Yes, Randi Weingarten, Public Schooling Is an Innovation “Dead End.” Just Watch School Inc.

Today education secretary Betsy DeVos is paying a visit to an Ohio public school at the invitation of one of her most vociferous critics, and one of the most ardent opponents of school choice: American Federation of Teachers president Randi Weingarten. The AFT is the second largest teachers union in the country, and Weingarten has repeatedly complained that DeVos has called public schools — institutions heavily influenced by union power — a “dead end.” One purpose of the invitation is to prove otherwise.


So are public schools dead ends? Of course not. Tens of millions of children attend them every year, and most will do fine in their lives. Of course, most likely would do well no matter where they went to school, and probably at a fraction of what we currently pay. But DeVos did not actually say that the schools themselves were dead ends. She said that the public schooling system — a government monopoly — is a dead end for entrepreneurship and innovation. “We are the beneficiaries of start‐​ups, ventures, and innovation in every other area of life, but we don’t have that in education because it’s a closed system, a closed industry, a closed market,” DeVos said in a 2015 speech. “It’s a monopoly, a dead end.”


Is DeVos right? To see for yourself, watch Andrew Coulson’s School Inc., now showing on PBS stations around the country. Why we have so little innovation in education is the central point of the highly engaging documentary. Coulson examines education and other industries both historically and around the modern world, and illustrates that freedom for people who make things, or perform services such as teaching, coupled with paying customers and an ability to make a profit — yes, a profit! — are the keys to unleashing innovation at scale, to the benefit of all.


At the touch of a screen, you and I can now listen to tens‐​of‐​thousands of different pieces of music stored on a device that also makes telephone calls, lets you play video games, empowers you to surf the Internet, and much more. That is a quantum leap from how we listened to music even just a couple of decades ago. Yet education is pretty much the same instructor‐​in‐​front‐​of‐​kids model it has been for centuries.


Apple, HTC, Samsung, all work for profits. Public schools? Not so much.


Essentially, profit shows that something is in demand — that freely choosing people find it of value — and that others could make money by producing something similar, or better. This takes innovation to scale while driving prices down. Not only is that not evil, as emotionally charged critiques of profit imply, it is a classic win‐​win!


Today’s DeVos‐​Weingarten confab is likely to be a nice show for public schools, illustrating that they are not dead ends. But DeVos did not say they were, and what she did say — a government monopoly suffocates innovation — is grounded in extremely well documented — and documentary—reality.