Comments (32) | Add a comment
EDITORIAL
Federal strings
Tools
The short version of the controversy over Nevada deciding to seek $175 million in federal "Race to the Top" schooling grants goes like this:
The weak economy has left Nevada schools short of revenue. "Race to the Top" participation would provide more federal dollars, but the program requires states to use student test scores to track how well students have advanced under individual teachers, whereupon those individual teachers are to be rewarded or dismissed based on those results.
Rewarding or firing teachers based on how students actually advance under their tutelage would be a good thing, restoring a measure of accountability more reminiscent of the free market, the argument goes. As a bonus, we could also get more federal dollars. What's to lose?
Why, then, are so many states and school districts saying no thanks to "Race to the Top"? Because it's another jobs program designed to stick local taxpayers with the bills.
Texas won't compete for up to $700 million of the federal money because the program "smacks of a federal takeover of our public schools," Republican Gov. Rick Perry announced in January.
In California, state Superintendent Jack O'Connell pointed out last year that "any monies won in this competition will not be used to cover operational costs, restore lost funding or supplement existing programs." They can only be used to hire new educrats to set up new "tracking and monitoring" programs -- for which funding will soon run out.
The Obama administration program is "premised on the belief that higher spending on public education improves educational performance," noted Dan Lips of the Heritage Foundation. "But decades of experience have demonstrated the limits of increasing federal education spending. Since 1985, real federal spending on K-12 education has increased by 138 percent. But higher federal spending has not corresponded with equal improvement in American educational performance. ...
"While states and local policymakers may welcome federally funded fiscal relief, they should recognize that new federal dollars will invariably come with new strings and bureaucratic costs," including a ban on using the funds to promote school choice, which saves tax money while enhancing academic achievement, Mr. Lips warned.
Instead of further increasing federal spending and debt -- and limiting parental choice -- Mr. Lips says Washington "should help states meet current fiscal challenges by offering state policymakers greater ability to prioritize how federal education dollars are allocated. ..."
Judge individual teachers based on student performance? Sure. But "Race to the Top" is not the unalloyed source of "free" money that it first appears.
Comments
Terms & Conditions
The following comments are provided by readers and are the sole responsiblity of the authors. The Review-Journal does not review comments before publication nor guarantee their accuracy. By publishing a comment here you agree to abide by the comment policy. If you see a comment that violates the policy, please use the Report Abuse button.
Some comments may not display immediately due to an automatic filter. These comments will be reviewed within 24 hours. Please do not submit a comment more than once.
Note: Comments made by reporters and editors of the Las Vegas Review-Journal are presented with a yellow background.
RSS
Twitter
Facebook
my control is only being a realist, and not someone who lives in a fantasy.
Now, I went through all of my posts, but more specifically the last two posts without attacking you personally, think you can manage one?
Jayce:
You know you try to have a conversation with some people and it just don't do no good.
I call those people republicans.
See, I expressed an opinion, and rather than answer, or express a contrary opinion, you decide its better to attack me; why do you think that is?
I mean, are you so utterly incapable of any rational thought, any deep reasoning, that all you are left with is namecalling?
I'm serious, are you so offended by a contrary opinion, that does not address you personally at all, that you can't answer in a similar fashion.
I suggest that you can't, but I could be wrong.
I'll give you another chance;
I believe free will is a fiction, that there is no such thing as free will and as an example I will use my highway example.
A person driving down a freeway at rush hour doesn't have the free will to drive as fast as they want, or to go where they might want to go at all times. This is an analogy about free will and life. Whatever you might believe that a person can "will" themselves into sometimes it just ain't so no matter how much they will it.
There are just some things that are beyond all of us, whether by reason of physical attributes, or intellectual impairments, or by accident of birth, or a thousand and one other reasons. These limitations are placed on us entirely apart from any "free will" we may have but they do limit what we can do everyday. I don't have a problem with this fact, I don't "blame" anyone for this fact, I don't believe that it is something to fear, or regret, or get angry about, it just is.
But, acknowledging that my "free will" IS in fact limited by forces beyond
Michelle S.:
Couldn't help yourself? Sounds like you proved my point.
Thanks for coming!
You don't even have the free will to quit breathing.