H.R.899 – To terminate the Department of Education
congress.gov
congress.gov
The push for more public funding to charter schools really only benefits districts with lower population and higher property taxes as the charter schools generally have a much higher teacher to student ratio.
Yes, they do (unless states took it away from local districts, but that's not a direct consequence of NCLB or the subsequent federal law, even if it is in some way motivated by it.)
NCLB created, and subsequent federal law has modified, requirements for testing and accountability based on that testing, but left to the states most of the actual standards and content of the testing (and did virtually nothing to direct curriculum.)
I went to school in a tiny Eastern European country and came out knowing 2 foreign languages, Calc 1 level math, a decent amount of European and World history, literature, geography, chem, physics...I was pretty well-rounded.
I was pretty shocked to get accepted at an Engineering college here and to see my American peers fail out the first year because they couldn't pass Trig/Algebra, not to mention the abysmal level of spelling, not knowing any literature....and then there were others who were just brilliant.
The same country had managed to produce both kids who could kick my ass on one hand and barely-functioning illiterates on the other. And both would have been "straight A" students in their respective schools.
So there's something really wrong with education in this country. Not saying that DeVos would fix it, I doubt that, but it's already pretty fucking terrible for too many kids.
The various departments, along with the whole government, just embody the prevailing paradigm. But it's pretty common in this country to shoot the messenger. (X) Whereas the real problem is with some of the political and social beliefs shared by vast numbers of citizens.
---
(X) - "guv'mint is baad! down with it!" No, government is what you all make it. It's a reflection of the contents of your shared mentality. If you think it's bad and you want to fix it, start with a look in the mirror.
Education in the US is pretty decentralized but there's plenty of work the federal DoE does that's very important, here's a good place to start looking: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Office_for_Civil_Rights
The DoE enforces many of these laws which prevent abuse, bullying (teacher tolerance of it), discrimination, etc in education, which is pretty important. It's almost certainly the case that the DoE has seriously impacted the education of you or someone you care about through lawsuits, intervention, investigation which all change policy at the local level in a big way.
There's plenty of more things that it does. Take some time to look at what the DoE does and answer the question for yourself, it isn't hard.
In particular there are a lot of states that would love to let private religious schools torture gay children to try to turn them straight. The DoE is the only reason they can't do that.
- regulating how states are accountable for standardized tests (No Child Left Behind, later Every Student Succeeds)
- regulating federal student loans
- civil rights (LGBT, race, etc.)
- federal assistance for low-income students and underperforming schools
They don't dictate curriculum or anything. So basically it falls under the old argument of Federal vs State control over education. Conservatives have been trying to get rid of the Dept of Ed ever since it was made a cabinet-level position in 1979. They might now have their chance.
I'll take inconsistent educational quality over consistently bad any day.
When the current administration lost the popular vote by millions, it's hardly what "voters" want. The electoral college was a hedge against populism. Yet it's been twisted to work FOR populist platforms by gerrymandering districts such that only a Republican has a fair shake, and the state then awards them their votes.
Notions that the people of any country have the government they deserve is nonsense. First past the post voting, special interest lobbying, and just plain ignorant politicians marginalize a lot of voices.
Wrong. If you don't like your government, it's your responsibility to change it. If you disagree, what's your alternative? Pray for alien intervention?
Introducing a bill is an easy way for any member of Congress to "take a stand" on some issue, and it happens thousands of times per Congress.
> "Unelected bureaucrats in Washington, D.C. should not be in charge of our children’s intellectual and moral development."
https://massie.house.gov/newsroom/press-releases/rep-massie-...
The next looming debt crisis is one founded on education loans. Does this sort of government gutting really help with that? Is congress planning on giving a check to every college student enrolled instead with the money saved? Are they planning on forgiving a large portion of mortgage sized education loans? If not I fully expect another financial crisis to arise in the next 10 years primarily caused by student loans.
Take a look ITT. They took billions per year of poorly spent government grants, and left taxpayers on the hook for hundreds of millions. That school would not have existed were it not for federal grants.
Separating the payer from the decision maker yields very uneconomical decisions, in education, healthcare, whatever.
There are two options (1) restore sanity by regulating the hell out of education pricing or (2) restore sanity with market pressure.
I lean towards #2, but either way, grants aren't effective at lowering costs.
You're also overlooking the rising value, and rising recognized value, of a college degree. Since 1979, only college-educated workers have seen median wages rise. A high school diploma earned a -27% real return over the same period. Is it any surprise young people are encouraged and willing to pay anything, anything for a shot at economic opportunity? (Further information at epi.org.)
The rise in public university tuition is largely explained by reduced subsidies. Year after year, states "hold the line" on higher education spending, leaving ever more of the cost to students (and students' families, of course). To the point that California famously once spent more on college than prisons, and now spends more on prisons than college.
Grants and loans have been around for a long time. I'm not saying they're the cause of rising tuition. I'm saying increasing them wouldn't help.
I agree that the value of a college degree has a lot to do with increased tuition costs. If the average person will earn more than a $1 million more over his lifetime for getting a college degree, even expensive college is still "a good deal".
Eliminating the department doesn't necessarily mean eliminating all of its current functions. It just means that it will not exist in the same tier of government, with a cabinet member at its head.
> increased state control
I don't follow.
http://news.mit.edu/2002/two-teams-mit-battle-it-out-tvs-jun...