Hello, im Robert Mackenzie and welcome again to the university of chicago. It was here in 1976 that Milton Friedman, professor of economics, learned that hed been awarded that years nobel prize for economics, science, university. Is, in a sense, his intellectual and professional home. And thats why free to choose has been coming here for the past several weeks. Now, the subject tonight is education. And its often pointed out that theres intense dissatisfaction in many quarters with the state of Public Education. Billions poured in of taxpayers money. Yet too many youngsters leaving School Without adequate skills in reading and other such equipment theyll need later on in life. Well, now, when that happens, what can be done about it . Milton friedman, himself a teacher most of his life, has diagnosed the problem, and he believes he has a solution. As well see in this film. These youngsters are beginning another day at one of americas Public Schools, Hyde Park High School in boston. What happens when they pass through those doors is a vivid illustration of some of the problems facing americas schools. What you get, they have to pass through mentally texas. Theyre faced by security guards looking for hidden weapons. Theyre watched over by armed police. All. Of that has to. Isnt that awful . What a way for kids to have to go to school through metal detectors and to be searched. What can they conceivably learn under such circumstances . Nobody is happy with this kind of education. The taxpayer is surely armed. This isnt cheap education after all those uniformed policemen, those metal detectors have to be paid for. And what about the broken windows and the torn schoolbooks and the smashed School Equivalency . The teachers who teach here dont like this kind of situation. The students dont like to come here to go to school and most of all, the parents, they are the ones who get the worst deal. They pay taxes like the rest of us. And they are just as concerned about the kind of education that their kids get as the rest of us are. They know their kids are getting a bad education, but they feel trapped. Many of them can see no alternative but to continue sending their kids to schools like this. Thats. To go back to the beginning. It all started with a fine idea that every child should have a chance to learn his three rs. Sometimes in june, when it gets hard, the kids come out in the yard to do their lessons. All 15 of them ages 5 to 31, along with their teacher. This is the last one room schoolhouse still operating in the state of vermont. That is the way it used to be. Parental control. Parents choosing the teacher. Parents monitoring the schooling. Parents even getting together and chipping in to paint the schoolhouse as they did here. Just a few weeks ago for parental concern is still here as much in the slums of the big cities as in bucolic vermont. But control by parents over the schooling of their children is today. The exception, not the rule. Increasingly, schools have come under the control of centralized administrations. Professional educators deciding what shall be taught, who shall do the teaching, and even what children shall go to what school . The people who lose most from this system are the poor and the disadvantaged in the large cities. They are simply stuck. They have no alternative. Of course, if youre welloff, you do have a choice. You can send your child to a private school or you can move to an area where the Public Schools are excellent. As the parents of many of these students have done. These students are graduating from Western High School in one of bostons wealthier suburbs. Their parents pay taxes instead of tuition, and they certainly get better value for their money than do the parents in hyde park. Thats partly because theyve kept a good deal of control over the local schools and in the process, theyve managed to retain many of the virtues of the one room schoolhouse. Andrew greene and margaret carlson, are you students here like barbara king . Get the equivalent of a private education. They have excellent recreational facilities. What is his how does his plan differ . They have a Teaching Staff that is dedicated and responsive to parents and students. Barbara is decisive and hes a read. Theres an atmosphere which encourages learning. Yet the cost per pupil here is no higher than in many of our inner city schools. The difference is that in weston it all goes for education and that the parents still retain a good deal of control. Unfortunately, most parents have lost control over how their tax money is spent. Ava bell goes to hyde park high. Her parents, too, want her to have a good education. But many of the students here are not interested in school, and the teachers, however dedicated soon lose heart in an atmosphere like this. David bells parents are certainly not getting value for their tax money. I think its a shame really that a parents are being ripped off like we are. When i say im talking about parents like me, that work every day scuffled to try to make you know, to try to make ends meet. We send our kids to school hoping that theyll receive something that will benefit them in the future. But when they go out here and compete in the job market, unfortunately, theyre none of that is taking place out of hyde park. Children like eva are being shortchanged by a system that was designed to help. But there are ways to give all parents more say over their childrens schooling. This is a fundraising evening for schools supported by a voluntary organization. New yorks inner city scholarship fund. The prints that have brought people here have been loaned by a wealthy japanese industrialist. Events like this have helped raise 2 million to finance catholic, Parochial Schools in new york. The people here are part of a long america tradition. The results of their private, voluntary activities have been remarkable. This is one of the poorest neighborhoods in new york city, the bronx. Yet this Parochial School supported by the fund, is a joy to visit. Boys and girls, were are going to start the workshop now. You start out with task one, put the words in alphabetical order. The answers are the youngsters here from poor families or at saint john. Chris stems because their parents have picked this school and their parents are paying some of the costs from their own pockets. The children are will behaved, eager to learn. The teachers are dedicated. Contrary destruction. How old are you . Six. Six. What are you working on . The cost per pupil here is far less than in the Public Schools. Yet on the average, the children are two grades ahead. Thats because teachers and parents are free to choose how the children shall be taught. Private money has replaced tax money and so control has been taken away from the bureaucrats and put back where it belongs. This doesnt work just for younger children. In the sixties, harlem was devastated by riots. It was a hotbed of trouble. Many teenagers dropped out of school. Grew groups of concerned parents and teachers decided to do something about it. They used private funds to take over empty stores. And they set up what became known as storefront schools. One of the first and most successful was harlem prep. It was designed to cater to students for whom conventional education had failed. Kennedy was a very dangerous president in the sense that he was excessively popular. Many of the teachers didnt have the right pieces of paper to qualify for employment in Public Schools. That didnt stop them from doing a good job here. A lot of the students have been misfits and dropouts. Here they found the sort of teaching they wanted. After all, they had made a deliberate choice to come to harlem prep. It was a very successful school. Many students went on to college and some to leading colleges. But after some years, the school ran short of cash. The board of education offered ed carpenter, the head of the school and one of its founders, tax money, provided he would conformed their regulations. Love him and we got along nicely. I know youre busy, but sometime after a long battle to preserve independence, he finally gave in. The school was taken over by bureaucrats. And i know he does, but i was a little bit hurt. And basically, we have a three. I felt that a school like holland prep would certainly die and not prosper under the rigid bureaucracy of a board of education. We had to see what was going to happen. I didnt believe it was going to be good. Im right. What has happened since weve come to the board of education has not all good. Its not all bad, but its more bad than good. Now, again, we do find things that the categories. But the categories really what . The school may not look different yet. But 30 of the former teachers have gone. Ed carpenter has resigned. The school is being moved to a Traditional School building. No one except maybe the bureaucrats, is very optimistic about its future. Unfortunately, the strangling of successful experiments by bureaucrats is not unusual. The same thing happened in california at a place called alum rock. For three years, parents at this school could choose to send their children to any of several specially created mini schools, each with a different curriculum. The experiment was designed to restore choice to those who were most closely involved. The parents and the teachers are probably the most significant thing that happened was the teachers for the first time had some power and they were able to build the curriculum to fit the needs of the children as they saw it. The state and local school board did not dictate the kind of curriculum that was used and a lot of School People became more involved in the school. They attended more meetings. Also, they had a power to pull their child out of that particular mini school. If they chose another mini school, at least in my opinion, was giving parents greater choice, had a dramatic effect on educational quality in terms of test scores. This school went from 13th to second place among the schools in its districts. But the experiment is now over. When school resumed after the summer vacation, this was just another Public School. Back in the hands of the bureaucrats. Giving parents a choice is a good idea. Yet it always meets with opposition from the educational establishment. This is ashford, the town in the south of england for four years. There have been efforts here to introduce an experiment in greater parental choice. Parents would be given vouchers covering the cost of schooling. They could use the voucher to send their child to any school of their choice. I have long believed that children, teachers, all of us would benefit from a voucher system change. But the headmaster here, who happens also to be secretary of the local teachers union, has a very different views about introducing vouchers. We see this as a barrier between us and the parent. This sticky little piece of paper in their hand coming in and under duress, you will do this all else. We make our judgment because we believe its in the best interests, in the best interest of every village and every little johnny that weve got and not because someones going to say, if you dont do it, we will do that. Its this sort of philosophy of the marketplace that we object to. It really means. In other words, mr. G objects to giving the customer, in this case the parent, anything to say about the kind of schooling his child gets. Instead, the bureaucrat should decide to strike. So we are answerable to parents and to our governing bodies through the inspectorate to the Kent County Council and to her majesty. Her majestys inspectorate to the secretary of state. These are people, professionals, who are able to make professional judgments. But things look very different from the point of view of parents. Jason wongs parents had a fight. The bureaucracy, the professionals for a year before they could get him into the school that they thought was best suited to his needs. As the present system stands, i think we virtually parents have got no freedom of choice whatsoever. They are told what is good for them by the teachers. They are told that the teachers are doing a great job. And ive just got no say at all. If the voucher system were introduced, i think it would bring teachers and parents together. I think closer the parent that is worried about his child would send or remove their child from the school that wasnt giving a good service and take it to one that was. And if a school is going to crumble because its got nothing but vandalism, its generally slack on discipline. And the children arent learning well. And thats thats a good thing from my point of view. Even good schools like this would benefit from a voucher system, from having to shape up or see parents, take children elsewhere. But thats not how it looks to the headmaster. Im not sure that parents know what is best educationally for their children. They know whats best for them to eat. They know the best environment. Environment they can provide at home. But weve been trained to ascertain the problem of children, to detect their weaknesses is to put right those things that need putting right. And we want to do this freely with the cooperation of parents and not under under any undue strains. Well, i can understand the teacher saying, yes, its a gun at my head, but theyve got the same gun at the parents head at the moment. The parent goes up to the teacher and says, well, im not satisfied with what youre doing. And the teacher can say, well, tough, you cant take him away. You cant move him, you cant do what youre like. So go away and stop bothering me. That can be the attitude of some teachers today and often is. But now that the positions are being reversed and the roles are changed, i can only say tough on the teachers. Let them pull their socks up and give us a better deal and let us participate more in america. There is one part of education where the market has had extensive scope. Thats Higher Education. These students attend dartmouth college, a private school founded in 1769. The college is supported entirely by private donations. Income from endowment and student fees. It has a high reputation and a fine record. 95 of the students who enroll here complete their undergraduate course and get a degree. So the students here pay high fees. Fees which cover most of the cost of the schooling which they get. Most of them get the money from their parents, but some are on scholarships provided either by dartmouth or by outside sources. Still others take out loans to pay the costs of schooling loans which they will have to pay back years later. Still, others work either during the school year or during the summer to pay the costs. Many students work in the colleges own hotel. This girl is helping to pay her own way, which is pretty good evidence that shes serious about getting an education for the bush. Sure, its a lemon and butter sauce that folk parents have perspective students come here on shopping expeditions to check out the product before they buy them. This is of a reservation. What you have here is a private market in education. The college is selling schooling. The students are buying schooling. And as in most such markets, both sides have a strong incentive to serve one another. For the college. It has a strong incentive to provide the kind of schooling that its students want. If it doesnt, they can simply pick up and go elsewhere for the students. They want to get their moneys worth. They are customers and like every customer, everywhere, they want to get full value for the money they are paying. I really would like to know where the chromium is. Vining. I know school ties. There is some stuff youre interested in. So much of the success. Here comes from the fact that students understand precisely the costs involved and they are determined to get their moneys worth. Different compounds that they send you sheet saying how much everything costs all the time so that you know exactly you can break it down per lecture. And when you see each lecture costing 35 and you think of the other things you can be doing with a 35, youre making very sure that youre going to go to that lecture. Many of the buildings and facilities at dartmouth have been donated by private individuals and foundations like other private universities. Dartmouth has combined the selling of monuments with the provision of education, and the one activity reinforces the other full program. And the students, in effect, earn part of their keep by helping to solicit alumni for contributions, knowing full well that they will be solicited in their turn. We could get any sort of pledge from you. Be greatly appreciated. Its another way in which the real value of education is brought home this year. All right. Thank very much how much the alums really because of your donations. So people like you that im able to go to dartmouth, otherwise id be paying more than 12,000. So i thank you. You pay about 50 of our tuition is up. I dont know if youre aware, but thats fine. Actual pledges. This may not be the usual idea of an economic market, but it is nonetheless a marketplace where buyers can choose and sellers must compete for custom. For the 19th. So you dont realize that too. What happens when the educational market is distorted . Look at state colleges and universities. Their fees are generally very low paying for only a small part of the cost of schooling. They attract serious students just as interested in their education as the students at dartmouth or other private schools. But they also attract a great many others students who come because fees are low. Residential housing is good, food is good. And above all, there are lots of their peers. Its a pleasant interlude for them. The university of california at los angeles. For those students who are here as a pleasant interlude, going to class is a price they pay to be here, not the product they are buying. We frequently wind up with people who cannot compete favorably with with even the average person here. There is a magnet here for everything. We have the best weather, practically speaking, in the country. Hollywood is here. Beverly hills is here. The social scene, the, you know, Television Industry in this country is centered here. The justification for using tax money to support institutions like this is supposed to be so that every youngster, regardless of the income or wealth of his parents, can go to college. A few youngsters from poor families are here, but not very many. Most of these students are for middle and upper income families. Yet everybody, whatever is income, pays taxes to help support these institutions. That is a disgrace