- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
You must log in or register to comment.
researchers described the canceled projects at the department’s Institute of Education Sciences as rigorous evaluations of how the federal government spends education dollars, efforts to improve the reading and math skills of U.S. students and guides for teachers on evidence-based methods of instruction. Many of the projects were near completion and had mostly been paid out, which means that the implied savings are likely much less than $881 million touted by DOGE.
In case someone in your life still needs more evidence that they’re full of shit
Can’t wait to read America’s death blow to Musk’s takeover
Annual cost of K12 from federal state and local is $17,700 per student currently. From pure cost perspective, America does not need public schools, just send kids to Mexico or even China cost much less, and business will get more obedient labor with better math.
Let’s see, who is leading this charge that we are spending too much money.
"Trump said the U.S. is “last in education out of 40 states” and “No. 1 in cost per pupil.”
Both claims are wrong. The U.S. does not lead any international rankings for education, but it is not at the bottom of the list, either. Cost per pupil is higher than most developed countries, but not the highest."
And why is the US cost higher but not as high as Norway, for example.
“The U.S. has long provided more services to students — such as meals, transportation, extracurriculars such as sports, and special education — than do other countries,”
And what happens when we spend more money?
“Although there are some exceptions, high-income school districts tend to spend more money on education per pupil and have better outcomes, while low-income districts tend to spend less and have worse outcomes.”
Kind of paints a different picture than the one you are attempting.
I thought “education is for obedient labor” is obvious enough that I am being sarcastic. 😅
Oh yes, I totally got that. Your comment about cost and going to another country because education is cheaper really made me think. I had to look it up because I was not sure, and I am still not. I think I did learn some though.
For instance, Norway spends the most but their outcomes are even better than ours. I think there is something to be said about overspending if you are not getting what you should for your money.
I also was thinking about parallels like US healthcare where we spend the most by a lot but don’t get anywhere near the best outcomes. It appears US education is not quite the same though.
It’s easy to fall into the mindset of assuming all replies are rebuttals by default, but that isn’t always the case. Sometimes they’re concurrences, and sometimes they’re just using what you wrote as a jumping-off point to a different tangent.
Thanks to musk and vp Trump, the masses cant read this.
That hat needs to be a different size or something
Is there a flagship example of how any DOE research has substantively improved outcomes in American schooling? Ideally with cost of study, cost to implement, and some metric around outcomes for students.
That’s a tall order, which isn’t to say it’s not effective but it is to say just how much research is conducted over the past 50 years using DOEs data. We’re talking statistical proof that preschool works, that poverty hurts achievement way more than you’d think (and why), how TV impacts test scores, and so on.
They have studies that follow kids from birth into adulthood that give us the only direct look into long term outcomes of various upbringings. I used it in my dissertation to show that even with college, “elites” will make a lot more money after graduation due to school selection, even controlling for student aptitude on tests and other merit metrics.
