Up for Subsim Debate: Defunding the Department of Education

CaptainHaplo · 01-30-11, 08:01 PM

Ok - we all know the US government is running a huge deficit, and it needs to slash its spending. So, I am going to try and start a series of discussions about various areas where spending COULD (but not necessarily should) be cut.

Now in the course of these discussions, I may play some devils advocate on positions I don't necessarily hold, just to get the discusion started.

Lets start with this one:

Defund (partially or in full) the Department of Education.

For 2010, the DoE total budget was $160.5 Billion (http://www2.ed.gov/about/overview/budget/index.html) - which it says accounts for roughly 10.5% of all education spending in the country. The rest comes from local, state and other sources.

The DoE has a mission - and it says it is this:
"to promote student achievement and preparation for global competitiveness by fostering educational excellence and ensuring equal access."
(http://www2.ed.gov/about/overview/fed/role.html)

As the President recently indicated, the quality of education in the US has dropped significantly when compared to the other nations.

"The United States has fallen from top of the class to average in world education rankings, said a report Tuesday that warned of US economic losses from the trend.
The three-yearly OECD Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA) report, which compares the knowledge and skills of 15-year-olds in 70 countries around the world, ranked the United States 14th out of 34 OECD countries for reading skills, 17th for science and a below-average 25th for mathematics"
(http://centerforgloballeadership.wor...tion-rankings/)

So, it is fair to say that while the DoE has seen its budget grow tremendously over the 3 decades of its current existence (though its history is far longer), it is now clear that it is failing in its mission. While the intentions of the DoE are very commendable, results show that despite significant additional "investment", its effectiveness has steadily worsened.

Would it not then be in the best interest of the students of today to entirely defund or drastically reduce the funding of this Department? What would be the impacts - negative and positive, of such actions?

One negative would be the elimination of some student aid via Pell Grants. However, that is a very small "slice of the pie" when compared to the wasted billions. Could a drastically reduced and refocused DoE be more effective, allowing more state and local control over the education children recieve?

While some will argue that "local control" is dangerous, since it would allow for one school to push a specific view (whether left or right, God focused or humanistic), if the local populace support such a school, is it the job of the Federal Government to "protect them from their own stupidity"?

Some interesting debate should follow, I hope. Keep it civil, make your points based on fact and not emotional demagogueary.

Why am I doing this? No - its not to start a war. If we truly expect to sit around jabbering about inane stuff while our government solves problems, then this country is already lost. We the people, from all views politically, have a duty to be part of the solution. So lets all get to it. Lets see if putting our heads together can come up with some solutions to fix the problems we face. Hey, and to all you folks from other parts of the world, pull up a chair and give your perspective too.

nikimcbee · 01-30-11, 08:21 PM

Fun topic. I have mixed feelings about it. I used to dabble in teaching, so I know a little bit about it.

I like the idea of having a national standard teacher standards, etc, as this varies widey by states.

Do you have more information on things that they are responsible for?

I would start with the head count and salaries.

nikimcbee · 01-30-11, 08:24 PM

just thought ot this: wack the school lunch program. I got to see this first hand as a student teacher. The school I was at, tried to get everyone enrolled in this program (so they can get more money

)

01-30-11, 08:28 PM

How many of those countries which scored better would consider defunding their dept of education to improve results?

nikimcbee · 01-30-11, 08:38 PM

My beef is more at the local-state level. Where I'd neuter the teacher's union.

This is what I have noticed in my experience. Paying more does not get a better result.

See State of Utah. They spend very little per student and have high ACT-SAT scores. Verses Minneapolis School district, which spends more than $10000 per student and has a high drop out rate and low test scores.

Wait, you want national stuff...
must...talk... national... stuff...not...local.

nikimcbee · 01-30-11, 08:43 PM

Quote:

http://www2.ed.gov/about/overview/fed/role.html

okay, so I read that. My thought is the fed could split up the funds between the states, with the only string being that it actually goes to education, and not some other fund, which they often do.

Task Force · 01-30-11, 08:56 PM

Cutting school funding... bad idea. really bad.

I can see it now, Instead of 30 to 40 students per class, it would be 40 to 50. (this seems to be the schools awnser, stuff more in, to help with costs)

The biggest issue are the stupid teachers, I find most of them seem to be long timers, who have been teaching so long they think no one knows better, useing old ideas for subjects to a already full class plan. EX math, The teacher goes over a subject for 2 days, and usualy on day 2 or 3 gives a quiz/test/ ect on it, and moves on. The problem is, you can't learn a new subject that quick, and completly understand it.

A good way to cut down prices... Down with school lunch, and its mystery meat! (I know I can go a day without it, have for years.)

mookiemookie · 01-30-11, 09:03 PM

DoE is a drop in the bucket when compared to the entire federal budget. Taking money away from Pell Grants and other student loans when the price of higher education in this country is rising at double and triple the rate of CPI inflation in order to do next to nothing is a tremendously wasteful, not to mention harmful bout of navel gazing.

If you're serious about reforming the DoE, then you start by scrapping garbage like NCLB and enacting a pay for performance system for teachers.

Kaye T. Bai · 01-30-11, 09:18 PM

Remember when California teachers were protesting in the streets about a miniscule paycut in their salaries when they're among the highest paid in the entire country?

Skybird · 01-30-11, 09:43 PM

Funding should not be mistaken with structure of curriculum. While more funds can lead to better education, it m7ust not necessarily be so - if the curriculum is badly structured.

For the US, I would assume there are other areas where more money can be saved with less damage being done, while in education it probbaly is mor elikely that more dmamage will be done with less money getting saved.

In the end, the financial problems of America derive from two major variables: the immense structural problems of it's economy, and its behemoth military spendings. Add to this the general consummation habit to not worry about saving for bad times, but to spend more than one can afford.

mookiemookie · 01-30-11, 10:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Skybird

and its behemoth military spendings.

This.

Quote:

The Pentagon admits to maintaining 737 bases in 130 countries on every continent except Antarctica.

That is completely wasteful. Talk to me when we get to the proposals that slash 50% of the $663 billion for the Dept of Defense.

Blood_splat · 01-30-11, 10:03 PM

I had a government teacher who would never change his curriculum. Everybody would just copy the answers from profiles that he made us keep. He was awarded teacher of the year almost every year. I swear he had the same curriculum for 25+ years. My sister graduated 5 years before me and she had the same worksheets in her profile book as I did.

CaptainHaplo · 01-30-11, 10:11 PM

I have to agree with Mookie and NikiMcBee here - returning control to the state and local level would not only save money, but would make education systems more responsive to the needs of the community it serve.

I threw this out there to see what we could come up with, and I like what is coming so far. I do think there needs to be some level of federal standard - but then that has created a "teach to the test" mentality.

A national standard is great, but unfortunately the DoE goes way beyond national standards. Look at the boondoggle that is No Child Left Behind. Bush pushed this through, but its a total setup. No school can ever maintain a "passing" grade, because it has to show continual improvement measured year to year. The laws of diminishing returns apply, but NCLB doesn't account for it. Just one example of where federal interference is a fail.

So what about cutting its budget drastically. Maybe 250 employees, it does nothing more than create a reasonable national standard and administers the Pell Grant program? Probably be able to do all that for around 10 Billion instead of 160+.

Yes, I know its a "drop in the bucket" total, but pretty much everything is - there are just thousands of drops in that bucket, and some of em have to go. If, hypothetically speaking - you cut 150 Billion from the DoE budget, you just got 1/10 of your total deficit slash in one go.If we were to use the "drop in the bucket" logic, nothing will change. We have to start somewhere - and this is one of those places where some good debate - solutions based instead of "left vs right" can take place.

Takeda Shingen · 01-30-11, 10:17 PM

Funding or de-funding the DoE accomplishes nothing. Disbanding or further empowering the DoE accomplishes nothing. We have teaching standards. They are strict. We have government-imposed standardized tests. They remain ineffective. You can give power to the local government and it will make no difference. The problem is that it is very difficult to get rid of bad teachers.

By my own observation, about 6 of out every 10 teachers needs to go. These people are in the business for the wrong reasons; summers off, the perception that teaching is a cushy job, etc. However, the NEA and the local teachers unions make it ridiculously difficult to remove these teachers, and make it nearly impossible once they achieve tenure. As such, you can fund and change any number of programs you want, and alter the curriculums and assessments as you please, but as long as you have that same crappy teacher running those programs you might as well have thrown that money and time down a hole.

nikimcbee · 01-30-11, 10:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Takeda Shingen

Funding or de-funding the DoE accomplishes nothing. Disbanding or further empowering the DoE accomplishes nothing. We have teaching standards. They are strict. We have government-imposed standardized tests. They remain ineffective. You can give power to the local government and it will make no difference. The problem is that it is very difficult to get rid of bad teachers.

By my own observation, about 6 of out every 10 teachers needs to go. These people are in the business for the wrong reasons; summers off, the perception that teaching is a cushy job, etc. However, the NEA and the local teachers unions make it ridiculously difficult to remove these teachers, and make it nearly impossible once they achieve tenure. As such, you can fund and change any number of programs you want, and alter the curriculums and assessments as you please, but as long as you have that same crappy teacher running those programs you might as well have thrown that money and time down a hole.

They need to diminish the union's influence at a national level. I don't have a clue how one would do that.

One thing that I noticed doing my pedagogical classes was (is) that the US k-12 system is the laughing stock of the world. I was more impressed with German system (the 3 types of education/schooling. Trade vs University prep)

I think our system is about having fun and catering to the lowest common denominator. I will also add, we are plagued with PCness. The rest of the world, is all business when it comes to school.

Just to stir the hornets nest, I'll add the US system's emphysis on sports.

I'm just trying to keep this on a national level and not local (per thread topic

).

01-30-11, 08:01 PM	#1
CaptainHaplo Silent Hunter Join Date: Apr 2007 Posts: 4,404 Downloads: 29 Uploads: 0	Up for Subsim Debate: Defunding the Department of Education Ok - we all know the US government is running a huge deficit, and it needs to slash its spending. So, I am going to try and start a series of discussions about various areas where spending COULD (but not necessarily should) be cut. Now in the course of these discussions, I may play some devils advocate on positions I don't necessarily hold, just to get the discusion started. Lets start with this one: Defund (partially or in full) the Department of Education. For 2010, the DoE total budget was $160.5 Billion (http://www2.ed.gov/about/overview/budget/index.html) - which it says accounts for roughly 10.5% of all education spending in the country. The rest comes from local, state and other sources. The DoE has a mission - and it says it is this: "to promote student achievement and preparation for global competitiveness by fostering educational excellence and ensuring equal access." (http://www2.ed.gov/about/overview/fed/role.html) As the President recently indicated, the quality of education in the US has dropped significantly when compared to the other nations. "The United States has fallen from top of the class to average in world education rankings, said a report Tuesday that warned of US economic losses from the trend. The three-yearly OECD Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA) report, which compares the knowledge and skills of 15-year-olds in 70 countries around the world, ranked the United States 14th out of 34 OECD countries for reading skills, 17th for science and a below-average 25th for mathematics" (http://centerforgloballeadership.wor...tion-rankings/) So, it is fair to say that while the DoE has seen its budget grow tremendously over the 3 decades of its current existence (though its history is far longer), it is now clear that it is failing in its mission. While the intentions of the DoE are very commendable, results show that despite significant additional "investment", its effectiveness has steadily worsened. Would it not then be in the best interest of the students of today to entirely defund or drastically reduce the funding of this Department? What would be the impacts - negative and positive, of such actions? One negative would be the elimination of some student aid via Pell Grants. However, that is a very small "slice of the pie" when compared to the wasted billions. Could a drastically reduced and refocused DoE be more effective, allowing more state and local control over the education children recieve? While some will argue that "local control" is dangerous, since it would allow for one school to push a specific view (whether left or right, God focused or humanistic), if the local populace support such a school, is it the job of the Federal Government to "protect them from their own stupidity"? Some interesting debate should follow, I hope. Keep it civil, make your points based on fact and not emotional demagogueary. Why am I doing this? No - its not to start a war. If we truly expect to sit around jabbering about inane stuff while our government solves problems, then this country is already lost. We the people, from all views politically, have a duty to be part of the solution. So lets all get to it. Lets see if putting our heads together can come up with some solutions to fix the problems we face. Hey, and to all you folks from other parts of the world, pull up a chair and give your perspective too. __________________ Good Hunting! Captain Haplo

01-30-11, 08:21 PM	#2
nikimcbee Fleet Admiral Join Date: Jul 2003 Location: Patroling the Slot. Posts: 17,952 Downloads: 90 Uploads: 0	Fun topic. I have mixed feelings about it. I used to dabble in teaching, so I know a little bit about it. I like the idea of having a national standard teacher standards, etc, as this varies widey by states. Do you have more information on things that they are responsible for? I would start with the head count and salaries. __________________

01-30-11, 08:24 PM	#3
nikimcbee Fleet Admiral Join Date: Jul 2003 Location: Patroling the Slot. Posts: 17,952 Downloads: 90 Uploads: 0	just thought ot this: wack the school lunch program. I got to see this first hand as a student teacher. The school I was at, tried to get everyone enrolled in this program (so they can get more money) __________________

01-30-11, 08:38 PM	#5
nikimcbee Fleet Admiral Join Date: Jul 2003 Location: Patroling the Slot. Posts: 17,952 Downloads: 90 Uploads: 0	My beef is more at the local-state level. Where I'd neuter the teacher's union. This is what I have noticed in my experience. Paying more does not get a better result. See State of Utah. They spend very little per student and have high ACT-SAT scores. Verses Minneapolis School district, which spends more than $10000 per student and has a high drop out rate and low test scores. Wait, you want national stuff... must...talk... national... stuff...not...local. __________________

01-30-11, 08:56 PM	#7
Task Force Rear Admiral Join Date: Jul 2008 Location: SPACE!!!! Posts: 10,142 Downloads: 85 Uploads: 0	Cutting school funding... bad idea. really bad. I can see it now, Instead of 30 to 40 students per class, it would be 40 to 50. (this seems to be the schools awnser, stuff more in, to help with costs) The biggest issue are the stupid teachers, I find most of them seem to be long timers, who have been teaching so long they think no one knows better, useing old ideas for subjects to a already full class plan. EX math, The teacher goes over a subject for 2 days, and usualy on day 2 or 3 gives a quiz/test/ ect on it, and moves on. The problem is, you can't learn a new subject that quick, and completly understand it. A good way to cut down prices... Down with school lunch, and its mystery meat! (I know I can go a day without it, have for years.) __________________ Task Force industries "Taking control of the world, one mind at a time"

01-30-11, 08:28 PM	#4
Tribesman Stowaway Posts: n/a Downloads: Uploads:	How many of those countries which scored better would consider defunding their dept of education to improve results?

01-30-11, 09:03 PM	#8
mookiemookie Navy Seal Join Date: Nov 2005 Location: Houston, TX Posts: 9,404 Downloads: 105 Uploads: 1	DoE is a drop in the bucket when compared to the entire federal budget. Taking money away from Pell Grants and other student loans when the price of higher education in this country is rising at double and triple the rate of CPI inflation in order to do next to nothing is a tremendously wasteful, not to mention harmful bout of navel gazing. If you're serious about reforming the DoE, then you start by scrapping garbage like NCLB and enacting a pay for performance system for teachers. __________________ They don’t think it be like it is, but it do. Want more U-boat Kaleun portraits for your SH3 Commander Profiles? Download the SH3 Commander Portrait Pack here.

01-30-11, 09:18 PM	#9
Kaye T. Bai Samurai Navy Join Date: Feb 2009 Location: Western Hemisphere, Earth, Milky Way Galaxy, Local Group, Virgo Supercluster Posts: 585 Downloads: 22 Uploads: 0	Remember when California teachers were protesting in the streets about a miniscule paycut in their salaries when they're among the highest paid in the entire country?

01-30-11, 09:43 PM	#10
Skybird Soaring Join Date: Sep 2001 Location: the mental asylum named Germany Posts: 42,604 Downloads: 10 Uploads: 0	Funding should not be mistaken with structure of curriculum. While more funds can lead to better education, it m7ust not necessarily be so - if the curriculum is badly structured. For the US, I would assume there are other areas where more money can be saved with less damage being done, while in education it probbaly is mor elikely that more dmamage will be done with less money getting saved. In the end, the financial problems of America derive from two major variables: the immense structural problems of it's economy, and its behemoth military spendings. Add to this the general consummation habit to not worry about saving for bad times, but to spend more than one can afford. __________________ If you feel nuts, consult an expert.

01-30-11, 10:03 PM	#12
Blood_splat Samurai Navy Join Date: Aug 2006 Location: Beneath the waves Posts: 568 Downloads: 20 Uploads: 0	I had a government teacher who would never change his curriculum. Everybody would just copy the answers from profiles that he made us keep. He was awarded teacher of the year almost every year. I swear he had the same curriculum for 25+ years. My sister graduated 5 years before me and she had the same worksheets in her profile book as I did.

01-30-11, 10:11 PM	#13
CaptainHaplo Silent Hunter Join Date: Apr 2007 Posts: 4,404 Downloads: 29 Uploads: 0	I have to agree with Mookie and NikiMcBee here - returning control to the state and local level would not only save money, but would make education systems more responsive to the needs of the community it serve. I threw this out there to see what we could come up with, and I like what is coming so far. I do think there needs to be some level of federal standard - but then that has created a "teach to the test" mentality. A national standard is great, but unfortunately the DoE goes way beyond national standards. Look at the boondoggle that is No Child Left Behind. Bush pushed this through, but its a total setup. No school can ever maintain a "passing" grade, because it has to show continual improvement measured year to year. The laws of diminishing returns apply, but NCLB doesn't account for it. Just one example of where federal interference is a fail. So what about cutting its budget drastically. Maybe 250 employees, it does nothing more than create a reasonable national standard and administers the Pell Grant program? Probably be able to do all that for around 10 Billion instead of 160+. Yes, I know its a "drop in the bucket" total, but pretty much everything is - there are just thousands of drops in that bucket, and some of em have to go. If, hypothetically speaking - you cut 150 Billion from the DoE budget, you just got 1/10 of your total deficit slash in one go.If we were to use the "drop in the bucket" logic, nothing will change. We have to start somewhere - and this is one of those places where some good debate - solutions based instead of "left vs right" can take place. __________________ Good Hunting! Captain Haplo

01-30-11, 10:17 PM	#14
Takeda Shingen Navy Seal Join Date: Mar 2000 Posts: 8,643 Downloads: 19 Uploads: 0	Funding or de-funding the DoE accomplishes nothing. Disbanding or further empowering the DoE accomplishes nothing. We have teaching standards. They are strict. We have government-imposed standardized tests. They remain ineffective. You can give power to the local government and it will make no difference. The problem is that it is very difficult to get rid of bad teachers. By my own observation, about 6 of out every 10 teachers needs to go. These people are in the business for the wrong reasons; summers off, the perception that teaching is a cushy job, etc. However, the NEA and the local teachers unions make it ridiculously difficult to remove these teachers, and make it nearly impossible once they achieve tenure. As such, you can fund and change any number of programs you want, and alter the curriculums and assessments as you please, but as long as you have that same crappy teacher running those programs you might as well have thrown that money and time down a hole.