The Math Forum

Search All of the Math Forum:

Views expressed in these public forums are not endorsed by NCTM or The Math Forum.

Math Forum » Discussions » Inactive » amte

Notice: We are no longer accepting new posts, but the forums will continue to be readable.

Replies: 5   Last Post: Sep 16, 1997 9:21 AM

Advanced Search

Back to Topic List Back to Topic List Jump to Tree View Jump to Tree View   Messages: [ Previous | Next ]
Tad Watanabe

Posts: 442
Registered: 12/6/04
Posted: Sep 15, 1997 7:57 PM
  Click to see the message monospaced in plain text Plain Text   Click to reply to this topic Reply

On Mon, 15 Sep 1997, Bob & Sarah Hazen wrote:

> Purely a philosophical/moral question about Ike funds:
> Professional interests aside for the moment, thinking solely on
> principle only, how does the clamor for the continued support of Ike
> funds differ in any substantial way from simply saying, "We insist that
> the U.S. taxpayers keep feeding us teachers at the public trough with
> money from taxpayers' pockets"?

I think the fact that you see IKE fund as a 'public trough' whose only/main
function is to feed teachers seem to be rather biased. Perhaps the
writer(s) participated in (or ran) those teacher workshops funded by the IKE
only to supplement his/her/their income, but I don't know if that's the
problem of the program or the participants.

Second, I don't know why making the same amount available as a block
grant to states make any difference. As I understand it, states do not
even have to spend the money on any education related items. As it is
now, isn't each state deciding *how* the money is to be spent within a
certain set of parameters? I don't know how such an approach (block
grant) is going to help education locally or nationally.

Tad Watanabe
Towson University
Towson, Maryland

Point your RSS reader here for a feed of the latest messages in this topic.

[Privacy Policy] [Terms of Use]

© The Math Forum at NCTM 1994-2018. All Rights Reserved.