One could pick apart on its own terms Nicholas Ferroni’s commentary suggesting that most states can’t be trusted to run their own education systems and “education is not an expense; it’s an investment”:

For context, Ferroni is a teacher in New Jersey who calls himself an “activist” (apparently for left-wing social causes) and moonlights as a paid speaker.  He takes it as written that the federal government is a net positive to education, which many of us would dispute.  Indeed, his case that there is already a wide gulf in the success of schools from state to state brings his assumption into question.  His faith in the value of teachers unions amplifies the need to question his assumptions.  In Massachusetts, which he calls out as an exception where the state government can be trusted with education, the success is directly attributable to reforms decades ago that reduced the unions’ power (which have been softened with predictable results).

The problem with insisting that “education is an investment” is that many institutionalized and powerful people believe it should be a unique form of investment whereby the simple fact of adding money increases profit, and wherein demanding accountability from the people who take that funding on the promise of making the investment bear fruit is an affront.

Education needs more accountability and less meddling from activists inside and outside of government.