These are classic discussions published back in October 2005

No Excuses — Step Three: Terminate the Worst Teachers

I have identified 5 steps Utah should take to improve K-12 education. STEP 3: Increased ability to terminate the worst teachers. This proposition would seem to make sense to everyone other than the worst teachers, and I don’t think it needs a lot of explanation.

No Excuses — Step Two: Improve Math in Grades 4-6

I have identified 5 steps Utah should take to improve K-12 education. STEP 2: Improve math performance in grades 4-6. Two years ago, we started a reading initiative for grades K-3. The results are impressive. These early-acquired reading skills will carry forward throughout the students’ lives. The next major learning hurdle comes in math in grades 4-6. Whether students ultimately excel in math turns, in large part, on where they are by the end of the sixth grade. Rather than correct math deficiencies early (when we could do so most efficiently), government tends to spasm further down the road. Currently, we panic over getting kids ready to pass their high school graduation exams (at a point when they not only lack the basic sixth-grade skills but all the others that subsequently should build on that base), and we pour money into college-level engineering initiatives to increase the number of engineers we produce (long after we have... (read more)

No Excuses — Step One: Pay the Best Teachers More

To better focus the discussion, I’m going to post separate entries for each of the 5 steps I have identified to improve public education in Utah. I greatly welcome ideas and input on each element and how it might best be implemented (or whether it should be implemented). STEP 1: Pay the best teachers more. Great teachers are invaluable and, currently, are underpaid. Bad teachers burden the system and should be paid less than the good teachers. Such pay differentials should encourage great teachers to enter and remain in the profession and encourage bad teachers to improve or leave. By identifying and rewarding excellence, we promote it.

No Excuses

The new campaign of the teachers union is “No Excuses.” The article states that one teacher “thinks the campaign is a great idea, but she questions whether legislators will ever give education more funding. ‘Those guys are so resistant to change,’ she said.” It’s odd how political perceptions can be so different. Other than simply wanting increased teachers’ pay, I don’t recall major initiatives for change that the Union has supported in recent history. Maybe someone will remind me of one. In any event, I welcome the Union’s campaign to boldly work for change in a no-excuses environment. Here are some changes that could use the Union’s support: 1. Increased pay for the best teachers. The societal value of a good teacher is incalculable. My perception is that the Union has been the biggest obstacle to paying teachers what they are worth; rather, the Union has insisted that the worst teachers be paid the same as the... (read more)

Public Hearings

Last night, at the Capitol, the Tax Reform Task Force held its first public hearing on the proposals that have emerged from the process. Here is a link to an audio of the 2 1/2 hour meeting. Much of the testimony was spirited and highly-informative. Upcoming hearings include: Oct. 25, noon, Western Park, 300 E. 200 South, VernalOct. 25, 6 p.m., County Commission chambers, 120 E. Main, PriceOct. 26, 6 p.m., Dixon Middle School, 750 W. 200 North, ProvoOct. 27, noon, Cedar City chambers, Old Post Office, 10 N. Main, Cedar CityOct. 27, 6 p.m., County Commission chambers, 197 E. Tabernacle St., St. George

Art in the Park

My wife, Sara, is Chair of the Dixie Arts Foundation. One of DAF’s big annual events is Art in the Park/Taste of Dixie (art exhibitors, food vendors, entertainers), which was held this past weekend. This year, a Friday night event was added to the usual Saturday festivities. It was a big success. The only miscues were lighting and overnight security for Friday night. According to well-established laws and procedures for volunteer organizations, dealing with miscues falls to the Chair’s spouse. But, after 20 popped breakers, wiring adjustments/rigging to make the steeliest fire marshal tremble, and a no-nonsense nightwatch by me and my four kids (whose shifts apparently ran concurrently from 9:45 to 10:05 p.m. — when the supply of Ding Dongs and pop was exhausted), the event was lit and secured. Sara, her board, and the many helpers and volunteers did an excellent job. It was a great community event.

Input Please

The Legislative Tax Reform Task Force is touring the state to solicit input on tax reform proposals. A schedule and some background information are included in this article. I am pleased that the Governor’s office (1) seems to be warming to the idea of a tax cut and (2) that it seems to identify personal income as the specific tax to be cut. In my opinion, the personal income tax has a greater effect on economic development than any other tax. Also, most of the State’s current surplus (about 80%) is coming from the income tax. Therefore, the personal income tax would appear to be the proper place to seek a reduction. The article highlights some differences that Speaker Curtis and I have with the Governor’s plan. In my opinion, we should look for the quickest, clearest way to move from point A to point B. Too often, government gets caught up in fanfare. If... (read more)

Flattish Tax

The Governor’s Office has backed away from a flat tax and, instead, proposes a personal income tax revision that it calls “flatter, fairer, and simple.” The proposal is not a flat tax. As I wrote a few weeks ago, it is difficult for governments to stick to (or enact) a flat tax, because of pressures for tax-favoritism brought by different sectors. This proposal has some winners (high wage-earners, charities and small families) and some losers (homeowners and big families). With it not being a flat tax, I look to see if the proposal truly reduces the tax rate, which would be a good thing. By that, I mean a real reduction to the taxpayers, instead of simply masking effective rates by visibly dropping one number but quietly recouping the money elsewhere. As it currently stands, the proposal seems to fail on this point. For many, the purported benefits under this proposal would be more than offset by the... (read more)
  • Twitter