Federal education spending tends to be concentrated on programs, such as Head Start, that are political sacred cows but notoriously ineffective. Ryan would replace these with block grants, presumably hoping that at least some states will spend the money more wisely. For higher education, Expanding Opportunity, Ryan writes,
The federal government offers 14 tax benefits for higher education; they cost over $36 billion in forgone revenue in fiscal year 2014. By their very nature, most of these tax benefits are ineffective for low-income families. Families must pay tuition before they file their tax returns, so these credits and deductions don’t help cash-strapped students. And research finds that some of these benefits have little effect on enrollment—most recipients would have enrolled without them. Even more disconcerting is that states take advantage of these benefits by spending less on higher education or student aid.68 So not only is the federal government shortchanging other priorities, but these tax benefits are making college more expensive for everyone.
But you can be sure that any attempt to change these programs will run into a hornet’s nest of demagoguery.
Turning to accreditation, he writes,
Building on the reforms offered by Senator Mike Lee of Utah, new accreditors would submit to the Department certification standards as well as reporting requirements, credit transfer plans, and outcome-based
standards. They would also be empowered to accredit specific, high-quality courses rather than just schools or programs. As a result, students would be able to build an online program of their own, the sum of which could add up to a fully accredited degree. David Bergeron and Steven Klinsky describe such a system in which “students who complete the preapproved, tuition-free MOOC and also pass the confirmatory [new accreditor’s] assessment would earn accredited course hours from [the accreditor] itself. Enough such courses in the right scope and sequence (say physics from MITx, poetry from Harvard, theology from Notre Dame and so on) could lead to a fully accredited . . .degree.”
You communicate that Head Start is a sacred cow; yes it is; and you communicate that it is notoriously ineffective; says who? do you have any documentation to back that up.
I favor terminating education in the fifth grade; but I know that will never ever happen.
It is pretty well-documented that the benefits fade quickly by 3rd grade or something.
Re: Head Start being ineffective:
http://www.brookings.edu/blogs/brown-center-chalkboard/posts/2013/01/16-preschool-whitehurst
http://conversableeconomist.blogspot.com/2013/01/head-start-is-failing-its-test.html
Also, the idea that MOOC’s would stay free when they become eligible for an accredited degree seems like a big assumption.
It is ironic to me your first link takes a dig at organic food. Pesticide-free nutrition is one place money should be spent on developing brains as early as possible (e.g. the womb). I guess it is a minor quibble. Getting kids to eat it is hard.
Comments like this make me weep. Show me the study that says that organic food helps child development that has any worthwhile controls at all. As to pesticides you would be amazed at the natural pesticides and other defences plants have evolved to defend themselves, not to mention how traditional agriculture ruthlessly selected ever more strongly for them in the millenia before the modern pesticide industry.