Suchergebnisse

All of the Board of Elementary and Secondary
Education, the Republican Gov. Jeff Landry
Administration, and the Louisiana House of Representatives not only have acted
prudently with education spending this year, but they also laid the foundation
for improved educational delivery.

HB 1 by GOP
state Rep. Jack
McFarland, the operating budget, passed unanimously. It actually didn't change
much from last year's, with marginal changes in a few areas of policy where few
expenditures changes proportionally more than trivially from the previous year,
and with almost every exception being relatively small absolute amounts. That
was good in that next year a temporary 0.45 percent sales tax, on the books
since 2016, finally will disappear, meaning now was not the time for significantly
greater spending.

The area with the biggest change was elementary
and secondary education, which will see an overall decrease in spending, but
that is due to vanishing federal pandemic-related funds as well as (for the
moment) reduced Recovery School District demands. Those aside, the actual amount
falls about $25 million from last year, even though the Minimum Foundation
Program goes $71 million higher. That happens because while the student count
is about a half percent lower and the base $4,015 per pupil amount remains the
same, the per pupil amount for mandated costs, or an inflationary factor for insurance,
fuel, and pensions, jumped from $100 (last set in 2009) to $122, and supplemental
additions in attracting and retaining teachers and class offerings also moved
higher. The three single areas moving the highest were accelerated tutoring ($30
million), differential compensation ($25 million), and mandated costs ($14.3
million).

The MFP formula, constitutionally, comes from BESE
and must be passed or rejected by the Legislature without change. If rejected, as
occurred last year, the formula used reverts to that use in the previous year (which
itself may be a formula from a previous year, depending upon the last time the
Legislature adopted it).

Last year's carried a $2,000 pay raise for educators
and $1,000 for other employees as well as $25 million in differential pay. But ultimately
the Legislature failed to act on that in favor of a separate line item that
technically made all of this good just for this fiscal year. Ironically, given
what was to come, the rejection of the 2023 MFP came in part as a result of
opposition to the differential pay increase as a permanent feature, as well as disgruntlement
over rejection of a financing mechanism that would pay down pension liabilities
while allowing for pay raises that would not have been uniform but dependent on
local education agency decisions.

Because that rejection was a blessing in disguise
that didn't lock in the $198 million in raises plus the $25 million for future
formulas. Instead, recognizing then that revenue roll-off to come demanded increasing
budgetary flexibility, BESE – the composition of which changed dramatically as
a result of fall elections – this year produced a formula that included the
differential pay but not the raises. Landry responded by offering $127 million more
outside the formula in his budget submission and the House upped the ante to
$166 million more (although that left a $24 million hole to be dealt with as
the process plays out). This means instructional spending in essence advances $110
million, after backfilling the original $127 million from the general fund.

It would mean, if given across the board, for
teachers a stipend of around $1,675 each for next year. Except the House
included language that would allow local education agencies to treat the extra
as differential compensation that allows districts to determine its distribution.
The formula specifies four ways in which this may work, three of which don't
kick up controversy typically have been where much of differential compensation
funds have gone, such as attracting teachers in high need environments.

It's the other use where the bulk of the that has politics-as-usual
unions, leftist politicians, and their lickspittles in the media and interest
groups in an uproar: Stipends for Highly Effective Teachers. In other words,
districts now have considerable sums by which to introduce or expand merit pay,
if they so choose. They could choose to spend no money this way and some or all
on other differential pay options, or to give, as established interests want,
it out on as raises on an equal basis.

Pay for performance, however, would be an option
and one deservedly available for the first time in bulk for far-sighted districts.
The question of merit pay researchers have poured over for decades with the bulk
of research converging on it has a positive
impact on outcomes if teamed with other structural reforms best
implemented at the district level. The current HB 1 language does precisely
this, combined with the MFP formula HCR 21 that
also has passed the House.

This potential boost for merit pay as a significant
feature in at least some Louisiana districts – presuming this stays in the
budget all the way through crossing Landry's desk – should encourage BESE at
the least to hold off any permanent pay raises for at least a couple of years
and the Legislature to keep the annual stipend, which would make for good sense
as well with budget uncertainties ahead. This could act as a pilot study that
could guide incorporating this into the MFP after some years down the road.

It's an exciting possibility to help improve
Louisiana's woeful, if improving, educational outcomes, and if things remain
the same throughout the legislative process finally made available with state
dollars for significant application.

Being able to take risks and having the freedom to try out wild ideas is the only process that leads to successful innovation.

"Had we used the true price index, we would have found a larger contraction due to lockdowns. That means that we understated the cost of lockdowns." ~ Vincent Geloso

As headlines report The Beatles used artificial intelligence to create a new song featuring John Lennon's voice, Verity Harding says the international frenzy shows just how unprepared we are for the new technological age.
The post What The Beatles can teach us about AI appeared first on Bennett Institute for Public Policy.

Survey finds growing acceptance of civilian firearms among the country's population.

What is your answer to the question: How Close to Full Capital Mobility Are We? It's got to depend on what countries are involved, what time horizon, etc. In a recent paper entitled "Measuring Financial Integration: More Data, More Countries, More Expectations", Hiro Ito and I tackle this question of mobility and substitutability (terminology due […]

Japan has lost a great deal of economic ground to Germany due primarily to its terrible debt record. And the debt performance of the US and China is the primary factor in determining whether America leads the global economy, or no one does.
The post Three–Four Teach One–Two a Global Leadership Lesson appeared first on American Enterprise Institute - AEI.

If you adopt one of my books, I will, if invited, do a free presentation to the class.

If fiscal conservatives in the Louisiana Legislature
bind themselves to using state dollars to boost educator salaries, they need to
do it the right way.

As the 2023 Regular Session hurtles to a close
next week, finally a majority consensus
has appeared around this pay hike of $2,000 per teacher and $1,000 per staff
included in the Minimum Foundation Program formula. The
Board of Elementary and Secondary Education must initiate the formula that goes
into effect only if the Legislature ratifies it; if not ratified unchanged, the
current formula is used.

BESE sent such a formula that has started its journey with Senate Education Committee approval. At present, the general
appropriations bill HB 1 doesn't
contain a line item for this, but instead allocates the $197.7 million total to
paying down unfunded accrued liabilities which would free up money for local
districts that could be used for raises. The increased flexibility is desirable
not only because it allows districts to set their own levels of raises but also
relieves state taxpayers of a one-size-fits-all obligation that may not be
sustainable with a deteriorating
revenue picture forecast for at least the next three fiscal years.

Unfortunately, legislative majorities may be turning
against the more prudent approach in their wanting to add yet another statewide
commitment to burden taxpayers, continuing a headlong rush towards throwing
money at school employers. Since 2019, legislators have granted raises totaling
$3,300 to teachers and $1,650 to support personnel each.

This approach only perpetuates a major impediment towards
improving Louisiana elementary and secondary education – deferral in linking
pay to performance. Only a little more than half of districts even supplement
state base pay and hardly any connect pay to performance; the state portion isn't
linked.

Granting across-the-board raises does little to
improve students' academic performance, research
reveals, contrary to much of the rhetoric that emanates from uncritical
backers of these. Additionally, it subverts the idea of the MFP to move closer
towards equal funding across richer and poorer districts.

So, if the goal is to use pay to enhance education
rather than throwing more money at a special interest, any raise must have
parameters attached that vary its size at an individual level according to student
performance (a combination of competence level and growth, components already calculated
at the educator level) and difficulty in boosting that (for example, proportion
of students eligible for free meals as a proxy for households without the
cultural and/or fiscal means to encourage learning). The formula already has
baked in related measures that would address improved student performance, a
differential compensation package based on local needs at a cost of $61
million.

Regrettably, language detailing the former
specifies across-the-board hikes, but BESE members have given notice they can
change that at the last minute. Fiscal conservatives must insist they do, or
else they must reject the resolution. The reverse goes with the differential
compensation; it must be in the resolution or face their rejection. Either case
means reversion to last year's formula, without additional funding. And, it all
must happen without busting the state's spending cap.

If legislators insist on the more reckless
approach to doling out raises – pay boosts which appear warranted to some
degree by spiraling inflation caused a debt-fueled spending binge by Washington
Democrats – by putting state taxpayers on the hook for money that may disappear
that would invite service cuts elsewhere and/or tax increases, they need to
take that risk in a way that actually promises improved education outcomes. BESE
should rewrite quickly a resolution that empowers it to distribute teacher pay
raises along performance criteria it will issue prior to Jun. 30, and anything
less than that legislative majorities must defeat.

The latest complaint about the North Sea: Up to half of the oil produced in the North Sea will be incompatible with UK refineries by 2035, campaigners have warned.Britain's refineries are geared up to handle what is known as light oil, rather than heavy crude.Around 25pc of domestically produced crude oil is already classed as heavy, with this proportion expected to rise to as much as 50pc in the next decade, according to an analysis by Global Witness.It means Britain will be forced to ship an ever growing proportion of oil from the North Sea abroad unless new refineries are built. Alice Harrison, of Global Witness, said: "Rishi Sunak's obsession with oil is a red herring."The UK can't process the oil we produce, and fresh analysis today shows the situation is only getting worse."Taking something produced in Britain and sending it abroad to be consumed by foreigners is known as an "export". We generally tend to think they're an interesting idea. With that lovely foreign money we get from these "exports" it is possible to buy things made by foreigners that we ourselves get to consume. These are known as "imports". The whole process, swapping - intermediated by that money stuff - of swapping exports for imports is known as "trade".It's the way the world gets rich, David Ricardo as well as Adam Smith wrote about it extensively some two and more centuries back. It comes as something of a shock that it's necessary to educate "Global Witness" on such simplicities. But some are a little more simple about reality than they think they are, obviously.We'd also add one more little detail. Currently the government gains 75% of those profits from that process of producing oil in the North Sea. True, we think that percentage is a little high but we also insist that resource rents should be taxed until the pips squeak. Still, we're really not sure why Global Witness is so against money flowing into the Treasury. Are they against it being used to buy nice things for British voters?

Javier Milei, President of Argentina, speaks at the World Economic Forum in Davos

By Julius Dihstelhoff & Tomaz Amorim. Global academic collaboration is a dynamic field, where it is important to deal with inequalities and build connections between institutions from different regions. Recent discussions have shed light on these pivotal issues.

Drawing on his ethnographic study of government science advisers, Noam Obermeister argues that much of their work involves learning by doing and that by creating realistic social simulations this expertise can be developed in the classroom. Transformation – much like sustainability – has become a cliche. As a former teacher of mine used to say, … Continued

Using novel linked data to track educational and employment trajectories in PeruJoan Jennifer Martinez (PhD candidate in Economics, UC Berkeley) measures the impact of teachers' gender bias on high school students' education and employment trajectories using novel data. This study was supported by CEGA's Psychology and Economics of Poverty Initiative.Data collection through in-person student sessions in Lima, Peru | José Miguel Valverde (Opportunities for Everyone)Although gender wage gaps have declined worldwide, this pattern has been uneven between higher-income and low- and middle-income countries. Labor supply outcomes continue to differ across genders globally, as unemployment and part-time jobs are more common among women. While recent research suggests that these gaps may be partially driven by behaviors that differ across genders — such as salary requests (Roussille, 2021), self-promotion (Exley and Kessler, 2022), and job-attribute preferences (Le Barbanchon et al., 2020, Biasi and Sarsons, 2020) — such behaviors may be reinforced by preferences and attitudes acquired prior to entering the labor market. Gender bias encountered during school, including students' exposure to teacher biases may have long-lasting effects on their labor market outcomes.Measuring the Gender Bias of School InstructorsUsing novel data from two sources — linked administrative information on students' education and employment and nationwide survey responses from public high school teachers and students — I evaluated the long-term effects of gender-bias exposure on 1.7 million public high school students expected to graduate between 2015 and 2019 in Peru.To construct and validate a measure of teachers' gender bias, I developed an online government portal that recorded approximately 2,400 teacher responses and 4,600 student responses to an Implicit Association Test (IAT) and gender-attitudes surveys. Data was also collected in person through sessions in Lima during 2022. I constructed an assessment-based measure of teachers' gender bias comparing the gender differences in teacher-assigned and blindly-graded tests. I veiled this measure with an alternative measure of bias using the IAT. Next, I used Empirical Bayes methods to retrieve teacher-level measures of teachers' gender bias in assessment, later using this measure as a dependent variable for estimating its long-term effects. I estimated the long-term consequences of bias by comparing students enrolled in the same school, grade and year but assigned to different teachers and, therefore, exposed to different levels of gender bias.Study Results and the Long Shadow of Gender BiasStudy results suggest that when high school students are exposed to the gender biases of teachers the effects can be deleterious and long-lasting, impacting factors such as whether students finish school, whether they apply to and attend college, and whether they succeed in formal sector employment as young adults.Math teachers who strongly associate males with scientific disciplines give higher scores to male students, when compared to blindly-graded test scores, while language arts teachers who strongly associate females with humanities-based disciplines award higher grades to female students. Figure 2 shows the distribution of teachers' IAT scores: math teachers who are men more strongly associate males with science than math teachers who are women, and the converse holds for language arts instructors.Distribution of teachers' gender-science Implicit Association Test (IAT) scores | Joan Jennifer MartinezFindings also suggest that female students who are assigned to more biased teachers are less likely to complete high school and apply to college than male students. Assigning female students during one grade to a high school math teacher who exhibits one standard deviation more severe gender bias against girls, compared to the average teacher, reduces girls' likelihood of ever graduating from high school by 1.3 percentage points (1.6 percent of the group mean) relative to the case in which boys are assigned to this teacher.Finally, female students assigned to more biased teachers in high school are less likely to hold a job in the formal sector after graduation and/or have fewer paid working hours relative to their male classmates. Female students who are assigned to a math teacher who is one standard deviation more biased during one academic year are 1.3 percentage points less likely to hold a formal-sector job at ages 18–19 (equivalent to 18 percent of the group mean). Further, this bias exposure causes monthly earnings losses of USD 2.6 at ages 18–19. The magnitude of this effect is large enough that it exacerbates the gender wage gap between 11 and 30 percent between ages 18–23, leading female students to suffer cumulative losses during their first two years in the labor market.Contributions and Policy ImplicationsEducators' gender biases in student assessments are a previously undocumented source of gender gaps in formal sector employment and earnings. These results offer insight into the effects of teacher biases on long-lasting human capital decisions and outcomes, especially the adverse conditions women face. Designing policy interventions to reduce the prevalence of such biases in educational settings is urgent. Another important area for potential study is whether students can be trained to recognize teachers' gender biases in order to prevent these biases from affecting their decisions.The Impact of Teacher Gender Bias on High School Student Outcomes was originally published in CEGA on Medium, where people are continuing the conversation by highlighting and responding to this story.

This weekly recap focuses on teachers' dissatisfaction with their pay and work hours, the staggering costs of insomnia, connections between wildfires and food insecurity., and more.