Ban Public Education

It is a gross understatement to say merely that "public education has been a colossal failure".

It is an understatement which cost this nation an extra $7.7 trillion, since the cost of education as a percent of GDP increased from 4.9% in 1959 to 7.9% in 1997.  Had we not made that "investment" we would have no public debt, no consumer debt, no automobile debt, and rather than owing more for our homes than they are worth, Americans would have equity in their homes.

E. Ray Moore:  How to ban public education


What would you call it if you placed children in an environment where they are more than twice as likely to feel that they aren't safe and three times as likely to witness fights between racial/ethnic groups?   Or 50% more likely to watch more than 5 hours of TV per day?  Or only 90% as likely to read for pleasure, experience espirit de corps, or to believe they are educated or treated or disciplined fairly?  Or 6% more likely to witness cheating and 20% more likely to be in an  environment which condones cheating?  Or 35% more likely to be disrupted from learning and 70% as likely to go to college?  Or to be 21% more likely to fail to be proficient in reading, 14% more likely to fail to be proficient in civics, 8% more likely to fail to be proficient in history, 7% more likely to fail to be proficient in geography, to score 14 points lower in math, 8 points lower in geography, and 14 points lower in history, and to cost their parents an extra $6,000 per year each?


Most  would call it--child abuse.

Americans call it--public education.



The ponderous debts are, unfortunately, the best news about American education.  Three decades of progressively worse anti-male bias in courts, schools, government, and industry didn’t change the ratio of earnings of male to female BS degree holders--it took one and a half women to earn as much as one man before, and it takes one and a half today [National Center of Education Statistics (NCES 98-086), "Gender Differences in Earnings Among Young Adults Entering the Labor Market"]. Discriminating against men simply because men are the best employees, don't sue their own employers for "discrimination" or "harassment", don't take one fifth of the year off for maternity and child care leave, excel in all standardized tests, have a higher work consistency, and don't create hostile work environments for their fellow employees, did not benefit real women. All claims by feminists to the contrary are fraudulent.  Before this nonsense began, the one-working-parent families in the US earned five times as much as Japanese families did, but today the one-working-parent families in Japan earn twice as much as our two-working-parent families do.


Boys constitute two thirds of those whose SAT scores would ordinarily have them in college, but anti-male bias reduced them to two fifths of BS degree recipients. Bigots who implemented this systemic anti-male bias would allow it to continue. They don't and never will admit that their bigotry undermined society, robbed the economy of $trillions, violates the Constitution, & is now illegal with Proposition 209 in California which outlaws affirmative action. Crowding males out of the education system reduced the "annual earning power" of just one year’s crop of graduates by four billion dollars, by seventeen billion dollars compared to if all college graduates had been men, and by almost three hundred billion dollars if in the last two decades all graduates in the US had been men. They would have earned almost three trillion dollars more just  over the last two decades--& they would have been better husbands and fathers.

This bears repeating: If all BS degree recipients in the last two decades had been men, their additional contribution to GDP would have been almost three trillion dollars--and they would have been better husbands and fathers.


The return on investment of educating a male is 6 times the cost of his education (ROI = 6x). The lower earning potential of women produces a negative return on the investment (ROI = .9). Including the above GDP loss decreases ROI to 0.29, and including the four decade increase in education costs from five percent to 8 percent of GDP decreases ROI to 0.10. It is not rational. Every statistical analysis demonstrates it to be a catastrophe. It increased gender warfare, crime, incarceration, illegitimacy, divorce, fatherlessness; reduced incomes, international test scores, Personal Savings; all point to the same pattern of social implosion.

The crowning glory of feminism, though, is the TIMSS where the American 12th grade boy scores 219 points lower than the Norwegian 12th grade boy, 117 points lower than the Russian boy, 115 points lower than the Cypriot boy, 78 lower than the Australian boy, 53 points lower than the Canadian boy, and 24 points lower than the French boy.

It was even worse on girls.  The American 12th grade girl scores another 53 points lower than the American boy and 196 points lower than a Norwegian boy! Yet 12th graders from countries like Japan, Korea, Singapore, Hong Kong, Taiwan, whose 8th graders scored more than 100 points higher than ours, weren't even included in the 12th grade study. Such a LOW score must have required a conscious effort on behalf of educators to impart systemic ignorance. Is it at all possible to achieve even lower scores? Can American girls be even further de-educated? Can their scores decline more than 219 points below Norway's? Is 393 higher than a girl would score if she just guessed? Could someone who knows the subject intentionally score lower than 393? From 8th to 12th grade, while most nations' scores improved dramatically, our 8th grade boys scored 56 points lower and our 8th grade girls score a whopping 104 points lower than our 12th graders. Nobody else came even close. It is the bottom of the Peter Principle Curve--no matter what we do, the only direction other than zero is up. It is rock bottom.


With that in mind, could you believe that there is even worse news?  There is.  All of these extra education dollars were supposed to "narrow the gender gap", and "narrow the race gap".   That didn't happen. The scores of all Americans decreased in unison, like a dance of the gremlins.  The 98 point drop in SAT scores affected blacks, Hispanics, Whites, boys, and girls equally, proving that "equality in education" truly is possible after all.  Washington, DC, which spends three times as much per student as many states who score at the opposite end of the spectrum, scores consistently dead last on all of the standardized tests, disproving the myth that more money solves problems.  The ACT Composite score of Washington is just 0.7 points higher than that for blacks in general (17.8 vs. 17.0), which is only because 7% of the students are Whites, whose average ACT score is 21.8.  This 4.8 point gap between blacks and Whites on the ACT test is equivalent to a 110 point gap in SAT Math scores, a 65 point gap in GRE Quantitative scores, a 15 point gap in IQs, ,  Washington scored higher than South Africa in TIMSS and higher than Mozambique in IAEP--but the average score for American blacks was lower than the score for BLACKS in both of these African countries.  This is the real monument to the success of the US Department of Education.

It's not that Mozambique and South Africa have a corner on education.  The top two percentile of their 8th graders scored 60 points lower than the lowest two percentile of Singapore's 8th graders.  This gap between the brightest of Africa and the dullest of Singapore is a huge number.  To consider that the gap between American blacks and Singapore is even bigger is almost incomprehensible.


The least expensive form of education to both taxpayers and parents is also the best by a landslide.  Home schooled students cost taxpayers not a dime, yet they consistently score higher than every other state's public schools, as well as the average for private and religious schools.  The highest scoring state in the ACT was Oregon, at 22.7, but home schooled students scored an average of 22.8, even higher than the average for Whites.  The further away from public education a child gets, the better his education, and undoubtedly the better his moral and spiritual upbringing.  Home schooled students whose parents have teaching credentials score lower than those who don't.  Students whose parents select teaching materials from government recommended sources score lower than those who don't.   Students who participate in any extracurricular government sponsored education programs score lower than those who don't.  Home schooled students in the age group of ninth graders scored at the level of the age group in the 12th grade in public schools, a 3 letter grade advantage, and one to two letter grades ahead of Catholic schools, which consistently score much higher than public schools.  That all three students who won the National Spelling Bee were home schooled students, and that the NEA wants to ban such students from these competitions, is no coincidence.


Even after years of anti-male bias, even after being confronted with every affirmative action program that a wizened "liberal" mind can muster, even being only 40% of the graduates from our once fine universities, our boys still score up to 239 points higher than than our girls on the Graduate Record Exam.  The distribution of GRE scores for both education majors and blacks is virtually identical, but the highest two percentile of both groups score lower than the median scores of engineering majors.  The highest two percentile of engineering majors score more than 200 points higher than the highest two percentile of blacks and education majors.

Which raises the question:  Why does this once great country hire teachers whose demonstrated intellectual skills are sub-par even for black Africans?  Education majors score lower than many if not most of the students they are supposed to educate.  Multiple studies show that a mother's involvement in the education of her child reduces academic skills, whereas the father's involvement increases it dramatically.  If this applies to parents, then who can claim that it does not apply to American teachers, only 15% of whom are men?  More than half of the teachers are men in every one of the countries which scored more than 100 points higher than us in 8th grade TIMSS math and science.  This credible worldwide study proved beyond the shadow of a doubt that there is a direct correlation between math and science skills, and the percent of men teachers--scores increase five points for each 1% increase in the percent of teachers who are men.


Educators assert that teachers who don't understand their material, as demonstrated by multiple standardized tests, are still capable of teaching it to students who already understand it better than their teachers do, as demonstrated by multiple standardized tests.  This is a perplexing philosophy.   How can it be explained?


bullet Reduce teen pregnancy, drug use, crime, delinquency, incarceration, divorce, Littleton-style school shootings, and increase SAT scores 98 points by:
bullet Banning public education, shutting down all public schools, selling off their assets, handing over the receipts to property taxpayers, turning the buildings into public baths, & relying on fathers to educate their own children.
bullet Cutting education costs two thirds by handing public education over to the church.
bullet Keep public education, but cut all expenditures in half to a level similar to Japan, and closer to our own costs of four decades ago, but restore school prayer in public schools