Yes to everything Angel said ^ our education system has been struggling for a while and it would be interesting to see a new approach with states leading the charge.
I think SOME states will really create a great system if this is what happens. And others will unfortunately have their education programs get even more crappy. I feel bad for those who live in communities that are already low on the list for quality of education.
Please go to the Department of Education website to read what they actually do. State and local educators do already decide the curriculum and what is taught in schools. At the primary and secondary level (the most important) It's already states and communities that establish schools, set the curriculum, goals, requirements for enrollment and graduation. Dept of Education supports them and makes sure those requirements are not discriminatory. Today if a state does not like their curriculum they have the autonomy to overhaul it. A lot of teachers and schools teach towards passing the assessments, I'm in Texas in 2012 the State went from TAKS testing to STAAR testing for students which they deemed to be more rigorous.
92% of all education funding is provided by the states. Federal government funding is 8% and that is split between multiple agencies a good amount coming from the Department of Agriculture for free school lunch. https://www.ed.gov/about/ed-overview/federal-role-in-education
Our local school boards already hold elections for parents to appoint people to certain positions. Parents can already go in front of their local boards to air grievances.
I didn't copy the whole link. https://www.ed.gov/about/ed-overview/federal-role-in-education
$68 billion spent for 4,400 employees annually at the DOE with the education situation we are having?! Yeah no, thank you.
I was referring less to funding and more to curriculum. Since the cost of living is different in every area it would make sense for that to be handled locally because expenses are different. A teacher and school in NYC will have higher expenses than a teacher in a rural area. While they do have some say over curriculum, there is still a baseline of things they are required to be taught. that’s why even within the same state some counties may be better than others. Some just do the bare minimum requirements and others go above and beyond. I worry for the areas that may now be dropped to below the bare minimum or worse case scenario there are rumors of some places that would completely leaving out parts of history if given the opportunity
If so much of the leg work is already done at the the state and local level then what is the need for the DOE? If not removed it should at least be defunded and re structured
Maybe read the whole paragraph on what the money is for. It's not $68 billion for salaries. Here is the full insert: " It has 4,400 employees – the smallest staff of the Cabinet agencies[5] – and an annual budget of $68 billion.[6]The President's 2023 Budget request is for $88.3 billion, which includes funding for children with disabilities (IDEA), pandemic recovery, early childhood education, Pell Grants, Title I, work assistance, among other programs.["
I agree that funding for things like programs for children with disabilities and grants are super important for supporting the younger generation and giving them the best opportunity in life possible. Getting rid of the DOE all together seems risky to do if there is no solid plan for what is going to replace all the programs within in that are doing so much good. it’s not all bad and not all good. I don’t think any government department is ALL good.
@@CarlyI think that's the crazy part, states had to be forced to literally accommodate students of all backgrounds regardless of sex, race, disability or economic status. Today it's through the DOE that civil rights are enforced, parents can easily file discrimination cases. States have to be forced to allocate a portion of their budgets to low income neighborhoods. My friend is a single mom who got a grant to go back to college, as well as a grant for childcare as long as she remains in college. She wants to be a teacher and now she's wondering who will fund those grants. If she finishes college she will be one less "burden" for taxpayers because she will no longer collect WIC, SNAP and housing assistance. If she doesn't finish college there is a great chance she will remain on government assistance for the foreseeable future.
@Melissa If we were restructuring to make it more efficient that would make sense. If we eliminate, of the 8% funds sent to states, who then decides which states gets which funding? Who is holding states accountable to educate all students regardless of race, sex, disability or economic status? Who is making sure that college is still accessible to low income students via grants and loans?
Exactly. I don’t think it is fair some kids to have more access for grants, loans, scholarships and special learning plans for disabilities simply because they live in one state and not another. that child has no control over where they live. And their address dictates what school zone they are in. I will use my own area as an example. For public schools, I live in the best county in the entire state for quality of school. (Very blessed and thankful) the county directly next to us is one of the worst.
I voted for Trump and I support this idea. Despite all the money spent on federal oversight, the U.S. still struggles with educational outcomes, and I don’t see a clear benefit from the department’s role. It’s a good move because it will give more control back to states, local governments, and individual communities. Local educators and parents understand what their kids need better than a big federal agency does, so letting states and districts take control mean education that’s more responsive and flexible. The DOE adds a lot of administrative costs, which could instead go directly to schools, teachers, or even the students themselves. By shrinking the federal role, there will be more money and resources making it to classrooms, where it’s really needed. Each state could experiment with different methods and models, which might lead to better options for students, depending on what works best for their area.