http://washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/op-eds/2012/04/dont-shoot-good-idea-because-its-messenger/551296?utm_source=Opinion%20digest%20-%2004/30/2012&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Washington%20Examiner:%20Opinion%20Digest

Don't shoot a good idea because of its messenger

April 29, 2012

Derek Hunter

Sun, 2012-04-29 20:00

Is a good idea invalid if it comes from someone with whom you disagree ideologically? Regrettably, some people dismiss ideas based simply upon the political ideology of the person proposing them, not their merits. Democrats are doing this with their reaction to Republican House Budget Chairman Paul Ryan's plan to reduce out-of-control government spending. But this out-of-hand dismissal of ideas is a bipartisan problem.

In New Hampshire, Republicans in state government are moving toward cutting off funding to a few school districts not because the curriculum they've adopted is ineffective, but because it was developed by liberals.

The advanced-placement curriculum is called International Baccalaureate, IB for short. It was founded in 1968 and is now used in more than 3,300 schools in more than 140 countries, offering programs to more than 1 million students. It's not widely used in the United States, but where it has been adopted, it has been effective in challenging students and raising test scores.

IB is so well-regarded that graduates of the program in some states are guaranteed admission to many top colleges and universities around the country, or at least offered college credit for IB classes taken in high school.

But, as is often the case in education, there's a problem. In this case, it's the fact that IB has an international focus.

The IB program encourages students to think critically, develop research skills and engage in their education. The program also encourages a focus on community service and learning a second language. It focuses on teaching about a global world, not a one-world government or global citizenship. But that is where the trouble lies.

Many on the political Right reject anything they feel threatens our national sovereignty. In fact, I am one of them. When a Supreme Court justice cites foreign law to justify a decision, or tells other nations that our Constitution should not be a model for them because it's too restrictive, I take issue with that. But an education program that prepares students for global economic realities -- and that, more importantly, works -- is not the same thing.

There are plenty of options for schools when it comes to advanced curriculums. The issue isn't that all schools should adopt IB, it's that schools should be free to adopt whatever program they think is best and that they find works for them.

Local control over education is a cornerstone of conservative education policy and has been from the start. For the New Hampshire state government to tell Bedford High School and the New Hampton School what they must do, rather than leaving it to the local school boards, violates that important principle.

Public education in this country is in shambles. Test scores measure just this side of pathetic when compared with the rest of the world's, especially considering we spend more money on it than any other nation. So why not embrace anything and everything that works?

More importantly, why not allow localities to experiment and find what works for them?

Just as No Child Left Behind proved that the federal government should not be dunking itself in the education pool, state government should only interfere when schools are failing. These schools in New Hampshire are not failing, they're thriving. But some Republicans in the state don't like IB simply because of its origins and focus, not its results. That is the wrong reason to oppose anything.

It doesn't matter where an idea comes from, what matters is if it works. At least that's how it should be, but that doesn't seem to be the case in New Hampshire.