Comments on: Awash in dubious data http://www.joannejacobs.com/2007/10/awash-in-dubious-data/ Free-linking and thinking on education by Joanne Jacobs Fri, 19 Mar 2010 14:15:26 -0700 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2 hourly 1 By: markm http://www.joannejacobs.com/2007/10/awash-in-dubious-data/comment-page-1/#comment-60421 markm Thu, 11 Oct 2007 14:11:36 +0000 http://joannejacobs.com/2007/10/08/awash-in-dubious-data/#comment-60421 I can't see where the Constitution authorizes the federal government to give money to state and local school systems, either. But if you take someone's money, you've got to follow their rules. I agree that the federal government will probably make a bigger mess of educational standards than most states would - and it probably already has. IIRC, there wasn't a significant federal education agency until I was halfway through school, and the schools have been going downhill ever since. I can’t see where the Constitution authorizes the federal government to give money to state and local school systems, either. But if you take someone’s money, you’ve got to follow their rules.

I agree that the federal government will probably make a bigger mess of educational standards than most states would – and it probably already has. IIRC, there wasn’t a significant federal education agency until I was halfway through school, and the schools have been going downhill ever since.

]]> By: Ragnarok http://www.joannejacobs.com/2007/10/awash-in-dubious-data/comment-page-1/#comment-60405 Ragnarok Thu, 11 Oct 2007 05:47:04 +0000 http://joannejacobs.com/2007/10/08/awash-in-dubious-data/#comment-60405 Oh yeah, can you parse this here fragment fer me, Mike? <i>"...its [sic] about the feds asserting their power into [sic] an area they have no right to mettle [sic] in."</i> I be a non-native English speaker, Mike, so cut me some slack, willya? Oh yeah, can you parse this here fragment fer me, Mike?

“…its [sic] about the feds asserting their power into [sic] an area they have no right to mettle [sic] in.”

I be a non-native English speaker, Mike, so cut me some slack, willya?

]]> By: Ragnarok http://www.joannejacobs.com/2007/10/awash-in-dubious-data/comment-page-1/#comment-60404 Ragnarok Thu, 11 Oct 2007 05:41:11 +0000 http://joannejacobs.com/2007/10/08/awash-in-dubious-data/#comment-60404 If I understand your rather muddled rant, Mike, you're saying a couple of different things. First, the states should refuse federal education money. Right? Second, if they refused the additional NCLB funding, they'd lose all Federal funding. Right? Can you point me at something that confirms the second claim? That would be good. But if you can't, please admit that you're wrong. It's OK, Mike, stout unionoids can be wrong all the time, it's somethin' to be proud of. Next: Even if it were true, what's the problem? Tell the Feds to <i>...take a flying leap"</i>, as you so elegantly put it. You don't need none o' their stinkin' money, do you? If I understand your rather muddled rant, Mike, you’re saying a couple of different things.

First, the states should refuse federal education money. Right?

Second, if they refused the additional NCLB funding, they’d lose all Federal funding. Right?

Can you point me at something that confirms the second claim? That would be good. But if you can’t, please admit that you’re wrong. It’s OK, Mike, stout unionoids can be wrong all the time, it’s somethin’ to be proud of.

Next: Even if it were true, what’s the problem? Tell the Feds to …take a flying leap”, as you so elegantly put it. You don’t need none o’ their stinkin’ money, do you?

]]> By: KDeRosa http://www.joannejacobs.com/2007/10/awash-in-dubious-data/comment-page-1/#comment-60399 KDeRosa Thu, 11 Oct 2007 02:37:03 +0000 http://joannejacobs.com/2007/10/08/awash-in-dubious-data/#comment-60399 “Title I” is Title I of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act which was reauthorized as NCLB. NCLB adopted all of ESEA and merely added the much-hated accountability provisions and distributed additional funding to pay for implementing said accountability measures, i.e., testing. “Title I” is Title I of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act which was reauthorized as NCLB. NCLB adopted all of ESEA and merely added the much-hated accountability provisions and distributed additional funding to pay for implementing said accountability measures, i.e., testing.

]]> By: Mike in Texas http://www.joannejacobs.com/2007/10/awash-in-dubious-data/comment-page-1/#comment-60396 Mike in Texas Thu, 11 Oct 2007 02:21:10 +0000 http://joannejacobs.com/2007/10/08/awash-in-dubious-data/#comment-60396 Rags, The problem is, the feds make their own rules. A school district or state can't just opt out of NCLB funding and lose only that money. They also lose their Title I funding. Title I is a whole different kettle of fish, but the feds are holding the states and districts hostage with it. NCLB is not about improving education for Title I kids, its about the feds asserting their power into an area they have no right to mettle in. Rags,

The problem is, the feds make their own rules. A school district or state can’t just opt out of NCLB funding and lose only that money. They also lose their Title I funding. Title I is a whole different kettle of fish, but the feds are holding the states and districts hostage with it. NCLB is not about improving education for Title I kids, its about the feds asserting their power into an area they have no right to mettle in.

]]> By: KDeRosa http://www.joannejacobs.com/2007/10/awash-in-dubious-data/comment-page-1/#comment-60392 KDeRosa Thu, 11 Oct 2007 00:25:01 +0000 http://joannejacobs.com/2007/10/08/awash-in-dubious-data/#comment-60392 MiT, I am appalled, but that fight has been lost for quite some time such that stare decisis comes into play. MiT, I am appalled, but that fight has been lost for quite some time such that stare decisis comes into play.

]]> By: Ragnarok http://www.joannejacobs.com/2007/10/awash-in-dubious-data/comment-page-1/#comment-60391 Ragnarok Wed, 10 Oct 2007 22:42:34 +0000 http://joannejacobs.com/2007/10/08/awash-in-dubious-data/#comment-60391 Mike'n'Taxes, If a state takes the money then it must also fulfill the requirements. Clear? A state can refuse the money and opt out. I thought we agreed on this, but then there's this pesky paragraph of yours: <i>"And if you believe the federal govt. will just let states walk away by not taking any federal money, then there’s a bridge in New York I’d like to sell you."</i> Yet your own article says that <i>"...and thus every state and district can exempt itself from the strings attached to the money."</i> So who's right? Your source - or you, yourself, and thou? 3-to-1 in your favour, I don't think. Mike’n'Taxes,

If a state takes the money then it must also fulfill the requirements. Clear?

A state can refuse the money and opt out. I thought we agreed on this, but then there’s this pesky paragraph of yours:

“And if you believe the federal govt. will just let states walk away by not taking any federal money, then there’s a bridge in New York I’d like to sell you.”

Yet your own article says that “…and thus every state and district can exempt itself from the strings attached to the money.”

So who’s right? Your source – or you, yourself, and thou? 3-to-1 in your favour, I don’t think.

]]> By: Tom Hanson http://www.joannejacobs.com/2007/10/awash-in-dubious-data/comment-page-1/#comment-60390 Tom Hanson Wed, 10 Oct 2007 22:30:17 +0000 http://joannejacobs.com/2007/10/08/awash-in-dubious-data/#comment-60390 I found the most interesting aspect of the entire discussion the comments of Michael Petrelli, the VP for policy at Fordham, regarding math scores. Even though math tests are harder. the scores are improving. And that comes as no surprise to Petrelli. See http://www.openeducation.net/2007/10/09/nclb-proficiency-illusion/ Tom Hanson Editor OpenEducation.net I found the most interesting aspect of the entire discussion the comments of Michael Petrelli, the VP for policy at Fordham, regarding math scores. Even though math tests are harder. the scores are improving. And that comes as no surprise to Petrelli. See

http://www.openeducation.net/2007/10/09/nclb-proficiency-illusion/

Tom Hanson
Editor
OpenEducation.net

]]> By: Mike in Texas http://www.joannejacobs.com/2007/10/awash-in-dubious-data/comment-page-1/#comment-60385 Mike in Texas Wed, 10 Oct 2007 20:23:32 +0000 http://joannejacobs.com/2007/10/08/awash-in-dubious-data/#comment-60385 KDeRosa, If you're a conservative you should be appalled at these intrusions. KDeRosa,

If you’re a conservative you should be appalled at these intrusions.

]]> By: KDeRosa http://www.joannejacobs.com/2007/10/awash-in-dubious-data/comment-page-1/#comment-60384 KDeRosa Wed, 10 Oct 2007 19:52:14 +0000 http://joannejacobs.com/2007/10/08/awash-in-dubious-data/#comment-60384 MiT, it's good to see that you are an originalist when it comes to Constitutional scholarship; however, the current interpretation of the Constitution permits federal interference in plenty of state powers, mostly through generous interpretations of the commerce clause and equal protection amendments. MiT, it’s good to see that you are an originalist when it comes to Constitutional scholarship; however, the current interpretation of the Constitution permits federal interference in plenty of state powers, mostly through generous interpretations of the commerce clause and equal protection amendments.

]]>