Why Our Kids Don’t Learn 63%

By Andrew Phelan0%

7/11/2026, 7:00:00 PM

BS Summary: This article contains 32 faulty reasoning types, including Politically Right Leaning Bias, Appeal to Emotion, and Unattributed Quote, with Appeal to Authority as the most egregious example at 23.2% saturation with 155 hits. Analysis detected 1,825 faulty-reasoning hits from 669 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 58% and a BS Rank of 63% (8,131 of 21,886 articles). This article is worse (more manipulative) than 62.90% of the article peer group.

Included in the 2025 One Big Beautiful Bill Act is a dollar-for-dollar tax credit, up to $1,700, for contributions to “Scholarship Granting Organizations” that parents can access and use toward paying for private school tuition and fees and other educational expenses. 
The provision is constructed such that states must choose to opt in to the program, which begins January 2027. 
As of this writing, per the IRS, 28 states have opted in. 
Of those 28, 25 are red states and three are blue—Colorado, New Hampshire and Virginia. 
This partisan imbalance is no accident. 
The nation’s two major teachers unions—the American Federation of Teachers and the National Education Association—are cash machines for the Democratic Party . 
And the last thing they want is parents having any say in where their child receives their K-12 education. 
The unions have published an “Open Letter to our Democratic Governors” urging them to “say no to the Trump private voucher scheme.” 
Per the leaders of these two unions, the signatories of the letter, “Public education  is the foundation of a thriving democracy” and vouchers are a betrayal. 
Amid the celebration of our nation’s 250th birthday, with recitals of the defining words of our founding declaration—our rights to “life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness”—the leaders of the teachers unions declare it un-American that parents should have the right to choose how and where to educate their children. 
We all should justifiably shudder that minds like this influence the majority of our nation’s children. 
The results speak for themselves. 
The Programme for International Student Assessment, administered by the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development , tests 15-year-olds in 80 countries in math, science, and reading. 
In the latest available scores, the top five countries are Singapore, China, Japan, Taiwan, and South Korea. 
The United States ranks 18th behind Poland, Czechia, and Denmark. 
Per the OECD, U.S. education spending per student in 2025 was $20,387 compared to the OECD average of $15,022. 
U.S. education spending as a percent of gross domestic product was 5.8% compared to the OECD average of 4.7%. 
Per the World Bank, education spending as percent of GDP in Singapore, the country with the highest PISA score, was 2.2% in 2024, less than half that of the U.S. 
Analysis done at the Cato Institute shows inflation-adjusted spending per student in the U.S. increased 140% from 1971 to 2019, while over the same period, test scores in math and reading for 17-year-olds barely moved. 
A May 2026 study by the Network Contagion Research Institute and the Gevura Fund, which have affiliations with Rutgers University and the University of Maryland, reports: “Combined NEA spending on political activities, lobbying, and contributions to outside organizations totals approximately $175 million in FY2025, nearly 4 times the $45 million spent on direct member representation. 
PAC records show that 90% of NEA candidate-directed spending and nearly all of AFT’s, has gone to Democrats consistently across decades.” 
A casual glance at the website of the NEA and the AFT barely turns up a hint about reading, math and science. 
Both are poster boards for the progressive political agenda. 
It is no wonder that scholarships and vouchers, tickets for parents and children to education freedom, is a nightmare for the teachers’ unions who are about control, not freedom. 
A recent study by the Thomas B. 
Fordham Institute ranks states by the strength and influence of their teachers’ unions. 
Among the top 25 states rated with the strongest teachers’ unions, only two—Ohio and West Virginia—have opted into the new tax-funded scholarship program. 
Why are so many of our youth embracing socialism and turning away from the principles of our founding? 
Look no further than the vice grip unions have on our public schools. 
Education freedom is vital to America’s future. 
The new tax-funded scholarship program is a major step in the right direction. 
COPYRIGHT 2026 CREATORS.COM 
We publish a variety of perspectives. 
Nothing written here is to be construed as representing the views of the Daily Signal. 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 9.0%Andrew Phelan: 9.8%Daily Signal: 6.2%Confirmation Bias9.0%This article: 9.6%Andrew Phelan: 1.4%Daily Signal: 0.7%Anchoring Bias9.6%This article: 13.5%Andrew Phelan: 2.9%Daily Signal: 3.1%Availability Heuristic13.5%This article: 6.0%Andrew Phelan: 1.4%Daily Signal: 1.2%Representativeness Heuristic6.0%This article: 0.0%Andrew Phelan: 0.0%Daily Signal: 0.7%Hindsight Bias0.0%This article: 6.0%Andrew Phelan: 1.6%Daily Signal: 1.9%Overconfidence Bias6.0%This article: 12.9%Andrew Phelan: 6.1%Daily Signal: 8.5%Framing Effect12.9%This article: 0.0%Andrew Phelan: 0.6%Daily Signal: 0.7%Loss Aversion0.0%This article: 0.0%Andrew Phelan: 0.3%Daily Signal: 0.5%Status Quo Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Andrew Phelan: 0.0%Daily Signal: 0.2%Sunk Cost Effect0.0%This article: 1.9%Andrew Phelan: 0.7%Daily Signal: 1.2%Optimism Bias1.9%This article: 3.6%Andrew Phelan: 1.3%Daily Signal: 1.3%Pessimism Bias3.6%This article: 18.5%Andrew Phelan: 8.8%Daily Signal: 9.1%Negativity Bias18.5%This article: 3.1%Andrew Phelan: 1.1%Daily Signal: 2.7%Self-Serving Bias3.1%This article: 2.8%Andrew Phelan: 1.8%Daily Signal: 1.8%Fundamental Attribution Error2.8%This article: 0.0%Andrew Phelan: 0.0%Daily Signal: 0.2%Actor-Observer Bias0.0%This article: 3.3%Andrew Phelan: 6.0%Daily Signal: 3.4%In-Group Bias3.3%This article: 0.0%Andrew Phelan: 4.0%Daily Signal: 3.0%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias0.0%This article: 1.3%Andrew Phelan: 3.0%Daily Signal: 2.3%Halo Effect1.3%This article: 0.0%Andrew Phelan: 0.2%Daily Signal: 0.4%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Andrew Phelan: 0.0%Daily Signal: 0.0%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 5.7%Andrew Phelan: 1.1%Daily Signal: 1.3%Recency Bias5.7%This article: 0.0%Andrew Phelan: 1.3%Daily Signal: 0.5%Primacy Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Andrew Phelan: 0.0%Daily Signal: 0.1%Blind-Spot Bias0.0%This article: 3.3%Andrew Phelan: 6.1%Daily Signal: 3.4%Ad Hominem3.3%This article: 0.0%Andrew Phelan: 6.2%Daily Signal: 2.7%Straw Man0.0%This article: 23.2%Andrew Phelan: 12.4%Daily Signal: 4.6%Appeal to Authority23.2%This article: 7.0%Andrew Phelan: 7.6%Daily Signal: 2.8%False Dilemma7.0%This article: 4.3%Andrew Phelan: 2.7%Daily Signal: 1.6%Slippery Slope4.3%This article: 0.0%Andrew Phelan: 0.4%Daily Signal: 0.3%Circular Reasoning0.0%This article: 15.1%Andrew Phelan: 10.4%Daily Signal: 9.4%Hasty Generalization15.1%This article: 1.9%Andrew Phelan: 0.1%Daily Signal: 0.3%Red Herring1.9%This article: 0.0%Andrew Phelan: 0.5%Daily Signal: 0.8%Bandwagon0.0%This article: 19.9%Andrew Phelan: 9.8%Daily Signal: 7.2%Appeal to Emotion19.9%This article: 7.8%Andrew Phelan: 2.4%Daily Signal: 2.2%Begging the Question7.8%This article: 6.1%Andrew Phelan: 1.0%Daily Signal: 3.1%Post Hoc (False Cause)6.1%This article: 0.0%Andrew Phelan: 0.0%Daily Signal: 0.1%Tu Quoque0.0%This article: 0.0%Andrew Phelan: 0.7%Daily Signal: 1.3%Burden of Proof0.0%This article: 0.0%Andrew Phelan: 0.3%Daily Signal: 0.2%Appeal to Nature0.0%This article: 0.0%Andrew Phelan: 0.4%Daily Signal: 0.4%Composition/Division0.0%This article: 3.3%Andrew Phelan: 2.1%Daily Signal: 2.5%Anecdotal3.3%This article: 0.0%Andrew Phelan: 0.0%Daily Signal: 0.1%No True Scotsman0.0%This article: 3.6%Andrew Phelan: 1.2%Daily Signal: 1.8%Ambiguity (Equivocation)3.6%This article: 0.0%Andrew Phelan: 0.0%Daily Signal: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Andrew Phelan: 0.0%Daily Signal: 0.1%Middle Ground0.0%This article: 0.0%Andrew Phelan: 0.0%Daily Signal: 0.1%Personal Incredulity0.0%This article: 0.0%Andrew Phelan: 0.0%Daily Signal: 0.2%Special Pleading0.0%This article: 0.0%Andrew Phelan: 0.9%Daily Signal: 0.4%Genetic Fallacy0.0%This article: 18.7%Andrew Phelan: 2.8%Daily Signal: 2.7%Unattributed Quote18.7%This article: 7.3%Andrew Phelan: 2.2%Daily Signal: 1.2%Quote-first Misdirection7.3%This article: 17.9%Andrew Phelan: 18.9%Daily Signal: 9.7%Biased Writer Voice17.9%This article: 7.6%Andrew Phelan: 8.3%Daily Signal: 3.9%Indoctrination7.6%This article: 1.3%Andrew Phelan: 0.1%Daily Signal: 0.3%Politically Left Leaning Bias1.3%This article: 20.9%Andrew Phelan: 13.9%Daily Signal: 10.7%Politically Right Leaning Bias20.9%This article: 6.3%Andrew Phelan: 1.2%Daily Signal: 1.7%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…6.3%

669 words analyzed.

Speakers

1speaker1.9%attributed speech656writer words
Voice mapSelect a segment to jump to its words
Writer's voice • 5 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 41 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 19 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 12 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 15 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 6 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 22 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 19 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 22 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 27 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 50 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 16 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 5 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 26 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 17 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 10 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 19 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 19 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 30 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 35 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 55 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 21 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 22 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 9 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 29 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 7 words • 0.0% coverageFordham Institute • 13 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 23 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 18 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 13 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 7 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 13 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 3 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 6 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 15 words • 0.0% coverage
Selected voice

Fordham Institute

100%flagged-word coverage
13 attributed words100% of attributed speech89% writer coverage
0%12.5%25.0%Politically Right Leaning -21.3 ptsWriter: 21.3%Fordham Institute: 0.0%0.0%Unattributed Quote-19.1 ptsWriter: 19.1%Fordham Institute: 0.0%0.0%Biased Writer Voice-18.3 ptsWriter: 18.3%Fordham Institute: 0.0%0.0%Indoctrination-7.8 ptsWriter: 7.8%Fordham Institute: 0.0%0.0%Quote-first Misdirection-7.5 ptsWriter: 7.5%Fordham Institute: 0.0%0.0%Attempt to Sell a Product -6.4 ptsWriter: 6.4%Fordham Institute: 0.0%0.0%Politically Left Leaning B-1.4 ptsWriter: 1.4%Fordham Institute: 0.0%0.0%

Attribution is sentence-level. Pattern percentages are calculated only from words assigned to that voice.

Loading…
Loading…
Loading…
Loading…

Analysis

Hover over highlighted words in the article to view the associated bias or fallacy analysis.