Academic Conversation Cast of Characters Neal Conan host of Talk of the Nation radio show (NPR programming) Howard

g) Howard L. Fleischman project officer from the PISA 2009 study Vance H. Fried policy analyst from the Cato Institute Andrew Howard Nichols representative from the Pell Institute Mike Ross OECD representative Andreas Schleicher featured author in Middle School Journal Student A college freshman Zach Butler college freshman

Talk Show The host sits in his comfortable office chair, takes a sip of water, and loosens up as he prepares to resume the show after a quick commercial break. Each of his guests have taken a seat around a semicircular table and been given microphones. All are prepared to share their knowledge and experiences with regard to the American educational system. The last ad has finished and Talk of the Nation is ready to commence. NEAL: (clears throat) For all of those tuning in this afternoon, welcome back. Im here with six guests and the concentration for todays discussion is education. But more specificallywhat all of these findings and opinions mean for the United States and its competition with other nations in education as this world becomes increasingly globalized. Alright folks I shall introduce each guest one at a time and once all have given some brief statements, we can then begin to have a debate. My first guest is Howard Fleischman, a project officer of the 2009 PISA study. Howard, what exactly is the PISA study? HOWARD: (adjusts collar and places hands on the table in an interlaced fashion) Hey Neal, thanks for having me. The PISA study, the Program for International Student Assessment, is basically an international observation of how well 15-year-olds from around the world do in math, science, and reading relative to one another (). This whole operation is spearheaded by the OECD of which the guest to the left of me (motions to Mike, a guest to be introduced later) is a part of. Ill get into the specific numbers later, but what we found was that in reading, American students are performing at an average level, in mathematics, American students are performing at a below-average level, and in science, American students are performing at an average level. So, in other words, there is room for improvement in each area, but we need to work on mathematics. NEAL: (scratches chin in a contemplative manner) Interesting, very interesting. Lets move onto my second guest, Vance Fried. Vance is a policy analyst with the libertarian think-tank, the Cato Institute and he specializes with the intersection of government and education. First, welcome to the show and second, provide our listeners with some of your thoughts on government and education.

VANCE: (leans back in his chair to get more comfortable and then moves his left hand in a circular fashion as he talks) Glad to be here, Neal. Big fan of the show. What I and the Cato Institute are interested in is how the government plays a role in the quality of our youths education. In my latest publishing, analysis No. 678, I explain how the government makes the process for applying and paying for college difficult. NEAL: (reflects for a moment) Ah, a very divisive issue politics is. Im sure some of our listeners are curious now if they werent before. Anyways, my third guest is Andrew Nichols who joins us from the Pell Institute. I have here a copy of the Institutes latest piece . What can you tell me about it? ANDREW: (picks up his stack of notes, straightens them, puts them back on table ) Always a pleasure, Neal. To truly understand the piece, you need to understand the Institutes interest. The Pell Institute is focused on the amount of opportunity in education. With that being said, this latest article explores the nations degree-attainment goals for the future. Essentially, the governments goal is to have 60% of the nation holding degrees by 2020. Its going to be a challenge. From there, we perform comparisons to other countries and identify some solutions to help us reach that goal. I mean this is simply a valence issue, Neal. NEAL: (takes a sip of water and repositions in his seat) Good stuff, Andrew. Guest #4 is Mr. Mike Ross of the OECD. Mr. Ross, what do you have to contribute to this discourse? MIKE: (becomes alert) A fair amount, Id say. Oh! And thanks for having me on. To begin, I work for the OECD, the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, a multifaceted group with 34 member countries. I believe Howard mentioned it earlier. The mission is selfevident. My specialty lies within the educational sphere. In the publication Education Indicators in Focus, I hone in on the social inequality in education. In many countries, no education means no future. Its unfortunate because it means you can be born into a world that gives you little chance to succeed. This is a travesty and the OECD is intent on stopping income disparity, the very menace that identifies social inequality. We also take a look at what education could mean if it had more equity. NEAL: (points to Andreas, the next guest) My penultimate colleague is Andreas Schleicher, a published author in the Middle School Journal. Andreas, what do you have to say about all of this? ANDREAS: (staring intently at Neal) Hi. As far as education goes, my piece covers the international aspect and not just one subject area. I detail how America has lost its competitive advantage and what other countries are doing to maintain a high le vel of performance in the classroom. NEAL: (scratches chest) Alright, it seems we have a scholarly panel, but my last guest is a college freshman by the name of Zach Butler. Hey Zach, what can you do to enhance the talk? ZACH: (unfolds arms after sitting quietly for several minutes) Hey, thanks for having me on. And all I can really give you is perspective. Having recently left the public school system and entered a university, I think I can give you a fresh set of eyes on the matter. NEAL: Oh no, I nearly forgot. We have but one more guest! I apologize, Student A. What do you have to say about this matter? STUDENT A: Similar to Zach, Im a college kid. As I grow up, Im experiencing the world in newer ways still. Im going to offer my personal opinions and thats about it

NEAL: Thank you. And now we have to go to a quick commercial break. We will be right back after these messages. For the next two minutes, a series of commercials plays on air. The host gets up and exchanges some words with the shows producers. Some of the guests use the facilities, while the rest stretch and prepare for the second half of the show. A little while later, its time to resume. NEAL: (speaking closely into the microphone) And now that weve been given some background on the guests, lets have an exchange of ideas. I want to reiterate the importance of the shows topic though, international education. Each of these guests has knowledge and data relevant to different concentrations on education, but their arguments will revol ve around Americas place in the competitive market of education. Lets begin. Ill start with someone random ( looks from guest to guest and finally decides on Mike) How about you, Mike? MIKE: (somewhat surprised he was picked first) Oh, okay. Well, in the past couple of years, the OECD has noticed that some of its member countries have experienced an increase in income inequality. In the United States, similar to Turkey and Israel, the ratio of the richest to poorest is 14:1 (OECD 2). In a greater context, what this really means is that future opportunities for poorer children are limited. A parents income has a strong relationship with their childs success down the road. The OECD has found that in top performing countries like Finland, Canada, Japan, and South Korea, all top PISA performers, educational policies of-NEAL: And can you verify that claim, Howard? HOWARD: Yes, I can. Those four countries are above average in performance. MIKE: (continuing his unfinished thought) equity are used (OECD 2). Also, the poorest students did better than expected (resilient students). The United States needs to follow the path of some of the countries mentioned earlier. In conclusion, I find that by placing emphasis on equity, what the child puts into the education, rather than the resources available to him or her already, the gap between rich and poor can close. More people will have job prospects. Income disparity should decrease. The nation as a whole can prosper and compete in job markets. NEAL: I want to look at that last comment a little closer. My two college guests will be entering the job market in a few years. What do you two think? ZACH: Um I like the idea. I think this country is always looking to explore possibilities where the entire nation benefits, regardless of party. However, I wonder if its really that simple. I have no qualification to dispute those claims or anything, but it should be explored. No doubt. Should we find a way to accommodate those new job market entrees, then the sky is the limit. STUDENT A: I want to try to connect with both Mike and Vance here, in my own way. I feel that the economic[al] status of the education system has a major impact because if they do not have the money or resources, then the schools and teachers suffer because they do not have the funding to get newer books or technology and even needed repairs around their schools. But I also feel that it can be related politically because even if the education system has the resources, it depends who is in charge of those resources and how they distribute them and if they are doing it correctly (Moskal). NEAL: Care to say more?

STUDENT A: Uh okay, yeah. In general, if America does not have the correct resources for any reason, this could hinder the performance of everyone in the education system, causing us to fall behind in test scores while other countries pull ahead and excel even more (Moskal). ZACH: I agree. I went to a poorer high school in my underclassmen days and the facilities and test scores were characteristic of most places like itlow. Then, when I went to a brand new, wealthy school, test scores were so much higher and it was named a School of Excellence in the state. ANDREAS: (seeming eager) Im going to jump in here. I like what youre saying, Mike. However, Im going to go a step further. What Ive found is that, over that period you mentioned, and we can both agree on, is other countries outperforming us in math, reading, and science. The catch is that the United States hasnt gotten worse, but rather, many other nations have caught up and surpassed us. For example, two generations ago, South Korea had the economic output of Afghanistan today and was at rank 24 in terms of educational output among todays OECD countries. Today it is the top performer in terms of the proportion of school graduates, with 96% of an age cohort obtaining a high school diploma, compared with 75% in the United States (Schleicher 12). To get this country back on track, we need to make some adjustments. NEAL: And what might those be? ANDREAS: (calm and collected) Setting higher expectations for students would be a first step. What might be considered an A+ on a paper or lab report here could easily be a B in some other country. Next, we need to allow for local control of schools. Instead of micromanaging, each school needs more autonomy to find the curriculum that works best, reduce overlap from classes, and giving teachers some creativity and discretion to make learning interesting. Lastly, Id say we need to make teaching an elite profession. If we are to take education seriously, why not treat it like medicine or law? In Finland, teaching ranks are professionalized. They are typically recruited from the top 10% of the class, are given extensive training, and are paid very well (Schleicher 15). If we recruit the brightest then they can educate Americas youth into the brightest! ZACH: I like the higher expectations because sometimes Ive felt cheated in some classes. I work extremely hard and someone else puts in minimal effort and gets the same grade as me. It doesnt always seem fair. Maybe its because the current state of the grading system provides no alternative. Its either pass or fail and sometimes theres no evidence to indict someone, hence the inflated number of good grades. I guess that ties in with Mikes idea on equity. STUDENT A: (excited) Same here! Group work does this to you most often. You can bust your tail for that good grade and a person that didnt do much or anything gets the same grade. Its wrong, plain and simple. ZACH: If we are to fix this, its going to take a pervasive initiative. That could be legislation or an educational movement, Im not sure. In some fashion, grades need to be doled out in the fairest manner possible. Easier said than done, but its necessary. ANDREW: I suppose I can enter the conversation now. My ideas are pertinent to what all of you are saying. The only distinction is that Im focused on the relationship between degree attainment and income inequality. So more specific than Mike. Im going to disagree with Andreas though in that we havent gotten worse. In general, probably not, but in select areas like degree attainment, we have. Just look at the data. The United States is third by percentage in the age bracket of 55-64 with degrees and 12th by percentage in the age bracket of 25-34

with degrees (Nichols 2). So similar if not larger numbers are going to college, but less people are finishing and getting their degrees like they used to. If more people had degrees, we would be better suited to compete with other countries in job markets. ZACH: In an anecdotal sense, I know that a great deal of people go to college and dont finish because of the inability to balance studies with partying, academic pressures, and personal problems from home. With that said, I sure hope Im part of that statistic that does have a degree! NEAL: Lets get Vance in on this. VANCE: (very reserved) My view is that the government is making going to college harder, usually when it comes to payment. Over time, the government has pumped dollar after dollar into universities to help students, but all it is doing is making the price of college go up because the universities can get away with it. For example, Penn State used to cost $4,272 (2010 equivalent) and now costs about $17,344 (Fried 6). Its an egregious waste. The government also favors non-profit schoolsschools run without profit as the primary objectiveover forprofit schoolsschools run by private, profit-seeking entitiesdespite the fact that non-profit schools maintain higher profit margins from huge pools of state funds and charity (Fried 4). The name is deceiving. Both types of institutions run like a publicly traded company, but one is better at hiding its value. NEAL: So...what about payment options? You hinted at those earlier? VANCE: Yes. Funding for universities needs to decrease drastically. Not only will it lower government spending, but it will force productivity with less money. Next, loan programs need to be restructured. They are often harmful to the borrower because they feel the need to borrow gargantuan amounts of money to go to college, not entirely aware of what this means for their future and credit (Fried 8). Lastly, Pell grants and tax credits need to disappear. If students will borrow large amounts anyway, then why do they need money that will never be returned to taxpayers? If several poor students dont need federal subsidies, surely middle class students dont. This entire process is making it harder for socioeconomically disadvantaged students to go to college, thereby making the country less competitive (Fried 8). Sure, there are other factors, but Im really honing in on payment methods. To fully explain this phenomenon would require a host of different specialists. ZACH: As somebody who typically agrees with you and your institutions work, I take issue with the second half of your argument. Its a tricky dilemma to tackle. I too believe the government makes it a ridiculous endeavor, but given that it is already so intertwined, I believe Pell grants and credits are crucial. My parents both have degrees and decent jobs, but extenuating circumstances make it hard to pay for college. They are divorced, I have three other siblings, taxes are high in my county, and I only make $5,750 a year working at a restaurant. But most of that goes to insurance, gas, and amenities. So Im not entitled to anything, but it makes my life a lot easier. VANCE: I see where youre coming from. Ill look into some of those situations and specify more clearly what I mean. ZACH: To justify it politically, I guess Id have to say that given the entanglement between the government and universities, by fault of the government, it would be ridiculous suddenly banish grants and reduce the money supply available to colleges. If they are to adjust as you

suggest, it must be gradual. Imagine the school trying to make a budget after all of this with several million dollars less to work with. Its absurd. ANDREW: Im going to agree with Zach too, Vance (gestures towards Zach with arm outstretched). The Pell grant is significant. In the fiscal year 2010, it helped at least 9 million people go to college. And it is a staple in reaching the Pell Institutes 2020 degree-attainment goal. NEAL: (absorbing all of the information) And lastly, lets get back to Howard and some of his data. HOWARD: (shuffling through pages with various charts and diagrams ) Perhaps these numbers will provide some more clarity on our situation here. Ill focus on rea ding specifically because in each cycle, one subject area is dealt with in detail. For 2009, that area was reading. Anyways, we found that in all of the participating OECD countries, only six had better scores and of the non-OECD countries, only nine had better scores. So for all of the countries in the entire study, 82 of them were identical or worse than the US. As for proficiency, 30% of students are reaching level 4, which is where the elite students reside (levels 4-6) and 18% of students scored below a level 2 (Fleischman iv). NEAL: How do some of my other guests tie into this? HOWARD: (prepared to answer) Well, going back to how to fix our position in academics. Andreas offered examples to fix the classroom setting. Maybe by implementing his policies, we could reach the upper echelon in each subject area? But I can also bring Andrew and Mike into this from an income inequality perspective. Demographically, Hispanics and Blacks perform worse than their Caucasian and Asian counterparts usually because of cultural differences, but also differences in income. This is reinforced by looking at the performance of poor students that require reduced price or free lunches. Hispanics, Blacks, and reduced price/free lunch students all fell below average on test scores (Fleischman iv). As far as the idea of competition itself, these conditions have made it so where Blacks and Hispanics arent even competing really. They, not necessarily by their own fault, are handing the opportunities for better schools, degrees, and standard of living to their peers. NEAL: (intrigued) Wow, Howard. Thats some concrete evidence. And unfortunately, we have to wrap up this session of Talk of the Nation. Listeners, I hope youve heard some insightful discussion. Take what youve heard and formulate your own opinions. Wed be happy to have you call in tomorrow and share them. And for the last word, I ask you to lend your ears to Zach. Zach, why is all of this important? What does all of this mean to you? ZACH: Well, in a broader sense, Im a stakeholder in the countrys success. I have lived in the United States for my entire life and I love it so it would please me to see the nation succeed as it has for so long. On a more personal note, I would like to get married and start a family one day. The goal with kids is usually to provide them with more opportunities than were available to you. Among other things, I want to be confident that my children will be getting a great education, hopefully better than I received in some respects. In short, if we can make the changes necessary for educational success, then I will have no worries about the direction this country is heading and what it means for my potential descendants. The host and his guests remove their headsets, set their microphones on the tables, stand up, and leave.

Works Cited Fleischman, Howard L., and Holly Xie. Highlights From PISA 2009 [Electronic Resource] : Performance Of U.S. 15-Year-Old Students In Reading, Mathematics, And Science Literacy In An International Context / Howard L. Fleischman ... [Et Al.] ; Holly Xie, Project Officer. n.p.: Washington, DC : National Center for Education Statistics, Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Dept. of Education, [2011], 2011. UNIV OF NORTH CAROLINA CHARLOTTE's Catalog. Web. 15 Mar. 2013. Fried, Vance H., and Institute Cato. "Federal Higher Education Policy And The Profitable Nonprofits. Policy Analysis. No. 678." Cato Institute (2011): ERIC. Web. 14 Mar. 2013. Moskal, Evan (Student A). "Problems in the American Educational System." Online interview. 16 Apr. 2013. Nichols, Andrew Howard, and Education Pell Institute for the Study of Opportunity in Higher Education. "Developing 20/20 Vision On The 2020 Degree Attainment Goal: The Threat Of Income-Based Inequality In Education." Pell Institute For The Study Of Opportunity In Higher Education (2011): ERIC. Web. 15 Mar. 2013. Organization for Economic Cooperation and, Development. "How Pronounced Is Income Inequality Around The World--And How Can Education Help Reduce It? Education Indicators In Focus. No. 4." OECD Publishing (2012): ERIC. Web. 14 Mar. 2013. Schleicher, Andreas. "Seeing The United States Education System Through The Prism Of International Comparisons." Middle School Journal 5 (2009): 11. JSTOR Arts & Sciences X. Web. 14 Mar. 2013.