Giving School Choice the Milton Friedman Test
Giving School Choice the Milton Friedman Test jszamosi Mon, 08/12/2013 - 10:39am If education reformers wish posterity to be kind to their labors, we would do well do emulate FriedmanтАЩs rigorous empirical methods. Commentary August 12, 2013 Andrew J. Coulson This article appeared in The Washington Times on August 12, 2013. Last month marked the 101st anniversary of Milton FriedmanтАЩs birth. The date was celebrated across the nation, particularly тАФ and rightly тАФ by school-choice advocates. Although Friedman launched the modern school-choice movement and lived to see it rise to national prominence, there is still more that those of us who support educational freedom can learn from his example. Friedman was famous for his advocacy of individual liberty and limited government, particularly in education, but often said that this was an avocation , not his vocation. Professionally, he studied the role of government spending and the money supply on consumers and unemployment. His work in this field was so compelling that it caused many economists to abandon their erstwhile Keynesian views, and it earned him the 1976 Nobel Prize in economics. What distinguished that work was its rigorous empiricism and focus on long-term outcomes. For example, a reigning belief among mid-20th century economists was that if government handed out money during hard times, people would spend it, stimulating economic growth. Friedman theorized that this was wrong and proposed that consumers mostly base their spending decisions on their тАЬpermanent,тАЭ long-term income prospects тАФ so they tend to save rather than spend
Last month marked the 101st anniversary of Milton FriedmanтАЩs birth, a milestone celebrated across the nation, particularly by school-choice advocates. Friedman, a towering figure in the realm of economics, not only launched the modern school-choice movement but also lived to see it gain national prominence. However, there is still much that those of us who support educational freedom can learn from his example, particularly in the realm of rigorous empirical methods.
Friedman was renowned for his advocacy of individual liberty and limited government, particularly in education. Yet, he often considered this an avocation, not his vocation. Professionally, he focused on the role of government spending and the money supply on consumers and unemployment. His work in this field was so compelling that it caused many economists to abandon their Keynesian views, and it earned him the 1976 Nobel Prize in economics. What distinguished that work was its rigorous empiricism and focus on long-term outcomes.
During the mid-20th century, a prevailing belief among economists was that if the government handed out money during hard times, people would spend it, thereby stimulating economic growth. Friedman theorized that this was incorrect. He proposed that consumers mostly base their spending decisions on their тАЬpermanent,тАЭ long-term income prospects. As a result, they tend to save rather than spend temporary additional income.
To test both theories, Friedman meticulously collected data that could potentially demolish either Keynesian stimulus spending or his own theory. тАЬThe ultimate test of the validity of a theory,тАЭ Friedman wrote, тАЬis the ability to deduce facts that have not yet been observed, that are capable of being contradicted by observation, and that subsequent observation does not contradict.тАЭ
In applying FriedmanтАЩs rigorous empirical methods to school choice, education reformers must ensure that their efforts are grounded in evidence and focused on long-term outcomes. The school-choice movement has grown significantly since FriedmanтАЩs time, but it remains crucial to continue evaluating its impact through objective, data-driven analysis.
One of the key challenges in assessing school choice is the need for comprehensive, longitudinal data that tracks student outcomes over time. This includes not only academic performance but also factors such as graduation rates, college readiness, and long-term economic success. By focusing on these long-term outcomes, educators and policymakers can gain a more accurate picture of the true value of school choice.
Furthermore, it is essential to consider the role of government in the school-choice landscape. Friedman championed limited government intervention, but the implementation of school choice often requires careful policy design and oversight. Policymakers must ensure that school choice programs are equitable and accessible to all students, regardless of their socioeconomic background.
In addition to empirical analysis, it is crucial to engage in ongoing dialogue with stakeholders, including teachers, parents, and students. By incorporating diverse perspectives, education reformers can refine their approaches and address any unintended consequences of school choice policies.
Ultimately, the legacy of Milton Friedman serves as a powerful reminder of the importance of rigorous empiricism and a focus on long-term outcomes in the pursuit of educational freedom. By emulating his methods, education reformers can ensure that their efforts are grounded in evidence and have a lasting, positive impact on students and communities. As the school-choice movement continues to evolve, it is imperative to remain committed to these principles, honoring FriedmanтАЩs enduring contributions to the field of economics and education.
