INTERVIEW – In his new book, the teacher and essayist reveals the causes of school bankruptcy and deplores the resignation of successive political leaders.
Le Figaro. -Educational regression will precipitate us in the third-worldization, ”write yourself. Isn’t that too alarmist? How is school crisis an existential challenge?
Joachim Le Floch-Imad. – Our economy will be worth our school tomorrow today, both in terms of productivity and innovation and growth gains. According to economists E. Hanushek and L. Wößmann, 25 points Pisa In addition represents an additional 30% GDP by 2100. This should worry us, while half of the college students do not master the basic skills in French and the level of schoolchildren is, according to Timss, between Kazakhstan and Montenegro.
Educational disintegration does not only make France: he defeats it. On the school’s ability to transmit knowledge depends indeed the maintenance of civil peace, the barbarism of acts is part of the void of thought. The survival of a model is also played …
This article is reserved for subscribers. You have 90% to discover.
To what extent does federal funding incentivize states to adopt nationally-driven education policies, perhaps diminishing local control?
Table of Contents
- 1. To what extent does federal funding incentivize states to adopt nationally-driven education policies, perhaps diminishing local control?
- 2. The Clandestine Takeover: How the Deep State is Steering National Education Policy
- 3. The Erosion of Local Control in Education
- 4. The Role of Federal Funding & Incentives
- 5. The Influence of Think Tanks & Foundations
- 6. Key Players & Their Agendas
- 7. The Rise of Social-Emotional Learning (SEL) & Its Implications
- 8. Concerns Regarding SEL Implementation
- 9. Case Study: common Core & the Pushback
The Clandestine Takeover: How the Deep State is Steering National Education Policy
The Erosion of Local Control in Education
For decades, a quiet shift has been underway in American education. While presented as improvements – standards-based reform, Common Core, and now, increasingly, social-emotional learning (SEL) – many argue these changes represent a intentional, centralized control over what and how our children are taught. The term “deep state,” while often sensationalized, accurately reflects a network of unelected bureaucrats, think tanks, and private interests wielding meaningful influence over national education policy. This isn’t about partisan politics; it’s about the essential question of who decides what our children learn.
The Role of Federal Funding & Incentives
The primary mechanism for this influence is federal funding. The department of Education, through programs like Title I (supporting disadvantaged students) and Race to the Top, dangles financial incentives that states find tough to resist.Accepting these funds, though, frequently enough comes with strings attached – requirements to adopt specific standards and curricula.
Conditional Grants: States are pressured to align their education systems with federal priorities to receive funding.
Wavers & Exemptions: The Department of Education can grant waivers from certain regulations, further incentivizing compliance.
Data Collection: Increased federal involvement necessitates extensive data collection on students, raising privacy concerns and potentially enabling tracking of ideological alignment.
This creates a system where local school boards and communities lose autonomy, effectively becoming implementers of a national agenda. Keywords: federal education funding, education policy, national standards, local control, school board authority.
The Influence of Think Tanks & Foundations
Beyond direct federal intervention, a network of think tanks and philanthropic foundations plays a crucial role in shaping education policy. These organizations frequently enough fund research, develop curricula, and lobby policymakers, effectively acting as policy entrepreneurs.
Key Players & Their Agendas
the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation: Heavily invested in common Core and now, personalized learning initiatives. Their funding has been instrumental in shaping the national conversation around education reform.
The Carnegie Corporation: Focuses on standards-based reform and teacher training, frequently enough promoting specific pedagogical approaches.
The Fordham Institute: Advocates for charter schools and accountability measures, often pushing for policies that align with a market-based approach to education.
The Aspen Institute: Promotes social-emotional learning (SEL) and competency-based education, framing these as essential for workforce development.
These organizations aren’t inherently malicious, but their influence raises questions about transparency and accountability. Are their agendas aligned with the best interests of students and communities, or are they driven by broader ideological or economic goals? Keywords: Gates Foundation education, Carnegie Corporation, Fordham Institute, Aspen Institute, education reform, think tanks, philanthropic influence.
Social-emotional Learning (SEL) – teaching students self-awareness, self-regulation, social awareness, relationship skills, and responsible decision-making – has become increasingly prevalent in schools nationwide. While proponents argue SEL improves student well-being and academic performance, critics raise concerns about its potential for ideological indoctrination.
Concerns Regarding SEL Implementation
Lack of Standardized Curriculum: The absence of a universally accepted SEL curriculum allows for significant variation in implementation, potentially exposing students to biased or controversial content.
Data Mining & Behavioral Profiling: SEL programs often involve collecting data on students’ emotional states and behaviors, raising privacy concerns and the potential for misuse.
Political Activism: Some SEL frameworks incorporate concepts related to social justice and equity, which critics argue promote a specific political ideology.
Parental Rights: Concerns exist regarding parental notification and consent regarding SEL programs and the data collected.
The push for SEL, frequently enough framed as a non-partisan effort to improve student well-being, warrants careful scrutiny. Keywords: social-emotional learning, SEL in schools, SEL curriculum, SEL data privacy, parental rights in education, emotional intelligence*.
Case Study: common Core & the Pushback
The implementation of Common Core State standards provides a stark example of the challenges to local control. introduced in 2
