Too often we jump to conclusions about what needs to be done to improve or "fix" education. Being in a review of all the scholarly literature on achievement at the moment, it is clear that there is little consensus on what makes one teacher more effective than another at imparting information and yet certain teachers are consistently more effective than others and certain schools and districts are more effective than others. Rather than make recommendations about how much to spend, how to teach or structure the learning environment what is vital is to get the incentives right. We need to reward principles who produce improved results and efficiency as measured by both current standardized tests and new tests and allow them the freedom to reward teachers who add value to their students and students who achieve the greatest gains as well as those who achieve among the highest. If the lowest performing teachers (and principals) were removed from the system, even with targeted increased class sizes, we can raise the rate of learning for most student by half a year additional learning per year. This will result in billions of dollars increase in Kansas GDP, according to extrapolations of estimates done by Hanushek and Woessmann. Proper incentives and power to the principles is the first key. Including online elements in learning also appears very promising as it is cost effective, can lower teacher work-load freeing up time to help weaker students and provide instantaneous feedback to student. Discipline is another key issue, sucking up instructional time.