The U.S. Education Crisis and Trump’s Reform Plan

1. 86

   Sharlee01posted 5 weeks ago

   
   
   The U.S. education system continues to struggle, with recent data highlighting significant declines in student performance. According to the 2024 National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), reading scores have hit their lowest levels in over three decades, with only 67% of eighth graders and 60% of fourth graders meeting basic proficiency. Math scores have also dropped compared to pre-pandemic levels, and the gap between high- and low-performing students has widened. Many attribute these declines to lingering effects of COVID-related disruptions, as well as ongoing debates over curriculum and education policies.
   
   When compared to other nations, the U.S. falls short in key academic areas. In global assessments, American 15-year-olds rank behind students from multiple countries in reading, while in math, the U.S. is outperformed by over 25 other education systems. Despite being one of the most heavily funded and scrutinized systems in the world, American students continue to lag behind their international peers.
   
   In response, President Donald Trump has introduced bold proposals to reshape education policy, with a particular focus on reducing federal involvement. His administration is reportedly considering an executive order aimed at scaling back or even dismantling the Department of Education, a move in line with his long-standing position that education should be handled at the state and local levels rather than dictated by federal bureaucracy.
   
   However, such a dramatic overhaul will not come without resistance. Any attempt to eliminate or significantly weaken the Department of Education would require congressional approval, and opposition is expected from both Democrats and some Republicans who believe federal oversight plays a crucial role in ensuring equal access to quality education. Critics argue that gutting the department could disproportionately impact students in low-income communities who rely on federal funding and protections. Others warn that such a move could undermine civil rights safeguards that prevent discrimination in schools based on race, gender, and disability.
   
   As Trump moves forward with his education agenda, the battle over the future of federal involvement in schooling is set to be a major flashpoint. While supporters see his plans as a necessary step toward returning power to parents and local governments, opponents fear the consequences of weakening federal protections and funding. With Congress divided and public opinion split, the success of Trump’s proposals remains uncertain.

   replyreport
2. 60

   Willowarborposted 5 weeks ago

   It's always about tearing things down in the most destructive manner.  Never about building anything.  Never any plan to actually build anything.  Do folks realize that these plans for the Department of Education will impact red states the most? 
   
   I'm not sure how much more these people can take... I mean prices are up at Waffle House and now this?
   
   Steve Rattner shared a chart based on data from the Center for American Progress on states’ K-12 education funding under Title I, the Education Department’s main federal program to help low-income students. Louisiana, Mississippi, Florida, Alabama, Nevada, and Arizona—Many other red states are not far behind. This will likely lead to a devastating domino effect of educational instability in states that need it the most.
   
   That dependence is, in large part, because they're just lower wealth states and they don't have the same capacity to step in and make up that difference," Kevin Welner, the director of the National Education Policy Center...
   
   Student performance, has worsened since 2020, making federal funds to help bridge academic gaps all the more important.... Interesting, seems like common sense.
   
   BUT A president does not have the authority to create or dismantle a federal agency, only Congress.  How much can he cripple our Nations education system with other actions? We'll see.   Why are there never any ideas on how to actually improve anything??

   replyreport
3. 83

   GA Andersonposted 5 weeks ago

   *spammer bump

   replyreport
   1. 86

      Sharlee01posted 5 weeks agoin reply to this

      I’ve come across the term "spammer bump" in online forums and social media. It refers to someone who posts a message to bring an old thread back to the top, often to promote unsolicited or irrelevant content. Typically done to increase visibility for their spam, it’s seen as disruptive and usually goes against community guidelines.
      
      Can you explain how my thread meets this criteria? What exactly am I promoting? This thread isn’t trying to bring an old post back to the top; it’s focused on a topic that is being reported currently, written in my own words, with no links included.  Last I looked that was a political forum.   What am I missing?

      replyreport
      1. 83

         GA Andersonposted 5 weeks agoin reply to this

         My explanation was posted. It had nothing to do with your thread specifically.
         
         GA

         replyreport
         1. 86

            Sharlee01posted 5 weeks agoin reply to this

            Your accusation could get me banned!
            
            My thread doesn't fit the criteria for a "spammer bump."  It is a newly posted thread with a current subject.  I posted it to have a one-stop spot to discuss the subject matter. It had two replies before you marked it a spammer bump.   
            
            I don't appreciate your accusation. Again I ask you to explain. I don't like word games. If you have a problem speak up. When you use a term of slang please be aware of what it indicates.
            
            A "bump" in a forum context simply refers to a post made to bring a thread back to the top of the discussion list, typically by replying to it. This is often done to revive an OLD thread and keep it active.
            
            A "spammer bump," on the other hand, is when the bump is done excessively or with the intent to disrupt or artificially increase the thread's visibility, often for promotional or malicious purposes.

            replyreport
         2. 68

            Ken Burgessposted 5 weeks agoin reply to this

            tsk tsk tsk...
            
            First you become a despicable Right Winger...
            
            Now...
            
            to have fallen so low...
            
            a SPAMMER!!!
            
            for shame

            replyreport
            1. 86

               Sharlee01posted 5 weeks agoin reply to this

               I must ask, is there anything spammy about this thread? I still can't figure out what this was all about.

               replyreport
               1. 68

                  Ken Burgessposted 5 weeks agoin reply to this

                  A spammer posted a bunch of new forum threads, GA bumped our more recent conversation pieces to 'bump' them to the top, over the spam.

                  replyreport
                  1. 86

                     Sharlee01posted 5 weeks agoin reply to this

                     I wish he had explained this  Or maybe just posted a simple comment that would have done the same thing.

                     replyreport