Phil Berger isn't just being his usual mean, evil self when cutting teacher assistants. No, he's relying on research!
Senate leader Phil Berger, an Eden Republican, said in an interview that he is relying mainly on research from Tennessee and the United Kingdom that casts doubt on the effectiveness of teacher assistants in helping students learn
First, we must beware when a tea party goon tells us that he is relying on research -- keep in mind that this is the party of climate change denial and a 6,000-year-old earth. Second, when anyone tells you that they're relying on two studies, they're probably cherry-picking data and very often trying to contradict the main body of research.
But it doesn't get much worse than having the author of one of the studies you cite tell the world that you're lying.
An author of the U.K. studies, the deepest in the world on teacher assistants, said in an interview that his team’s research should not be used to support a move by lawmakers to cut aides, more commonly referred to as TAs.
“We went out of our way to say publicly and to anyone who asked us that getting rid of TAs is actually going to cause schools far more problems than it will solve,” said Rob Webster, a researcher at the University of London’s Institute of Education who has co-authored numerous papers about the research.
The authors went out of their way to say publicly that getting rid of teacher assistants is stupid. How could Phil have possibly missed that?
Unless, of course, he was fully aware that there's no research that supports his mean, evil legislation, so he decided to lie instead.