Maryland is proposing to increase education spending by 57%.
Analysts say the investment will "pay for itself" by assuming:
• Students won't leave the state
• Higher taxes won't harm investment
• Huge positive effects which aren't supported by the evidence
What a disaster.
Analysts say the investment will "pay for itself" by assuming:
• Students won't leave the state
• Higher taxes won't harm investment
• Huge positive effects which aren't supported by the evidence
What a disaster.
That increase would take their per pupil spending above $25,000 each year.
70% higher than the national average.
With no meaningful accountability mechanisms.
70% higher than the national average.
With no meaningful accountability mechanisms.
Kirwan looked at places like Finland and concluded we need to:
• Spend more
• Pre K for all.
That's selection on the dependent variable.
AND FINLAND SPENDS LESS THAN US ANYWAY
• Spend more
• Pre K for all.
That's selection on the dependent variable.
AND FINLAND SPENDS LESS THAN US ANYWAY
Imagine if I found out the 5 richest people in the world took painkillers every day
You wouldn't conclude that taking painkillers would make you rich
Yet here we are.
William Kirwan is a math professor - he should know better.
You wouldn't conclude that taking painkillers would make you rich
Yet here we are.
William Kirwan is a math professor - he should know better.
Finland also has a national school choice system.
Why isn't that in the Kirwan proposal?🤔
Why isn't that in the Kirwan proposal?🤔
How did the state determine how much needed to be spent for better outcomes?
They asked public school employees their opinions.
Unsurprisingly they said they wanted a HUGE increase.
They asked public school employees their opinions.
Unsurprisingly they said they wanted a HUGE increase.
The "researchers" couldn't even get the cherry-picking right.
Their estimate are based on a 5 percentage point increase in graduation rates
BUT the study they cited found effects of 3-4%.
I'm not kidding. Look:
Their estimate are based on a 5 percentage point increase in graduation rates
BUT the study they cited found effects of 3-4%.
I'm not kidding. Look:
More evidence they couldn't even get the cherry-picking right:
Their estimates are based on an 11 percentage point increase in graduation rates from pre-K
BUT the study they cited found effects of 7.7 percentage points
Again, I'm not kidding. Look:
Their estimates are based on an 11 percentage point increase in graduation rates from pre-K
BUT the study they cited found effects of 7.7 percentage points
Again, I'm not kidding. Look:
Their estimates were also based on Perry Pre-K, but:
• That program was from over 50 years ago
• It was only 123 students
The most recent experiment (2018) of a statewide pre-K program (Tennessee) was actually NEGATIVE.
Why didn't they cite this study?🤔
• That program was from over 50 years ago
• It was only 123 students
The most recent experiment (2018) of a statewide pre-K program (Tennessee) was actually NEGATIVE.
Why didn't they cite this study?🤔
Maryland currently has a voucher program (called BOOST)
BUT it only gives kids 12% of what they would have gotten in government schools!
Why don't they follow Finland and meaningfully expand school choice?🤔
They would SAVE taxpayer money and cause real systemic change.
BUT it only gives kids 12% of what they would have gotten in government schools!
Why don't they follow Finland and meaningfully expand school choice?🤔
They would SAVE taxpayer money and cause real systemic change.
