I have absolutely no idea what you are talking about.
You do not give the slightest evidence that abolishing the federal DOE will have a significant effect on the fraud in academia that Peter identifies in this article.
Academics and university adminstrators are to blame for their own behavior. It had nothing to do with the federal government.
1. Mr. Boghossian made the remark that he agrees with some Trump policies on this.
2. Other than eliminating the Department of Ed, I don’t know what he promised to do, so I was curious whether Mr. Boghossian was agreeing with that or some other policy idea? To be fair, maybe he meant starting serious de-accreditations until things change. But I didn't ask you, I asked Mr. Boghossian.
3. Now you’ve gotten me into explaining why people think liquidating the Department of Ed would help fix things, and it’s very simple: There is a trough of money, it is 5x or 10x as big as it should be, there are no serious checks on who gets it from an intellectual or anti-corruption standpoint, and half the money in the trough is allocated for political purposes. The political Right thinks that we should just eliminate the trough of money entirely, and the elimination of the Department of Ed is one piece of that achievable at the national scale, because it structures so much about education beyond the moneys it directly gives. This is really not so complicated.
4. Now you are saying that you don’t get how I brought this up when it is honestly pretty obvious.
And I never said "that I do not get how you brought this up." I am disagreeing with the result of abolishing the federal DOE. You obviously have a hammer, and you imagine everything is a nail.
You and Peter can believe whatever you want, but if the goal is getting rid of academic fraud, this will not work.
My claim is that abolishing the federal DOE will have ALMOST ZERO IMPACT on fraud within academia.
The fraud is most intense in the humanities and social sciences which receive very little federal government funding. It is also worse in private universities, not public universities. The trough of money largely goes to medical research and the sciences.
The NIH, which administers federal medical research funding, is not part of the DOE.
The NSF, which administers federal science research funding, is not part of the DOE.
Climate change research is funded via Dept of Energy
Military related research is funded via DOD.
So abolishing federal DOE would have virtually no impact on federal research funding in universities.
The Leftist ideology of academia came from within, not from the federal government. The federal government cannot change the ideological beliefs of an entire profession, particularly if it abolishes the department in that domain.
For the record, I am in favor of abolishing the federal DOE and alot more. I just think that we should not be naive as to its impact on academic fraud.
I have absolutely no idea what you are talking about.
You do not give the slightest evidence that abolishing the federal DOE will have a significant effect on the fraud in academia that Peter identifies in this article.
Academics and university adminstrators are to blame for their own behavior. It had nothing to do with the federal government.
The US department of education was created in 1980.
How has US education changed since its creation?
This article is not about the federal DOE, and I am not interested in changing the topic
The question is the most effective means to fight academic fraud.
Abolishing the federal DOE is clearly not it.
Are you being thick?
1. Mr. Boghossian made the remark that he agrees with some Trump policies on this.
2. Other than eliminating the Department of Ed, I don’t know what he promised to do, so I was curious whether Mr. Boghossian was agreeing with that or some other policy idea? To be fair, maybe he meant starting serious de-accreditations until things change. But I didn't ask you, I asked Mr. Boghossian.
3. Now you’ve gotten me into explaining why people think liquidating the Department of Ed would help fix things, and it’s very simple: There is a trough of money, it is 5x or 10x as big as it should be, there are no serious checks on who gets it from an intellectual or anti-corruption standpoint, and half the money in the trough is allocated for political purposes. The political Right thinks that we should just eliminate the trough of money entirely, and the elimination of the Department of Ed is one piece of that achievable at the national scale, because it structures so much about education beyond the moneys it directly gives. This is really not so complicated.
4. Now you are saying that you don’t get how I brought this up when it is honestly pretty obvious.
No, I am not "thick." Are you?
And I never said "that I do not get how you brought this up." I am disagreeing with the result of abolishing the federal DOE. You obviously have a hammer, and you imagine everything is a nail.
You and Peter can believe whatever you want, but if the goal is getting rid of academic fraud, this will not work.
My claim is that abolishing the federal DOE will have ALMOST ZERO IMPACT on fraud within academia.
The fraud is most intense in the humanities and social sciences which receive very little federal government funding. It is also worse in private universities, not public universities. The trough of money largely goes to medical research and the sciences.
The NIH, which administers federal medical research funding, is not part of the DOE.
The NSF, which administers federal science research funding, is not part of the DOE.
Climate change research is funded via Dept of Energy
Military related research is funded via DOD.
So abolishing federal DOE would have virtually no impact on federal research funding in universities.
The Leftist ideology of academia came from within, not from the federal government. The federal government cannot change the ideological beliefs of an entire profession, particularly if it abolishes the department in that domain.
For the record, I am in favor of abolishing the federal DOE and alot more. I just think that we should not be naive as to its impact on academic fraud.
https://frompovertytoprogress.substack.com/p/one-radical-reform-to-solve-all-our