Abolish the Dept. of Ed. - Libertarians on Ed.

[wawa]

Thanks to Vanessa's post, I was checking out Gary Johnson's website. Education is the issue where the Libertarians usually lose me, but i'm open to being convinced in either direction.

This is what he has to say (formatting will be wonky I'm sure):
www.garyjohnson2012.com/issues/education

#1 - Give Education Back to Parents and Teachers

LOCAL CONTROL MEANS THAT WE ALL WIN.

All parents should have an opportunity to choose which school their children attend.
Putting educational funds in the hands of the people who use them gives parents and students a vote as to which schools are best and which need to improve.
Our children deserve the chance to succeed educationally, but the same old way of thinking won't cut it. It's time to free individuals and states from burdensome federal mandates and regulations so they can pursue the right educational strategies for their students.

#2 - End the Department of Education

ALTHOUGH IT MAY SOUND DRASTIC, THERE ARE practical reasons why it should be considered.

The Department of Education grants each state 11 cents out of every dollar it spends on education. Unfortunately, every dollar of this money comes with 16 cents of strings attached. States that accept federal funding lose five cents for every dollar spent on education to pay for federal mandates and regulations, taking millions of dollars out of the classroom.
Schools should have the authority to decide how best to spend educational dollars. Without federal regulations and mandates, schools could choose to purchase new computers, better lab equipment, and maintain after-school sports and music programs even during times of tight budgets.
Once citizens and their local representatives have the freedom to decide how their educational funds will be spent, they can consider innovations that will drive student choice, educational competition, and better results

So...anybody want to school me on what this would mean in terms of consequences? Good ideas? Bad ideas? Why?

Let's discuss.

[Deleted]

We almost have a national curriculum www.corestandards.org/ I think something like 41 states have adopted them.

[wawa]

May 22, 2012 13:22:16 GMT -5 asdfjkl said:

Oh yeah, and I agree with his first point about school choice, too.

This guy might be a complete wingnut on everything from the 8th Amendment to the color of traffic lights, but I completely agree with him on the education reforms.

You'd probably also like him on 8th ammendment. Anti-waterboarding. Not sure that it actually applies there, but similar concept.

My sarcasm meter is broken though - were you just naming random issues, or has he actually said strange things on 8th ammendment and traffic lights?

I'm seriously considering voting for this guy.

[secretlyevil]

May 22, 2012 12:52:55 GMT -5 wawa said:

#1 - Give Education Back to Parents and Teachers

LOCAL CONTROL MEANS THAT WE ALL WIN.

All parents should have an opportunity to choose which school their children attend.
Putting educational funds in the hands of the people who use them gives parents and students a vote as to which schools are best and which need to improve.

Our children deserve the chance to succeed educationally, but the same old way of thinking won't cut it. It's time to free individuals and states from burdensome federal mandates and regulations so they can pursue the right educational strategies for their students.

No, states already have too much power when it comes to education. They need less power IMO. Curriculum, etc. needs to be set at a federal level so it doesn't change from state to state. Perfect example - text books. Large states, like Texas, have too much control over text books. Smaller states end up having no say because publishing houses cater to these larger states with more money to spend. Also, as we've seen a lot of recently - politics controls what shows up in the text books, again Texas is a perfect example of recent ridiculous changes in history books, etc. because the elected school board didn't agree with it.

I think giving more power to the Department of Education would go a long way to make public school more fair and even when it comes to funding, etc.

[ringstrue]

My issue is just the general one of - what happens when your local govt. doesn't give a crap about education? Or worse, what happens when they have their own definition of education and "science" and what should and shouldn't be taught? And why the hell are we calling ourselves the "Untied States" if we can't unite on basic things like the fact that we should educate our kids?

[wawa]

May 22, 2012 13:39:12 GMT -5 @septimus said:

We almost have a national curriculum www.corestandards.org/ I think something like 41 states have adopted them.

Those only apply to math and english though, right?

And they aren't actually being implemented through the feds, are they? I thought it was a state-led thing.

What in the world does the DOE actually DO?

[wawa]

May 22, 2012 13:49:29 GMT -5 ringstrue said:

My issue is just the general one of - what happens when your local govt. doesn't give a crap about education? Or worse, what happens when they have their own definition of education and "science" and what should and shouldn't be taught? And why the hell are we calling ourselves the "Untied States" if we can't unite on basic things like the fact that we should educate our kids?

I think the answer to this concern would be that it's much MUCH easier to take back control on a local level when things go wonky. It doesn't take big money. Particularly if we're talking about actual school board decisions, and not even state-wide. It really doesn't take more than a handful of extremely determined parents to unseat a crazycakes on a local school board.

So if you don't like what they're doing, protest, organize and vote the bastards out.

(I'm not sure if I agree with this. But I think that's the answer tha the pro-local choice/control crowd would give)

[MrsAxilla]

I'm really torn. On one hand, I think there should be a "floor" of minimum required concepts. Science and history are perfect examples. There's too much room for politics there and I'm not comfortable with any child learning that creationism is just as valid as evolution, or that slavery wasn't really THAT bad, no matter what their community standards are. On the other hand, I don't think we need to have national standards on what literature is taught. I think community standards there are perfectly fine. Some communities might find that certain books are more relevant to their students than others.

I'm leaning against school choice, too. I think the focus should somehow be on improving all schools, otherwise you just end up with stratification according to wealth. Poorer families just won't have the ability to send their children to "good" schools across town. We already have that situation - the schools in poor areas suck while wealthy areas are great (at least in my metro area.)

[whitewolf]

I am equally suspicious of local control. Local control accomplished some skeery stuff in Texas, Arizona, and textbooks.

I maintain the teachers themselves in any given school should, in conjunction with their administrators, be deciding these matters based on their students' needs. They're not all lazy idiots, as you know, and as a profession should be trusted to both ascertain their students' weaknesses and set core standards.

I am leery of national standards re-imposing a canon, and there really are no accurate, reliable tests that actually measure grade level (at least in reading), so...


National standards are coming, fyi!
www.parcconline.org/achieving-common-core

[Deleted]

May 22, 2012 14:12:53 GMT -5 MrsAxilla said:

I'm leaning against school choice, too. I think the focus should somehow be on improving all schools, otherwise you just end up with stratification according to wealth. Poorer families just won't have the ability to send their children to "good" schools across town. We already have that situation - the schools in poor areas suck while wealthy areas are great (at least in my metro area.)

I'm still looking for data that says school choice actually works. Milwaukee has one of the longest-running voucher programs, and the data that I've seen shows that it doesn't really have much impact.

Plus, think about it - the theory behind vouchers is that the public schools will have to compete with the private schools and will thus get better. So if that theory were to work in practice, why is Milwaukee usually found to be the second-worst major metropolitan school system? If competition from vouchers works, shouldn't we be near the top?

As far as the Dept. of Ed goes, I have no strong opinions.

[teflep]

May 22, 2012 13:39:12 GMT -5 @septimus said:

We almost have a national curriculum www.corestandards.org/ I think something like 41 states have adopted them.

All but 4 have now.

[teflep]

May 22, 2012 13:53:22 GMT -5 asdfjkl said:

May 22, 2012 13:49:29 GMT -5 ringstrue said:

My issue is just the general one of - what happens when your local govt. doesn't give a crap about education? Or worse, what happens when they have their own definition of education and "science" and what should and shouldn't be taught? And why the hell are we calling ourselves the "Untied States" if we can't unite on basic things like the fact that we should educate our kids?

This is the way it is right now WITH the Dept. of Ed. The only difference right now is that poorer communities are being forced to comply with fed mandates that they can't afford to implement and that change every 4-8 years depending on who's in power.

We are over 10 now and with the waivers, it could be longer until ESEA is reauth'd. So, this is changing as well

[bqbride]

May 22, 2012 13:49:29 GMT -5 ringstrue said:

My issue is just the general one of - what happens when your local govt. doesn't give a crap about education? Or worse, what happens when they have their own definition of education and "science" and what should and shouldn't be taught? And why the hell are we calling ourselves the "Untied States" if we can't unite on basic things like the fact that we should educate our kids?

This is my problem with making education, and many other things, a state issue. I live in AZ. Need I say more about why this is so frightening to me?

[wrathofkuus]

May 22, 2012 14:20:21 GMT -5 asdfjkl said:

May 22, 2012 14:12:53 GMT -5 MrsAxilla said:

I'm leaning against school choice, too. I think the focus should somehow be on improving all schools, otherwise you just end up with stratification according to wealth. Poorer families just won't have the ability to send their children to "good" schools across town. We already have that situation - the schools in poor areas suck while wealthy areas are great (at least in my metro area.)

I don't think this is true. You have a stratification based on wealth as a result of the current system, which does not allow for school choice. Property taxes pay for schools which means that wealthier areas have better funded schools (as you've noted in your own post). Add to that the fact that you can't choose where to put your money and schools don't have any motivation to improve. Public schooling is the ONLY monopoly in this country in which your participation is mandatory whether you decide to use it or not. You must give money to a specific school. If you're going to send your kids to public school, you MUST send your kids to that specific school. If you decide to opt out and go to private school, you STILL have to fund that specific school. Fucked up, I say.

I wouldn't say that public school is the only thing for which this is true, but this is a problem and has always galled me, too.

[Deleted]

May 22, 2012 14:22:46 GMT -5 asdfjkl said:

May 22, 2012 14:18:57 GMT -5 @angryharpy said:

I'm still looking for data that says school choice actually works. Milwaukee has one of the longest-running voucher programs, and the data that I've seen shows that it doesn't really have much impact.

Plus, think about it - the theory behind vouchers is that the public schools will have to compete with the private schools and will thus get better. So if that theory were to work in practice, why is Milwaukee usually found to be the second-worst major metropolitan school system? If competition from vouchers works, shouldn't we be near the top?

As far as the Dept. of Ed goes, I have no strong opinions.

But isn't that because you can use the voucher to go to a private school? You can use it to get away from your district. At least in my queen for a day world, school choice would mean there are no districts. So everyone has a theoretical "voucher", but you can't use it for private schools. You have to use it to choose a public school.

We also have open-ish enrollment. So if you qualify, you can get a voucher and go to private school. Or you can stay in MPS (whether you qualify for a voucher or not) and go to your neighborhood school or enter the lottery system to get into a specialty school (arts magnet, language immersion, Montessori, etc.). It's my understanding that while there are some good schools, school choice - either in the form of open enrollment or the voucher program - hasn't had a positive impact on your average neighborhood school.

[teflep]

May 22, 2012 13:51:52 GMT -5 wawa said:

May 22, 2012 13:39:12 GMT -5 @septimus said:

We almost have a national curriculum www.corestandards.org/ I think something like 41 states have adopted them.

Those only apply to math and english though, right?

And they aren't actually being implemented through the feds, are they? I thought it was a state-led thing.

What in the world does the DOE actually DO?

They distribute federal funds, maintain accountability, ensure all students have access to resources.

As for other subjects, they arent developed yet. They will be, though.

[secretlyevil]

May 22, 2012 14:18:57 GMT -5 @angryharpy said:

May 22, 2012 14:12:53 GMT -5 MrsAxilla said:

I'm leaning against school choice, too. I think the focus should somehow be on improving all schools, otherwise you just end up with stratification according to wealth. Poorer families just won't have the ability to send their children to "good" schools across town. We already have that situation - the schools in poor areas suck while wealthy areas are great (at least in my metro area.)

I'm still looking for data that says school choice actually works. Milwaukee has one of the longest-running voucher programs, and the data that I've seen shows that it doesn't really have much impact.

Plus, think about it - the theory behind vouchers is that the public schools will have to compete with the private schools and will thus get better. So if that theory were to work in practice, why is Milwaukee usually found to be the second-worst major metropolitan school system? If competition from vouchers works, shouldn't we be near the top?

In Florida, school choice did nothing but cause more problems as in, how is the school district supposed to afford busing for all this school choice. Don't like your neighborhood school - here's a voucher go to a private school.

These two "solutions" do not address the real issues and do not "fix" anything. From what I remember reading in the past, there really hasn't been any positive stats that they were working either. I should provide links but I'm too sick/tired to go research at this moment.

[whitewolf]

May 22, 2012 14:18:57 GMT -5 @angryharpy said:

I'm still looking for data that says school choice actually works. Milwaukee has one of the longest-running voucher programs, and the data that I've seen shows that it doesn't really have much impact.

Plus, think about it - the theory behind vouchers is that the public schools will have to compete with the private schools and will thus get better. So if that theory were to work in practice, why is Milwaukee usually found to be the second-worst major metropolitan school system? If competition from vouchers works, shouldn't we be near the top?

As far as the Dept. of Ed goes, I have no strong opinions.

dpi.wi.gov/eis/pdf/dpinr2012_49.pdf

[teflep]

May 22, 2012 14:26:22 GMT -5 asdfjkl said:

May 22, 2012 14:24:24 GMT -5 teflep said:

We are over 10 now and with the waivers, it could be longer until ESEA is reauth'd. So, this is changing as well

I'm not sure I understand what you're saying here.

That the time/dedication to standards is increasing as more and more thought is (supposedly) being used to develop. Plus, our lack of focus on education keeps many standards and rules in place (see NCLB...supposed to be reauth'd by 2014, so that would be 13 years in, but not likely).

[ringstrue]

May 22, 2012 13:53:22 GMT -5 asdfjkl said:

May 22, 2012 13:49:29 GMT -5 ringstrue said:

My issue is just the general one of - what happens when your local govt. doesn't give a crap about education? Or worse, what happens when they have their own definition of education and "science" and what should and shouldn't be taught? And why the hell are we calling ourselves the "Untied States" if we can't unite on basic things like the fact that we should educate our kids?

This is the way it is right now WITH the Dept. of Ed. The only difference right now is that poorer communities are being forced to comply with fed mandates that they can't afford to implement and that change every 4-8 years depending on who's in power.

Oh I'm fine with getting rid of the DOE and I definitely see that our country is big and diverse enough that local control needs to be there. I really don't know much about the public education world so I surely can't say what I think *the* answer should be. I just take pause at the idea that there should be *no* national anything when it comes to education - not even guidelines or, you know, a list of suggested subjects - not that you were saying that.

[teflep]

May 22, 2012 14:35:01 GMT -5 ringstrue said:

May 22, 2012 13:53:22 GMT -5 asdfjkl said:

This is the way it is right now WITH the Dept. of Ed. The only difference right now is that poorer communities are being forced to comply with fed mandates that they can't afford to implement and that change every 4-8 years depending on who's in power.

Oh I'm fine with getting rid of the DOE and I definitely see that our country is big and diverse enough that local control needs to be there. I really don't know much about the public education world so I surely can't say what I think *the* answer should be. I just take pause at the idea that there should be *no* national anything when it comes to education - not even guidelines or, you know, a list of suggested subjects - not that you were saying that.

But who will hold them accountable; ding them when they are out of compliance; ding them when they are dooming an entire generation (much as many states and LEAs are now)? I can't believe I am taking the lib stance on this...it's giving me the heebs.

[ringstrue]

May 22, 2012 14:40:09 GMT -5 teflep said:

May 22, 2012 14:35:01 GMT -5 ringstrue said:

Oh I'm fine with getting rid of the DOE and I definitely see that our country is big and diverse enough that local control needs to be there. I really don't know much about the public education world so I surely can't say what I think *the* answer should be. I just take pause at the idea that there should be *no* national anything when it comes to education - not even guidelines or, you know, a list of suggested subjects - not that you were saying that.

But who will hold them accountable; ding them when they are out of compliance; ding them when they are dooming an entire generation (much as many states and LEAs are now)? I can't believe I am taking the lib stance on this...it's giving me the heebs.

Got me. You do this?

[secretlyevil]

May 22, 2012 14:43:03 GMT -5 ringstrue said:

May 22, 2012 14:40:09 GMT -5 teflep said:

But who will hold them accountable; ding them when they are out of compliance; ding them when they are dooming an entire generation (much as many states and LEAs are now)? I can't believe I am taking the lib stance on this...it's giving me the heebs.

Got me. You do this?

The biggest complaint (around here anywhere) is the lack of parental involvement. I can't see this getting any better if education is turned completely over the states.

[druidp]

I just want to say :heart: :heart: :heart: to SBP through this entire thread. That is all. Back to stupid work.

[teflep]

May 22, 2012 14:49:09 GMT -5 asdfjkl said:

May 22, 2012 14:40:09 GMT -5 teflep said:

But who will hold them accountable; ding them when they are out of compliance; ding them when they are dooming an entire generation (much as many states and LEAs are now)? I can't believe I am taking the lib stance on this...it's giving me the heebs.

I think the idea is that the community will, and because there's less federal control, they'll be *able* to hold them accountable. They'll be able to nix stupid "reforms" like multiple tests and pages of pre-test dittos for 3rd graders. They'll have more control over the curriculum and more control over the content.

I think we forget that the Dept of Ed. is a relatively new government bureaucracy. What were we doing before that? Whatever it was, it was apparently working better because every chart whore who posts about education on these boards has demonstrated that our kids are getting stupider, not smarter.

I think the problem is how do we fix the problem schools without hurting the schools that are just fine. National standards seem to have a minimal effect on those problem schools while bringing down the schools that were just fine (hence my reference to the lowest common denominator). We don't need an entire department to handle funding, and we certainly don't need that department tying funding to test scores and participation in testing initiatives. We might not be sure what does work, but we've already proven what doesn't.

I see what you are saying and, in theory, it could work. Buuuut, I think a huge problem now is lack of parental involvement. Some just dont have the time, knowledge, whatever...again, in theory it should help this, but people are lazy (see low voter turnout, for one). I used to be for the abolishment of the DoE, but now, I am not so sure. I understand it is a newer agency, but that doesn't make it inherently bad. Bureacracy doesn't automatically make for a poor result..many factors do.

[secretlyevil]

May 22, 2012 14:51:16 GMT -5 asdfjkl said:

May 22, 2012 14:47:00 GMT -5 secretlyevil said:

The biggest complaint (around here anywhere) is the lack of parental involvement. I can't see this getting any better if education is turned completely over the states.

I can. There's no point in me taking a stand against rampant testing in schools now. There's nothing I can do about it. If it were a smaller scale more local issue (like my pissing and moaning about the parking situation in my neighborhood or the fact that we didn't have a recycling program until last month), then I might be more inclined to get involved. I don't like exercises in futility. I'm too busy for that shit. I'll just send my kid to private school. Tell me I can actually make a difference? I'm there. I'm in.

You are unique. A typical member of this board is not the norm. As a teacher, H's number one complaint was the two extremes: parents who never got involved and then those parents who were so involved (you dare give my child a B!) that it was counterproductive. Unfortunately the never involved parents seem to be the majority, at least through my personal experience by way of H.

[teflep]

May 22, 2012 15:12:25 GMT -5 asdfjkl said:

You can't say, "We should keep the system we have because look at all the ways it's not working." I don't understand this line of reasoning.

I can only speak for myself, but that is not what I am saying. I am all for change (I dont think this RTTT is any better than the current system and still leaves many with little to no funds and don't get me started on ARRA funds), but the abolishment of the USDE is like, imo, throwing the baby out with the bath water. Private schools are no different, really, especially if they accept fed and/or state funds. Maybe I'm cynical and maybe you're optimistic. I just am not convinced, at least at this time, that this drastic of a move will change the system.

[marie427]

I am nodding at both SBP's and Tef's posts even though they are arguing on different sides - how is that possible???

Anyhoo, local control does equal a better chance at keeping families and educators accountable for the education of their community's children. On the other hand, I don't like the idea of states and communities going rogue and teaching their students lies (i.e. slavery wasn't so bad, kids!) just because they can. I know the DoE is relatively new but there has to be *some* oversight; we are a diverse country but our educational standards should not be extremely different from state to state or town to town. Yes, I know the DoE hasn't done the most sparkling job but I don't think dismantling it completely is necessarily the right answer here.

[wawa]

May 22, 2012 15:29:04 GMT -5 marie427 said:

I am nodding at both SBP's and Tef's posts even though they are arguing on different sides - how is that possible???

Anyhoo, local control does equal a better chance at keeping families and educators accountable for the education of their community's children. On the other hand, I don't like the idea of states and communities going rogue and teaching their students lies (i.e. slavery wasn't so bad, kids!) just because they can. I know the DoE is relatively new but there has to be *some* oversight; we are a diverse country but our educational standards should not be extremely different from state to state or town to town. Yes, I know the DoE hasn't done the most sparkling job but I don't think dismantling it completely is necessarily the right answer here.

LOL, I'm glad I'm not the only one. I'm ridiculously open to being swayed on this topic since I think both sides have good arguments.

The biggest question I have is - so what does the DOE do now for places that are instituting things like teaching creationism as science?

Are we testing on science and history? Or is that all just reading, writing and math?

[secretlyevil]

May 22, 2012 15:12:25 GMT -5 asdfjkl said:

May 22, 2012 15:07:47 GMT -5 secretlyevil said:

You can't say, "We should keep the system we have because look at all the ways it's not working." I don't understand this line of reasoning.

I am not saying that. I have to agree with what tef just said. The DOE isn't the entire problem. The system is broken and IMO, is mostly due to a lot of power in education is left up to the states. In Florida - education is the first to get cut, followed by healthcare. More money isn't the complete solution either but it would make a big difference.

For this particular issue - educating children, I think it needs to be left completely up to the federal government. Education shouldn't be a political issue period. If there was a way to remove education from the whims of the political arena that would be perfect.