Government-run Hospitals, Armies, and Schools

In a recent column in the Wall Street Journal on Britain's current political campaigns, the writer was discussing what dominated the news when it was being preempted by the Pope's funeral or Prince Charles' wedding.  He mentioned unemployment, the high cost of "petrol", and then appeared the phrase "the usual media blather about 'killer hospitals.'"   That's not part of the usual media blather in the United States, though "failing schools" is.  Just as I think the "failing schools" is not a completely accurate portrayal of our school system, I also suspect that "killer hospitals" isn't completely accurate for Britain. 

But, I'd argue that our public schools could be much better.  And Britain's hospitals could be much better -- they could be like ours.   Of course, we put WAY more money into health care than Britain, and we get better care.  All those who think tax increases for health care are going to be easier to sell than tax increases for schools, please raise your hands.  So, I find Kevin Drum's suggestion that national health care would be "good for the middle class" pretty weird.  But what about schools?

There are certain dynamics that go with public services, whether those services are schools, hospitals, or the military.  Right now we seem to have the best-in-the-world military, in personnel, equipment, training, and leadership.  We've got best-in-the-world hospitals and health care in general.  In both cases, though through different funding mechanisms, we are putting significantly greater resources than the rest of the world into those efforts.  We also spend more than the rest of the world on education.  We have outstanding post-secondary education, but we don't get best-in-the-world results in K-12 education.  Why?

Well, we trust soldiers to use judgment to implement their training, and we provide them with tremendous technological support.  We've gone for a smaller, better-trained and better-equipped military, and it's worked.  And, our military leaders are tremendously well-educated, generally far more than comparable business professionals.  Multiple degrees are common, and the experience and training are beyond compare.

We also give freedom and respect to university professors.  Though this has gotten us some Ward Churchill types, it's also produced a top-notch higher-education system.

Perhaps we should look at some similar approaches in K-12.  Look for leaders with diversified experience and multiple degrees.  Give teachers time to reflect and plan collaboratively, and expect them to critique their own work and build on it.  Question whether many teachers with small classes is a better approach than fewer, more effective and better-supported teachers with larger classes.  (At least, we could experiment a little, right?)

If you've read this blog much, you've seen my suggestions before.  For a interesting book comparing how our college system developed and the different history of K-12, try Teaching in America: the Slow Revolution.