Slashdot Mirror
EdTech Funding Cut from Proposed FY06 budget
An anonymous reader writes "Bush's proposed FY06 budget eliminates a $500M Enhancing Education Through Technology program that is a major component of many schools' tech budgets. Rural school districts that serve underprivileged populations are going to be especially hard-hit, since they rely so heavily on technology to use educational resources that would otherwise be unavailable."
I think for the most part the money given to schools for technology is wasted (it was at my school). Technology is not the only important thing to learn in school (far from it in my opinion), and I really feel like the money can be better spent on other things (like more and better teachers). The problem is that this cut isn't going to be used for something else in education. In effect Bush is cutting education spending in favor of spending on his imperial aspirations in the middle east, and that is what I take issue with.
Here's a radical idea; how about making sure that kids can handle pencil-and-paper science and mathematics before we throw computers at them?
And let's be honest...short of some vocation training (typing, basic word processor-spreadsheet usage), what will kids use computers for that they can't get with books and a live teacher?
Life is hard, and the world is cruel
The school I used to teach at spent an unwholesome amount of money installing a satellite dish. This same school had about two or three working TVs, and additional TVs were not bought. Note: I'm not saying that this would have been a good investment even if we did have ample TVs, but it was a blaringly obvious waste of money in our case. (Not that this excuses anything, but the decision was made at a higher level, for all schools in our county.)
Also note that the amount of money would not have been at all unwholesome if it was spent on more important things, such as paying teachers more or (my preference) reducing class sizes.
Ben Hocking
Need a professional organizer?
(Not to mention the fact that every one of the schools that has implemented a "high technology" plan is committed to spending obscene amounts of money on Microsoft licenses for the next 15 years.)
How about we try teaching kids facts and thinking skills? Wouldn't that be something?
Our intelligent designer has never created an animal that we couldn't improve by strapping a bomb to it.
"Give me my money back ..."
How about not taking it in the first place?
vodka, straight up, thank you!
Proponents of devolution have a valid point. When descisions are made by more local governing bodies, they more directly reassemble the opinion of those directly effected by the outcome of the legislation. I agree, particularly at the town/city level. It's a good general philosophy, but there are some flaws. Any society --democratic republic, corporate oligopoly, anarcho-capitalist, fascist dictatorship-- that has a powerful private sector has organisations willing to buy political interest proportionate to their wealth, not democratic population. Now, you have to be pritty fuckin rich to p0wn a share of congress (not to say the Microsoft, Boeing, GE, Haliburton, etc haven't done it), but any two bit corporation can push around a state legislature with direct campagne contributions, quazi-legal favors, and the threat of capital flight (no state senator/rep wants his consitiuents to loose their jobs because the factory decided to outsource). If we had a real democracy with equil access to a diverse and independent media (which would lead to a multiparty system), both Congress and state government would be directly accountable to the american people and decisions that effect all americans could be fairly made. Real democracy and indipendent criticism are more important prospects for freedom then devolution. Besides, one of the problems (certainly their tyranical compulsory nature is the biggest) with american schools is that funding is based on property tax. Thus poor areas have poor funding. People remain ignorant and economically disadvantaged in certain communities for years. National funding is certainly more equitable and most american's would not be opposed to it. Any libertarian should hold that the first thing the government (state or national) should do is stop regulating public schools, or regulate them in a way that maxamises students rights (ie ban schools from making students attend, ban police without warents or military recruiters from schools).
Government can spend money on educatin if that's what the vast majority want (and they do). We could cut the Department of Defence funding by half and use a quarter of that to fund non-compulsory educational services like free internet access, larger public libraries, and community colleges. In the end we would be spending much more on education then we currently are and could still pay off the deficit and cut taxes, moreover, we would win a lot of friends internationally by not systematically destroying any small nation that challenges our political or economic intrests.
------ Take away the right to say fuck and you take away the right to say fuck the government.
Call, me crazy, but I think that educating people is more important and better for humanity than killing others...
"Empathise with stupidity, and you're halfway to thinking like an idiot." - Iain M. Banks
Nowhere in the constitution is there any authority for congress to spend one single penny on education. It's up to the states and local communities to fund it, if they want publicly funded education at all.
There IS, however, authority to raise and fund an army. You may not like what the army is being used for, but at least there is a constitutional basis for having an army in the first place.
But if the federal government provides funding to schools, then the federal government gets to control what is taught and how. Because if the schools don't teach the way the feds want, the feds can cut their funding to the offending schools.
The schools become dependent and the feds get a big stick to force schools to teach things their way.
It's the worst possible disaster when it comes to education. It's also why, historically, schools were funded locally.
We're at the point now where state governments are basically just administrative units of the federal government. Some people may think that's just great, but I think it's horrible. And it's going to get a LOT worse before it gets better, if it ever does get better.
Government IS the problem.