Resolved: United States policy on illegal immigration should focus on attrition through enforcement rather than amnesty.

Does anyone else immediately think of General Grant’s war of attrition when they see the word attrition?

Speaking of words, I think this resolution is a bit lopsided. If we are to think of attrition as a wearing down or weakening of illegal immigration, nothing comes to mind for the Con. Because amnesty isn’t about diminishing the flow of illegals, it’s about legalizing the ones already in the country.

So returning my attention to the beginning of this month’s topic, we’re left debating what US policy on illegal immigration should be focused on – this is still a sticky situation because 1) immigration policy should probably approaching the problem of illegal immigration with multiple foci, 2) attrition through enforcement is an ongoing and major element of US policy, and 3) amnesty is a relatively outdated and politically as well as logistically unfavorable action.

Is it possible to negate the resolution by not solely supporting amnesty over enforcement but supporting amnesty and enforcement and other promising measures? What passes for a counter plan these days anyways?

Only a few days before the release of the first topic of this school year. Thanks to UChicago’s unconventional quarter system, I don’t actually have classes until the end of September. However, I will be returning to Chicago before that time which means no Yale for me. Oh well.

Since Healthcare has already been touched on at NCFLs, I wonder what the Powers That Be have decided on for the camp kids and eager beavers to bite into…

Coach Jim Menick has a 5-part series on Public Forum over on his blog Coachean Life (see blogroll).

Contemplating a move…

Devoting my energies to helping my brother prepare for his first NFL Nationals! (he’ll be doing Student Congress)

While Wikipedia is definitely not a recommended source, it can point us in the right direction.

Ideas that can be used to argue for the resolution:
The Capability Approach – Wikipedia entry, an interdisciplinary introduction, working paper on the approach’s development, critiques, and advances

The interesting thing about the Capabilities approach is that it is relevant in policy as well as philosophy as advanced by Amartya Sen and Martha Nussbaum respectively.

Ideas that can be used to argue against the resolution:
Libertarianism, Wikipedia entry on Robert Nozick’s Anarchy, State, and Utopia

The next task is to examine various economic theorists’ approaches to the provision of healthcare.

To be updated whenever I find something:

Account needed (free), McKinsey Quarterly, How health care costs contribute to income disparity in the United States

Practical (Utilitarian?) approach – inadequate healthcare leads to bad things x, y, z, therefore, society is obligated to ensure adequate healthcare to all its citizens in order to prevent such bad things from happening.

The American Medical Association – “Ethical Issues in Health Care Systems Reform: The
Provision of Adequate Health Care”

The Universal Declaration of Human Rights

NYT – Industry Pledges to Control Health Care Costs

WP – Health Groups Vow Cost Control

I wonder if there are historical and/or structural reasons why the United States, in contrast to the societies of France or Britain or Canada, did not create a national health care system. And if the debate will need to consider how different societies define both an obligation of the government and what is ensuring adequate health care. I’m going to look up some NPR stories…

NYT – U.S. Budget Gap Is Revised to Surpass $1.8 Trillion

NYT – Obama Push to Cut Health Costs Faces Tough Odds

Resolved: A society has an obligation to ensure adequate health care for its citizens.

Because of the Introduction to Political Philosophy class I’m taking, I immediately thought of John Rawls and essential social goods. I then wondered what “adequate” healthcare meant.

Resolved: That, on balance, the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 has improved academic achievement in the United States.

Performance measurement within NCLB/Dept. of Ed:
Letters to Chief State School Officers Regarding an Update on Several NCLB Cornerstones
Final Regulations on Modified Academic Achievement Standards
Mapping America’s Educational Progress 2008

Links:
Center on Education Policy – Answering the Question That Matters Most: Has Student Achievement Increased Since No Child Left Behind?

The Productivity Argument for Investing in Young Children

Urban Education Institute at the University of Chicago

Tracking Achievement Gaps and Assessing the Impact of NCLB on the Gaps: An In-Depth Look into National and State Reading and Math Outcome Trends (PDF)

The 2007, 2006, and 2005 Iowa Educational Research & Evaluation Association Award Winners are papers on NCLB effects

When I think of NCLB, I think of the Dept. of Ed. trying to exert some sort of control over the nation’s schools without stepping on states’ rights more than a policy designed to improve overall academic achievement. NCLB’s most recognizable features are:

Standardized testing – how academic achievement is measured, but the standards of these tests are not the same from state to state

Accountability – more publicized data on how students are doing on these standardized tests; this does create more pressure for schools to teach students what they need to know in order to do well on these tests. And if these tests are what the states have determined to be their academic ideals, is this debate over what the states consider to be academic achievement or if NCLB has created the right structure and incentives for schools to get students over a certain score?

Parent choice – I am skeptical about school vouchers mostly because not all students at “bad” schools do poorly and not all students “good” schools do well – it’s important to consider the student as well as the school. Research has shown that differences in academic ability emerge before formal schooling and are connected to the home environment. How many words a young child hears from his or her parents on a daily basis changes how their brain development. So when we evaluate the performance of a school, it’s important to think about the context in which it exists, what kind of homes its student body is coming from, and what disadvantages they may be bringing with them into the classroom. NCLB puts a lot of pressure on individual schools to show results, but one school’s starting point for improvement may be very different from another’s and I’m not sure how much emphasis is put on equalizing the entry-level capability of each student with adequate parent training, Head Start, and pre-K programming versus standardized testing in elementary schools and beyond.

A pillar of NCLB that I do think could have a direct impact on academic achievement rather than an administrative/logistical/political impact on schools that will steer them toward positive reform is the use of “proven education methods.” It is important for educators to examine and test whether the way a subject is being taught works for the greatest number of students possible and what new ways could work better or reach the kids that couldn’t be reached before. I would look for data that shows schools picking up new teaching systems or techniques that have helped students or revamping old methods so that they work more effectively.

There is a persistent debate over standardized testing and whether it is an accurate measure of academic achievement and whether it’s even measuring what we are truly interested in measuring. Such a debate could have a place in this month’s resolution. But I think there is also plenty to be said about how the federal government can create a policy that could give schools the incentive to innovate the way it teaches students, whether or not such innovation has taken place, and whether or not the innovation has succeeded. We could count up the number of states that have shown better test scores since the start of NCLB and the number of states that have stayed the same or gotten worse, but that would be an overly simplified and boring debate. Standardized testing is the way NCLB chooses to determine if there has been an improvement in academic achievement, but what are the ways schools under NCLB have chosen to create improvement? If those ways work or do not work, was it because of NCLB?

Are there other explanations behind school improvement or decline? What about changing demographics? What about state budgets? What about changes in what we know about child health and development and parental behavior?

NCLB is a regulatory framework imposed upon our nation’s schools. Has it shaped them into schools that help students achieve more? Is standardized testing an essential part of effective education reform? Are there successful charter schools that do not use standardized testing? And if so, why not?

With the month coming to a close, I’ll just post two links on Brazil and move on to the March topic.

Economist – Brazil’s oil industry
Newsweek on the rise of Brazil – a substantial piece brought to my attention by the Council on Foreign Relations