Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
If you graduated from public school in 1978 like I did, you'd be hard pressed to point out a specific deficiency in your own "pre-historic" education that the federal Dept. of Ed. fixed in the following years.
^^^ this ^^^
Let's do a thought experiment. Let's imagine the US Department of Education actually fixed the major problems that exist in the public school systems. If that happened, there would then be no reason for the US Department of Education to exist anymore -- and its employees could then be eliminated, and the Congressional committees who oversee the DOE and allocate funding to it would then lose power.
Clearly, actually fixing problems is not in the interest of career federal bureaucrats and of the elected representatives who allocate money and wield power.
It is much like the "War on Poverty" and the "War on Drugs." The federal bureaucrats who depend on a steady paycheck really have no incentive to actually, you know, win the war. Their incentive is for the war to never end. So, it doesn't.
It's important to remember that the entire Department of Education didn't exist until 1979, when Jimmy Carter created it (insert reason for creating it here).
ED was the spin off of the then HEW. Today, it employs 4400 people (most of whom have never set foot in a classroom) with a budget of $69 billion. One wonders where was that $69 billion before the department was created? There are also 3.1 million public school teachers in the country. If you disband the department and send the budget back to the schools, it amounts to $22,000 per teacher per year. You think schools are getting that much now? Believe me, you wouldn't notice the ED was dissolved.
regardless of who is the sec of education our school system in changing and changing is not always bad. Firs to all the need for a sec of education or an federal education dept is probably not needed. Education should be run by state an local governments as each state has different concerns and needs. Schools in rural states can not begin to have the same concerns and problems as school in the inter cities. A school district in Beverly Hills can't begin to understand the needs of the kids living in say, So. Los Angeles or east L.A for that matter. Private schools, home schooling and charter schools seem to be the trend and may eventually be h norm. Just think about how education was approached in 1917 compared to now. For those who still have grandparents or great grandparents living that went to school before WW2 or shortly after, ask them abot their education.
The primary, over-arching purpose of the Education dept. is student grants and loans for college. You know those Pell grants and federal direct loans your kids get? ED does that. (unless your kid is one of the 20% of college students who receive no aid, but 80% do).
That's what it does.
Other than that, it keeps stats on education, like what the dept. of Labor does, but for education.
A tangential function is the administration of grant money that makes up anywhere from 1-10% of any K-12 school's funding. Usually that money is used for "extra" stuff that schools do... you know like what grants normally fund for any organization.
If we closed it down, Ed's functions would probably move back to HHS. SOMEbody has to administer the student loans and grants - that is a big part of the U.S. economy.
regardless of who is the sec of education our school system in changing and changing is not always bad. Firs to all the need for a sec of education or an federal education dept is probably not needed. Education should be run by state an local governments as each state has different concerns and needs. Schools in rural states can not begin to have the same concerns and problems as school in the inter cities. A school district in Beverly Hills can't begin to understand the needs of the kids living in say, So. Los Angeles or east L.A for that matter. Private schools, home schooling and charter schools seem to be the trend and may eventually be h norm. Just think about how education was approached in 1917 compared to now. For those who still have grandparents or great grandparents living that went to school before WW2 or shortly after, ask them abot their education.
The bolded makes no sense. We are one country and we need a curriculum that is standard from state to state so that students that move during their education are provided for.
That is what the common core was supposed to address.
Every first world country that educates it's children has a common curriculum that each of its locations must teach.
First, I think it is clear now that most high-performing nations establish a number of common principles and cornerstones to build a strong education system and high-quality teaching profession. Every nation, of course, has unique characteristics of its teaching profession, culture, and education system, which may not be directly analogous to the U.S. But to the extent that the U.S. can copy or adapt, and beg, borrow, and steal, successful practices from other nations, we should do so.
Quote:
The overwhelming sentiment at the Summit was that teachers today need to be treated more as professionals and knowledge workers, and less as interchangeable cogs in an educational factory line out of the last century.
The bolded above is part of where the US falls down.
Quote:
High-performing education systems pursue a comprehensive set of reforms—not piecemeal, reform-by-addition. They don't push reforms in isolated silos. They commit to system-wide reform.
The primary, over-arching purpose of the Education dept. is student grants and loans for college. You know those Pell grants and federal direct loans your kids get? ED does that. (unless your kid is one of the 20% of college students who receive no aid, but 80% do).
You need 4400 people just to administer loans? Billions of loans are given out everyday by banks and mortgage companies and nobody notices. It's a computer program for crying out loud.
How many educations are you willing to sacrifice to keeping that disruptive kid in the same classroom? What is the lost opportunity cost there? How much damage are you willing to take on most kids to protect the few troublemakers?
While I agree with much of what you say about parents, I disagree here.
For the OP's original question:
About the only thing that may happen is fewer unfunded mandates forced down on local districts to pay for. How is that a bad thing?
I said I didn't have the answer, not that the answer was to leave the kid in the classroom.
I pointed out that a proposal to have a separate facility for these kids would be expensive, contrary to the idea that it wouldn't cost any more than we are now spending. Schools haven't figured out the answer to this problem in the past 200 years or so of universal education. Some private schools put up with a lot to keep a student's tuition money; this is not just a problem with public schools. I did suggest online education. Sometimes these "alternative" schools help such kids as well.
bad plan... Schools as babysitters or treatment centers
There are more effective solutions for students / teachers / kids w/ needs / & clueless (and helpless) parents
It would be SO GREAT if public schools were SCHOOLS!
(and NOTHING like we have known in our short 100 yr lifetime...) schools could be SO MUCH BETTER.
Give them a chance to change, encourage it !!
DO NOT smother them with 'protectionism'
They have and are failing US(a) terribly.
They have failed for decades. Tho kids and teachers are resilient so a little GOOD fruit falls from the tree, but this orchard is a mess, time to get out the chain saw and shape it up and burn the non-productive / diseased wood.
An orchard will NEVER survive without a good pruning and burning the diseased stuff.
Orchards take many yrs of training to be productive. If you have never been a farmer, go try it!
Please, inform the class, what do you mean? Care to expound? What is your solution or preferred pedagogical philosophy? It seems you can write a tome on what the American education system isn't and what it should be without actually providing a possible solution or remedy. Are you looking to address educational inequality and disparity?
Since we have someone with no experience with public schools, and who apparently disdains public schools, I think we can expect a downward spiral.
I didn't want the thread shut down or moved into the Politics forum since I didn't get any useful replies there; I'd like to keep it on the topic of education only, instead of devolving into a political debate.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
