescribe input.

I will probably disappoint the libertarians here, but I believe the government does have a role to play in education (but not the federal government). I believe everybody in a jurisdiction should contribute to the education of children in that jurisdiction - without a well-educated youth, we will decline as a country and a civilization. To that end, I believe that this is a place where government coercion is justified. Once they have collected that money, though, it should be made available to the student and his family to choose the educational source. That source should be accredited, in the same way our colleges are accredited, to be eligible for government financing. It should be accountable to the student and his parents for an education, to the government directly only for financial malfeasance. And the source could be a private tutor (for one or several students), a traditional school, etc.

"What about the social benefits of forcing children to interact outside their socio-economic set?" I hear you cry. Well, does that happen now? I don't think so. And I doubt it ever will. And, frankly, that's not the government's job - that's the job of the parents; to make sure their kid is socialized. If they don't want to socialize their kids, the government isn't going to be able to force them to anyway.

The system of education in this country as it stands fails many of the students enrolled in it. I don't want the kind of school system all too common in the rest of the first world, where your entire life is set by the time you are 12, and it is extremely hard to get off the track decided at that time; people should have the option in majoring in Undecided for a year or two at every level, of changing their mind. And for goodness sake, the kindergarten you go (or don't go to) to shouldn't affect your life. But the solid skills of learning need to be taught in primary school, the solid subjects to be learned need to be taught in secondary school, so that when a student goes to college, they have the tools to make the most of their time at college.

Finally, I would like to say "Thank you" to all the teachers who teach, who go into their classroom to make sure their students learn, and don't let them slack or slide. The ones who give their students the tools to learn, and let them develop their skills. The ones who do not see teaching as a synonym for indoctrinating. I believe most teachers want to have their students succeed. My rant is directed mainly the educators, administrators, and lawmakers whose primary interest is making their lives easier at the expense of the students. The ones who want more money in schools because it means more money in their paychecks. My mother-in-law is a teacher, and I have had many teachers who have taught me things I could never have learned on my own, things I never would have thought of trying to learn on my own.