The blogspot version of this blog is HERE. The Blogroll. My Home Page. Email John Ray here. Other mirror sites: Greenie Watch, Political Correctness Watch, Dissecting Leftism, Immigration Watch, Food & Health Skeptic, Tongue Tied and Australian Politics. See here or here for the archives of this site
28 February, 2023
It’s Now or Never for School Choice Everywhere
Stephen Moore (below) is a good economist but a poor sociologist. The idea that you could dump the products of failed schools into successful schools and get a good result from that is naive. It would just destroy the successful schools. What is needed -- classroom discipline -- would be hard to achieve but there is no other generally effective solution to the problem of low educational achievement
This story could bring tears to your eyes. In Baltimore, Maryland, there are 23 schools in which not one single student tested “proficient in math.”
Can we all agree these are schools that aren’t proficient in teaching math — or just about any course, for that matter?
A Fox News investigation calculated that Baltimore spends an average of $21,000 per student. How could the teachers unions possibly spend that much money and accomplish almost no learning?
With a dreadful record like this, it would be natural to think Baltimore must have the worst schools in the nation. Maybe not.
It turns out things may be worse in Illinois.
According to data from the Illinois State Board of Education reviewed by Wirepoints, an investigative journalism center, there were 30 schools last year, 22 of which are in the Chicago area, that failed to lift even one student to grade-level reading.
Wait, it gets worse. The state has more than 50 schools in which not a single student had achieved grade-level math.
Wouldn’t the proper response be to shut down these schools that are robbing children of an education?
Not in Illinois. In fact, the state educators rated the performance of several of these abysmal schools — are you ready for this? — “commendable.” This takes grade inflation to a whole new level of absurdity.
Of course, the decision by teachers unions and education administrators to shut down the schools for a year or more didn’t help. Yet the test results in many of these schools weren’t much better before the pandemic.
And don’t blame a shortage of money. Many of these Chicago schools are spending up to $30,000 per child.
What we have here is a case of widespread educational child abuse.
All over the country, our public schools are delivering failing results. Last year, test scores nationally reached a several-decade low. The schools that had by far superior test scores to the public schools in almost every state were Catholic schools.
Now, think about this for a moment. If we really cared about the future of our children, wouldn’t we just contract out the nation’s thousands of rotten school systems to the Catholic dioceses around the country? Or throw in Jewish schools, charter schools, Montessori schools, home schools — or whatever works?
In most highly populated inner-cities where public schools are especially deficient, the mostly minority children can receive a better education in Catholic schools — at roughly half the cost of the public schools.
If there is a silver lining here, it is that there are some states that have rapidly expanded their school choice programs, allowing the education dollars to follow the students wherever their families choose to send them.
Arizona, Florida, Iowa, and West Virginia have already done so, with Texas, Tennessee, and Utah considering bold moves toward universal school choice for families that can’t afford private alternatives.
Some 40 years ago, a famous national study on the condition of America’s schools warned of a “crisis of mediocrity” in education. Today, things have deteriorated so much that mediocrity would be an improvement and is considered “commendable.”
University of Chicago economists have estimated that the loss of education just from the Covid shutdowns will cost the nation trillions of dollars of lost income and productivity from the diminished earning potential of our children throughout their whole lives.
A mind is a terrible thing to waste. And our public schools are wasting millions of minds week after week while they spend billions upon billions of dollars on Lord knows what.
It’s time for bold new approaches. There are thousands of private and religious schools that have proven they know how to teach children, and instead of achieving 0 percent reading and math proficiency, they reach nearly 100 percent.
Education reform is simple: Put our children, our nation’s greatest assets, in these schools.
https://www.nysun.com/article/its-now-or-never-for-school-choice-everywhere
**********************************************************
Florida Republicans seek to remove Leftist propaganda from what’s taught in higher education institutions
Bill, if passed, would ban colleges from offering majors or minors in Critical Race Theory, Gender Studies, or Intersectionality.
A new bill introduced by Florida Republican Representative Alex Andrade seeks to shut down diversity, inclusion, and equity programs in state colleges and universities. HB 999 prohibits state colleges from funding or supporting any “programs or campus activities” that promote diversity, equity, and inclusion or Critical Race Theory.
The bill would also require state colleges to remove majors or minors related to Critical Race Theory, Gender Studies, or Intersectionality. It would also ban the presentation of American history that contradicts the “creation of a new nation based on universal principles stated in the Declaration of Independence” and any coursework that features “identity politics, such as Critical Race Theory.”
The bill features “breathtaking control of viewpoint and content throughout all academic activity in the entire Florida system,” according to Julian Davis Mortenson, a professor of law at the University of Michigan who specializes in constitutional and international law. Mortenson says that the bill prohibits colleges from spending “any money to fund pedagogy, programming, or activities” related to diversity, equity, and inclusion and changes who is allowed to hire university faculty and complete post-tenure reviews.
The bill is part of a broader effort from Florida Republicans to restrict what’s taught in higher education. Earlier this year, Gov. Ron DeSantis introduced a budget that would block state universities from using funding to support diversity, equity, and inclusion initiatives.
The bill also comes after a controversy between DeSantis and the College Board over an AP African American Studies course. DeSantis rejected the course, saying it imposed “a political agenda.” DeSantis then announced plans to “ensure Florida’s public universities and colleges are grounded in the history and philosophy of Western Civilization,” which included prohibiting diversity, equity, and inclusion, as well as so-called “Critical Race Theory.” Much of DeSantis’ outline, such as points forbidding colleges from supporting diversity, equity, and inclusion activities and programs, are reflected in HB 999.
As of now, it is uncertain whether the bill will pass or not. DeSantis’ office said that the governor would “decide on the merits of the bill in final form if and when it passes.” If passed, the bill would have far-reaching implications for academic freedom in Florida’s colleges and universities.
******************************************************
Court Gives Conservative 'Mama Bears' the Last Laugh, Brutally Punishes School Board Trying to Keep Porn Stash Hidden
A school district in Georgia was forced to pay $100,000 in legal fees to a group of mothers who were barred from conducting out loud readings at school board meetings of the porn-infested books the board had approved for kids to see on school library shelves.
A federal court ordered the Forsyth, Georgia, County School District to pay the legal fees of the group calling themselves the Mama Bears, who sued the district when officials barred them from reading from the disgusting books during board meetings, according to Atlanta NBC affiliate WXIA.
The group claimed that the school board violated their First Amendment rights in order to hide the disgusting, inappropriate content of the books from the public. And a federal judge agreed, ruling that the board’s efforts to shut the mom’s group down was unconstitutional.
The lawsuit against the district was brought by parents Alison Hair and Cindy Martin who attempted to read aloud at a board meeting passages of board-approved books that she feels are pornographic in nature. Hair and other members of Mama Bears group were barred from reading the passages, a policy the women claimed is illegal.
The women’s group sued the school district in a federal lawsuit and won. Fox News added that the district was ordered to pay the Mama Bears nominal damages of $17.91 and their attorneys fees of $107,500.
The court also told the district they were prohibited from barring the plaintiffs or any “current or future FCS speakers entitled to speak at an FCS school board meeting, from reading or quoting verbatim from the text of any book or written works available in an FCS library or classroom, while addressing the school board during the public-comment period at school board meetings.”
***********************************
27 February, 2023
Trump says federal government will directly oversee discipline in schools if he is re-elected
Donald Trump has announced he will “end the leftist takeover of school discipline and juvenile justice” and allow the federal government to oversee discipline in schools if he is elected president next year.
The former president, in a video message posted by his team on Twitter, said “troubled youth” were “going wild” by indulging in criminal activities.
He said he will push for the Department of Justice (DOJ) and Department of Education (DOE) to take over school discipline of students.
“Many of these carjackers and criminals are 13, 14 and 15 years old. I will order the education and justice departments to overhaul federal standards on disciplining minors,” the former president said in his address video.
“So when troubled youth are out of control, they’re out on the streets and they’re going wild, we will stop it. The consequences are swift, certain and strong, and they will know that.”
He also hit out at Democrats who raise calls to “defund the police”, claiming they turned once-great American cities into “cesspools of bloodshed and crime”.
Mr Trump claimed his plan to restore law and order involves signing a record investment in hiring retention and training for police officers nationwide.
He also said vital liability protections for officers will be increased and alleged Democrats wanted to take such protections away from the police.
The one-time president said he wanted the police to do their jobs right and that they need to have the necessary support and protection to do so.
In another video message on Truth Social, Mr Trump painted a grim picture of the US, referring to the country as being in “serious decline” and argued that another four years with him as president would fix the situation.
Meanwhile, Mr Trump’s campaign announced the hiring of key staff in Iowa, where the GOP’s first 2024 caucus is set to take place. He is one of two declared candidates so far.
**************************************************
Welcome to America’s Racialized Medical Schools
Knowledge is being replaced by propaganda
Earlier this month, the White House announced a five-year plan for redressing racial inequality. It is essentially the Biden administration’s version of a diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) plan, like those issued by nearly every major university, only at a vastly larger scale. The policy aims to “advance an ambitious, whole-of-government approach to racial equity and support for underserved communities” by embedding equity goals in every aspect of the government.
From the highest offices of the state down to the smallest local bureaucracies, DEI now pervades almost all levels of American society. And while it was once thought that the fringe racial theories that animate the DEI agenda could be confined to small liberal arts campuses, it is clear that is no longer the case.
Increasingly, medical schools and schools of public health are enthusiastically embracing the values of DEI and instituting far-reaching policies to demonstrate their commitments to the cause. To many in the universities and perhaps in the country at large, these values sound benign—merely an invitation to treat everyone fairly. In practice, however, DEI policies often promote a narrow set of ideological views that elevate race and gender to matters of supreme importance.
That ideology is exemplified by a research methodology called “public health critical race praxis” (PHCRP)—designed, as the name suggests, to apply critical race theory to the field of public health—which asserts that “the ubiquity of racism, not its absence, characterizes society’s normal state.” In practice, PHCRP involves embracing sweeping claims about the primacy of racialization, guided by statements like “socially constructed racial categories are the bases for ordering society.”
These race-first imperatives have now come to influence the research priorities of major institutions. Perhaps no better case study exists than that of the University of California, San Francisco (UCSF), an institution devoted exclusively to the medical sciences, and one of the top recipients of federal grants from the National Institutes of Health. Last May, UCSF took the unprecedented step of creating a separate Task Force on Equity and Anti-Racism in Research, which proceeded to make dozens of recommendations.
That task force builds on layers of prior DEI bureaucratic expansion, spanning nearly a decade. This programming includes the “UCSF Anti-Racism Initiative,” started after the summer of 2020, which established dozens of new institutional policies throughout the university, such as “evaluating contributions to diversity statements in faculty advancement portfolios.” The School of Medicine, meanwhile, has published its own Timeline of DEI and Anti-Racism Efforts, which documents such steps as adding a “social justice pillar” to the school’s curriculum and creating an anti-racist curriculum advisory committee.
The policies often promote an idiosyncratic and controversial understanding of concepts like diversity and racism. Through its Difference Matters initiative, the medical school created a document titled “Anti-Racism and Race Literacy: A Primer and Toolkit for Medical Educators”—which is filled with eyebrow-raising assertions. Racism, the guide asserts, “refers to the prioritization of the people who are considered white and the devaluation, exploitation, and exclusion of people racialized as non-white.”
Anti-racism, meanwhile, involves directly shifting power from those who are white to those who are Black. “Anti-racism examines and disrupts the power imbalances between racialized and non-racialized people (white people), to shift power away from those who have been historically over-advantaged and towards people of color, especially Black people.” Of course, when applied to the allocation of lifesaving medical care, these ideals can carry weighty consequences. During the height of the COVID pandemic, New York, Minnesota, and Utah issued guidance for allocating monoclonal antibodies that heavily prioritized racial and ethnic minorities.
While this hyper-racialized approach has long been the norm in humanities departments, it now appears to have fully crossed over into the hard sciences as well, with medical schools leading the charge. Med schools across the country have aggressively embraced DEI programming, often instituting policies that promote a narrow vision of social justice. In 2021, the University of Michigan Medical School created its Anti-Racism Oversight Committee Action Plan, making a set of new policy recommendations that had won the endorsement of the medical school’s leadership. That action plan called for a new curriculum to help inculcate a “demonstrated increase in understandings of DEI, antiracism, and intersectionality concepts in medical students and residents.” For medical residents, the plan stipulated that the curriculum should be based on Ibram X. Kendi’s book Stamped from the Beginning.
Some of these initiatives create obvious issues of academic freedom. In 2020, the UNC School of Medicine created a “Task Force for Integrating Social Justice Into the Curriculum,” issuing a report with dozens of recommendations. One called for faculty to adhere to “core concepts of anti-racism,” listing several of these required “concepts,” including “race is not a set biological category” and “specific organs and cells do not belong to specific genders.”
The task force also called for students to “be trained in core advocacy skills”—even listing a number of political causes that it deemed important for students to embrace. These causes, which the report labeled “health realms,” included “restoring U.S. leadership to reverse climate change,” and “achieving radical reform of the US criminal justice system.” The school initially listed every recommendation as “On Time” on an online implementation tracker, though it eventually walked back some of the more controversial requirements.
All of this comes under the broad umbrella of “diversity, equity, and inclusion,” illustrating how the term is both far more radical and more deeply entrenched than its defenders often claim.
Shorn of any context, the principles of diversity and inclusion strike many people as unobjectionable, and even laudable. But in practice they are used as a shorthand for a set of divisive ideological dogmas and bureaucratic power grabs. Under the banner of DEI, medical institutions that are supposed to focus on protecting human life are being sacrificed on the altar of the racialist ideology.
Because of the ideological project associated with DEI initiatives, critics often highlight their effect on curriculum and teaching. But the more potent effect, in the long run, could end up being on scientific research and scholarship.
For the UCSF Task Force on Equity and Anti-Racism in Research, the stated goal is to transform the university’s research enterprise. “To truly rectify the entrenched, structural harms from racism in research,” the task force report notes, “we must start from its foundations in the way that we privilege knowledge, methods, and people. The overarching changes required to mitigate racism in research is a philosophical shift in the mindset of those in power and those who produce research.”
Although the policies listed in the report are only recommendations, some have already been implemented, and many are likely to be in the future. The report’s first recommendation, for example, calls for a new vice chancellor for DEI in research. In September, UCSF announced the role was given to Tung Nguyen, co-chair of the task force. The report—referred to by Nguyen as a “labor of love and trauma”—states that the recommended policies will show that “anti-racism” is “centered in all aspects of the way we work and function as a research enterprise.”
That includes emphasizing diversity statements even more strongly in the promotion and tenure process, and evaluating university leadership along such lines as their “record of hiring women and members of historically excluded populations.” Not necessarily the qualities that people suffering from serious illnesses would look for in their medical care providers.
The task force calls for inserting similar DEI requirements into its research enterprise and adding “scoring criteria on equity and anti-racism” to UCSF’s internal grant programs. It recommends expanding UCSF’s existing anti-racism research grant program—something Nguyen has emphasized since taking his new role. The report itself links to UCSF’s “Pilot for Anti-Racism Research” program, which funds small research projects within the university.
That program provides perhaps the clearest articulation of what UCSF means by “anti-racism research.” It borrows the language of UCSF’s “Anti-Racism and Race Literacy” guide, noting: “Anti-racism examines and disrupts the power imbalances between racialized and non-racialized people, to shift power away from those who have been historically over-advantaged and towards people of color.” It later adds, “Anti-racism research uses approaches such as the Public Health Critical Race Praxis for applying Critical Race Theory to empirical research.”
In other words, under the new ideological regime that has taken power both inside the federal bureaucracy and in institutions like UCSF, even medical research has become yet another front in a larger ideological battle. Tomorrow’s doctors and medical experts are being selected and trained on the basis of their willingness to “disrupt power imbalances between racialized and non-racialized people.”
Much of the report raises obvious concerns. Some, for instance, might reject the task force’s assertion that racism pervades all areas of the university—especially in such a progressive bastion as UC San Francisco. It is telling that the university seems to actively encourage this assumption in research, but also unsurprising—after all, the “ordinariness of racism” is one of the tenets of public health critical race praxis, which is now being pushed by Nguyen under the guise of anti-racism research.
https://www.tabletmag.com/sections/news/articles/americas-racialized-medical-schools
****************************************************
Free the charters: The right choice for New York’s families is obvious
Gov. Kathy Hochul’s plan to allow about 100 more charter schools to eventually open in the city should be a no-brainer,
In all too many neighborhoods, especially lower-income minority ones, the only good public-school option is a charter. But many ’hoods still lack that option, because state law prevents new charters from opening by “capping” the number in the city.
When it comes to teaching their students, public charter schools overall do a far better job than the regular public system. In 2018-19 (the last pre-COVID school year), 62% of charter students citywide scored proficient on statewide math tests, vs. 45% at Department of Education schools. In reading, the gap was smaller but still substantial, 57% vs. 47%.
And that’s despite the fact that charters enroll few kids from higher-income families, and far fewer white children, who are usually more “privileged.”
Charters mainly enroll children from black and Hispanic lower-income families, though that could change as efforts (in the name of “equity”) to lower standards in the regular system drive ever-more white and Asian-American parents to seek alternatives.
If the cap continues to deny them that possibility, they may well leave the public schools (and even the city) entirely: DOE enrollment is already falling drastically, with no end in sight.
When it comes to special-needs students and English Language Learners, charters do an exceptional job of addressing learning disabilities and actually teaching English, so that these kids are far more likely to be genuinely “mainstreamed” than if they’re condemned to the regular public schools.
“I have to say, I really feel that [first] charter school saved my life and my daughter’s life,” says Marcia Ward-Mitchell, whose daughter Kimana, who has autism and ADHD, is now 14 and thriving at her third city charter school.
“She can read,” says Azalia Lopez Volpe, “she can read. Like, she can read!” of her daughter Violetta, diagnosed with dyslexia in first grade and only getting the help she needed after switching to Bridge Preparatory Charter School on Staten Island, the city’s first public school that caters specifically to students with literacy disorders.
Sure would be nice to have such schools in all five boroughs — but the state’s current “charter cap” for the city prevents it.
On top of everything else, charters are also safer than DOE schools, because they have the freedom to put kids in time out, suspend them, separate them — that is, to ensure that one misbehaving student doesn’t bring down a whole class, and so reduce misbehavior because kids learn actions have consequences.
Charters excel despite getting less than half the per-pupil funding. All by itself, that disproves the lie that they “steal resources” from DOE schools.
Hochul’s plan simply does two things: 1) Permits about a dozen charter allowances “used up” by schools that closed to be re-used by new ones. 2) Removes the NYC-only cap on total charters allowed so that the 100 or so still available in the rest of the state can be issued in the five boroughs.
Of course, after two decades when the Empire State’s “experiment” with allowing charters has proved a huge success, any policy reason for capping them at all vanished long ago.
Yet the Legislature resists, thanks solely to the power of the teachers unions — the city United Federation of Teachers and New York State United Teachers — which hate charters because they’re mainly non-union.
The UFT and NYSUT are elephants in Albany, spending millions in members’ dues to buy support and mounting hefty get-out-the-vote operations that are key to many legislators’ re-elections. Somehow, lawmakers normally obsessed with race ignore the fact that the overwhelmingly white unions fight furiously to prevent new hope for mainly minority families that want better futures for their children.
We pray that the governor stands strong, not using the charter issue as a bargaining chip to be traded for some other part of her agenda. And that enough lawmakers listen to their consciences, not to this special interest, and stand with the children.
The right choice couldn’t possibly be more clear.
https://nypost.com/2023/02/26/free-the-charters-the-right-choice-for-new-yorks-families-is-obvious/
***********************************
26 February, 2023
ChatGPT could be an effective and affordable tutor
Imagine a private tutor that never gets tired, has access to massive amounts of data and is free for everyone.
In 1966, Stanford philosophy professor Patrick Suppes did just that when he made this prediction: One day, computer technology would evolve so that “millions of schoolchildren” would have access to a personal tutor. He said the conditions would be just like the young prince Alexander the Great being tutored by Aristotle.
Now, ChatGPT, an artificial intelligence-powered chatbot with advanced conversational abilities, may have the capability to become such a tutor.
ChatGPT has collected huge amounts of data on a wide range of topics and can pass graduate school exams.
As a researcher who studies how computers can be used to help people learn, I think ChatGPT can be used to help students excel academically. However, in its current form, ChatGPT shows an inability to stay focused on one particular task, let alone tutoring.
Philosophy, engineering and artificial intelligence scholars envisioned using the computer as an “intelligent tutor” well before the internet became a global commercial network in the 1990s.
I believe lessons from developing those early tutoring systems can offer insight into how students and educators can best make use of ChatGPT as a tutor in the future.
Computers as tutors
Suppes – the Stanford philosophy professor – was a pioneer of a field called “computer-assisted instruction”.
He developed some of the earliest educational software. That software provided individual instruction via computer and led students to have better test results than those who didn’t use the program. I worked for Suppes in developing software and other online programs from 2004 to 2012.
Since then, experiments in building “intelligent tutors” to help students have driven advances in artificial intelligence, social networks and computer hardware.
And today, the abilities of ChatGPT to write essays, answer philosophical questions and solve computer coding problems may finally achieve Suppes’ goal of truly personalised tutoring via computer.
In 1972, a new personalised learning system called PLATO – Programmed Logic for Automated Teaching Operations – made its debut. It was the first widely available personalised learning system of its kind.
Created by Don Bitzer, a professor of electrical engineering at the University of Illinois, PLATO allowed up to 1000 students to be logged onto a mainframe computer simultaneously.
Each student could complete different online courses in foreign languages, music, maths and many other subjects while receiving feedback from the computer on their work.
PLATO enabled students to reach the same level of achievement as in-person classes in less time. And most students preferred this mode of instruction over sitting in a large lecture class. Yet, the system was too expensive to be used by many colleges and universities.
Each computer terminal was marketed at over $US8000 – about $58,000 today – and schools were charged additional fees every time a student used the system. Still, PLATO’s success with students inspired a number of companies to create software that provided a similar kind of tutoring, including the College Curriculum Corporation, which was co-founded by Suppes.
Popular personal computer brands, such as Apple and Commodore, advertised the availability of educational software as a reason for families to invest in a home computer.
Early versions of personalised learning
By 1985, researchers at Carnegie Mellon University were designing software using advances in artificial intelligence and cognitive psychology.
They claimed the current technology had advanced to a level that enabled computer systems to be designed to serve as effective as human tutors.
However, even though there were over 10,000 pieces of educational software available at the time, much of it was of fairly low quality and did not provide real tutoring.
Although the more advanced designs of the educational software developed at Carnegie Mellon enabled students to learn significantly more than students in traditional classrooms, they were not widely used in schools.
In the 1980s and 1990s, a school would need a sizeable number of expensive, high-powered computer workstations for students to use an intelligent tutor. Today, the computers are much more powerful and much less expensive.
And early intelligent tutors were used primarily in maths, science and technology courses, which limited their appeal.
Students could not ask the software programs a question. However, students could get feedback on answers to quizzes and tests.
In 2001, the next generation of intelligent tutoring systems was able to have conversations with students in written English.
These systems, early chatbots, used advances in natural language processing to have dialogues with students about a range of subjects. Each system was designed specifically for one subject, such as physics. Adding another subject, like English, would require its own specialised tutoring system.
The next few years brought three developments, which enabled a forward leap in achieving the dream of computerised tutoring.
One was the availability of broadband internet, which was faster than the dial-up connections of the 1990s.
The second was the lower cost of more powerful computers.
The third was investment by technology companies and government funding for university research in artificial intelligence, which led to the development of what we now call chatbots.
The first chatbots
By 2007, early AI chatbots provided tutoring by talking students through their answers to questions.
Research showed these chatbots supported learning outcomes similar to the effects of human tutors. Even so, using chatbot technology to provide tutoring was primarily experimental.
During the 2010s, social networks and advances in artificial intelligence dramatically changed the way people interact with technology.
Chatbots are integrated into many parts of our lives and are no longer experimental. People now talk to their phones, to their cars and their home appliances. Many people have virtual assistants at home. They can ask Alexa, Siri or Google for directions or the answers to simple homework questions.
Today, ChatGPT has advanced abilities that enable more complex conversations and can provide individualised tutoring much like what Suppes predicted in 1966.
I asked ChatGPT why it would be a good tutor, and it responded: “I am a good tutor for a student because I am able to understand and respond to a wide range of questions and prompts, and I can provide detailed and accurate information on a wide range of subjects.
“Additionally, I am able to communicate this information in a clear and easy-to-understand manner, making it accessible for students of all levels of understanding. Because I am a machine-learning model, I can also provide a large amount of information quickly and efficiently, which can be especially helpful for students who are trying to learn a lot of new material in a short amount of time.”
By contrast, Siri said, “Hmm … I don’t have an answer for that. Is there something else I can help you with?”
Recent research in using chatbots in college courses shows that how chatbots are used is important in encouraging students to learn more deeply. For instance, AI chatbots enabled significant improvements in learning in a graduate course on cloud computing at Carnegie Mellon.
These learning gains occurred when these chatbots asked students to build on an existing argument or to provide more information about a claim they had made. In this case, the chatbot asked the student a question, rather than vice versa.
Many educators are worried about students learning less with ChatGPT since it can be used to cheat on assignments and papers. Others are worried about ChatGPT giving wrong answers or spreading misinformation.
Yet the history and research of intelligent tutors show that using the right design to harness the power of chatbots like ChatGPT can make deeper, individualised learning available to almost anyone.
For example, if people use ChatGPT to ask students questions that prompt them to revise or explain their work, students will have better learning gains.
Since ChatGPT has access to far more knowledge than Aristotle ever did, it has great potential for providing tutoring to students to help them learn more than they would otherwise
https://theconversation.com/chatgpt-could-be-an-effective-and-affordable-tutor-198062
******************************************************
'Bloated bureaucracy has got to be slashed:' UVA board member launches 'battle royale' against 'incessant' highlighting of slavery
Newly released text messages have shed new light on the unfiltered opinions of a controversial University of Virginia Board of Visitors member who was recently appointed by Republican Governor Glenn Youngkin.
The text messages released Thursday through a public records request show board member Brett Ellis railing against UVA faculty and students for highlighting the school's historical connection to slavery.
Ellis declared a 'battle royale for the soul of UVA' and slammed attempts to distance the school from Thomas Jefferson, the third US president and UVA's founder, over Jefferson's enslavement of black people, according to Washington Post.
An Atlanta businessman and UVA alumnus, Ellis has faced stiff backlash from UVA faculty and staff since Youngkin appointed him last summer, in part due to a 2020 incident in which he tried to remove an anti-slavery sign outside a dorm.
Ellis freely admitted in an open letter that he had carried a 'small razor blade' to cut down part of the sign that read 'F*** UVA' but was halted by two university staffers, who warned him it would be consider criminal property damage.
Though Ellis has been vocal about his views in defending Jefferson, the text messages reveal his behind-the-scenes rants to other members of the Board of Visitors, which oversees UVA's long-term planning, budget and policies.
The messages were obtained through Virginia's Freedom of Information Act by Richmond-based author Jeff Thomas, who specializes in analyzing the state's political culture.
In one message, Ellis slammed Academic Outreach Vice Provost Louis P. Nelson, who is also a professor of architectural history who has studied buildings connected to slavery in Africa and the US.
'Check out this numnut who works for [Provost Ian] Baucom and has nothing to do but highlight slavery at UVA. This bloated bureaucracy has got to be slashed,' wrote Ellis in a message to two other Youngkin appointees to the board.
In another message to a fellow Youngkin appointee, Ellis wrote: 'We have to raise hell with the BOV about this whole "Get Jefferson" movement by the CD [Cavalier Daily student paper] and the super liberal faculty...'
In a statement to the Washington Post, the university said: 'These text messages demonstrate a disappointing disregard for the hard work of UVA faculty and staff, as well as the University’s core values of civil discourse and honor.'
'It is important to note that the messages were sent before these members attended their first Board meeting, and that they have since had many opportunities to witness firsthand the many ways this institution, and its employees, contribute to the Commonwealth of Virginia, our nation, and our world,' the university added.
Ellis is one of four board members appointed by Youngkin last year, and confirmed by the Virginia state Senate earlier this month. The others are Stephen P. Long, Amanda Pillion, and Doug Wetmore.
Still, appointees by Youngkin's Democratic predecessor, Ralph Northam, retain a majority on the 19-member board.
Ellis leads the Jefferson Council at University of Virginia, which has sought to protect the founder's legacy as well as other traditions.
His appointment to the school's board of visitors has significantly amplified the group's voice.
The influence of the new appointees seemed apparent in a statement the board's chairman, known as a rector, issued during a a meeting in September, affirming the university's connection to its founder Jefferson.
'We are a University founded by Thomas Jefferson, and honoring his legacy and his contributions to our nation has, and will always be, an indelible part of what it means to live, learn and work here,' UVA Rector Whittington Clement said in remarks at the meeting.
'That is the policy and the position of this institution and it will not change under our leadership or that of President Ryan or his team.'
************************************************
UK: Teachers told my 15-year-old daughter to cover her ANKLES because they were sexually attractive
Teachers told a 15-year-old schoolgirl she needed to cover her ankles because they might be sexually attractive.
Olivia Williams, 15, a pupil at Trinity Academy Cathedral school in Wakefield, West Yorkshire, was told her trousers should not be tight and she had to cover her ankles to avoid 'drawing sexual attraction'.
Schoolmasters at the academy rated as 'outstanding' by Ofsted have banned pupils from going to the toilet unless they have a special pass, or a pink pass for girls on their period.
Although the NHS says periods can last for up to a week, the Academy's pink passes are reportedly taken away from the girls after only four days.
Olivia was suspended for two days after she organised a protest against the rules yesterday.
Her mother Katie McLoughlin, 35, told MailOnline: 'It's ridiculous. Who looks at ankles and thinks they are attractive?
'All the children have got toilet passes. The girls have got pink passes. Everybody knows what it means. 'After four days the passes have been taken from the girls.'
Although Katie was shocked at the school's new rules, she said she was 'overwhelmed' and 'so proud' of her daughter for standing up for what she believed in.
Olivia told MailOnline that the stringent rules made her feel 'embarrassed'.
Even though Olivia was suspended she went to protest again today but was told she would be expelled if she continued demonstrating against the draconian measures.
In a letter to parents, the school's principal Rob Marsh said: 'Student toilets are open before school, between lessons, at breaktimes, lunchtimes and after school.
'Students are allowed to go to the toilet at any point during these times. We understand that at times, some students may need to attend the toilet more frequently. 'For this reason, we have a toilet pass system. 'We also grant access to girls who need to attend toilets at specific times.
'Our uniform rules have not changed for quite some time and are standard for a secondary school.
'We have been in contact with parents of those students involved [in protests] throughout the day.
'The first contact was largely about trying to encourage support to get students back into school. 'We will be in touch again regarding sanctions and next steps.'
It came as protests broke out over similar rules at schools across the country this week.
The demonstrations have turned into a TikTok trend that is causing chaos at schools.
In a letter to parents, one headteacher said pupils had 'decided to imitate a trend relating to school protests' on social media and that similar protests were taking place at 'numerous schools throughout the country'.
At Penrice Academy in St Austell, Cornwall, told parents that 'due to a social media post yesterday evening, some of our students took the decision to protest'.
Protests took place at schools in Cornwall, Lincolnshire, Yorkshire and Essex with videos of furious children rebelling being shared on social media.
***********************************
24 February, 2023
One-Size-Fits-All Education Doesn't Work Well, but Diversity Advocates Are Hitting the Accelerator
There’s a world of difference in the abilities of elementary school students in the Trotwood-Madison City School District, outside Dayton, Ohio. Some low-performing fifth graders are only capable of reading first-grade picture books with basic words like dog and cat, says Angie Fugate, a district specialist focusing on gifted education. In the same classrooms, the aces read at a sixth-grade level, devouring thick novels that adults also enjoy, including the Harry Potter series.
This remarkable learning gap of about five grade levels exists today in many if not most K-8 classrooms in the U.S., according to researchers. They say it makes teaching everyone in a classroom extremely difficult and may help explain the poor performance of many public schools.
The gap partly reflects reformers’ decades-long push against grouping students by ability that’s only intensifying now in a renewed clamor for diversity in classrooms. Although much attention has focused on dropping selective admissions at academically competitive public schools, the diversity movement has also rolled back gifted programs and honors classes at more schools, from New York to Seattle.
Even educational experts who support diversity warn that the dismantling of accelerated instruction will likely add to the learning gap problem as advanced students are increasingly tossed into general education classrooms.
The learning gap already exists in big cities, suburbs, and small towns. A 2021 study found that in about 70% of fourth-grade classrooms, student performance varied widely, with pupils placing in four or more different math benchmarks from low to advanced – or from about the second- to sixth-grade levels.
The pandemic lockdowns widened the spread even more. It was particularly harmful to low-income students of color who spent more time in remote instruction and dropped even further behind their white peers, according to a 2022 study.
To learn, students need challenging instruction calibrated just beyond what they already know. But the wider the learning gap in a classroom, the more likely that a teacher won’t provide everyone with appropriate levels of instruction, says Scott Peters, a senior research scientist at school assessment group NWEA who focuses on the achievement gap.
“What schools are doing today is so inefficient and ineffective,” Peters says. “Equity should be about giving every kid what they need to grow. But we are teaching every kid the same thing, despite the big achievement gaps among them, and that’s the definition of inequity.”
For diversity advocates, the priority is integrating classrooms of high-achieving whites and Asians with more blacks and Latinos despite the disparity in skill levels that often exists among these students. They argue that mixed classrooms are essential in a country with a population that’s become much more diverse over the past two decades.
Halley Potter at the Century Foundation, a progressive think tank, says that while ability grouping almost always produces classrooms skewed by race and class, mixed classrooms create “learning environments that build empathy, reduce racial bias, and prepare students to thrive in a diverse world.”
But what about academic performance? Years of research to find out if mixing students from different economic backgrounds improves the performance of low achievers is “inconclusive,” according to a review of the studies by Sarah Cordes at Temple University.
Several studies suggest that struggling students do see gains in more prosperous schools ? but a few studies suggest they don’t. The bigger issue, Cordes points out, is that it’s unclear what’s causing the improved performance: Is it the exposure to high-achieving peers or the family background of the struggling students?
If mixed-ability classrooms work, it’s not reflected in the nation’s report card. The national testing scores of fourth and eighth graders in math and reading showed almost no progress from 2009 to 2019. More telling, the divergence between the high and low performers widened significantly. Scores for the weakest students fell in both subjects and in both grades.
But researchers who say lumping students together isn’t working and it’s time to consider new approaches sometimes face a hostile reception in today’s racially charged fight over public education.
“If you want to be called a racist, go out and say that you're for ability grouping,” says Jonathan Plucker, a professor of education at Johns Hopkins University who studies and consults with schools on this issue. “And people will say it to your face. But I’ve spent my career trying to help every kid grow academically, and I think the research says that ability grouping is a better way to do it.”
The learning gap takes shape even before kids enter kindergarten. A 2022 study looked at math and science skills among kindergartners of different races. Researchers found that about 16% of white students and only 4% of blacks and Latinos showed advanced abilities, a spread that they attributed mostly to differences in family income and early educational opportunities for children.
As students move through elementary school, so does the learning gap. In a study of sixth graders, researchers examined math and reading test data from two large and racially diverse urban school districts with more than 22,000 students in the 2014-2015 school year. They found that 59% of math classrooms and 82% of English classrooms had a gap of five or more grade levels.
School reformers have arguably helped to maintain if not widen the gap by dismantling ability grouping practices like tracking, according to Tom Loveless, a former senior fellow at Brookings Institution who wrote a book on tracking. This system that typically places students in low-, average- and high-performance classrooms for most of their schooling was the dominant way to organize students in the late 1980s, when it first came under attack by liberal-minded educators and academics. They were inspired by the work of Jeannie Oakes, an educational theorist at UCLA whose research focused on school inequalities and social justice.
While research showed that top students benefited from the high tracks, those in the lower tracks, composed of many black and Latino students, were being neglected. Oakes found that the low tracks were filled with less-experienced teachers, ineffective rote instruction, and unruly behavior that undermined students’ ability to learn.
Reformers succeeded in sharply reducing tracking in English, history, and social science courses across the county, but not in advanced math, according to Loveless. They also rolled back remedial education, in which struggling kids were pulled out of class and placed in groups for special interventions in subjects such as reading.
Since then, the opposition to tracking has expanded into a broader movement that has toppled other forms of ability grouping in several cities.
***********************************************
Texas A&M University Displays the Destructive Results of Diversity, Equality & Inclusion Programs
One of the great ironies in contemporary college systems is how rampantly anti-intellectual they have become over the course of the last generation or so. Cerebral rigor, open-mindedness, and challenging information have long been underpinning aspects of university life. These days, those same elements are regarded as threats on too many campuses. More troubling is the inability of some schools to apply common sense while looking at the concrete results of a failed experiment.
This takes us to College Station, Texas. Texas A&M University has been leaning heavily into the Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion initiatives that have been mushrooming across the country at universities and corporations. These social engineering programs are claimed to be set up to make the opportunity and acceptance of minorities more widespread, while critics have maintained these are more like opportunities to exact social revenge and pave the way for activism to gain more power. At TAMU, the critics are being proven correct.
Try to imagine that a social program designed to aid the people was shown to instead be exacerbating the problem being addressed, such as a food bank that was found to have created more malnourishment with recipients or if Alcoholics Anonymous led to more getting locked into alcoholism. There would be calls to suspend the program.
Professor Scott Yenor, writing for The Martin Center, exposes how years of DEI enforcement at A&M have not led to improved conditions and better campus life for the allegedly target student groups. Instead, it is seen that what has been accomplished is a lowered satisfaction level across the board. And yet, in the face of this blatant failure of the DEI programs, the college looks over these results and declares that even more DEI enforcement is needed.
"TAMU has sought to build a DEI university since the late 1990s, when former Secretary of Defense Robert Gates was its president. Efforts accelerated with TAMU's 2010 Report on Diversity, which announced a two-pronged revolution in equity and inclusive climate. Important incentives were put in place for university units and colleges that adopted aggressive equity measures and efforts to measure and improve the campus climate."
The college has conducted studies of the student body since these DEI measures were implemented, and it shows that respondents indicate the opposite has occurred. Instead of improving the climate among students on campus, they have come to feel less satisfied with their experience. Over just five years, all major ethnic groups showed significant drops in their perception of being part of the TAMU experience.
We have seen DEI methods intended to diminish "white privilege" and make opportunities more available to minorities. Just last week, we saw a Florida university had a DEI program that established a scholarship for which whites were not eligible. These methods, however, are shown to have the opposite effect.
While the chart above shows diminished results for all racial groups, whites experienced the lowest drop, while staggeringly, blacks over that small five-year window saw a drop of nearly 30%. Barely half of all black students at TAMU felt inclusiveness at the school, where inclusion was the primary thrust of the DEI program.
A likely cause for some of that result is the DEI push to show POC students the areas where they are supposed to feel exclusionary efforts. Whether it is exposing students to something they previously never felt or experienced or reclassifying things to show an imbalanced result for others, it appears possible that the feeling of exclusion was manufactured. Instead of opening up opportunities, the DEI program instead highlighted claims of systemic oppression, and this further divided the campus rather than fostering inclusivity.
What other explanation can be concluded when you have DEI programs set up to target POC students and make their campus experience richer, and instead, the result is more end up feeling as if they do not belong? It is clear the DEI initiative was a failure. But at TAMU, they are not looking to bring an end to this failing effort; amazingly, these results are instead seen as a reason to ramp up the program.
"The diversity commissars at TAMU, however, were in no mood to reexamine their priors in the face of these survey results. Instead, they focused on the newly-emerged racial chasm between whites and blacks. TAMU's 2020 State of Diversity Report recommended a lot more. Seizing on the new chasm, the report announced a frontal assault on the systemically racist TAMU community."
This is how race hustlers usually operate. They do not highlight successes that are easily pointed out. Instead, when their divisive tactics create a deeper racial chasm, they claim that it is proof they are needed for further time spent repairing the damage. Pay no mind that they added to the damage rather than healed anything.
This is a grifter's hustle, offering a solution to a problem they have created. That colleges play into this is disturbing, and that universities claiming to be institutions of higher learning cannot learn from the most basic level of lessons is as troubling a sign of our future that exists. The evidence is clear, and the scam is obvious, but these high-minded thinkers give in to their base emotional responses.
*************************************************
Biased reading list for Australian High School students
Of the five Australians who have won the Booker Prize, which one is on the NSW HSC English set text list? Of course you knew it was Aravind Diga whose novel White Tiger won in 2008. The other four winners of the Booker have yet to make it on to the racist NSW HSC reading list. Why DBC Pierre (Vernon God Little), Richard Flanagan (The Narrow Road to the Deep North), Thomas Keneally (Schindler’s Ark) and Peter Carey (Oscar and Lucinda, 1988, A True History of the Kelly Gang, 2001) are not on the list is worth considering.
Diga is on the list and the other four aren’t because of racism. The faceless bureaucrats who set the curriculum are obsessed with ethnicity and give preference to books by non-whites or books by white authors about the problems of non-white people belonging in mainly white societies. It sounds absurd but look at the list. Consider who is on the list of approved texts and, more importantly, who isn’t.
While DBC Pierre’s selection was controversial, there can be no doubt that the books of Flanagan, Carey and Keneally will stand the test of time because of the quality of their writing. In particular Flanagan’s book is recognised as a masterpiece but all three are examples of writing of the highest order and must stand among the best novels ever written by an Australian.
Why then are these brilliant novels not on the NSW HSC reading list? Instead the ideologues who compiled the current farce prefer works such as Swallow the Air by ‘Wiradjuri author’ Tara Winch and Journey to the Stone Country by Alex Miller or Small Island by Jamaican writer Andrea Levy which are all concerned with the awful way that white people treat black people. The books by Miller and Winch were probably selected because the curriculum specifies that the books studied must include, ‘a range of Australian texts, including texts by Aboriginal and/or Torres Strait Islander authors and those that give insights into diverse experiences of Aboriginal and/or Torres Strait Islander peoples’. The book by Levy was presumably selected because it shows that the awful way that black people are treated extends across the globe and is not just limited to the racist cesspool which some people call Australia. These books, and the others like them on the reading list, are not bad novels, but neither are they great works of art and it would be interesting to hear from the people who selected them as to why they consistently prefer second-rate novels when there is an abundance of great literature available.
It is not only great Australian writers who are absent from the HSC reading list. We see the same reluctance to include great writers on the list when we consider British and American authors. Any list of the very best of contemporary or recent fiction by northern hemisphere writers must include people such as John Updike, Phillip Roth, Cormack McCarthy and Ian McEwan.
The funniest book about male adolescent sexuality ever written is incontestably Portnoy’s Complaint and perhaps it may be too risqué for a high school audience but The Human Stain and American Pastoral, also by Roth will be read generations from now for an insight into post-World War II America in the same way that we look to Balzac for insight into post-Napoleonic France. Updike’s novels cover the same territory with equally majestic and insightful prose which makes the stuff the HSC students have to digest seem amateurish. Cormack McCarthy’s The Road about the journey of a father and his son across post-apocalyptic America, was probably not written with the NSW HSC syllabus in mind but, if ever a book was written to capture the imagination of an adolescent male, this is it.
There are dozens of writers around the globe whose work offers us great insight into our contemporary world and who demonstrate the power and the beauty of ideas expressed in precise prose. Instead of putting the best of modern writing before HSC students, by focussing on works by non-white writers who are mainly concerned with issues of race, the NSW Board of studies is simply going to leave most HSC students bored with studies.
The decision to promote second-order fiction and to ignore the abundance of contemporary great literature that would capture the imagination of students must produce the same sort of disengagement we see in Chinese students who are required to immerse themselves in the riches of Xi Jinping Thought. The difference is that while Xi Jinping is steadily crushing any form of public dissent, for the moment, in Australia, we still have the ability to produce open debate about the relationship between ideology and power. The furore over the establishment of university courses focusing on Western Civilisation is a manifestation of that ideological struggle. The HSC reading list which is a product of the current academic ruling class, and which pushes an ideological barrow not supported by most Australians, is another. Step by step and book by book, the academic Left is chipping away at the legitimacy of the ideas that have shaped the modern world.
According to US academic Ambereen Dadabhoy, ‘Shakespeare is implicated in the hostility and violence, the currency of racism, experienced by those “of dark skin”.’ She is not alone. Google ‘Shakespeare and racism’ and hundreds of articles addressing this issue are available. The same applies if we ask Google if Shakespeare was a misogynist or an antisemite. There are hundreds of articles investigating these issues. From my unscientific reading, approximately half come to Shakespeare’s defence and find him not guilty but that still leaves 50 per cent of the people who examine these issues inclined to consider the greatest writer in the English speaking world for the past one thousand years, guilty of at least one of the wokerati’s trio of capital sins.
People in power all too often seem unable to distinguish between racist plays and plays about racism and the higher up the academic hierarchy one goes, the more the ‘experts’ judge the work of Shakespeare against the current race-obsessed intellectual climate rather than in relation to the Elizabethan age in which he wrote.
The idea that Shakespeare was a racist, misogynist or antisemite was rarely considered until recently. But increasingly, The Shrew, The Merchant and Othello are seen less as masterpieces and more as problematic plays unsuitable for study in secondary schools. The madness must be stopped.
https://www.spectator.com.au/2023/02/aussie-life-106/ ?
***********************************
23 February, 2023
Two Tales of Higher Education in North Carolina
The African woman below describes the ambience at an historically black college and compares that with the ambience at a college in an affluent white area. The scenery is undoubtedly better in the white area. She sees the facilities and scenery in the white area as conferring more opportunity on the students who go there. She sees the black college students as disadvantaged by comparison.
Yet she also says that the educational environment at the black college is very good and likely to help the students there to develop themselves in constructive directions
That seems a non-sequitur to me. Does nice scenery make you learn better? Any such influence is surely marginal.
The real difference between the two colleges lies not in facilities but in the family background of the students. The lush environment of the white college tells us that a lot of the parents of the students there are affluent. And affluence is substantially transmissable. The habits of thought and behaviour that made the parents and grandparents affluent will tend to be passed onto the children who will thus be well equipped to become affluent themselves.
So the advantage that the writer sees as coming from the college environment in fact comes from the family of the students there and little more. Different families lead to different lives
A week ago, I visited the first Historically Black College or University for women in the United States, Bennett College. The college itself is landmark, a beautiful representation of Black women, and a hallmark of Greensboro.
The women who attend and teach at the college are known as the Bennett Belles — epitomizing grace and intellect with every step they take. The campus is laid out intentionally with residential halls facing the academic buildings so that, as the tour guide informed me, “the young women of Bennett remain focused on what matters.”
At the tip of the campus is a brick chapel, which once hosted the late Dr. Martin Luther King Jr., facing gates that women can walk through only twice in their time at Bennett — when they first become Belles and when those Belles finally leave the ball (also known as graduation). The gates are parallel to the president’s home, which serves as the campus’ North Star.
As I sat, perched, at the bench in front of the chapel, I felt an overwhelming sense of joy mainly due to the fact that Black women had a place they could call home — a space in which they could and should delve into all their interests without remorse. I imagine that I would have felt this way had I gone to Spelman, another Historically Black College for Black women situated in Atlanta.
After speaking with the Black women who attended Bennett, my heart was full. Before me were tens of young women, from different walks of life, passionate about making the world a better place — and they had the added bonus of having each other to lean on.
That same day, I travelled to another higher education institution, Elon University, which was about 30 minutes out. I drove with a professor who also had not yet visited the university, and when we turned into campus, our jaws immediately dropped.
Flanked to our left was a beautiful brick building simply titled “The Inn” and ahead of us was a huge fountain surrounded by the greenest grass you could possibly imagine. (I later found out that Elon is known for being one of the most picturesque campuses in the country, and it surely lived up to its name.) The school was simply breathtaking.
Though my time at Elon was edifying and exciting (I taught my first class there based on my edited collection!), I could not help but think about the Bennett Belles, their campus, and how some years back the college was in the news for potentially losing accreditation. I could not help but think about how Dr. Tressie McMillan Cottom discussed Bennett College in her piece about student debt for the New York Times. Or, how at present nearly all full-time first-time Bennett College students receive financial aid.
In comparison, a quick look at Elon University’s demographics suggests that the majority of college-age students are white, rich, and from the Northeast. Lots of students who attended the private school I graduated from landed at Elon. Though a fair amount of Elon’s students still need financial aid (~36 percent of first year students needed aid this past year), there is no shortage of resources.
The differences in facilities, for example, between the two schools are stark. At most public universities and HBCUs, separate colleges or departments may share floors or even a building. At Elon, and lots of private PWIs, colleges and/or departments have their own campus or building.
To me, these two colleges, thirty minutes apart, represented two completely different institutional realities, which differ along the lines of race, gender, and class in higher education.
Bennett College is more than equipped to educate students, but the noticeable lack of investment in HBCUs, like Bennett, that serve purposes beyond educating Black students, is egregious at best.
What’s more Elon isn’t unique in its proximity to whiteness and wealth (and the legacy thereof) in the higher education sphere. My dad used to say that predominantly white institutions are where the resources were concentrated. And he’s right.
In 2016, the United Negro College Fund found that Howard University, the HBCU with the largest endowment of $600 million, has a significantly lower endowment than the 10th place non-HBCU university, University of Michigan at $9.5 billion. Billions to millions. Comparing Elon and Bennett, Elon’s current endowment is 335 million as of 2021 while Bennett’s is $15 million. The differences are stark. Yet, the outsized cultural and economic impact of HBCUs are unparalleled.
At the crux, the [type of] access to higher education is an excellent representation of how inequality still shapes the spaces that generate opportunity. And how when we talk about who faces challenges in higher education, and who ends up makes decisions for students overall, there is a gap.
The two tales of higher education boils down to this: The Bennett Belles are as capable as anyone I met at Elon University, but because of their race, gender identity, and for many, class, they will not be easily granted the space to lead in the way Elon students will be expected to, they will not receive every resource they are entitled to.
Even amidst challenges faced, Bennett College students are thriving in every area, being selected for high ranking graduate programs, interning at Fortune 500 companies, and the list continues. What would happen if these women were granted the resources to go above and beyond what they’ve already achieved?
https://momentum.medium.com/the-two-tales-of-higher-education-197457b64ee1
***********************************************
The Collegiate War on Excellence and Descent into Mediocrity
The United States has been considered a truly “exceptional” place because it excels in so many ways. It has the biggest output of goods and services. It has had the most powerful military presence on the planet for many years. Its technological advances have been the greatest of any nation. And, more relevant to this readership, surveys of higher education, conducted in such diverse places as London and Shanghai, say that America has a commanding proportion of the world’s greatest universities.
Yet, over the last generation, a remarkable and disturbing development has occurred: American universities are increasingly downplaying, ignoring, or even condemning their distinction in the production and dissemination of ideas that they have, historically, done so well. The genesis of this development goes back several decades. Around 1960, time-use data suggest that the typical college student spent around 40 hours per week in class, studying, writing papers, working in laboratories, etc., while earning a 2.4 or 2.5 grade point average—roughly one half “B” grades and one half “C”s. Fast forward to the present. Twenty-first-century data suggest a typical American college student spends under 30 hours per week on these activities (probably about 28), a 30% reduction from two generations earlier, yet the average grade point average is above 3.0—mostly “B”s, with a smattering of even higher grades.
Students are doing far less work for more recognition. If excellence associated with great achievement typically requires hard work and discipline, the present college-going generation is lacking, in large part because their professors are far less demanding than those in the past (grade inflation has been indirectly encouraged by the increasing dominance of an administrative staff contemptuous of academic values, a subject for another epistle.)
Colleges that, a half century or more ago, seemed eager to reward scholarly excellence with not only admissions but also generous financial aid are now obsessed with other things totally irrelevant to academic excellence, namely such biological characteristics as skin coloration, or even sexual preferences. I predict this will become embarrassingly obvious in the forthcoming Supreme Court cases involving Harvard and the University of North Carolina, leading the court to restrict the race-preferential treatment that currently exists.
There are still other manifestations of a near contempt for the pursuit of excellence. The widespread abandonment of required SAT or ACT test results reduces the ability of college admissions officers to assess the academic performance of applicants. The attempt by law and medical schools to suppress the rankings of their institutions by magazines trying to measure excellence is yet another manifestation of this worrisome trend. Medical schools which ease learning requirements while promoting “diversity” could literally cost lives through incompetent health care in future years.
The biggest single cause of this descent into mediocrity is the enormous federal financing of student financial aid. Unlike nearly all private scholarship assistance, there are virtually no minimal performance criteria to get federal student loans or Pell Grants. Indeed, just the opposite. If a student fails a number of courses, takes a relatively low course load, and therefore takes five and one-half years to graduate, he will probably have received at least one-third more financial assistance from the federal government than the student who graduates in four years, or even less, summa cum laude. The attrition rate of Pell Grant recipients is very high—there is no financial pressure to excel or even to persist in amiable mediocrity.
There are some early signs that America’s research excellence is being significantly challenged as well. The number of non-American schools in global lists of the top 50 or 100 institutions is growing. Aside from declining research spending in the U.S. relative to other nations, the diminishing emphasis on research probably in part reflects the current American academic obsession with promoting essentially progressive, woke agendas as manifested by swollen and increasingly powerful diversity, equity, and inclusion bureaucracies that have no interest in promoting academic integrity and merit—indeed, often the opposite.
The disdain for academic excellence recently hit home for me. My wife and I made a gift to modestly augment an already existing scholarship endowment fund we had created at my university. The university often provides additional matching funds from unrestricted gifts to enhance the impact of a donation, but it would not do so for our scholarship because we have a stipulation that the monies must go to a good student who is in the top 20% of his high school class. The university did not like that restriction, and therefore no matching funds were provided. At my university, scholarships to promote academic excellence are disfavored relative to ones available to prospective students with mediocre secondary school or collegiate performance. Mediocrity trumps excellence.
At zero net cost to the government or society, we could significantly promote improved student academic performance. If we restricted federal financial aid provision for poorly performing students, we would save billions each year. For example, deny aid for all students after five years of study. Deny aid to students with lower than a “C” average, and impose some anti–grade inflation standards on colleges accepting federal student financial aid.
Suppose we then used the funds saved by giving $10,000 graduation bonuses to roughly 400,000 students annually who graduate both in the top one-quarter of their college class and with scores above the national average on a new National College Equivalence Examination (NCEE), a 3–4 hour test required for graduation from any U.S. university. The NCEE would measure both general educational literacy and success in a major field of study (I have discussed that exam elsewhere, notably in my book Restoring the Promise: Higher Education in America). This expenditure-neutral set of proposals would set us on the path to restoring and enhancing our reputation for educational excellence.
https://www.independent.org/news/article.asp?id=14421&omhide=true&trk=title
***************************************************
Why Not Shut Down Public Schools That Don’t Educate the Kids?
Mike Weisser
Yesterday, I ran a column about my experience as a substitute teacher at Holyoke High School in Holyoke, MA. To be brief, I can only say that I have never encountered such a deplorable and destructive situation in any educational environment of any kind — deplorable because of the utter and complete chaos which engulfs every aspect of the school, destructive because generations of children are not being given the slightest opportunity to shape or grow their lives.
It was only after I posted the column that I learned the entire public school system in Holyoke has now been under state receivership for the last seven years. What this means is that back in 2015, the public schools in Holyoke were such a mess that the Massachusetts Department of Education had no choice but to take over running the system in an effort to end what had been the ‘chronic underperformance’ of Holyoke public schools.
What does the phrase ‘chronic underperformance’ mean?’ It means that too many students end their school years without knowing how to read or write.
According to most experts, what is referred to as ‘functional literacy,’ meaning the ability to read and write at what is necessary to hold even the most menial job, is equivalent to reading and writing at an 8th-grade level.
I didn’t experience a single moment yesterday at Holyoke High School where the atmosphere in any classroom was conducive to learning anything — reading, writing or anything else.
In one class a female student walked into the room, lay her head down on the desk, covered herself with her coat, and slept for the entire hour. She didn’t even wake up when the class session ended. And this was in the room where three paraprofessionals stood around talking to each other for the entire class period and none of them attempted to wake up this young girl, even when the other students were filing out of the room.
So, I walked over to this kid, tapped the desk until she woke up, and asked her whether she was getting any sleep at home.
To which she replied, “I always sleep here because I don’t like this class.” Note the word ‘always.’
Take a look at the school’s website: Holyoke High North Campus | Holyoke Public Schools. It says that the school provides “a frame of reference and field experience that connect academic work to the work of the world.”
It does? According to test scores, the school is currently graduating 81% of its students, of whom — ready? — only 27% can read and write at a tenth-grade level.
In other words, the learning experience of most of the kids who graduate from Holyoke High School is basically the same experience that the young girl is having who slept through the entire, hour-long algebra class.
And none of the paraprofessionals in the room even tried to wake her up when the class came to an end!
At one point during this particular class session, a woman appeared in the hallway and began chatting with one of the paraprofessionals standing at the entrance to the class. I walked over to these two ladies who continued conversing until the woman who had briefly appeared turned and continued walking down the hall.
I was told by the paraprofessional that the other woman was an assistant principal at the school, obviously a member of the school’s management team.
Did this woman bother to introduce herself to me and welcome me to the school on the first day of my job?
Of course not. Why bother introducing herself to me? After all, I was only the adult responsible for trying to teach something in that class.
But the point is, he administration which runs Holyoke High School isn’t interested in teaching anything at the school. When I asked a teacher why such a level of total chaos was being allowed to exist in the classrooms and the hallways, the answer was — you guess it — a shrug.
If a sizable number of students ambled into my classroom late for every class, what this tells me is that placing the school in receivership won’t change anything at all. If the State Department of Education wants to prevent Holyoke High School from unleashing a sizable number of kids every year who are totally unprepared to deal with the wider world, they have to come up with a plan that will prevent these kids from having any contact with the high school at all.
What happens to kids who attend Holyoke High School is what happens to kids who commit a serious crime and are sent to jail. What happens is they spend their jail time learning how to commit more crimes. At Holyoke High School the kids learn that showing up late for every class will have no practical effect on their ability to get through school.
Which means these kids will never learn what it means to show up for a job on time, never mind not being able to read or write. Which means they won’t get jobs even in an economy where the unemployment rate is less than 4 percent.
Holyoke High School should be shuttered and closed, the entire school administration fired, and all the students should be bussed to schools in adjacent school districts where there is actually a commitment to teach kids how to read and write.
For the first time in their entire lives, these Holyoke kids will find themselves surrounded by other kids who don’t wander around outside the classrooms after class sessions have begun.
And the peer pressure the kids from Holyoke will now experience will be exactly what they need in order to prepare themselves to grow and survive after their school years come to an end.
***********************************
22 February, 2023
Youngkin Orders Department of Education to Review the College Board’s AP African American Studies Course
Virginia Gov. Glenn Youngkin (R) ordered the state’s Education Secretary to review the College Board’s “AP African American Studies” course, becoming the fourth state to do so.
"After numerous reports about draft course content, the governor asked the Education Secretariat to review the College Board’s proposed AP African American Studies course as it pertains to Executive Order 1,” a spokesperson for Youngkin’s office said in a statement.
Executive Order 1 prohibits divisive concepts, like Critical Race Theory (CRT), from being taught in Virginia schools. The order was signed shortly after Youngkin entered office.
According to Fox News, the Advanced Placement course covers a variety of topics pertaining to black history. A revised version released this month removed the lessons on the Black Lives Matter movement and topics derived from books that teach CRT.
Last month, Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis rejected the new proposed AP African American studies course. His administration held open the possibility of approval of the course if changes were made, which Guy covered. DeSantis’ office later said that the College Board would revise the curriculum.
"We are glad the College Board has recognized that the originally submitted course curriculum is problematic, and we are encouraged to see the College Board express a willingness to amend,” Florida Department of Education (FDOE) Communications Director Alex Lanfranconi said, which Townhall covered.
“AP courses are standardized nationwide, and as a result of Florida’s strong stance against identity politics and indoctrination, students across the country will consequentially have access to an historically accurate, unbiased course,” Lanfranconi continued. "As Governor DeSantis said, African American History is American History, and we will not allow any organization to use an academic course as a gateway for indoctrination and a political agenda.”
Shortly after, the College Board denied that DeSantis’ decision played a role in the revision of the course.
Other states to review the course include Arkansas, Mississippi and North Dakota.
"I would invite the review and I would invite everyone to participate in the review," Associate Professor Greg Carr of Howard University's Afro-American Studies told WUSA9. Carr reportedly contributed to the course framework.
"We all don't agree, but this is a very inclusive course and course framework that allows the flexibility for all of us to come to the table of any racial or cultural background and discuss what it means to be a person of African descent in the world and U.S.,” Carr added.
https://townhall.com/tipsheet/madelineleesman/2023/02/21/youngkin-education-n2619784
*****************************************************
Scottish schools have become places of indoctrination
Nicola Sturgeon may be on her way out – but after 16 years of SNP rule, Scottish schools are still places of indoctrination. This may sound like a hyperbolic thing to say, but that’s the only conclusion you can draw when you look at what Scottish educators and the Scottish government are saying themselves.
Take the General Teaching Council for Scotland’s Standard for Headship, which sets out the professional framework for what a headteacher, teachers and schools should be all about.
You would expect such a document to be all about imparting knowledge and aspiring to teach every child as much as possible. Instead, it is a horrifying mix of therapeutic new-speak that stresses the need for teachers and headteachers to focus on the matter of social justice.
In the 16-page Standard for Headship report ‘social justice’ is mentioned seven times. We are informed, for example, that the very culture of Scotland is ‘based on social justice’, that we now have ‘professional values of social justice’, and that social justice is about a commitment to ‘sustainable policies and practices in relation to protected characteristics…. and intersectionality’.
The terms sustainable or sustainability appear 23 times in the document. This includes what some would see as a Malthusian demand for ‘respect for our natural world and its limited resources’ as well as a call for ‘learning for sustainability’, whatever that means.
This new doctrine is highly therapeutic, with the entire document grounded in a need to ‘promote health and wellbeing’ and ‘emotional intelligence’, which, as part of our culture of social justice, is ‘enabling’ and ‘empowering’ pupils to be ‘safe’ and ‘caring’.
This melding together of social justice moralising and therapeutic language permeates through the entirety of the Scottish education system. Education in Scotland is no longer viewed as a way of passing on vitally important knowledge to children, but rather as a way to ensure that ‘diversity’ and ‘inclusion’ are embedded in our children’s minds.
As one educational expert told me, if student teachers, ‘don’t subscribe to the particular interpretation of “social justice” that is currently in vogue, then they won’t achieve registration for the General Teaching Council.’
Elsewhere the Scottish government and Education Scotland have worked to ensure that teachers are ‘Embedding race equality in school’. This is not simply about treating people equally, quite the reverse in fact. Rather it is about the promotion of Critical Race Theory and the divisive and self-loathing idea of ‘white privilege’, which is endorsed by Education Scotland.
According to the Scottish government, ‘A new package of support materials…. will embed anti-racism and race equality into all aspects of school life’. An Education Scotland policy document says that ‘As the child grows, they can see diversity’ in all subjects, including, ‘mathematics’. Who knows, perhaps future generations in Scotland will be taught that ‘their truth’ means that two plus two equals colonial oppression.
Perhaps worse of all is the Supporting Transgender Pupils in Schools guidance document, a policy that would fit comfortably on the shelves of the most extreme trans activist.
Schools, for example, have to ensure that children, ‘demonstrate an understanding of diversity in sexuality and gender identity’. From age 12 children can self-identify and receive support and validation from schools. The school will develop a ‘support plan for the transgender young person’, thus creating a ‘safe space for transgender young people to be themselves and have their identities respected’.
If parents don’t support this development it is implied that they a wellbeing concern. But then, many parents will not even know that this gender fluid ideology is being adopted or that their child is being transitioned with the help of the school as, ‘it is best to not share information with parents or carers without considering and respecting the young person’s views’.
Some of the above issues may appear to be justified and legitimate, and indeed, if we were talking about university education, being exposed to some of these ideas would be entirely legitimate. It’s entirely fair for young adults to be able to debate the merits of Marx versus Malthus or the differences between Critical race theory and colour-blind anti-racism. And we should be able to discuss transgender policies too – even though many universities appear to be uncomfortable with any debate on this issue.
But this is school education we are talking about. Many of these ideas are not part of a debate, they are a dogma, a form of cultural engineering, where ideas and outlooks that the majority of the Scottish population oppose are forced onto children.
For those who are directing this process there is a clear attempt to ‘change the culture’ of Scottish society through the politicisation of the curriculum.
To counteract this a number of colleagues and I have just set up the Scottish Union for Education, a campaign group for parents and teachers to challenge the declining standards in education and the growing indoctrination that is taking place in our schools.
The Scottish Union for Education will challenge these illiberal (and indeed illiterate) developments and aim to create a framework for ordinary parents, grandparents, teachers and communities to make their voices heard. It may appear to be a tough ask, but I am convinced that the majority are on our side and for the sake of our liberal and democratic society, something must be done.
https://www.spectator.com.au/2023/02/scottish-schools-have-become-places-of-indoctrination
*****************************************************
Work visa extension to attract international students to Australia
International students who complete a degree in a skill shortage area will be given an extra two years to stay in Australia after graduation.
The move, intended to help business beat skill shortages as well as speed the return of international students to Australia, was announced on Tuesday by federal Education Minister Jason Clare and Home Affairs Minister Clare O’Neil.
For international students it means that the period of their post study work visa is increased from two to four years if they complete a bachelors degree, and increased from three to five years if they complete a masters degree.
But they get the benefit only if they study in a skill shortage area and the government has released a list of likely complying degrees including many in the health, teaching, engineering and agricultural fields.
All international students doing PhDs will benefit from the new policy regardless of their field of study. The period of their post study work visa will lengthen from four to six years.
The new work rights will come into effect on July 1 this year. International students are warned that they should check a more precise list of courses eligible for the extended work rights which will be released nearer to the July 1 commencement date.
Mr Clare said the changes would “make Australia more attractive as a study destination” for international students and help business fill skill shortages.
“Businesses are screaming out for skilled workers, particularly in the regions. We have got the second highest skills shortage in the developed world, according to the OECD,” he said.
The government will continue to give international students a further extension on their post study work rights period if they study at a regional or remote university. Regional universities will continue to attract an extra year and remote universities an extra two years on top of the two year extension announced on Tuesday.
Tuesday’s announcement also brings back the cap on the number of hours which international students are permitted to work in Australia while they attend their education institution.
The previous 40 hour per fortnight cap was temporarily removed by the Morrison government in early 2022 to help deal with labour shortages as the Australian economy emerged from Covid.
The new working hours cap will be 48 hours a fortnight and the higher figure will ease the impact of the change on international students who currently have no limit on their working hours. As before, the cap will not apply in holiday periods.
International Education Association of Australia CEO Phil Honeywood said he believed Mr Clare and Ms O’Neil had struck the right balance between the need to give students an incentive to choose Australia over other study destinations, the need to meet Australia’s skill needs and the obligation to find a sensible working hours solution.
But he said that international students will needed a clearer path to permanent residency. “If we are to encourage students to spend a decade of their life in studying and working in our economy, we need to have clearer migration pathways,” Mr Honeywood said.
***********************************
21 February, 2023
The big school choice turnaround in Iowa that more states should follow
State lawmakers are often slow to act, but they can move quickly when voters make them feel the heat. Consider Iowa, where Gov. Kim Reynolds recently signed the nation’s third publicly funded education choice program for all K-12 students, following West Virginia and Arizona.
This represents a stunning reversal. A smaller proposal failed to clear the legislature last year. What changed?
The Students First Act will provide Iowa families education savings accounts (ESAs) that they can use for private school tuition, tutoring, textbooks, curricular materials, and a variety of other education expenses. The ESAs, funded with a portion of the state’s per-pupil spending, are worth about $7,600 annually. That more than covers the average private elementary school tuition in Iowa (about $5,400) and nearly covers the average private high school tuition (about $9,200).
Families can also roll over unused ESA funds from year to year to save for later expenses. Initially, the ESAs will be available to low- and middle-income families; they will open to all Iowa families in the program’s third year.
The policy Reynolds signed is significantly more ambitious than her proposal last year, which was limited only to low-income students. That bill cleared the state senate but failed after a lengthy battle in the Iowa House of Representatives. Although the GOP had strong majorities in both chambers, several Republicans representing rural areas raised concerns about the effects that school choice policies might have on their local public schools.
Last spring, Reynolds took the unusual step of endorsing several primary challenges to legislators in her own party who had thwarted her school choice proposal. The governor was betting that she had a better understanding of the GOP base’s priorities than the legislators she was challenging—politicians who had already proven their popularity in their districts. If they survived their primary challenges, Reynolds’s standing in the party would be significantly diminished.
Rural Republican legislators nationwide have long posed a stumbling block to passing school choice legislation. In rural areas, public schools are often the largest employers, and the local superintendents wield significant political power. Rural legislators therefore tend to heed those superintendents’ hostility to expanding school choice.
But in the wake of the COVID-19 school shutdowns, the relationship between parents and their local schools changed. "We wouldn’t have passed the ESA bill but for COVID," explained Iowa Sen. Brad Zaun, a long-time proponent of school choice. "Groups like Moms for Liberty were down at the capitol nearly every day clamoring for school choice."
But they didn’t become school choice supporters overnight. Initially, parents just wanted their local public schools reopened. Some districts—including in Des Moines, the largest in the state—stayed closed for in-person instruction for more than six months. Frustrated parents turned to the governor and their state legislators for help. Lawmakers ultimately forced schools to reopen.
But the shutdown fight had permanently changed the relationship between parents and their local schools. Many parents felt that the schools had broken faith with them. Parents were also given a window into their children’s classrooms via Zoom, and many didn’t like what they saw, particularly the politicization of instruction.
Even after schools reopened, parents remained wary and engaged. Samantha Fett, the Warren County chapter chair for Moms for Liberty, described how her group first got involved trying to remove books with sexually explicit scenes and images from elementary school libraries. "The public school administrators and school boards would just ignore us and hope we’d go away," she said.
But they didn’t. Instead, they again turned to state lawmakers. "The frustration we had the local level not making any progress, not getting any answers, and being pushed away, drove us to look for solutions outside the district system," said Fett.
Soon the parents’ groups were barraging the legislature with complaints. Inappropriate books. Lessons derived from critical race theory. Policies that put biological males on girls’ sports teams and in girls’ locker rooms. Policies kept parents in the dark about their children being called pronouns that differed from their sex.
"Schools they trusted all these years were usurping their authority as parents and they didn’t like it," said Iowa Senate President Amy Sinclair. At first the legislature tried dealing with each issue as it arose, but eventually state lawmakers offered a comprehensive solution: school choice.
"The legislature got tired of playing whack-a-mole with all the issues," said Sinclair. "School choice solved all of them at once."
Parent groups enthusiastically embraced school choice policies, like ESAs, which not only gave them the ability to choose schools that aligned with their values, but also strengthened their hand when raising concerns at their local public schools.
Reynolds also expressed these concerns on the campaign trail, explicitly framing her push for school choice as an effort to combat the radical ideology that had seeped into the public school system and to restore parental authority in education. Her gamble paid off. The candidates she endorsed won their primaries. In the general election, Iowa voters rewarded her with a second term and expanded the Republican party’s legislative majority.
Lawmakers got the message. Last month, they moved with all deliberate speed to deliver the choice bill to Reynolds’s desk.
Lawmakers in other states would be wise to follow Gov. Reynolds’s playbook.
https://www.foxnews.com/opinion/big-school-choice-turnaround-iowa-more-states-should-follow
************************************************
To Increase Equity, School Districts Eliminate Honors Classes
CULVER CITY, Calif.—A group of parents stepped to the lectern Tuesday night at a school board meeting in this middle-class, Los Angeles-area city to push back against a racial-equity initiative. The high school, they argued, should reinstate honors English classes that were eliminated because they didn’t enroll enough Black and Latino students.
The district earlier this school year replaced the honors classes at Culver City High School with uniform courses that officials say will ensure students of all races receive an equal, rigorous education.
These parents disagreed.
“We really feel equity means offering opportunities to students of diverse backgrounds, not taking away opportunities for advanced education and study,” Joanna Schaenman, a Culver City parent who helped spearhead the effort, said in the run-up to the meeting.
The parental pushback in Culver City mirrors resistance that has taken place in Wisconsin, Rhode Island and elsewhere in California over the last year in response to schools stripping away the honors designation on some high school classes.
School districts doing away with honors classes argue students who don’t take those classes from a young age start to see themselves in a different tier, and come to think they aren’t capable of enrolling in Advanced Placement classes that help with college admissions. Black and Latino students are underrepresented in AP enrollment in the majority of states, according to the Education Trust, a nonprofit that studies equity in education.
Since the start of this school year, freshmen and sophomores in Culver City have only been able to select one level of English class, known as College Prep, rather than the previous system in which anyone could opt into the honors class. School officials say the goal is to teach everyone with an equal level of rigor, one that encourages them to enroll in advanced classes in their final years of high school.
“Parents say academic excellence should not be experimented with for the sake of social justice,” said Quoc Tran, the superintendent of 6,900-student Culver City Unified School District. But, he said, “it was very jarring when teachers looked at their AP enrollment and realized Black and brown kids were not there. They felt obligated to do something.”
Culver City English teachers presented data at a board meeting last year showing Latino students made up 13% of those in 12th-grade Advanced Placement English, compared with 37% of the student body. Asian students were 34% of the advanced class, compared with 10% of students. Black students represented 14% of AP English, versus 15% of the student body.
The board saw anonymous quotes from students not enrolled in honors classes saying they felt less motivated or successful. One described students feeling “unable to break out of the molds that they established when they were 11.”
Tuesday marked Ms. Schaenman’s first time attending a school board meeting in person in years. She wandered the hallways of City Hall with fellow parent Pedro Frigola looking for the right room, clutching a stack of copies laying out the two-page resolution they and a few dozen other parents are asking the board to adopt.
Mr. Frigola said he disagrees with the district’s view of equity. “I was born in Cuba, and it doesn’t sound good when people are trying to achieve equal outcomes for everyone,” he said.
His ninth-grade daughter, Emma Frigola, said she was surprised and a little confused by the decision to remove honors, which she had wanted to take. She said her English teacher, who used to teach the honors class, is trying to maintain a higher standard, but that it doesn’t always seem to be working.
“There are some people who slow down the pace because they don’t really do anything and aren’t looking to try harder,” Emma said. “I don’t think you can force that into people.”
For a unit on research, Emma said her teacher gathered all the reference sources they needed to write a paper on whether graffiti is art or vandalism and had students review them together in class. Her sister, Elena Frigola, now in 11th grade, said prior honors English students chose their own topics and did research independently.
In Santa Monica, Calif., high school English teachers said last year they had “a moral imperative” to eliminate honors English classes that they viewed as perpetuating inequality. The teachers studied the issue for a year and a half, a district representative said.
“This is not a social experiment,” board member Jon Kean said at a meeting last spring. “This is a sound pedagogical approach to education.”
Gail Pinsker, a Santa Monica-Malibu Unified School District spokeswoman, said the shift this school year “has increased access and provided excellent educational experiences for all of our students.”
Several school districts have scaled back plans to eliminate honors classes after community opposition. San Diego’s Patrick Henry High School planned to eliminate 11th-grade honors American literature and U.S. history last year, but reinstated both after listening to students and families, a district spokeswoman said.
The school district in Madison, Wis., pulled back on plans last year to remove stand-alone honors classes and now lets students earn an honors label within general classes. A Rhode Island district made a similar move.
Those who support cutting honors classes point out that the curriculum of honors courses often doesn’t differ substantially from regular classes. Honors classes often move at a faster pace and the students complete more assignments. Some can boost grade-point averages or give students an advantage when applying for college.
Critics say attempting to teach everyone at an elevated level isn’t realistic and that teachers, even with the best intentions, may end up simplifying instruction. Instead, some educators and parents argue schools should find more ways to diversify honors courses and encourage students to enroll who aren’t self-selecting, including proactively reaching out to students, using an opt-out system, or looking to teacher recommendations.
“I just don’t see how removing something from some kids all of a sudden helps other kids learn faster,” said Scott Peters, a senior research scientist at education research nonprofit NWEA who has studied equity in gifted and talented programs.
https://www.wsj.com/articles/to-increase-equity-school-districts-eliminate-honors-classes-d5985dee
****************************************************
Biden Student Loan Forgiveness Plan in Trouble at Supreme Court, Lawyers Say
President Joe Biden’s sweeping plan to partially forgive student loans will likely receive a cool reception when the Supreme Court hears challenges to the program on Feb. 28, legal experts told The Epoch Times.
Biden introduced the plan in August 2022 in a move that critics decried as a constitutionally dubious attempt to shore up Democrats’ fortunes ahead of the November 2022 congressional elections. While the Congressional Budget Office said the plan could cost about $400 billion, the Wharton School at the University of Pennsylvania estimates the price tag could exceed $1 trillion.
The student loan relief program is premised on the existence of the emergencies the Trump administration declared in March 2020 to combat the COVID-19 virus. The national emergency and the public health emergency enabled federal agencies to exercise expansive powers in managing the government’s pandemic response.
In a move that could undermine the government’s legal arguments in the pending court cases, Biden’s Office of Management and Budget said in a Jan. 30 press release (pdf) that it would extend the soon-to-expire emergencies to May 11 “and then end both emergencies on that date.”
The federal government put a pause on student loan payments and interest during the recent pandemic but then claimed in 2022 that the pandemic gave it emergency authority under the law to proceed with partial loan forgiveness. Republicans, who took the majority in the House of Representatives in January, say the emergencies aren’t justified and should be ended sooner.
About 26 million people reportedly applied under the program before courts blocked it last year. Of those 26 million, 16 million were said to have been approved before the government stopped accepting applications.
The Department of Education claims that it has the authority to move forward with the debt relief proposal, which would cancel as much as $20,000 in loan principal for 40 million borrowers, under the Higher Education Relief Opportunities for Students Act of 2003 (HEROES Act).
But lawmakers involved in the passage of the HEROES Act say the statute was enacted after the 9/11 terror attacks to provide student loan relief to military service members and their families and was never intended to be used to cancel debts en masse.
The court is scheduled to hear two related cases dealing with the program, Biden v. Nebraska (court file 22-506) and Department of Education v. Brown (court file 22-535), back-to-back on Feb. 28.
The Biden student loan forgiveness plan is flatly unconstitutional, attorney Caleb Kruckenberg of the Pacific Legal Foundation, a national nonprofit public interest law firm, told The Epoch Times.
He said Biden unveiled the debt relief program not long after the pandemic “was over anyway [and] we all sort of understood what that meant.”
Kruckenberg said that even if the Biden administration were successful at the Supreme Court, which he doubts, their stated authority would expire May 11.
He conceded that the announcement that the emergencies will terminate may render the challenges to the program moot, but mootness “is a flexible standard,” he said.
“There is a legal answer, and then there’s a practical answer. And I think the practical answer is, if the court very much wants to reach the case, they will,” he said.
It appears the Department of Education has not “disclaimed” the authority to grant student loan relief, so even if the emergency is over, the court may wonder if there is a chance the department could claim such authority again in the future, he said, adding that department officials will never say they lack the authority.
“They’ll always insist in any emergency we can do whatever we want,” he said. “And that’s a big enough risk for the Supreme Court to say, ‘We’re going to set some rules here.’
“You have to wonder what the administration is doing and … what they’re planning in the best case scenario for them. Frankly, I was surprised that they asked the Supreme Court for intervention, because a lot of us watching this case expected, and we still expect, if the Supreme Court rules on it, then the administration is going to lose.”
Kruckenberg said that the administration might be thinking politically, reasoning, “‘Well, we’re going to make the Supreme Court overturn this, so that it’s not our fault … so that we can say we tried, but the court stopped us.’”
“There will probably be two or three dissenters, but I think there’s a very clear majority [that is] going to say, probably not in a complicated opinion, that this is just completely out of bounds.” It will be “a strong rebuke of the department,” he said.
Veteran Supreme Court observer Curt Levey, president of the conservative Committee for Justice, also said he expects the Biden administration to lose.
The court may not even reach the question of how the expiration of the COVID-19-related emergencies affects the validity of student loan relief, Levey told The Epoch Times.
The HEROES Act “was clearly aimed at military personnel,” but it’s not clear whether it allows cancellation of debt, Levey said. The statute allows postponement of debt, which is what his group argued in a friend-of-court brief (pdf), he said.
So the government has overreached by going beyond military personnel and by allowing debt cancellation, he said.
“This has been a court that’s not been afraid to say, ‘Look, the executive branch is overreaching,’ whether it’s the rent moratorium or certain things with immigration, or trying to force private employers to mandate vaccinations,” Levey said.
“They have been willing to say, ‘This is overreach,’ [and] not just defer blindly to whatever the administration says a statute means.”
***********************************
20 February, 2023
GOP-Led States Race To Roll Out New School Choice Measures
Which state will be the next to enact universal school choice?
In January, Utah and Iowa passed legislation that would create universal school choice, joining Arizona and West Virginia as trailblazers in universal ESA programs.
These universal school choice programs take the form of education savings accounts, or ESAs, which disburse funds to families in flexible accounts that can be spent on a variety of education related expenses — tuition, tutoring, textbooks, and more. Unlike scholarships or vouchers, funds from accounts can roll over from year to year, incentivizing economization.
“Too often, parents have been frustrated that their child’s assigned school has failed to meet their needs,” an education scholar at the Heritage Foundation, Jason Bedrick, tells the Sun. “What’s clear is that parents are tired of the one-size-fits-some model of education.”
“ESAs give families the freedom and flexibility to choose the learning environment that’s the right fit for their children,” Mr. Bedrick says.
Opponents, often buoyed by teachers’ and superintendents’ unions, say these programs divert resources from traditional public schools. The programs have also come under recent scrutiny for unusual educational expenditures, including chicken coops and SeaWorld tickets.
Proponents say, however, that public funding should follow the student — if a child is no longer enrolled in a public school, he or she should be able to spend the taxpayer dollars in the education program of the family’s choice, including raising chickens and visiting aquariums.
Of the proposals, the loudest declaration in support of school choice comes out of Arkansas, where Governor Sanders made a splashy announcement of her education plan after her rebuttal to the State of the Union address last week.
Ms. Sanders’s plan would phase in a universal ESA program over the course of three years, alongside increased benefits, including raises, for public school teachers.
In Wyoming and South Carolina, bills to create ESAs have passed in at least one of each state’s legislative chambers. South Carolina’s legislation would create a more limited program — only 15,000 accounts would be available to lower- and middle-income families.
Meanwhile, Wyoming’s would be a universal school choice regime with funding of about $6,000 per student.
In neighboring Idaho, a similar bill in the state senate that would create a universal ESA program, with funding of just less than $6,000 per student, made it out of the education committee after a grueling hearing.
The Republican chairman of the committee, Dave Lent, opposed the measure. “I cannot, in good faith, send money out with no accountability,” Mr. Lent said, according to the Idaho Capital Sun.
In Texas and Oklahoma, Republican governors are making concerted pushes for school choice programs despite hesitancy from their own party leadership.
Oklahoma’s legislature is currently considering two bills that would create large-scale ESA programs — one universal. While Governor Stitt has voiced ardent support for school choice measures, he’s faced opposition from within his own party. Oklahoma’s Republican speaker of the house, Charles McCall, has historically opposed education savings accounts.
At a recent event, Mr. McCall was quoted by the Journal Record as advocating for education reforms to support students “in all four corners of the state” — implying that ESA programs do not achieve that end.
In Texas, the speaker of the house, Dade Phelan, has expressed skepticism about school choice measures in the past, while Governor Abbott has made a concerted push for ESAs. A bill in the state senate would create a universal program.
“That will give all parents the ability to choose the best education option for their child,” Mr. Abbott said in January at a pro-school choice event. “The bottom line is this: This is really about freedom.”
Mr. Phelan, however, appears to be coming around after appointing a new pro-ESA chairman to the Public Education Committee.
Texas and Oklahoma face challenges from their more rural areas, which have historically opposed school choice. Recent polling, though, has shown that rural voters tend to support school choice, but superintendents’ unions wield significant power over elected officials.
In Governor DeSantis’s Florida, the first house bill of the legislative session would universalize the state’s current ESA program.
Meanwhile, in Arizona, Governor Hobbs is crusading to roll back that state’s trailblazing school choice program. In an interview with Fox News on Sunday, Ms. Hobbs rejected the premise that governors across the country are promoting.
“What I want is for every student in the state of Arizona no matter where they live to have access to high quality public education,” Ms. Hobbs said. “With this universal voucher system, that’s not happening.”
https://www.nysun.com/article/gop-led-states-race-to-roll-out-new-school-choice-measures
*******************************************************
Group advocating for 'race-blind America' demands woke UNC medical school stop injecting social justice issues into its curriculum
A group advocating for 'race blind America' has launched a campaign to stop the University of North Carolina's medical school integrating social justice issues into its curriculum.
Color Us United is a non-profit that claims to fight for people who 'are upset by government, corporate and media claims that America is a hateful country'.
Its most recent initiative is a bid to stop the UNC School of Medicine from implementing social justice into its teaching - which the school is attempting to do via a task force that gave recommendations in 2020 that is taking advisement from the Association of American Medical Colleges.
The taskforce claims: 'A wealth of literature has demonstrated disparities in health care access, quality, and outcomes. We now know these disparities are apparent both across our healthcare system and within most individual providers’ patient panels.'
The AAMC protocols also require medical students to study issues such as 'Unconscious Bias Awareness,' 'Understanding and Responding to Microaggressions' and 'Understanding that America's medical system is structurally racist.'
The taskforce's stated goals include finding environments where diverse groups of students thrive, training in areas of social justice and DEI (diversity, equity, inclusion), recruiting students from diverse backgrounds, eliminating racist content and terminology from the curriculum, avoiding implicit bias in treatment and allowing students to advocate on behalf of patients.
The UNC confirmed which of the recommendations they would be implementing in a 2022 report.
Ultimately, it wants all faculty to be trained in these methods and be judged based on their ability to integrate it into their teachings.
But Christian Watson, a spokesperson for Color Us United, told DailyMail.com this is little more than an attempt to force doctors to become social activists and send the medical field toward politicization.
'A big part of it is the accrediting agencies that have been taken over by people of some political ideas,' Watson said. 'The AAMC, the body that accredits all medical schools in America, has certain requirements it has to follow.'
He noted that the University of North Carolina - a part of the state's hallowed 'research triangle' - has taken at least 89 of these ideas from them.
They also argue that North Carolina is going to be teaching students that many health disparities are caused by racism.
'They want to subject professors to implicit bias training, actively discriminating against whites and Asians,' Watson added. 'Teach anti-racism ideology. They're teaching them how to be anti-racist as opposed to how to be good doctors.'
Color Us United - which aims to get 10,000 people to sign a petition against these initiatives - says this ideology is spreading, but that North Carolina is particularly important given its status as a state school
'North Carolina is the flagship institution, it's not only subject to AAMC but taxpayer dollars,' Watson noted. 'We think it's quite significant taxpayers know what kind of education their doctors get.'
While Watson believes there is some place for debate on racism and equity within the classrooms, he doesn't believe that the efforts of the AAMC are appropriate or done in good faith.
He said: 'I think the premise of the program, that we need to integrate social justice into medical education, is flawed. Doctors are not meant to be social activists. Doctors are meant to care for their patients.
'There's nothing wrong with having conversations, but they should be done on a neutral basis. Not one that affirms a particular viewpoint. They are basically positing a leftwing view point about health disparities to the exclusion of others that may challenge that,' he added.
The organization said in a press release that it wants 'UNC Medical School to renounce their commitment to social justice and affirm the importance of colorblind, meritocratic patient care over political activism'.
The group has fought DEI programs in the past, including when a small school district in California planned to spend $40 million teaching 'ethnic studies' to high school students
'Taxpayer dollars shouldn't be used to fund courses that are fundamentally racist and anti-American,' President Kenny Xu said.
There are plans to release a letter undersigned by doctors and legislators in an attempt to influence the issue further within the state, which is currently governed by Democrat Roy Cooper.
Currently, the organization's petition stands at just around 300 signatures, but they believe once their message is heard, it will spread.
'We believe that North Carolina can be a test case to challenge the broader demands of the AAMC,' Watson said. 'We think that overall, our message, which is not a political one, it's one of common sense, is gonna prevail.'
***************************************************
'Woke' California university slammed for 'dehumanized' initiative encouraging students to tell on professors
College students are pushing back against a "woke" California university for encouraging students to tell on professors for racism if they aren't called on "consistently" during class.
Campus Reform correspondents Courtney McLain, Emily Sturge, and Darryl Boyer joined "Fox & Friends Weekend" to discuss the broader issues at hand with the far-left infusion of the "woke" agenda in college classrooms.
"I believe when Francis Bellamy wrote One Nation under God, Indivisible, we oftentimes overlook that word indivisible," Boyer told Rachel Campos-Duffy. "We must stop dividing our nation and come together as one… I spent a considerable amount of time in higher education. I spent my undergrad at the University of North Florida. Now I'm at Florida State University working on my graduate degree, and I've never felt like I've been discriminated against based on the color of my skin."
"And it just really makes me feel dehumanized when people can be able to tell on their professor for racism," he continued. "That really takes away the credibility for when things like that may really be happening."
California State University Monterey Bay has faced criticism for urging non-White students to report "race-related stress" under the Personal Growth and Counseling Center tab on its website.
"Document acts of racism or intolerance. Don't ignore or minimize your experiences, and think broadly about what could be an act of racism. It doesn't have to be an overt act (e.g., professor consistently not calling on you or minimizing your contributions, curriculum racially biased, etc). Talk to someone you trust, and report it," a webpage on "Coping with Racism and Discrimination" says.
According to the university website, race-related stress can cause psychological symptoms like anxiety, depression, paranoia, and self-blame, as well as physiological health concerns such as heart disease, hypertension, and muscle tension.
"Students of color who experience stereotype threat may begin to believe that their peers do not regard them as individuals, but as representatives of their racial/ethnic group," the page reads.
McLain, who is a student at University of Central Florida, noted her angst surrounding the move, citing concerns as to how it affects academic progress.
"I am seeing more and more of this diversity, equity and inclusion being forced by my school, and I'm frustrated because I feel like I'm not learning as much academically as I could because we're putting so much money into this," McLain said.
"We're seeing this in more and more schools across the country, that these students are just being believed automatically, which worries me because when I need to go to my administration about a problem, they don't want to believe me, since sometimes these students are actually saying things that are incredible," she continued.
Sturge is a student at the University of Florida, and she argued the left is "winning the culture war" through the avenue of "woke" education in America's classrooms.
"I think this story is just yet another example of wokeism taking over college campuses," Sturge said. "We're seeing the left inject this woke ideology into college classrooms because this is how the left is winning. They're winning the culture war because they're injecting it into our course curriculum."
"These things are absolutely crazy, and we're seeing these things happen in California, and so we feel like it's far away off in a blue state," she continued. "But here in Florida, we're also seeing that, too. We're Florida students, and we're seeing these woke ideals in our classrooms."
Despite the widespread effort of the far left, the trio touted Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis,' R., efforts to counter indoctrination in the state's classrooms.
***********************************
19 February, 2023
Democrats Forcing Teachers to Lie
There's a national conversation occurring right now about the role of parents in the lives of their children—specifically, the role a parent has in critical decisions regarding their child's sexuality and gender identity.
In Virginia, a bill is being debated right now that would compel teachers and administrators to disclose to parents if their child is identifying as a different gender from their birth while at school. Critics call this a forced outing. I discussed it in this space last week in detail.
This is an issue that should be completely non-partisan and not even worthy of debate. So, of course, because woke Democrat lawmakers are involved, it has become highly partisan and a heated debate.
When most observers contemplate this issue and engage in the emotional discussion that inevitably ensues, one's perspective will naturally gravitate toward either the parent who would like to know what's going on with their child when they're at school or that of the child who might wish to keep certain secrets from their parents.
Lost in this discussion is the role of the teacher.
The most outspoken representatives of the education class will advocate for secrecy to prevail. They believe they are the only adults who can be trusted with such things and that the parent inevitably is a judgmental abuser who will force their child to suicide rather than compassionately deal with their gender identity issues.
But suppose you think this policy through, a habit not often associated with left-wing advocates. In that case, you'll realize the position of the Democrats and the professional educators who are on the side of secrecy or really on the side of deception.
In short, their position is for teachers to be compelled to lie to keep their jobs.
Read that sentence again.
The position of the Democratic Party on this vital issue involving adolescent and pre-adolescent children is to force teachers to lie to parents in order to keep their jobs.
In California, a teacher just lost her job because she refused to lie to a parent about this very issue:
A California teacher, who lost her job after refusing to comply with a California district's gender policies, citing Christian beliefs, is blowing the whistle on the expectations she felt as a teacher to not only hide students' gender transitions from parents, but also to keep them in the dark through lying.
"I knew immediately, like in my gut, in my heart, in my soul, that there was a decision I had to make because, you know, these two things were totally butting heads," Jessica Tapia, who worked at the Jurupa Unified School District, told Fox News Digital. "I essentially had to pick one. Am I going to obey the district in the directive that are not lining up with… my own beliefs, convictions and faith? Or am I going to stay true…, choose my faith, choose to be obedient to… the way the Lord has called me to live. And so it was crazy to be in the position where I realized that I couldn't be a Christian and a teacher."
For anyone advocating for the teacher, school counselor, or school administrator to keep sexual and gender identity secrets with a child secret from their parents, they need to recognize exactly the scenario they are creating.
Say a parent recognizes that their child is going through something in their life. They're not sure what it is, but they know that they're not the same. They're behaving strangely around the house. They're concerned. So they call their child's teacher.
"I've noticed that Jane is not herself lately. She is secretive, she dresses differently, and she's very moody. Please, tell me, have you noticed anything at school? Is there anything going on that I should know about?"
Now, what is the teacher supposed to do at this moment? According to the Democrats and the policy that they're promoting, they want the teacher to tell this parent, this concerned parent, this parent who is doing all the right things and trying to find out what's going on with their child, the Democrats want this teacher to lie. They want this teacher to tell the parent that everything's fine and there's nothing going on that they should know about.
And if the teacher doesn't feel comfortable lying to a parent about something so serious, they are fired.
Now, if you listen to the left, this entire issue comes down to forced outing and eventual suicide for the adolescent child who chooses to out themselves to their school but stays in the closet to their parents. And I suppose from a 12-year-old's perspective, that's all that matters.
But what if you're a teacher? What if you actually care about the child's future? What if you think, in your judgment, that the parent should know about this?
Too bad. You will lie, and you will deceive, or you will be out of a job.
Now, we're used to electing officials lying, and we're used to government workers lying, and we're certainly used to Democrats lying, but this may be the first time in American history that the party is advocating that their lies be instituted as policy for government workers going forward.
There's a lot at stake in this issue, and it all comes down to one very important value: the truth.
What side are you on?
https://townhall.com/columnists/larryoconnor/2023/02/16/democrats-forcing-teachers-to-lie-n2619644
**************************************************
The UFT’s racist effort to crush charter schools
When it comes to minority city families’ efforts to get their children a quality public-school education, Michael Mulgrew, his United Federation of Teachers and their politician pawns are literally standing in the schoolhouse door (albeit less blatantly than Alabama Gov. George Wallace back in 1963).
We’re talking, of course, about the UFT’s relentless drive to prevent more public charter schools from opening in the city, even though charters plainly do better by their students.
In the last pre-COVID year, 62.2% of city charter kids scored proficient on statewide math tests, vs. just 45.6% at regular public schools. In reading, it was 57.3% vs. 47.4%.
The gap for black students: 63.9% vs. 28.3% in math, 58.2% vs. 35% in reading.
On a different front, charter enrollment of English Language Learners has been rising rapidly, perhaps because these public schools manage to teach ELL students to be proficient in English at twice the rate of regular city schools.
In neighborhoods across the city, the only high-quality public schools are charters.
Insofar as they can, parents are voting with their feet: 29% of city black students now attend a charter, with another 8% at private or Catholic schools. Many more are on waitlists, hoping charter seats open up.
Put it another way: Almost half of all NYC charter students are black, with most of the rest being Latino — and interest is growing among Asian-Americans, too, after the de Blasio years saw excellence downgraded at many once-high-performing regular public schools.
Membership in the United Federation of Teachers, meanwhile, is predominantly (about 60%) white. The statewide parent union, New York State United Teachers, is 80% white.
That is: As good a job as the unions do of hiding it, their war on charters is a case of well-organized, privileged whites striving to preserve that privilege by denying opportunity to lower-income non-whites.
We don’t believe that Mulgrew’s motive is racist, but the facts fit what the left these days routinely calls “racism,” and maybe even “white supremacy culture.”
To cover the reality, the UFT uses its resources to buy minority politicians and create fake grassroots (“astroturf”) support for its agenda. But polls show most New Yorkers want more charters, with 2:1 support for expansion among both African-Americans and Hispanics.
As far as “equity” goes: The city’s 275 charter schools enroll 142,500 students (again, overwhelmingly low-income, minority kids), about 15% of total public-school enrollment. But thanks to years of UFT and NYSUT backroom maneuvering, charters get just 10% of city education spending — roughly $3 billion out of the Department of Education’s $31 billion budget.
Yet charters still vastly outperform the UFT-dominated DOE schools.
It may not be racist if the UFT and NYSUT succeed in stopping Gov. Kathy Hochul’s proposal to allow dozens more charters to open in the city, but it certainly will be rank injustice.
https://nypost.com/2023/02/18/the-ufts-racist-effort-to-crush-charter-schools/
**************************************************
School choice gives parents the power to break teachers unions' chokeholds on students
School choice advocate Corey DeAngelis said teachers unions aim to maintain power over people's kids by fighting against letting families have educational options.
The growing movement to give parents the ability to choose where to send their children to school has helped them break through teachers unions' chokeholds on education, a school choice advocate told Fox News.
"Finally, we are freeing families from the clutches of the teachers unions once and for all, and there's not a dang thing they can do about it," Corey DeAngelis, a senior fellow at the American Federation for Children, told Fox News.
The school choice debate has taken a front seat as parents push back against curriculum decisions and as more states pass legislation offering more educational options for students. School choice, which allows tax dollars to follow a student rather than a specific school, would free families from the teachers unions' control and allow them to pick an education system that aligns with their values, DeAngelis said.
"The teachers union monopoly wants to force kids to attend their residentially assigned, government-run institutions that they staff," DeAngelis told Fox News. "It's about maintaining power. It's about maintaining a monopoly on the minds of other people's kids."
"For far too long in K-12 education, the only special interests who had any influence were the ones who represented the employees in the system," he continued. "But now the kids have a union of their own, and they're called parents."
Debates over what topics are appropriate for classroom discussions, such as critical race theory and gender identity, have become flashpoints nationwide. Parents have increasingly spoken out at school board meetings to voice concerns and advocate for a say in their kids' education.
"School choice is a winner for everybody except for Randi Weingarten and the teachers unions who want to trap your kids in schools that aren't working for them," DeAngelis said.
DeAngelis blames the teacher unions for trying to control the minds of our nation's kids by not supporting educational options for families.
DeAngelis blames the teacher unions for trying to control the minds of our nation's kids by not supporting educational options for families. (Photo by Jeff Swensen/Getty Images)
Weingarten, the president of American Federation of Teachers, previously said school choice advocates aimed to privatize and defund public education. She criticized efforts to divert funds from public districts to bankroll school choice initiatives.
"America’s parents don’t want vouchers that syphon money away from the schools that 90 percent of kids attend—they want to invest in public schools and get educators the resources they need to create safe classrooms, boost academic skills, and pave pathways to career, college and life," a spokesperson for the union told Fox News in a statement. She pointed to a study that found "parents and voters back improving education in public schools over more 'school choice'" by an 80-20 margin.
That argument is an "admission that they're not confident in the product that they're providing," DeAngelis told Fox News. "Why would giving families a choice defund public schools that you staff?"
Giving parents a choice wouldn't exclude public schools, but would allow for a wider array of options, according to DeAngelis.
"We don't want to destroy the public schools," he told Fox News. "We want to make them better."
"When you inject competition into that system, the district starts to allocate more resources into the classroom so they don't upset parents, and they have to compete for the employees," DeAngelis added.
Math scores saw their largest decreases ever in 2022, according to the Nation's Report Card. Reading scores also dropped to levels not seen since 1992 for fourth and eighth graders across the country.
School choice would also allow disadvantaged children more opportunities to access educational options like private schools that only some families can afford, DeAngelis said.
"Why should they be forced into this one-size-fits-all system?" DeAngelis said. "School choice is an equalizer."
Arizona became the first state to pass universal education scholarship accounts to all 1.1 million K-12 students in the state in 2022. Other states, including Iowa, Utah and Florida, have followed in pushing school choice legislation.
"It's the teachers unions' own fault for overplaying their hand and awakening a sleeping giant: parents who just want more of a say in their kids' education," DeAngelis said.
***********************************
17 February, 2023
K: Woke University of Kent comes under fire for telling students not to say 'Christian name' or 'surname' because the terms are ‘offensive’
A woke university has been criticised for trying to stop use of the phrase 'Christian name', claiming it is offensive.
The University of Kent has told students to stop using the term because it claims it only relates to Christians. Instead, it suggests students say 'first name' or 'given name' to avoid being offensive.
The university also took against using 'surname' because it derives from 'sire-name' and was therefore deemed to be patriarchal. Guidelines say the term is permitted but discouraged. University bosses instead said 'family name' would be more acceptable.
The recommendations on what students should say in respect to names is listed on the University of Kent's Equality, Diversity and Inclusivity pages online.
But Tim Dieppe, head of policy at advocacy group Christian Concern, told The Telegraph that the institution was 'displaying an irrational fear of using the term "Christian" as if it is something to be ashamed of'.
He added: 'Christianity has provided the moral and spiritual foundation for Western civilisation. This move to police language is another symptom of the abandonment of Christianity.'
Toby Young, founder of the Free Speech Union, said the guidelines were an example of the 'woke movement' attempting to police language considered offensive, and that the trend was imported from American universities.
He added: 'You might even say we've been colonised. Policing language is a hallmark of every totalitarian society.'
The University of Kent said it wanted to create an inclusive community for its students. A spokesperson said: 'These are guidelines not policies.'
***************************************************
Radical activists try to silence all debate about transgender kids
An elementary school teacher near St. Louis emailed the Washington University Transgender Center at the nearby children’s hospital with a problem: After a fifth-grade student had decided she was trans, a number of her friends decided the same. The teacher didn’t want to “discourage” the children, but suspected there might be “other reasons” the friend group all expressed an interest in switching gender.
The clinic worker was happy to help, emails uncovered by the Daily Mail reveal. It didn’t matter what the teacher’s well-founded suspicions were; she should affirm the choices of all these 10- and 11-year-old children.
Furthermore, anyone who suggested that peer pressure or “contagion” might be an issue in the increase in transgender kids wasn’t “affirming” and “in my personal and professional opinion, invalid.”
Invalid.
That’s become the language of a fringe, radical group of transgender activist who see any questioning of their beliefs, any discussion of momentous societal shifts, as out of bounds. You’re not allowed to even discuss it.
You see it in what’s happening to The New York Times, which had the temerity to publish the most innocuous, basic of articles about transgenderism.
Yet an open letter, addressed to Philip B. Corbett, associate managing editor for standards, and signed by 200 leftist activists, accuses the paper of “editorial bias” in its coverage of the trans population. Somehow The Times is not fair enough about the gender transition pushed on ever-younger children.
What’s preposterous about this letter is that the pieces in question are utterly benign and soft-pedal the issue of kids being pressured to make life-changing decisions about their bodies before they’re old enough to vote.
The Emily Bazelon article “The Battle Over Gender Therapy” came years after Abigail Shrier’s book “Irreversible Damage” first laid out how dangerous pediatric “gender care” had become. Bazelon mentions the book but makes sure to note activists “abhor” it. Bazelon also focuses on the right wing as opponents of children transitioning genders. It’s insane to imagine it’s only the “right wing” who care about permanent damage being done to children in the name of “fixing” their gender identity.
The other article the letter writers find problematic is “When Students Change Gender Identity, and Parents Don’t Know.” Writer Katie J.M. Baker illustrates that parents are upset when their kids are transitioned at school, behind their backs. Well, yes. There’s absolutely nothing controversial about this.
For people who may have felt the issue of children being induced to declare themselves trans was overblown, letters like this expose that it is not.
https://nypost.com/2023/02/16/radical-activists-try-to-silence-debate-on-transgender-kids/
***************************************************
Cal State Monterey Bay urges students to report ‘race-related stress’ — like not being called on in class
A California university is urging students of color to report incidents that cause “race-related stress” — such as not being called on by their professor in class.
California State University Monterey Bay’s Personal Growth and Counseling Center offers tips on how students can cope with the “burden of race-related stress” that can lead to psychological distress and even physiological health problems.
“It is important to understand that you can experience race-related stress even if you were mistaken that a racist act occurred. Race-related stress reactions only require that a person believes that they were the target of racism,” the center writes on its website.
To deal with such trauma, the university urges students to document “acts of racism or intolerance,” such as reporting teachers for not calling on them and for offering a “racially biased curriculum.”
“Don’t ignore or minimize your experiences, and think broadly about what could be an act of racism. It doesn’t have to be an overt act (e.g., professor consistently not calling on you or minimizing your contributions, curriculum racially biased, etc). Talk to someone you trust, and report it,” the school urges.
Race-related stress can cause psychological symptoms like anxiety, depression, paranoia and self-blame. It can also affect students’ physical health, potentially leading to heart disease, hypertension, and muscle tension, according to the center.
“Students of color who experience stereotype threat may begin to believe that their peers do not regard them as individuals, but as representatives of their racial/ethnic group,” the page reads.
Other ways the school urges students to deal with the stress is to build a support network of friends and family; positive affirmation and good self-care; embrace their spirituality; take classes or join campus groups to develop a positive cultural identity; and become involved in social action.
The example of reporting teachers for not calling on students of color or offering racially inclusive courses was found under the “social action” section of the webpage.
The counseling center also urges students to “call people out when you witness acts of injustice and intolerance,” but not to ” [accuse] another person of being racist” which can shut “them down and end the conversation.”
“Encourage thoughtfulness and dialogue by addressing racist behaviors and language, without escalating into hostility and name-calling,” the website says.
About 46% percent of students enrolled in the fall 2022 semester were Latino, followed by white students at 29%, Asian Americans at 9%, two or more mixed races at 8% and 3% were African Americans, according to school statistics. Just over 7,000 students are currently enrolled.
https://nypost.com/2023/02/16/cal-state-monterey-bay-urges-students-to-report-race-related-stress/
***********************************
16 February, 2023
British university professor was 'cancelled' for teaching basic facts about Islam
Human rights scholar Steven Greer, 66, effectively went into hiding after Bristol University Law School undergraduates complained that elements of his course were racist and discriminatory.
The Belfast-born academic, who grew a long, bushy beard, wore fake glasses to disguise himself and carried a screwdriver and a 'sturdy' umbrella in case he was attacked, admitted he was more afraid for his life than during the Troubles after he was hounded by 'woke' students.
Professor Greer, who was exonerated of all wrongdoing by an inquiry last year, has now accused Left-wing activists of putting the lives of academics such as himself at risk, and warned a 'Woke Inquisition' could 'dumb down degree courses at many of the UK's finest institutions'.
The grandfather-of-three said: 'Cancel culture is fast becoming the scourge of academia. A climate of fear is already replacing an environment of free, critical inquiry.
'There is a growing risk that many students will leave university with little critical insight, knowledge, or appreciation of the vital importance of intellectual freedom and evidence-based thinking in a healthy democracy.
'Some, wearing self-tied gags and blinkers, will go on to join the next generation of leaders. This does not bode well for the future of our society.'
He said academics were at risk of attacks because of how easy it was for students to make racism allegations 'based on nothing but lies and distortion'.
The professor added: 'Prejudice is deplorable and should rightly be condemned but this is far removed from legitimate academic enquiry. 'Unfortunately, cancel culture fails to see the distinction.
'The issue is compounded by universities. While some remain beacons of intellectual freedom, others are increasingly cowed by members of the cancel culture woke far-Left.
'Not only are students losing out but the reputation of British higher education is also being damaged around the world.
Prof Greer said university bosses need to do more to protect academics from 'intolerant' students.
He said: 'I had until last year enjoyed a wonderful career and I believe I had earned the respect of students, colleagues and peers all over the world.
'Almost overnight my name became synonymous with bigotry, racism and Islamophobia – especially on social media – because of a handful of malicious students who set out to ruin my life. 'I was vilified and my name and reputation were dragged through the mud.
'For my own safety, I was forced to act like a fugitive for including academically authoritative, fact-based information in my course that a few militant students took objection to.
Allegations of Islamophobia were first made against Prof Greer after he used a teaching slide that mentioned the 2015 terror attack on the Paris offices of Charlie Hebdo, a magazine that had published cartoons of the Prophet Mohammed.
The slide was described as having 'Islamophobic rhetoric'.
Additionally, a lecture that included 'well-attested observations' about the inferior treatment of women and non-Muslims in Islamic states and the tough penalties handed out under Sharia law was slated as 'bigoted and divisive'.
A five-month inquiry led by a senior academic at Bristol University found each of the accusations to be baseless. An independent KC appointed during the inquiry also found Prof Greer was not guilty of harassment.
But the 'scurrilous falsehoods by a handful of illiberal students' led to the removal of the material from the course and left him fearing for his reputation and his life.
He was not allocated any further teaching duties upon his return and says he was kept on what he regards as unofficial 'research leave' until his retirement in September 2022.
University bosses also dropped his module on Islam, China and the Far East so Muslim students would 'not feel that their religion is being singled out or in any way "othered" by the class material'.
**************************************************
Subsidizing Higher Education Is Not Creating Widespread External Benefits
President Biden’s student debt relief proposal created a storm of controversy. That is not surprising, since it was a transparent (and apparently successful) attempt to buy the votes of an important Democratic constituency, even though it created a target-rich environment for critics.
It is sharply pro-rich at the expense of those far poorer, from a party pretending to stand for the opposite. It is very costly to everyone else (the National Taxpayers Union put the average burden at just over $2500 per taxpayer). The income cutoffs, designed to make it appear it is less pro-rich than it is, are misleading because most affected are in the early parts of their careers, when their incomes are lower, even though their average lifetime incomes (wealth, in present value terms) are likely to be far higher. It will encourage more people for whom the costs of going to college exceed the benefits to go anyway. It will raise the cost of college further, transferring many of the benefits claimed for students to the providers of education.
Oral arguments to Constitutional challenges to Biden’s plan will be heard at the Supreme Court in February, with much at stake.
What I have found surprising, however, is that the arguments and evidence for how ineffective, poorly targeted, inequitable and probably unconstitutional the student debt forgiveness plan is have not gone one seemingly obvious step further—to ask why we subsidize higher education so heavily in America, even without the currently proposed additional debt relief. After all, student loan forgiveness would only be the ex post icing on the cake of very large subsidies of other people’s money that already go to higher education.
Thirty-one years ago, a Congressional Budget Office study found that tuition subsidies alone averaged more than 80 percent of the cost of providing an education at 4-year public colleges and universities. And despite claims by Elizabeth Warren and others that there has been reduced investment of in higher education, the evidence does not support that.
And that is just one part of what Gordon Tullock called “a highly regressive scheme for transferring funds from the people who are less well-off to those who are well-off.” Economists Edgar and Jacqueline Browning put it similarly, in their classic Public Finance and the Price System: “Subsidies to higher education effectively benefit the brightest and most ambitious young people, and this group will on the average have the highest lifetime incomes even without assistance.” So, the question becomes whether the supposed benefits of college attendance to others in society are great enough to justify the huge subsidies. And careful thinking makes that highly doubtful.
As Peter Passell has written:
“The prospect of heavy debt after graduation would no doubt discourage some students from borrowing,” but “that may be the wisest form of restraint. Someone has to finally pay the bill, and it is hard to see why that should be the taxpayers rather than the direct beneficiary of the schooling.”
An important thing to recognize in this situation is that subsidies supposedly going to students increase the market demand for education, so that the incidence (who actually captures the gains from subsidies) is often quite different than claimed. As Adam Smith noted over two centuries ago, education subsidies increase college demand and go in large part to education providers in better wages and working conditions.
Market forces (in addition to serious barriers to entry into becoming an accredited and respected higher education provider) largely transform student aid into education provider aid. The case made for higher education subsidies to the rest of us has also long included a thicket of highly questionable arguments.
Many have argued that subsidizing higher education results in higher productivity, benefiting others. But competitive labor markets mean that higher productivity is captured by the workers in higher compensation, not by others in society. Consequently, it does not justify subsidies from others. It has also been argued that subsidies are justified because they increase the supply of skilled workers, lowering costs. However, the greatest part of that “gain” is actually a transfer from existing workers forced to accept lower wages for their skills than otherwise, not a net gain to society.
Still others have argued that added education provides cultural benefits to society. Again, however, such benefits primarily accrue to the students themselves (e.g., the ability to appreciate art), providing little or no justification for public subsidies from others.
There are other problems with the “external benefits” argument for government provision of education. “Skate” or “Easy A” classes do not provide substantial external benefits because they do not teach much of value. In contrast, law, medical, and dental training may teach a great deal, but as mentioned above, the benefit of such training goes to graduates in higher incomes, not society.
Furthermore, one must confront the fact that courses in some fields actually seem to make students less productive in the eyes of many potential employers. It is hard to see external benefits rather than external costs to others in such areas. Sizable external benefits to others would also require, at a minimum, that schools successfully teach valuable truths and skills and that students retain such wisdom past graduation, yet both conditions frequently go unmet.
There may be some social benefits, though difficult to articulate and measure, that one might argue justifies government higher education subsidies. But most plausible illustrations come at lower levels of education, not college (e.g., learning your ABCs and basic times tables in primary school), with few if any added benefits from higher education subsidies.
And even if there are some benefits to others from further education, those benefits to others would have to be greater than the costs imposed on others to fund the subsidies, a comparison few proponents consider seriously. With current subsidies already very large, before any consideration of loan forgiveness, costs are often far larger than benefits. And given our tax burdens and the vastly expanded future tax burdens implied by the recent explosion of government debt (that will also now need to be financed at much higher interest rates), the arguments for leaving the money in citizens’ hands, where they could always invest in added education if they believed it was the highest valued use of their funds, become even stronger.
Arguments against President Biden’s student loan forgiveness plan are plentiful and powerful.
The substantial number of Swiss-cheese arguments long put forward in defense of higher education subsidies also lay bare what is only sensible as an effort to buy millions of votes from what has become a major Democrat interest group.
But those same arguments should also confront the massive higher education subsidies that would remain even in the absence of loan forgiveness. That would also bring us back to the Constitution. Not only does our supposed “highest law of the land” fail to grant the President unilateral executive power to cancel loan debts, nowhere does it enumerate education as a legitimate function of the federal government. We need less government involvement in both dimensions, not more in either.
https://www.independent.org/news/article.asp?id=14419&omhide=true&trk=title
******************************************************
Australian parents flock to private schools amid public system exodus
Given the chaos at many State schools, any parent who could afford to opt out would want to
Parents are sending their children to the state’s independent schools in record numbers, while the share of students enrolled in public schools has plunged to its lowest level in 15 years.
There were thousands fewer students enrolled in NSW public schools last year as families increasingly opted for a private education.
Official data released on Wednesday showed that 63.7 per cent of NSW students attended public schools in 2022 – a fall from 65.5 per cent five years ago. The proportion of students in independent schools has surged to 15.1 per cent, up from 13.3 per cent in 2017.
Catholic schools have remained relatively steady, with their share of students rising slightly to 21 per cent in 2022.
Families flocking to new housing developments on the city’s fringe are partly behind the surging enrolments in new and low-fee independent schools, according to Helen Proctor, a professor of education at University of Sydney.
“The new private schools are marketing themselves well, and the price point is really attractive to parents. These schools are also heavily subsidised by public funding, unlike the older and wealthier schools,” she said.
The exodus of students from public schools is a longer-term trend that has occurred while the number of private schools with fees between $5000 to $10,000 has grown, said Glenn Fahey, an education research fellow at the Centre for Independent Studies.
“It comes as little surprise to see an increasing flight of parents to private schools. This is a trend that had been going for some time,” he said.
Minister for Education and Early Learning Sarah Mitchell said the government supported parents’ freedom to choose which school they enrol their children in. “We also support the growth of low-fee non-government schools in high-growth areas through capital funding,” she said.
Figures released by the Australian Bureau of Statistics show the state’s independent school enrolments grew by 6570 in a year to reach 187,913 – the highest on record.
Association of Independent Schools NSW chief executive Margery Evans said enrolment growth had occurred in low and mid-fee Anglican, Islamic and Christian schools in Sydney’s newer suburbs.
“Demand for places in many independent schools exceeds supply, and schools report having scores of names on their waiting lists and, in some cases, hundreds of students are turned away,” Evans said.
Sydney’s private schools, many of which have increased fees by 4 to 7 per cent this year, have been lobbying to increase student caps, with principals warning restrictive student caps are creating huge enrolment pressures.
The ABS figures reflect a national trend, with independent schools across Australia recording the highest growth rate at 3.3 per cent last year, followed by Catholic schools at 1 per cent. Enrolments in government schools fell for a second year running, down by 0.6 per cent across the country.
Ellouise Roberts, head of education statistics at the ABS, said the proportion of students enrolled in independent primary schools was growing, with about 12 per cent of NSW students in private primary schools.
“This increase in the primary school share for independent schools has been continuing over a few years,” she said, noting that these proportions are much higher for high school, with 18.5 per cent of secondary students in NSW independent schools.
Across all schools, private schools had a lower student-to-teacher ratio (11.7 students to one teacher) than government schools (13.4 students to one teacher) and Catholic schools (13.6 students to one teacher).
Principal Alan Dawson at Richard Johnson Anglican School in Oakhurst said demand was increasing for low-fee private schools in high-growth areas in the city’s north-west. “Our fees are about $6400 for year 12 – parents really see it as value for money,” Dawson said.
“Even just in the past year to this year, we’ve seen a 44 per cent increase in a year at our Marsden Park campus. This is mainly due to a lack of public schools in this growth corridor,” Dawson said.
Leppington Anglican College principal Michael Newton’s school in south-west Sydney opened its doors this year and already has 180 students.
“We’ve got kids who have come from other public schools in the area,” he said. “There are some big open-learning style classrooms – for some parents, their children have found that difficult.”
He said parents who enrolled their children at the $8000-a-year school valued how staff used explicit instruction to explain academic concepts to children and the attention they received from one classroom teacher.
“In our area, parents say they want a disciplined environment,” he said.
Nikki Kapsanis, who lives in Earlwood, chose Rosebank College for her children, Jonas and Alexis.
The Five Dock private school charges $11,400 for year 12. This is significantly below amounts charged at Kambala and SCEGGS Darlinghurst, the most expensive Sydney schools where fees have increased beyond $45,000 for the first time this year.
“For us, the school is up there with the elite schools but not with the cost,“ Kapsanis said. “The co-educational factor was a big plus, and it offers academics, performing and arts. We think the fees are worth it.”
“The kids went to our local public primary school but for high school we wanted a private education. As children get older and they become teenagers, they need discipline.”
ACU senior lecturer and former principal Paul Kidson said there can be a “misguided view” that there is major academic benefit to sending children to private schools. There are many reasons parents select independent schools including social status, religious affiliation and family connections.
“It will be interesting to see what happens with enrolments in low-fee schools as mortgage and cost of living pressures grow,” he said, adding that high-fee schools will be relatively insulated.
***********************************
15 February, 2023
As Republican states move towards more school choice, don’t forget to hire more teachers
By Robert Romano
Republican-led states including Florida and Utah are moving towards private schools to accommodate growing demand among conservatives, libertarians and Republicans for an alternative to public education systems that have long been dominated by the cultural left and Democrats.
It is little wonder.
A 2016 survey by Education Week found that only 27 percent of teachers were Republicans versus 41 percent Democrat and 30 percent independents. In higher education, the advantage is more like 10 to 1. And the situation is only worsening.
Lack of Republican representation in these professions is nothing new. And it is hardly confined to education. In civil service positions, the Democrats’ advantage is 2 to 1. Democrats have a 3 to 1 advantage in publishing and information technology and 4 to 1 in media production.
George Washington University Professor Jonathan Turley noted in a recent oped to The Hill: “For elementary, middle and high schools, voucher programs may allow parents to speak with their feet. I hope we do not come to that — but the opposition to vouchers is telling. The alarm is based on the recognition that, given a choice, many families would not choose what public schools are offering. This includes many minority families who want to escape from a cycle of education that leaves many students barely literate and lost. They likely would prefer an alternative to a system like Baltimore’s, where a student failed all but three classes and still graduated in the top half of his class.”
Such dominance has reached a breaking point. At the school level, parents have had enough of “diverse and inclusive”, equity-based, critical race programs that have traded away traditional American values like freedom of speech but also equality, color-blindness and civil rights in the tradition of Martin Luther King, Jr. who taught us to treat each other not by the color of their skin, but the content of their character.
But after Covid public school lockdowns in 2020 and 2021 and repeated instances of parents being openly attacked at school board meetings and even having Justice Department investigations of parents arising as a result, now Republican states are springing into action with a renewed push for private education—with public funds, whether in the form of tax credits or vouchers.
But who’s going to teach at these new center-right schools?
College admissions are breaking almost 2 to 1 female, with further breakdowns on partisan affiliation as women tend to vote Democratic and men tend to vote Republican, on the margins. According to the National Student Clearinghouse, in 2020-2021 the breakdown was 59.5 percent female, and 40.5 percent male. And it’s not because of discrimination.
There is a pervasive “no college” message among conservatives that apparently has gotten through loud and clear in recent years, but what it means is that the next generation of jobs including in education but also health, law and the sciences, that require a degree will be more left-wing than ever.
Anecdotally, I was once on track to be an art teacher before the political bug bit in the early 2000s and I changed my major to political science. Just what the world needed, another conservative pundit! But at a younger age, was I impacted by conservative messaging that suggested public schools were dominated by the left? I cannot say with certainty. But I was definitely one less Republican teacher. I still regret it.
Republicans actually need young people to take their places in these institutions, and hopefully achieve more balanced perspectives in education. Men, who disproportionately vote Republican, generally would still need to go to college to get a degree in education to teach in order to get the job at these schools. But fewer men are going to college and may not value the need for education to build the schools conservatives say they want in the future.
Why is there no push in Republican states to become educators? We can do vouchers or tax credits all day long, but if we want balanced education, at least a few of us have to become teachers.
If schools are not good in red states, either, that’s on Republican governors and legislatures for not recruiting better talent and urging at least a few of their kids to get into the profession.
The truth is Republicans have been blasting the quality of K-12 public education for more than 40 years, and yet despite demand for more alternatives, private school enrollment is actually lower today than it was in 1995 even as public school enrollment has steadily risen to more than 50 million. Parents who homeschool are making a sacrifice but it might not be the most efficient solution.
85 percent of Americans, which include Republicans, still depend on public schools, and in charter school cities like New York City, they must resort to lotteries because of limited availability of seats.
So, whether red states opt for public or private school options, the fact is somebody still has to work there. As Republican states rightly pursue these alternatives, they must be aware that they will still have to train and recruit new teachers—and go outside the education degrees as necessary to fill in the gaps—whether they’ll be working in brand new center-right private schools, or we just take back what is ours.
**********************************************
Enraged residents slam 'fraud and corruption' as Baltimore schools hit shocking new low
Days after Gov. Wes Moore, D-Md., declared education a top priority for his tenure, Baltimore reported that zero students in 23 different public schools are proficient in math. Also, 93% of third through eighth graders tested below grade level in the same subject.
Baltimore residents responded by blasting school officials and lawmakers for "fraud and corruption" which they claim is to blame for the low numbers.
"I lay the blame in two places," U.S. Army veteran and Baltimore resident Evie Harris said on "Fox & Friends First" Friday. "I would start with the board of schools commissioners or the Board of School Administrators. And I'm going to also add in some parents… We've been having these results for decades. I am not shocked because we've been having these results. I am angry, and I would lay the blame majorly at [CEO of Baltimore City Public Schools] Sonja Santelises and the Baltimore City School administrators who are absolutely dismissive and arrogant at the results we are seeing here in Baltimore."
First vice chair of the Baltimore County Republican Central Committee Kyna "K.J." McKenzie also weighed in on the report. "I'm shocked. I am frustrated and angry about it. As a parent, I'm a parent. I live in Baltimore City and we've been dealing with this for decades," she said. "And these results are very frustrating."
"Frustrating because we're not able to get to the root cause of what's happening, because everyone the leadership here blames it on racism. We've had Democratic leadership for decades. The people here in power look like me and everything's blamed on racism."
The report came from the Maryland State Department of Education's 2022 state test results known as MCAP, Maryland Comprehensive Assessment Program. Data concerning math scores and proficiency came from across various elementary, middle and secondary schools.
On February 1, Gov. Moore touted his administration's investment in public education, noting it is the largest investment in the state's history.
"We can no longer separate our vision for economic prosperity from the duty to make Maryland's public schools the best in the nation," he said during a speech earlier this month.
McKenzie noted that despite the governor's comments, his policies are creating a "prison pipeline," hurting Maryland residents.
"The governor has just put forward a budget and he's cut spending for school choice options for Baltimore City's people, for Marylanders. And that's that hurts us," she explained. "We don't even have the option of taking the money that they pour into these students and money that we're given through this budget to go to other places for better education. And so what we have here is an education to prison pipeline."
"They have two choices here in Baltimore City for kids: You're either going to prison or you're going to take them away in a body bag. You know, this is a real crisis we have here."
Harris argued that school officials are refusing to seek out actual solutions in order to stay "in power."
"They don't want to because not solving the problem keeps them in power. And it also keeps their emotionalism, their guilt tripping and keeps parents ignorant to a degree and keeps parents fearful and not knowing what to do," Harris told host Todd Piro.
In addition to Baltimore education officials, Harris called out Baltimore Mayor Brandon Scott for what she argues is failing to hold the city's school board officials accountable.
"There is none. There is not [accountability]," Harris said. "There's only, again, the attitude, the elitism and the constant failure of our children."
Harris argued one practical solution for Baltimore residents is to pull children from the public schools and consider homeschooling or enrolling kids in private schools.
She noted, however, that one "very successful" charter school is under attack from the school board which is trying to shut down the school over a paperwork technicality. She argues this proves officials are more focused on retaining "power and control" than bettering education for children.
"Enough is enough. Parents, we encourage parents to wake up, fight back and tell them, 'no, these are our children. They have meaning and they have a purpose. And you don't get to ruin their lives.'"
***************************************************
Inside the University of Pennsylvania's Precedent-Setting Effort To Revoke Tenure From Its Most Controversial Professor
On September 16, 2019, students at the University of Pennsylvania Law School hosted a town hall with law school dean Theodore Ruger to discuss the "issues" surrounding Amy Wax.
A tenured professor at the law school, Wax had sparked outrage earlier that year when she argued, in a speech at the National Conservatism Conference, that the United States should favor immigrants from countries with similar values to its own. Since those nations "remain mostly white for now," Wax said, her approach implied that "our country will be better off with more whites and fewer non-whites"—even though, she stipulated, the policy "doesn't rely on race at all."
In audio of the town hall obtained by the Washington Free Beacon, Ruger told students that Wax's comments were "racist" and had caused "harm." He also suggested they could be grounds to fire her: It "sucks" that Wax "still works here," Ruger said, adding that the "only way to get rid of a tenured professor" is a "process" that is "gonna take months."
The town hall set the stage for a protracted battle over academic freedom. Since January 2022, Penn has been trying to sanction Wax—potentially by revoking her tenure and dismissing her—for statements the law school alleges violate its anti-discrimination policies. The case is testing the argument, aired by one of Wax's colleagues, that a professor's academic views can be so "offensive" that they "undercut" her ability to teach students and provide a "good case for termination."
Wax's views are undeniably controversial. She said in a 2017 interview that black law students "rarely" finish in the top half of their class. She has argued that black poverty is self-inflicted and, in the context of immigration policy, expressed a preference for "fewer Asians," citing their "indifference to liberty" and "overwhelming" support for Democrats. She even invited Jared Taylor, a self-described "white identity" advocate, to speak to her class on conservative thought, saying his views were "well within the subject matter of the course."
But tenure is intended to protect provocative speech. It came about in the 1920s after many professors were fired for endorsing then-controversial ideas like evolution, atheism, and free love. Robust job security meant academics could speak and teach freely about charged subjects, even if doing so was considered blasphemous.
That's why Wax's case has raised alarm about the future of academic freedom and the power of tenure to protect it. Unlike Princeton University's Joshua Katz, whom the school sacked ostensibly over his consensual relationship with a former student, Wax is under the microscope only for what she's said. Her dismissal would set a new precedent, signaling that tenured professors can be booted for airing views that students or administrators deem offensive.
"This is a game-changer, because it's a pure case of speech," Wax told the Free Beacon. "If they succeed in punishing me for that, it will eviscerate academic freedom as we know it."
Faculty across the political spectrum echo that warning. Wax's defenders include the conservative Princeton professor Robert George and the liberal Harvard Law professor Janet Halley, both of whom say Penn is playing with fire. "Statements on issues of law and public policy"—and the act of "inviting a controversial speaker" to class—are "unquestionably protected by academic freedom," Halley wrote in July on behalf of the Academic Freedom Alliance, a nonprofit that defends faculty speech rights.
George, who cofounded the alliance, said that punishing Wax for either would have a chilling effect. "The message to faculty and students alike will be clear," he said. "You had better not defy the campus orthodoxies, because if you do, the consequences could be severe."
The law school has maintained the case is about fairness rather than free speech. Ruger told Penn's faculty Senate in June that Wax's comments had led "reasonable students" to conclude that she would grade them "based on their race"—despite the law school's blind grading policy—and implied she had sabotaged the job prospects of minority students. She therefore deserved "major sanctions," a term defined by Penn's faculty handbook to include suspension and termination.
With that statement, Ruger triggered a disciplinary process that has been used just a handful of times in the university's history: The last time Penn axed a tenured faculty member, it was because he killed his wife.
This report—based on emails, memos, and recorded meetings—provides a window into Penn's efforts to oust its most controversial professor. It sheds light on tactics that, if successful, are likely to be employed against other tenured dissidents, including the concealment of evidence and the use of surreptitious probes. Penn, for example, ignored the results of an outside investigation that found "no evidence" Wax had treated students unfairly—then launched a second investigation, without disclosing it to Wax, and kept the results of both probes secret for months.
The opacity has alarmed the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression, another free speech watchdog defending Wax, which told the Free Beacon that it would compound the case's chilling effect. "Anything less than total transparency," said Alex Morey, the group's director of campus advocacy, "sends the message that administrators will find a way to punish controversial academics at any cost."
Ruger, the dean of the law school, did not respond to a request for comment.
Penn's crusade against Wax is something of an about-face for the university, which as recently as 2015 awarded her its top teaching prize. But Wax, who holds Ivy League degrees in law, biophysics, and neuroscience, has always been an intellectual bomb-thrower: Her most explosive position may be that racial disparities have more to do with group differences in IQ than with racism, a belief she has defended in books, law review articles, and popular essays,
That view set the stage for an official complaint against Wax, filed in April 2021 by eight law school alumni, alleging that her "derogatory remarks" had harmed students. The complaint seized on her 2017 statement that black students rarely finish in the top half of their class, which, it said, had caused minority students to "reasonably assume" she had violated the school's anonymous grading policy.
Rather than adjudicate the complaint internally, Penn asked Daniel Rodriguez, a professor and former dean at Northwestern University law school, to serve as an outside investigator and determine whether there was any merit to the complaint. In August 2021, Rodriguez presented Penn general counsel Wendy White with a 45-page summary of his findings, based on interviews with 26 alumni.
The report, a copy of which was obtained by the Free Beacon, found that the most serious charges against Wax were baseless. There was "no evidence" she had "breach[ed] the anonymity of exams," "graded minority students differently," "denied them access to professional opportunities," or "singled them out for special ridicule," Rodriguez wrote.
Rodriguez did find that Wax made a number of off-the-cuff remarks—such as telling a black student she was admitted "because of affirmative action" and saying "Hispanic people don't seem to mind" loud neighborhoods—that were "harmful" or "derogatory." (Wax denies having made the comment about affirmative action.) But he also found that students had omitted the context of other remarks, making them sound worse than they really were. It seemed to be "the content and shape of her very controversial views"—rather than any sort of discriminatory conduct—that had troubled alumni, he said.
If Penn does sanction Wax, she has indicated that she will file a lawsuit. Though as a private school Penn is not bound by the First Amendment, its official policies do promise faculty academic freedom—and Wax could sue for breach of contract.
The stakes of that lawsuit would be high. If Wax won, the resulting precedent would make it harder for all universities, not just Penn, to fire tenured dissidents. If she lost, it would give schools legal cover to axe them.
"Universities are just spoiling to purge dissidents like me," Wax said, "the few of us left who are standing in the way of a complete woke takeover. That's why this case is so important."
***********************************
14 February, 2023
A girl bullied to death - and her grieving dad smeared by HER school! From suicide, to rape, to gender madness...
The disgusting Triantafillos Parlapanides has now resigned
To watch the video of 14-year-old Adriana Kuch being brutally assaulted in the hallway of her own high school — to see her crouching in the fetal position as she's swarmed and dragged and pummeled by three other students while another student off-camera yells, 'F**k her up! F**k that b*tch up!' — is to see the confidence of bullies in present-day America.
Once upon a time, kids like this would attack off-campus, in secret, no witnesses. Now they attack openly in cafeterias and classrooms, school buses and social media, secure in the knowledge that administrators won't do a thing.
After Kuch was assaulted — and it took 40 seconds for an adult to intervene, these brazen kids punching away regardless — her attack was posted on social media: TikTok, Snapchat, Instagram.
Two days later, Adriana committed suicide. A message sent just hours before mocked her for 'dripping' blood and getting 'whooped.'
This poor young girl already had a host of stressors and risk factors — her mother, who battled addiction, had died when she was little, and her father had been concerned about Adriana vaping marijuana. But it seems that this beating, and the endless social media humiliation that followed, broke her young spirit.
'She was so embarrassed that they jumped her,' said her father, Michael Kuch. 'She would say, 'I don't want to be made fun of.' It was like she was attacked twice. It used to be you'd go to school, get bullied and then you left. But now you come home and you keep getting bullied — they still keep picking at you at home.'
In the immediate aftermath of the attack, the school suspended the bullies involved but did not call the police. Instead, Michael Kuch brought his daughter – beaten and bloodied – to the police station himself.
After Adriana's suicide made headlines, the school superintendent, Triantafillos Parlapanides, posted to social media that in this case, 'there are two sides to every story.'
This is an adult entrusted with the education and care of teenagers? This is appalling. No wonder bullies at his school beat and crush and slap and insult with impunity. No wonder the bullied feel even more helpless — the adults in charge won't stand up for the victims!
On Friday, the day of Adriana's wake, Parlapanides sent a series of emails to DailyMail.com in which he seemed to blame Adriana and her father for this tragedy. Responding to a question about whether the school had offered Adriana any services — as it's believed she had been bullied for quite some time before her suicide — this craven, blame-shifting, cowardly deflector wrote: 'After her mother's suicide since her father was having an affiar [sic] at the end of her 6th grade. Her father married the woman he had an affair with and moved her into the house. Her grades and choices declined in 7th and 8th grade. We offered her drug rehab and mental services on 5 occasions but father refused every time.'
Wow. The fish, as they say, rots from the head. This guy should be fired immediately and never allowed to work with children again. He violated Adriana's private health information and essentially blamed her father for her mother's suicide.
As of Thursday, the four girls allegedly involved in the attack at New Jersey's Central Regional High School have been charged; three with fourth degree assault, and one with disorderly conduct. Prior to that, her father said, the school did next to nothing: No investigation. No monitoring of social media.
It's fair to assume that Central Regional, like far too many schools across America, has no real rules against cyber-bullying. Why would they? There's no federal law against it, even as the CDC reported in October 2022 that one in five high school students reported being bullied on campus the previous year. More than one in six reported cyber-bullying. Self-reports are highest in middle schools at 33%, then high schools at 30%.
Where are our educators? Our administrators? Our elected officials?
Make no mistake: Cyber-bullying among children and adolescents is a public health crisis, just as the angry young American male is, just as the school shooter is, just as the post-COVID learning and socialization gap is, just as the woke orthodoxy that every boy or man who questions their gender should have access to women's and girls' bathrooms, locker rooms, shelters, prisons — whether or not girls and women feel safe — is as well.
In May of 2021, a 15-year-old boy raped a female classmate in a trans-friendly school bathroom. He assaulted that young girl in a bathroom stall. A teacher later testified that she saw two pairs of feet under the stall door but did nothing.
Scott Smith, the girl's father, said she had been held down on the floor and attacked in that stall. Why was a grown teacher afraid to knock? To yell 'What's going on in there?' Or 'Get out of there now and let me see what you're doing!'?
That school superintendent, Scott Ziegler, also did nothing. In fact, he claimed there was no record of that assault — or a similar sexual assault committed by the same boy, against another teenage girl, later that same year in another Virginia school.
For agitating for justice, for demanding that the school board tell the truth about sexual assaults in girls' bathrooms and what transgender policy may have to do with them, Scott Smith was arrested at a school board meeting, dragged on the ground till his shirt rolled up to his chest, winding up with a bloody mouth.
Humiliated.
That's what fathers standing up for young female students in America get today — shamed as anti-trans, bigots, MAGA or MAGA-adjacents, idiots who can't comprehend liberal nuances.
Michael Kuch, speaking out after his daughter was bullied and committed suicide, gets smeared by the school superintendent, who took it upon himself to air their private family matters.
And look at the non-coverage of whistleblower Jamie Reed in much of liberal media. Here is a 42-year-old who identifies as 'a queer woman, politically to the left of Bernie Sanders' — married to a trans man — who worked for four years at The Washington University Transgender Center at St. Louis Children's Hospital.
She's the first American gender clinic worker to come forward and say children are being harmed by medical gender transition.
You would think her explosive essay, published yesterday in the Free Press, would make headlines everywhere. Not so, despite her dire warnings.
'What's happening to children,' Reed wrote, 'is morally and medically appalling.' With little more than claims of gender confusion and two visits with an in-house therapist, these children, she says, are placed on puberty-blockers that can result in lifelong sterilization or increased risks for cancer or who knows what — because we have no longitudinal studies. The teenagers Reed saw, most of them virgins, were approved for surgeries that many come to regret. They had no idea what their minds and bodies were in for, but they trusted the adults at this facility.
Reed reprinted an email from one angry parent:
'Please be advised that I'm revoking my consent for this course of medical treatment. Grades have dropped, there's been an in-patient behavioral health visit and now he's on five different medications . . . [Redacted] is a shell of his former self, riddled with anxiety. Who knows if it's because of the hormone blockers or the other medications. I revoke my consent.'
For alerting us to this public health emergency, Reed says she expects to be shamed and unemployable. 'I am putting myself at serious personal and professional risk,' Reed wrote. 'Almost everyone in my life advised me to keep my head down. But I cannot in good conscience do so.'
The children of America need more adults like Jamie Reed and Michael Kuch and Scott Smith: Willing to stand up for the most vulnerable, the most at-risk, to push back against this ultra-woke world in which black and white, right and wrong, are increasingly archaic ideas. We cannot abide bullies, be they kids in class or teachers who look the other way or school shooters whose aberrant behaviors give plenty of warning — our most recent a six-year-old who intentionally shot his teacher — or trans activists who equate concern and questioning with prejudice and hate.
We are failing our children. It's long past time for the adults in the room to grow up.
*************************************************
DeSantis Camp Calls Out 'The View' Host for 'Dishonest and Incorrect' On-Air Claim: 'Stop Lying'
A representative for Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis called out purported Republican Alyssa Farah Griffin after she charged on ABC’s “The View” Thursday that the governor is “erasing history” for black students by banning critical race theory in classrooms.
Griffin falsely claimed DeSantis had hijacked the curriculum on the subject of black history in order to censor topics such as slavery and the civil rights movement.
In a response to the governor’s recent ban of an AP black history course that was CRT in disguise, she made an accusation that was not supported by the facts.
“You’re literally talking about erasing history,” she said on “The View.”
“This is straight up saying we’re not gonna learn about slavery, we’re not going to learn about the Civil War. That’s much more dangerous,” Griffin continued.
The AP black history course in question had been appropriately flagged as a trojan horse for Marxist ideals and will not be taught in Florida classrooms in its original form.
DeSantis took issue with its focus on black history as “queer theory” and also its literature on “abolishing prisons,” among other topics.
None of that was mentioned on “The View,” and so DeSantis’ press secretary, Bryan Griffin — no relation, apparently — called out the ABC host and CNN contributor online after her comments aired.
“@Alyssafarah stop lying,” Bryan Griffin tweeted. “Florida has extensive requirements to teach black history. But @GovRonDeSantis will not allow ideologues to utilize black history as a vehicle for a political agenda in FL’s classrooms.” He later told Fox News that Griffin’s claims were “both dishonest and incorrect.”
Columnist David Marcus also reacted to her comments on “The View.”
“This is incredible lying, but I think Whoopi at least believes it,” Marcus tweeted. “Alyssa Farrah Griffin knows damn well that CRT is implemented in the schools but is too afraid to say so.”
In his tweet, DeSantis’ press secretary shared a link to the state’s approved curriculum on the subject of African American History.
According to the Florida Department of Education, students will learn about the history of “African peoples before the political conflicts that led to the development of slavery; the passage to America; the enslavement experience; abolition; and the history and contributions of Americans of the African diaspora to society.”
“Students shall develop an understanding of the ramifications of prejudice, racism, and stereotyping on individual freedoms, and examine what it means to be a responsible and respectful person, for the purpose of encouraging tolerance of diversity in a pluralistic society and for nurturing and protecting democratic values and institutions,” the department clearly states.
But it also clearly states that theories on race intended to stoke racial division will not be permitted in classrooms for the purpose of poisoning young people against one another.
“Instructional personnel may facilitate discussions and use curricula to address, in an age-appropriate manner, how the individual freedoms of persons have been infringed by slavery, racial oppression, racial segregation, and racial discrimination, as well as topics relating to the enactment and enforcement of laws resulting in racial oppression, racial segregation, and racial discrimination and how recognition of these freedoms has overturned these unjust laws,” the guidelines say.
The website adds that classroom instruction and curriculum “may not be used to indoctrinate or persuade students to a particular point of view.”
************************************************************
Washington University says it is 'alarmed' by whistleblower allegations against its transgender center and vows to 'ascertain the facts'
Washington University is 'alarmed' by the allegations of a whistleblower who worked at its transgender clinic at the St Louis Children's Hospital and has vowed to 'ascertain the facts'.
Jamie Reed, a former employee at the Washington University Transgender Center at St. Louis Children's Hospital, said that working there was like working 'in a cult' and that what is being done to kids is 'morally and medically appalling'.
After the article was published, Missouri's Attorney General Andrew Bailey confirmed his office was launching an major probe into the clinic following Reed's allegations, which he characterized as 'disturbing.'
Bailey said his primary goal was to make sure children were not harmed by 'individuals who may be more concerned with a radical social agenda than the health of children.'
In her affidavit, Reed said in one instance a girl was prescribed cross-sex hormones because she did not want to become pregnant.
'There was no need for this girl to be prescribed cross-sex hormones. What she needed was basic sex education and maybe contraception,' she said, adding that a basic assessment of her case would have revealed that.
'But because the doctors automatically prescribe cross-sex hormones or puberty blockers for children meeting the bare minimum criteria, this girl was unnecessarily placed on drugs that cause irreversible change to the body.'
She alleged that in another instance, a patient asked for their breasts to be removed and was given the surgery at St. Louis Children's Hospital - but just weeks later, the woman asked for them to be 'put back on.'
Reed draws the conclusion that proper assessment was not taken, and the patient was not properly informed that the changes were irreversible, according to the document.
The former employee added: 'Three months later, the patient contacted the surgeon and asked for their breasts to be "put back on." Had a requisite and adequate assessment been performed before the procedure, the doctors could have prevented this patient from undergoing irreversible surgical change.'
The whistleblower, who first came forward in The Free Press, included a list of outlandish requests children came into the center with, which she alleged doctors listened to and then prescribed cross-sex treatment for.
She said: 'Children come into the clinic using pronouns of inanimate objects like mushroom, rock, or helicopter. Children come into the clinic saying they want hormones because they do not want to be gay.
'Children come in changing their identities on a day-to-day basis. Children come in under clear pressure by a parent to identify in a way inconsistent with the child's actual identity.
'In all these cases, the doctors decide to issue puberty blockers or cross-sex hormones.'
Reed alleged the hospital's public claims that it did not perform gender transition surgeries on minors was a lie.
'The Center regularly refers minors for gender transition surgery,' she said. 'The Center routinely gives out the names and contact information of surgeons to those under the age of 18.
'At least one gender transition surgery was performed by Dr. Allison Snyder-Warwick at St. Louis Children's Hospital in the last few years,' Reed alleged.
In another shocking claim, Reed alleged that one 17-year-old patient was brought into the clinic by a man - who he was not related to. The teenager was living with the man.
The teenager started hormones 'as soon as they turned 18.' But the patient's mental health very quickly deteriorated - and Reed claims it was soon revealed the man who initially bought the child to the clinic was sexually and physically abusing him.
Despite learning of the alleged abuse of power, the center did not stop the gender transition treatment, the affidavit claims.
Reed worked at The Washington University Transgender Center at St. Louis Children's Hospital and was responsible for patient intake between 2018 and November 2022.
Reed said she took the job at the center with the intention of 'saving' trans kids, but that she believes what is happening amounts to 'permanent harm' on young, vulnerable children.
After four years, she says she became convinced the clinics were harming kids and families, whose understanding of the realities of the medical side-effects involved was scarily poor.
Doctors acted as though they were more entitled to make decisions than parents, says Reed, and only one parent's consent was required in cases involving minors.
Reed cites examples of a 17-year-old girl's birth canal allegedly being 'ripped open' when she had sex while taking testosterone to transition to male, unaware that the drug would cause her to bleed extensively if she had intercourse.
In other scenarios, she claims teenage girls were terrified when their clitorises turned into micro-penises while they took the drugs.
Some psychiatrically 'disturbed' children from juvenile detention centers were also presented because they had 'at some point' expressed an interest in changing gender.
The doctors I worked alongside at the Transgender Center said frequently about the treatment of our patients: 'We are building the plane while we are flying it.' No one should be a passenger on that kind of aircraft.'
Among those patients, according to Reed, was a boy who'd been sexually abusing dogs. 'Somewhere along the way, he expressed a desire to become female, so he ended up being seen at our center.
'The way the American medical system is treating these patients is the opposite of the promise we make to "do no harm."
'Instead, we are permanently harming the vulnerable patients in our care... what is happening to scores of children is morally and medically appalling.'
She describes seeing a sudden, sharp uptick in the number of young girls 'demanding testosterone', sometimes presenting themselves as 'clusters' from the same schools.
Reed perceived a 'lack of formal protocol' at the center, and that doctors ignored the fact young girls lied about having other illnesses and prescribed them hormones.
She reveals that in order for a young girl to start transitioning to male, all she needed to do was see a clinic-recommended therapist once or twice and obtain a letter of support for their decision.
That therapist was often given a template for the letter that was written by the clinic, according to Reed.
'Frequently, our patients declared they had disorders that no one believed they had.
'We had patients who said they had Tourette syndrome (but they didn't); that they had tic disorders (but they didn't); that they had multiple personalities (but they didn't).
'Clinics like the one where I worked are creating a whole cohort of kids with atypical genitals - and most of these teens haven't even had sex yet.
'They had no idea who they were going to be as adults. Yet all it took for them to permanently transform themselves was one or two short conversations with a therapist,' Reed writes.
She says the doctors at the hospital treat the issue of transitioning among teens as an 'experiment'.
'Experiments are supposed to be carefully designed. Hypotheses are supposed to be tested ethically.
'The doctors I worked alongside at the Transgender Center said frequently about the treatment of our patients: 'We are building the plane while we are flying it.'
'No one should be a passenger on that kind of aircraft.'
***********************************
13 February, 2023
Combatting Woke tyranny: can science be saved?
Joseph Forgas
The takeover of universities and scientific associations by radical Woke activists seeking to impose an ideological strait jacket on academia has now reached alarming proportions. Compelled speech, compulsory DEI declarations, de-platforming, and worst of all, the hounding and cancellation of anyone accused of departing from politically correct dogmas, have become hallmarks of coercion in academia.
The totalitarian objectives of Woke activism are directly traceable to Marxist-Leninist conflict ideologies, something I was forced to study for several years in my youth while living in a communist society. Strangely, the Woke academic revolution is not a movement by the dispossessed, but rather, is driven by secure upper middle-class activists who infiltrated powerful institutions, straining to outdo each other in vacuous moral posturing and virtue signalling.
The dispassionate pursuit of truth and free speech cannot coexist with such blind ideological activism in our universities and scientific associations. Much damage has already been done by the creeping take-over by zealots of our institutions. This happened while the silent majority remained silent and did nothing to prevent the destruction of some of our most important universities, research institutions, and scholarly associations.
A case in point now worth revisiting is the major recent scandal in psychological science when the executive of the Association of Psychological Science (APS) summarily terminated Prof. Klaus Fiedler, the Senior Editor of their flagship journal, Advances in Psychological Science. Fiedler was accused of racism by racial scholar Steven Othello Roberts [who is black], who was offended by critical reviews by four distinguished scientists (Hommel, Stanovich, Stroebe, Jussim) of his paper on Racial Inequality in Psychological Research. The Spectator Australia also covered this disgraceful incident at the time.
Rather than responding rationally to critical comments, as academic authors must do when getting negative feedback, Roberts published a denunciation of Fiedler and his critics, insinuating that as they were, to quote: ‘All senior White men.’ This illustrates his point that ‘…systemic racism exists in science. There is a racialised power structure that marginalises research by (and about) people of colour.’
Within days, an internet lynch mob was formed demanding Fiedler’s dismissal, while Fiedler was given limited opportunity to present his case. To its indelible shame, the Association of Psychological Science obliged.
Following the time-honored pattern of Woke activism and attendant moral outrage, the Woke warriors specifically demanded that APS should ‘empower and fund your Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion Committee to … address racism’, to ‘conduct remedial training for all editors on … anti-racism’, and ‘give Dr. Roberts the option to have his outstanding and important commentary published in PoPS, with the four other articles in question available only as supplementary online material … and grant him any additional reparative action he might deem necessary’.
This is a complete mockery of how science, and refereed publications in particular, are supposed to work. Woke activists now define what truth is and decide what should or should not be published. Freedom of speech, evidence, and rational discourse are summarily dispensed with, and political pressure is exerted to exact revenge on those declared as ideological enemies. And our scientific associations go along with this.
These are the same Orwellian strategies that oppressive tyrannical regimes have employed throughout history. The carefully constructed institutional edifice of universities and scientific associations exist precisely to resist ideological tyranny – but these institutions have largely failed us in recent years. It could be argued that the only racially-charged rhetoric in this sorry saga came from Dr. Roberts, who did not argue his case in the journal as invited by Fiedler, and resorted instead to publicly accusing Fiedler and his critics.
However, there are some incipient signs that a kind of resistance to Woke tyranny in science may be slowly forming. Recently, over 130 psychological scientists sent a strong letter of protest to APS demanding that the Association revisits Fiedler’s termination. The letter was signed by such influential academics as Steven Pinker, Jonathan Haidt, Robin Dunbar, and Roy Baumeister, among others. Perhaps this rare reaction is due to Fiedler’s widely recognised qualities as an eminent scholar with a highly respected editorial track record for several major journals, also explicitly acknowledged by APS at the time of his appointment.
Once criticisms of the APS decision surfaced, and five out of six associate editors as well as numerous academics resigned in protest from the Association, APS then disingenuously claimed that Roberts’ allegations of racism had nothing at all to do with Fiedler’s termination. This lame explanation lacks credibility.
APS can now be fairly accused of compromising the values of scientific integrity and transparency they are obliged to represent. Their claim that Roberts’ incendiary allusion to racism had nothing at all to do with Fiedler’s termination is unlikely. As Fiedler argues, ‘The APS action was prompted by widespread disquiet about ‘racism’, not editorial practices. A disquiet was triggered by a misconceived and unfounded accusation, as the unreported evidence shows’.
Claims by disgruntled authors against editors would never succeed if it was not for the Woke mob baying for retribution. The spineless activism of APS, the wanton destruction of the career and reputation of a decent and highly respected scientist, and the feeble and dishonest protestations amount to a complete betrayal of APS’ mission that has brought shame and disrepute on the field.
The real issue is that in addition to many university administrations, independent scientific associations like APS have been taken over by ideologues, for whom social activism is more important than defending truth and scientific integrity.
APS is not alone in betraying their foundational values. Numerous scientific associations and conference organisers now impose an absurd requirement that scientific papers must be prefaced by regurgitated statements about how the work promotes diversity, equity, and inclusiveness, a policy reminiscent of the well-honed coercive ideological practices of totalitarian regimes.
Just such Woke activism is also ripe in the STEM disciplines like physics and chemistry, as documented at a recent meeting on free speech and academic freedom at Stanford University.
As the Economist recently noted, many academic job advertisements mandate elaborate statements about an applicant’s commitment to DEI principles, and scientific merit often comes second to political correctness and activism as a selection criterion. Some job ads explicitly exclude white males from applying, all in the name of social justice, diversity, equity, and inclusiveness.
Academic institutions are also eliminating objective tests in the name of improving inclusiveness and equity. Good luck with going to a doctor next time who has not been selected on merit…
Woke ideology sees entire disciplines, such as mathematics, as racist that must be de-colonised because it insists that there can only be one correct answer to a mathematical problem – thereby privileging white supremacy, and denying the legitimacy of alternative ways of ‘knowing’. Once reputable institutions such as the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory and the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation go along with such bizarre nonsense, and California has a proposal to do away with advanced math programs in schools because they are considered racist.
Is there a way back from such lunacy? Some scholars at Stanford University’s forum on free speech argued that the situation is beyond redemption. As many faculties in the arts, humanities, and social science are now exclusively staffed by like-minded ideologues, even if free speech was miraculously restored, there is nobody left to voice alternative views. After decades of hiring faculty based on ideology and Woke principles rather than merit, entire disciplines may be doomed. The only solution may be to start new institutions and new associations explicitly committed to heterodoxy. Within psychology, just such an initiative is now in progress so that disgraceful episodes like Fiedler’s cannot re-occur.
Recent protests in the Fiedler case may offer a faint hope that things might be slowly turning. But this will only happen if all scientists, and all concerned citizens consistently speak up against the kind of injustice committed by the APS.
https://zephr.spectator.com.au/2023/02/combatting-woke-tyranny-can-science-be-saved/
************************************************************
How to promote academic freedom in America
WHEN SEEKING a job to teach in the University of California system, academic excellence is not enough. Applicants must also submit a diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) statement, explaining how they will advance those goals. That sounds fair enough, except that a promise to treat everyone equally would constitute a fail. Meanwhile in Florida, Governor Ron DeSantis and the state legislature are trying to ban the teaching of critical race theory, an approach to studying racism with which they disagree. While this has been going on, a row has broken out (also in Florida) over a new pre-college course in African-American studies. These three developments have one thing in common: they are attempts to win arguments by controlling the institutions where those arguments take place.
Threats to academic freedom in America can come from many directions. Students sometimes object to being exposed to ideas they deem troubling. Some even try to get faculty members fired for allowing such ideas to be voiced. Donors occasionally threaten to withdraw funding, which has a chilling effect on what can be taught. Speakers can be banned. Academics may self-censor, or succumb to groupthink. Occasionally American society demands restrictions on academic freedom, as when professors in the 1950s were asked to take loyalty tests to prove they were not communist sympathisers.
All these threats still exist. Plenty of people have rightly worried about academic freedom in America in the past. And yet one of the things that is distinctive about this moment is that the warring parties have determined that the best way to win the argument, and the most thorough way to stifle debate, is to remake institutions according to their preferences.
DEI statements may seem innocuous enough, and their intentions may seem laudable. Yet if they are used as a filter for hiring, they will filter out anyone who fails to toe the campus-progressive line, and anyone who objects on principle to ideological litmus tests.
In Florida, Mr DeSantis seems to be hoping that left-wing professors in state colleges will go to work somewhere else, creating openings for more conservative professors. The Stop WOKE Act, now law in Florida, bars teaching about systemic racism unless this is done “in an objective manner”—a qualifier which is rather subjective. Academics who cross the line will be threatened with dismissal.
As for that course on African-American history, a draft version was denounced from the right as dangerous woke nonsense and then, when it was revised, denounced from the left as a whitewashed version of black history. The notion that students might look at contradictory ideas and judge their merits was too terrifying to contemplate.
Partisans on both sides seem indecently eager to create separate institutions for liberals and conservatives, where the liberals would never have to hear wrongthink (a category that would include some of Martin Luther King’s ideas, were they proposed by a less revered speaker), and the conservatives would never have to encounter the works of Derrick Bell (who has as good a claim as anyone to have developed critical race theory).
No doubt this would make both ideological tribes happier. But it would be a disaster for the country. Democracy depends on citizens who can find compromises. Liberalism depends on taking an opponent’s argument seriously and learning from it. America needs institutions that can have these debates, rather than monocultural incubators of mutually exclusive ideologies. DEI statements could even be repurposed to this end: rather than asking applicants what they have done to further racial diversity and equity, institutions of higher learning might start asking how they plan to further real diversity of thought
https://www.economist.com/leaders/2023/02/09/how-to-promote-academic-freedom-in-america
**************************************************************
How ‘Diversity’ Policing Fails Science
At Texas Tech University, a candidate for a faculty job in the department of biological sciences was flagged by the department’s search committee for not knowing the difference between “equality” and “equity.” Another was flagged for his repeated use of the pronoun “he” when referring to professors. Still another was praised for having made a “land acknowledgment” during the interview process. A land acknowledgment is a statement noting that Native Americans once lived in what is now the United States.
Amidst the explosion of university diversity, equity and inclusion policies, Texas Tech’s biology department adopted its own DEI motion promising to “require and strongly weight a diversity statement from all candidates.” These short, written declarations are meant to summarize an academic job seeker’s past and potential contributions to DEI efforts on campus.
The biology department’s motion mandates that every search committee issue a report on its diversity statement evaluations. Through a Freedom of Information Act request, I have acquired the evaluations of more than a dozen job candidates.
To my knowledge, these documents—published in redacted form by the National Association of Scholars—are the first evaluations of prospective faculty DEI contributions to be made publicly available. They confirm what critics of DEI statements have long argued: That they inevitably act as ideological litmus tests.
One Texas Tech search committee penalized a candidate for espousing race-neutrality in teaching. The candidate “mentioned that DEI is not an issue because he respects his students and treats them equally,” the evaluation notes. “This indicates a lack of understanding of equity and inclusion issues.”
Another search committee flagged a candidate for failing to properly understand “the difference between equity and equality, even on re-direct,” noting that this suggests a “rather superficial understanding of DEI more generally.” This distinction arises frequently in DEI training, always as a markedly ideological talking point. According to the schema, equality means equal opportunity, but, to use the words of Vice President Kamala Harris, “Equitable treatment means we all end up in the same place.” Somehow, failing to explain that distinction reflects poorly on a biologist.
The biology department’s search committees also rewarded fluency in the language of identity politics. An immunology candidate was praised for awareness of the problems of “unconscious bias.” “Inclusivity in lab” was listed as a virology candidate’s strength: “her theme will be diversity, and she will actively work to creating the culture—e.g. enforce code of conduct, prevent microaggressions etc.” Another candidate’s strengths included “Land acknowledgement in talk.”
Many critics rightly point out that diversity statements invite viewpoint discrimination. DEI connotes a set of highly contestable social and political views. Requiring faculty to catalog their commitment to those views necessarily blackballs anybody who dissents from an orthodoxy that has nothing to do with scientific competence.
The Texas Tech documents show how DEI evaluations can easily seek out these contestable social and political views. The search committees espouse a narrow definition of diversity, encouraging a myopic fixation on race and gender—a definition over which reasonable people can disagree. “Some of us were surprised that there was limited mention of BIPOC issues,” one evaluation notes, using a DEI acronym for “black, indigenous and people of color.” For another candidate, “Diversity was only defined as country of origin and notably never mentioned women.” Of course, many scholars actively seek to avoid a fixation on race and gender, preferring to promote diversity of thought and equality.
Throughout these reports, the search committees displayed an eagerness to find breaches of DEI orthodoxy. One cell biology candidate was given a “red flag” for alleged “microaggressions towards women faculty.” The report names two examples: “assuming one junior faculty was a graduate student” and “minimizing the difficulties of women in the US by comparing to worse situations elsewhere.”
The evidence shows that diversity statements function as political litmus tests, but it’s worse than that. Heavily valuing DEI while selecting cell biologists, virologists and immunologists constitutes a massive failure of priority. This is an issue of academic freedom, and it is a degradation of higher education.
***********************************
12 February, 2023
Students protest after New Hampshire school district bans urinals
Students walked out of a New Hampshire school in protest of the district banning the use of urinals and shared spaces in locker rooms, according to a report.
On Friday, about 150 students walked out of Milford High School and middle school in protest of the new bathroom restrictions.
The protest came after a lengthy debate by the board of education over whether to separate school bathrooms and locker rooms at the school by the sex assigned at birth and not gender identity, The Boston Globe reported.
The students demonstrated for about 45 minutes, according to Superintendent Christi Michaud.
One student who participated in the walkout told a local television station that students were not consulted about the new policy.
“Nobody that I know – ask anyone here – no one requested this change,” student Jay Remella told WMUR during the walkout. “It was solely made by the school board and a parent complaint.”
Board of education member Noah Boudreault proposed the urinal prohibition as part of a “compromise,” that was accepted by a 4-1 vote on Monday.
The ban replaced an earlier proposal from vice chair Nathaniel Wheeler to separate bathrooms and locker rooms strictly on students’ gender assigned at birth — which was criticized by LQBTQ students, according to The Globe.
Wheeler’s proposal would have offered separate, gender-neutral single-stall restrooms, effectively ending the district’s current policy of allowing students to use the bathroom of the gender they identify with.
At Monday’s board meeting, parents supportive of Wheeler’s proposal donned yellow smiley-face stickers that said “Support Parental Rights,” according to The Globe.
But a majority of the audience wore rainbow flags and condemned the policy as discriminatory during a public speaking portion of the meeting.
Nick Romeri, a 16-year-old transgender sophomore, said the policies could have a negative impact on the mental health of the district’s LGBTQ students. He said he and other queer students just want to be treated the same as cisgender high school students.
“I want my high school experience to be just like everyone else’s, like getting my license, taking biology class, and figuring my life out, not fighting for it,” he said.
Romeri urged concerned parents not to react out of fear.
“I see all these scared people on both sides not knowing what to do yet wanting to help their children in different ways,” he said. “The best way you can help your children is not discriminating against their peers, but listening and helping your child grow. That is all we want.”
He later told The Globe that he was happy that a compromise was reached, but felt the ban on urinals was unnecessary.
Under Boudreault’s proposal, students would be required to change for gym class inside stalls instead of in shared locker room spaces.
While changing, the capacity of each bathroom will be capped at the number of stalls it has — meaning only eight girls could change at a time in the girls’ high school locker room and only three boys at a time in their locker room.
Boudreault told The Globe that his main concern was safety and that his job as a board member is “to mitigate risk.”
He said he does not view LGBTQ students as dangerous, but said that something had to be done to address the concerns of both parties so the school could deal with other pressing issues it is facing, such as students vaping in the bathrooms.
“My proposed solution took care of a myriad of other issues that the school district is experiencing, so instead of fighting the gender fight, I decided to fight the larger fight,” he told the newspaper.
Superintendent Michaud raised concerns that the new directive could jam up bathrooms and take away from instructional time.
The school is reviewing if the policy is legal under New Hampshire’s plumbing code which demands schools offer one “water closet” per 30 students, according to The Globe. The school has about 1,200 students between middle school and high school.
The number of stalls is not evenly distributed between both schools and genders, with most stalls being in girls’ bathrooms.
Michaud said installing bathroom stalls in place of urinals throughout the school could potentially cost tens of thousands of dollars.
The bathroom discussions began last fall when a transgender girl began using the middle school girls’ locker room, Michaud told The Globe.
“Nobody asked for this,” student Autumn Diveley told WMUR during Friday’s walkout. “Nobody but the few parents who complained to the school board asked for this.”
According to The Globe, a similar contentious debate regarding bathrooms is ongoing in nearby Concord as New Hampshire state lawmakers consider bills that could affect transgender students.
https://nypost.com/2023/02/10/students-protest-after-new-hampshire-school-district-bans-urinals/
*****************************************************
Radicalized sex-ed: A telling tale of how NYC educrats shut out parents, even on Community Education Councils
I recently listened to our school’s sex educator proudly exclaim that she teaches her entire puberty course without saying “boy or girl, man or woman once” because she was committed to “inclusivity.” I was mystified.
No one had told parents, even those on the Community Education Council, that this would be how such courses would be taught. But it’s all-too-typical of how the Department of Education treats these councils. And parents.
Five years ago, this same educator taught my eldest children in the same elementary school about puberty, explaining to the boys what would happen as they became men and to the girls what would happen on their journey to womanhood.
She did this in sex-segregated classrooms, because all the adults, including her, agreed 9- and 10-year-olds were most comfortable learning about the soon-to-happen changes to their bodies in sex-specific groups, where they’d be more likely to ask questions.
In fact, our parent coordinator, a DOE employee, wrote to fifth-grade parents in 2019 that “two [of four classes] will be with students separated by gender. This is more comfortable for the boys and girls when discussing certain topics and issues.”
Yet I was now listening to a parents-only Zoom presentation about the upcoming course — taught by the same sex educator at the same school — and the changes from just a few years ago made it unrecognizable.
Boys and girls are no longer segregated for sex-ed classes but all take the class together, for starters. And the educator told parents she follows DOE guidance on subject matter: “It is so important to them that we are discussing gender identity and sex assigned at birth at every opportunity so that no kid ever feels othered.”
She gave parents a “Gender & Sexuality Glossary for Parents & Caregivers,” which uses the word “gender” 27 times but never defines it other than to say that the “gender binary” is “the cultural concept that male (masculine) and female (feminine) are the only genders.”
Yet “gender-fluid” is defined; it’s a person who “identifies with multiple genders.” As is “gender identity”: “a person’s internal sense of their gender — who they are in their heart and mind relating to their gender.”
How, I wondered, did a sensible, reasonable puberty course transform itself into a radical gender-ideology indoctrination session? One thing I knew for sure: Kids are the losers.
In 2019, when my daughter had this very puberty-education program, she loved it. She was separated into a girls-only classroom for half the sessions. The girls could ask questions, and did. Recently I asked her if she thought anyone would have asked questions if there were boys in the room. “I doubt it,” she replied.
Bizarrely, DOE’s sex-segregation rules only apply to health classes. My son’s high school currently offers a financial literacy club open only to girls and non-binary students. Boys need not apply.
No one has suggested kids have changed. Or that girls now feel comfortable asking about tampons or bras in front of boys, or that boys won’t be embarrassed hearing about erections in front of girls.
The NYC DOE Guidelines on Gender would shock most parents if they knew about them. Yet despite one of the most expansive (and expensive) elected parent-leader systems in the country, parents were never given an opportunity to weigh in on the Gender Guidelines, which also allow boys who identify as girls full and mandatory access to girls bathrooms and sports teams and prohibit educators from saying things like a “boy’s penis.”
The guidelines were created by DOE’s first “LGBTQ liaison,” Jared Fox, an unelected man from Iowa with no kids and apparently no need to consult with city parents before radically changing how our kids are taught.
DOE is now holding biannual elections for its Community Education Councils. It pays great lip service to “elevating parent voice” and pays millions to advertise these elections in many languages. But why should parents run and devote hours away from their families to influence school policy when the agency adopts enormous changes, like the Gender Guidelines, without ever mentioning the proposed changes to elected parent leaders?
I can’t say I’d be surprised by low interest in these elections. I served as president of Manhattan’s largest school district’s Community Education Council, 2017-2021. I was also a member of my kids’ elementary School Leadership Team, 2016-2022. Despite both positions overlapping with the development of the Gender Guidelines, never once did anyone from DOE, my school principal or district superintendent ever inform us about these guidelines or solicit feedback from parents.
If DOE wants parents to run and serve as parent leaders, it should commit to a real partnership with parents, and that starts with a real seat at the table and a real opportunity to be heard.
************************************************
‘Undeniable trend’: Australian boys’ schools feel the pressure to go co-ed
Next year Knox Grammar – one of the state’s largest schools – will have educated boys at its upper north shore campus for a century.
In that time, the private school has expanded from a single Federation-era house to vast and manicured grounds spanning almost 10 hectares. But the school’s motto “virile agitur” – a Latin phrase that translates to “do the manly thing” – has stayed the same.
Founded as a Presbyterian boys’ school with about two dozen students, it now has more than 3120 enrolments. Knox’s major expansion gathered pace in the early 2000s when it overhauled its boarding centre, “great hall”, 500-seat aquatic centre and the senior school.
But even under the weight of its all-boys history, principal Scott James acknowledges Knox “cannot be a standalone institution”, and “must provide opportunities for boys and girls to socialise and integrate”.
“Single-sex schools compared with co-educational schooling is an important educational conversation we have at Knox,” James said. “There is an abundance of research showing both pros and cons for each type of educational model.”
Establishing relationships with nearby girls’ private schools – Ravenswood, Pymble Ladies College and Abbotsleigh – has been key in allowing the school “to provide supervised activities that offer co-educational learning experiences”.
“We are now looking at shared study sessions with Abbotsleigh,” he said.
Eight years ago, The Armidale School famously became the first of the elite Athletic Association of Great Public Schools (GPS) to open their doors to girls. A former principal described the move as part of “an almost unstoppable wave”, after seeing a shift from single-sex to co-ed in all but the oldest schools in Britain.
Britain’s Winchester College, the 640-year-old alma mater of UK Prime Minister Rishi Sunak, has now joined the pack. Girls can enrol at the $78,000-a-year Hampshire school in sixth form, and Queenwood’s principal Elizabeth Stone will become head of the school this year, the first woman to lead the college.
Across Sydney, the pressure for boys’ private schools to look to admit girls is rising, and parents and alumni are making their voices heard.
A push by tech billionaire Scott Farquhar for Cranbrook to go co-ed was heavily backed by a group of former students who said private boys’ schools foster attitudes and behaviours that are no longer acceptable in broader society.
While that school’s final decision to admit girls by 2026 was not achieved without pain, one school council member believes will be the first of many eastern suburbs schools that will eventually make the co-ed leap.
Scandal hasn’t helped the case for private boys’ schools. Prominent Sydney schools such as Knox, Trinity and The King’s School all featured in the Royal Commission into Institutional Responses to Child Sexual Abuse.
Knox – which charges fees up to $37,600 – most recently hit headlines after 20 students were expelled or suspended after sharing racist and homophobic videos, messages and rantings on violent misogyny via an online chat group.
In the past year alone, Waverley College expelled six students over bullying that involved “assault and humiliation-type behaviours”, the incident sparking an external investigation and calls for a cultural audit at the school; while Cranbrook was forced to undertake a detailed internal review after reports of anti-Semitic bullying.
At Newington College, a possible shift to co-ed is also on the table, with the school putting the idea to its community last February. In a message to parents in November, the school’s chairman Tony McDonald said no decisions had been made.
“Council has delved into research and looked further at other schools both here and overseas,” McDonald said. “We have commissioned independent experts to distil strategic opportunities ... and we are also deep in the process of interrogating foundational operational questions.”
The debate is unfolding against a backdrop of decline in single-sex schools: the number of private single-sex schools fell in the past decade even as the number of independent schools rose. There are now 68 private single-sex schools, down from 79 in 2012.
Data from the Association of Independent Schools NSW shows all-boys schools made up 7 per cent of the 511 private schools across the state last year.
***********************************
10 February, 2023
Princeton fostering 'continued antisemitism' by hosting speaker who compares Israelis to Nazis
Pete Hegseth weighs in on the petition to remove a statue of John Witherspoon, Princeton's sixth president, from his alma mater's campus for owning slaves:
Princeton University is pushing the "disturbing continued antisemitism" fostered on college campuses by hosting a prominent pro-Palestine activist who has repeatedly compared Israelis to Nazis, Fox News' Pete Hegseth said.
"A guy like this should not be chosen in the first place if your goal is to foster dialogue," Hegseth, a Fox & Friends Weekend co-host and Princeton alumnus, said. "If your goal is to foster one particular viewpoint you've decided is the legitimate viewpoint, then he probably represents the views of the English department, which is left-wing and pro-Palestinian."
Princeton hosted pro-Palestinian activist and journalist Mohammed El-Kurd on Wednesday, sparking outrage from the campus’s Jewish community. El-Kurd has accused Jewish Israelis and Zionists of eating the organs of Palestinians; often called them bloodthirsty; repeatedly compared Israelis to Nazis; and praised terrorism against Israeli civilians.
"Believing in what he's espoused is by definition, intolerance," Hegseth told Fox News Digital. "The university says it does not tolerate intolerance, but only as it pertains to other forms of racism."
"Somehow antisemitism gets a carve-out," he added. "And it's an ongoing sin and a stain that the modern left is oddly, eerily and scarily silent on."
The executive director for Princeton’s Center for Jewish Life, Rabbi Steinlauf, told The Princeton Tory: "We have reached out repeatedly to Professor Jeff Dolven in the Department of English, expressing our disappointment in this invite, and respectfully asking that his department publicly provide context for Mr. El-Kurd’s rhetoric: our request is for the English Department to acknowledge and call out his dangerous language."
The Anti-Defamation League wrote that "even a cursory analysis of his [El-Kurd's] social media and his book ‘Rifqa,’ reveals an indisputably troubling pattern of rhetoric and slander that ranges far beyond reasoned criticism of Israel. It is unvarnished, vicious antisemitism." In his book, El-Kurd wrote, "they [Israelis] harvest organs of the martyred [Palestinians], feed their warriors our own."
El-Kurd has also compared Israelis to Nazis in numerous tweets from May and June of last year.
He tweeted that "Zionist settlers" were starting fires in a Palestinian neighborhood in Jerusalem and said "these are the sadistic barbaric neonazi pigs that claim to be indigenous to our land."
"I don’t care who this offends they have completely internalized the ways of the nazis," he tweeted in another.
Hegseth said the English department's sponsorship of El-Kurd "is part of the disturbing continued antisemitism that is allowed to fester and be fostered at college campuses across America."
"If you're going to bring that radical of a view in, at least bring a fact-based, commonsense view from the pro-Israeli side who will call out the ahistorical and, frankly, immoral stances that he takes," Hegseth told Fox News.
El-Kurd, a correspondent the progressive magazine, The Nation, was invited to Princeton as the speaker for the annual Edward W. Said ’57 Memorial Lecture, which is intended to foster serious discussions about the Israeli–Palestinian conflict.
A Feb. 5 letter, signed by over 40 students, called on the English department to "openly denounce a speaker committed to disseminating hatred, libel, and calls to violence against Jewish members of the University community." The letter clarified that in the name of free speech, they were not calling for cancelation, but condemnation of the event.
****************************************************
School Districts Across a Red State Adopted Policies to Hide Students’ Gender Transitions From Parents<
Documents obtained by a parental rights group show that school districts across the state of Idaho adopted policies to conceal students’ gender transitions from their parents after the Idaho State School Board Association instructed them to do so.
According to parental rights organization Parents Defending Education, several Idaho school districts implemented policies that stated that school staff members could be demoted or terminated for violating a student’s confidentiality relating to LGBTQ+ issues, including disclosing the student’s gender identity from their parents. The policies were discovered in FOIA documents obtained by PDE. The ISSBA provided school districts with a template to create such policies.
For example, the Orofino Joint School District’s policy adapted by the ISSBA states that: “School employees should not disclose a student’s transgender status or sexual orientation to other individuals...the student’s parents/guardians, unless they have a legitimate need to know or unless the student has authorized such disclosure. Action in violation of such student confidentiality may subject an employee to discipline, up to and including possible termination and for certificated personnel, a report to the Professional Standards Commission.”
Another school district in Juliaetta, Idaho appeared to pay the Idaho School Boards Association at least $2,000 for “template policies,” which included a template to create the district’s LGBTQ+ policy keeping parents in the dark about their child’s gender identity.
"This is further proof that living in a 'red' state doesn't protect families from these issues in school - and that the traditional power brokers in education policy who families have trusted for many years, like school board associations, are as much a part of the problem as well-known activist groups,” PDE President Nicki Neily said. It's worth noting that state school board associations are funded by dues from local school boards - which themselves are paid for through taxes. It's time for local school districts to take a stand against these unaccountable bureaucracies and cut off the spigot."
In September, Republican Sen. Tim Scott (SC) introduced legislation that would prevent schools from hiding information about a students “gender identity” from their parents, which Townhall covered.
“The law in the United States has long recognized the importance of parental rights. A parent’s right to oversee the care education of their child is guaranteed by the Fourteenth Amendment,” the bill reads. “Parents have a fundamental, constitutionally guaranteed right to raise and educate their children in the way they choose.”
“Public schools across the country are violating these fundamental parental and familial rights by deliberately hiding information about gender transitioning from their parents,” it continued.
“These schools are sabotaging the parent-child relationship and encouraging children to keep secrets from the adults who are charged with protecting and defending them – their parents,” the bill said. “Children do best when their parents are actively involved in their education.”
******************************************************
Virginia parents outraged after education board nominee who stood against socialism is ousted
Virginia senators nixed Suparna Dutta's nomination to the education board one week after she sparred with another member over the Constitution and socialism.
Virginia Democrats blocked a conservative appointee from serving on the state education board to silence opposing viewpoints, parents in the Old Dominion State told Fox News.
"Her ejection is a kick in the gut to all of us parents who are concerned about lack of transparency, lack of choice and hoards of our tax dollars being used to fund district-mandated social activism supplanting academics in the classroom," Fairfax County parent Brooke Corbett told Fox News.
"Voting to remove her because she's not qualified for the board as a public school parent is just as ludicrous as stating parents should not be telling schools what to teach when they object to offensive, unacademic socialist instruction," she continued.
Gov. Glenn Youngkin, who campaigned on parental rights in schools, appointed Suparna Dutta to the Virginia Board of Education in July. But the Indian immigrant and Fairfax County parent advocate lost her confirmation in the Senate of Virginia Tuesday night on a party-line vote.
"Unfortunately, this is all too common," Fight for Schools Executive Director Ian Prior told Fox News. "Our schools and education system has become so infiltrated by angry, woke, know-it-all activists that it is going to take a generation to undo the damage."
"This says a lot about the far left and their so-called equity, diversity, and inclusion," Prior, himself a Virginia parent, said. "What they really are for is uniformity of viewpoint and if that includes diversity then they get to go virtue signal as if that’s more important to them than finding people that will march in lockstep with their morally bankrupt ideas."
Dutta's removal came one week after she sparred with another board member over whether public schools should present socialism as "incompatible with democracy." The parental rights advocate encouraged public school curriculums to focus on "traditional American values" in an earlier board meeting, leading the progressive Virginia Grassroots Coalition to labeled her a "far-right extremist" as it campaigned against her confirmation.
"I thought people celebrated diversity. Whether it's diversity of thought, diversity of viewpoint or diversity of any of the many characteristics?" Dutta told Fox News ahead of the vote.
Prior, a champion for school choice and parents' rights, said he's not surprised Virginia democrats mobilized to "spike the appointment of a well qualified and respected parent advocate like Ms. Dutta. Her diverse viewpoints and experience would be too much for their fragile minds."
https://www.foxnews.com/us/virginia-parents-outraged-education-board-nominee-stood-socialism-ousted
***********************************
9 February, 2023
Ownership, Control, and Reform: Market-Based Approaches to Universities
By almost any indicator, American higher education is in trouble. Enrollments have fallen continuously since 2011, the longest period of sustained decline in the over 150 years since the federal government began regular data collection. Opinion surveys show low levels of public support for America’s universities. For decades, higher-education tuition fees rose faster than nearly all other prices and even more than American incomes, meaning that, amidst general affluence, college had become less affordable. Student outcomes, too, generally have been disappointing, with a majority of entering freshmen at baccalaureate schools either failing to graduate within the expected four years or ending up “underemployed,” taking jobs historically filled by those with a high school education or less.
Alarmingly, there is striking evidence of a lack of collegiate intellectual diversity and tolerance for alternative points of view, as witnessed by numerous incidents of shouting down speakers or otherwise canceling their visits. Freedom of expression, characterized by vigorous but civil debate over competing ideas—the foundational principle on which good universities operate—is in peril. Most frightening? Higher education seems impervious to change—resistant to needed reforms.
An overwhelming majority of American students attend so-called public universities, legally owned by public entities, usually state governments. But with some small but important exceptions, even so-called private colleges and universities receive a considerable amount of federal-government support, often indirectly. At private schools, many students use federally provided loans to pay otherwise-unaffordable high tuition fees, while faculty, staff, and outside donors also receive massive amounts of federal research support or other forms of indirect aid (e.g., favorable tax treatment of donations and investment income).
However, the federal government appears to be more the problem than the solution, as is evidenced by the New York Federal Reserve Bank and others suggesting that its financial-aid programs have contributed mightily to rising tuition fees. Therefore, reform of the federal financial-aid system is urgently needed, but the Biden administration is actually aggravating the problem with constitutionally, financially, and academically dubious loan-forgiveness programs. Another complication: Higher education itself has become a prime provider of money, ideas, and the training of many—largely progressive—governmental leaders, and it is thus now an almost sacrosanct ward of the state.
Hence, in the current national political environment, arguably the best hope for reform of public higher education will come at the state level. State governments “own” most of the public universities in some sense, and their governing boards are usually selected via the political process, although in a myriad of different ways (i.e., gubernatorial and/or legislative appointment; election by the public). If the U.S. is, in the late Justice Louis D. Brandeis’ phrase, a “laboratory of democracy,” are some states paving the way toward positive substantive changes in the way colleges and universities operate?
The Florida Initiatives
Florida in particular has been receiving a good deal of attention lately. Let by Gov. Ron DeSantis, who is highly critical of American higher education, Florida has initiated several reforms. I’ll mention just three: He is bringing in a number of conservative academics and activists to serve on the governing board of New College, a rather unique, public liberal arts college in Sarasota; he is demanding accounting from all public universities on their expenditures related to “diversity, equity, and inclusion” (DEI); and he is supporting direct state-university funding of research and teaching decidedly outside of mainstream progressive academia.
Changing the Governing Board: New College
The New College of Florida is very small—it has fewer than 700 students—with a traditional liberal arts emphasis. Like many liberal arts colleges, it has a progressive orientation that some have likened to Washington’s Evergreen State College, where race-motivated (some would say anti-white) protests a few years ago led to upheaval and dramatic enrollment declines. New College does not give out grades, instead relying solely on written evaluations. Outside evaluators such as U.S. News & World Report have historically ranked the school rather highly despite its somewhat nontraditional method of assessing student excellence, and the institution fashions itself as Florida’s “honors college” (although published data suggest few applicants are turned down for admission).
Should a state government subsidize an expensive-to-operate (on a per-student basis), small liberal arts college? Perhaps, but DeSantis has his doubts, and he wants to transform it into a classical liberal school with a decidedly more conservative orientation, like Michigan’s Hillsdale College. To that end, he has named six new trustees of the school (nearly half the board), all with a staunch right-of-center orientation.
One of the new appointees, Christopher Rufo of the Manhattan Institute, a think tank with mostly classically liberal scholars, has been particularly vocal, telling Michelle Goldberg of the New York Times, “If we can take this high-risk, high-reward gambit and turn it into a victory, we’re going to see conservative state legislators starting to reconquer public institutions all over the United States,” and adding that the school’s curriculum is “going to look very different in the next 120 days.”
Other new board appointees are somewhat skeptical, notably Mark Bauerlein, a retired, very distinguished literature scholar at Emory University who now edits the conservative magazine First Things and once served with me amiably on the board of the conservatively oriented National Association of Scholars. Bauerlein told the Sarasota Herald-Tribune, “I do believe what we see will be a lot less controversial than we’re hearing now.”
I suspect Bauerlein is right. Not all new board members think alike. Besides, changing directions radically and quickly in academia is nearly impossible, hence why some reformers think that whole institutions (like the University of Austin) need to be created from scratch in order to effect positive change. The New College faculty probably has tenure protection and may belong to the local faculty union. Does Rufo think the board of trustees can turn a woke gender-studies professor into, say, an admirer of the Enlightenment who loves David Hume, John Locke, and Adam Smith and promotes their contributions? Where does Rufo, one of 13 trustees, think the money to radically transform New College is going to come from? Already students and alumni are up in arms over Rufo’s and the governor’s announced intentions.
However, in a Wall Street Journal op-ed with Ilya Shapiro, Rufo suggested another path to reform that might be more effective: having legislators pass laws abolishing DEI bureaucracies, outlawing racial preferences, etc. Regarding the latter point, why do state governments allow state institutions to even collect data identifying students or employees by race? A cautionary note here, however: While conservative legislatures might pass anti-DEI laws, progressive ones might do the opposite, for example, requiring mandatory “anti-racism” indoctrination of all students. Be careful what you wish for.
https://www.independent.org/news/article.asp?id=14409&omhide=true&trk=title
****************************************************
UK: A 14-year-old reveals what it's really like to be a pupil today as trans hysteria grips schools
She’s 14 and attends a co-educational state secondary in South-East England — where she says one in ten children in her year identifies as trans or non-binary. After becoming increasingly upset by the school’s acceptance of transgender ideology, this female student has decided to expose the truth about life in an ongoing culture war.
The other day, I went to the school office to get a new copy of the timetable. The teacher I spoke to used ‘they/them’ pronouns about me, asking another member of staff, ‘they have lost their timetable, can they have a new one?’
He knows me really well and it’s clear that I’m a girl. I felt furious he didn’t just say ‘she’. But it’s not just the odd teacher here or there; I am regularly asked if I am in the process of transitioning.
There is a gender-neutral uniform policy at school and lots of the girls wear trousers. Those of us that do are often asked if we are transgender, especially if we have short hair, as I do.
The fact a girl likes playing video games, or doesn’t like feminine clothes or make-up is enough to be seen as potentially trans. When my mum complained about me being called ‘they’, the teacher apologised but explained he was being cautious in case I was transitioning. He said the teachers are treading on eggshells, scared of being labelled transphobic.
It feels like trans is all anyone talks about. The library has a section devoted to LGBTQQIA+ books and there is a display for Pride in the school entrance, with rainbow flags and words and terms such as ‘non-binary‘, ‘polysexual’, ‘demiboy’, ‘demigirl’ and ‘pansexual’. These words come up in lessons, too. I’m now in Year 10, and the other day a girl in my English class asked if the Greek god Zeus was a man or a woman and the teacher replied that Zeus could have ‘identified as non-binary’.
More recently another teacher said Lady Macbeth was ‘neither a man nor a woman’. I think most parents will have no clue this is what their kids are being taught.
So I’m glad the Education Secretary Gillian Keegan is set to tell schools they must be more open about their handling of trans issues. I would be too scared to say this at school, though. I would lose my friends if I did, as they’re completely intolerant of anything they think is transphobic.
That’s what made me decide to speak out here — without giving my real name.
When I started at my secondary school four years ago, I didn’t even know what ‘transgender’ meant. It hadn’t been talked about in primary school or at home. But within days, we were told by a teacher in our PSHE (personal, social, health and economic education) class that we would be seen as ‘transphobic’ if we used any of the ‘offensive words’ from a long list, which included ‘gender bender’ and ‘butch’.
I had no idea what transphobic meant, but I could tell it was definitely something I didn’t want to be seen as. At that age, when you are told something at school you just believe it. We trusted that what the teachers told us was true.
But I did ask my mum about it later. She is a feminist and is critical of students being dictated to. She said that often it depends how you use words — that people within queer communities have used ‘gender bender’ as a positive way to describe themselves and that ‘butch’ is used by lesbians to describe other lesbians who are quite masculine in appearance.
While still in my first year, 11-year-old girls in my class began asking to be called ‘he’ or ‘them’.
Soon afterwards a number of others were doing the same. It felt as if they joined in because it meant they were seen as cool.
You get special treatment if you say you are trans or non-binary and suddenly become the centre of attention when you ‘come out’.
As soon as a girl says she is a boy, her name is changed on the school register and students are told to use their chosen boy’s name.
Now, out of 200 students in my year, at least 20 say they’re trans — almost all are girls claiming to be boys or non-binary. Although there is one boy saying he’s a girl, this really is largely about girls saying they are boys. The kids in my year don’t say they are lesbian or gay, because those words are thought to be an insult.
There is a straight boy going out with a straight girl who says she is trans, so he now has to say that he’s bisexual. It’s often said by my schoolmates that trans girls are ‘better’ girls than ‘other girls’. I find this insulting. But the teachers don’t take any action even if they do hear conversations like this.
Recently, I was watching a news item with friends about the changes to the Gender Recognition Act in Scotland and every time a guest on the programme said, ‘this is a threat to sex-based rights’, my friends were sneering and laughing. It made me feel as though girls have no rights and are not respected in my school.
There is constant talk of transphobia and bigotry and many of the students who say they are trans constantly talk about being ‘victims’, with anyone who isn’t trans being the perpetrator.
Coming out as a lesbian or gay doesn’t have the same effect, but barely any students do, in my experience.
My friend Kelley* was ‘affirmed’ [accepted without question] as a boy in Year 7. She has serious mental health issues and is regularly off school as she self-harms.
Kelley socially transitioned without any teacher challenging her. She has a new name and can now use the boys’ changing rooms. All my friends pretty much believe in ‘gender identity’. Girls and boys are referred to by teachers and students as ‘assigned female at birth’ or ‘assigned male at birth’. This is shortened to AFAB and AMAB.
There is also confusing language such as the word for being attracted to non-binary people, ‘skoliosexual’. I find it ridiculous — but can’t say that.
There is a lot of breast-binding going on, too, but we don’t know who might be on puberty blockers because no one talks about that. One trans-identified girl wants to get a breast binder, but was complaining that her parents would not want her to.
I joined the Equalities Club because I believe in equal rights for all, then found it was impossible to talk about any group, other than trans people, that was discriminated against. There’s a rule against wearing badges in school but some students wear trans flag and pronoun badges and nobody tells them off.
Recently, a group of us were watching Prime Minister’s Questions and when MPs talked about maternity care, using the terms ‘birthing partner’ and ‘non-birthing partner’, I wondered out loud why they didn’t just say ‘mother’.
I was told off by a friend who said that not everyone with a cervix is a woman. I didn’t want to disagree because I knew what would happen — I would be publicly humiliated.
Until now, I’ve just gone along with most of it. But there are some things I can’t leave alone. For example, I really like J. K. Rowling but she was called a ‘TERF’ (Trans-Exclusionary Radical Feminist) by a friend, who said she was heartbroken to hear that J.K. was ‘anti-trans’.
I asked in what way J.K. was transphobic but this friend couldn’t give me an answer, she just said: ‘I hope all TERFS drop dead.’ I was shocked by her anger.
There have also been violent comments on social media towards ‘transphobes’ with students from the school threatening to strangle them.
That’s why I’m writing this piece anonymously, although I believe I should be able to say these things without fear of attack. I want adults to know what it’s really like in schools like mine now.
***********************************************
Australia: Parents push to punt God from state schools
Renewed calls have been made for the state government to review how its controversial century-old religious instruction practices are taught in Queensland public schools.
Lobby group Queensland Parents for Secular State Schools has been calling for changes to religious instruction for nearly a decade without success.
In Queensland schools, one hour of religious instruction is provided to students, with the exception of preppies, if they are given consent from parents on enrolment.
Under Queensland legislation, it allows volunteers from religious groups to enter state schools to deliver approved religious instruction, a statement on the department of education’s website.
The parents’ association spokeswoman Alison Courtice said the practice in public schools had changed little since 1910 and said parents felt it did not align with a modern Queensland.
Ms Courtice suggested religious instruction be moved to break times or have a change in policy which allowed non-participants to continue regular class work, taught by teachers.
“We are not saying they can’t or shouldn’t practice faith, but there’s a time and place. It should not be during curriculum time,” Ms Courtice said.
“Religion in public schools still has the same law from 1910 that religious organisation can come in, essentially Sunday school, at the expense of learning.”
Education Minister Grace Grace said she was aware that there were differing views on the “issue” but confirmed there were no proposed changes.
“Religious instruction is not compulsory and if schools do choose to do it, it’s limited to one hour a week and it’s up to parents whether their child participates or not,” Ms Grace said.
Ms Grace said nonparticipating students received supervised instruction in a separate location, such as reading time or personal research.
P&Cs Qld chief executive Scott Wiseman said the association did not have an official stance on whether or not religious instruction had a place in schools.
“It needs to be a local school community decision, local P&Cs should talk it through with the community,” Mr Wiseman said.
“If it’s something the local community want that’s fine, if not, that’s fine.”
In 2021 however, the association quietly removed religious instruction as a priority from its annual advocacy position statement’s wellbeing section.
It had previously stated that “access to Religious Instruction within the school where the school parents, school community and principal consider it to be a best fit” was a priority.
Mr Wiseman did acknowledge that the debate had been a divisive “issue” in schools for a long time.
Ms Courtice said religious instruction could have a place in an approved curriculum if it was used for education purposes to teach students about different cultures. “If religion is going to be included, it should be in a comparative way, taught by teachers and part of an approved curriculum,” she said.
“Students can then understand why their classmates might wear a turban, or have a dot on their forehead or wear a hijab. That would be wonderful.”
Ms Courtice said an online religious instruction that children could study with the guidance of parents or guardians would also be appropriate.
According to a Right To Information document obtained by the parental group, just 26 per cent of parents or guardians out of 568,752 enrolments statewide, gave permission for their children to be taught religious education in 2019.
***********************************
8 February, 2023
Washington’s Centennial Elementary backpedals minority-only club after parent outrage
A Washington elementary school had planned on banning white students from a new “safe space” club until backlash forced it to reconsider segregating its fifth-graders.
Centennial Elementary in Olympia had kicked off the calendar year with a new “Black, Indigenous, People of Color” student group for fifth-graders that only accepted its minority students, according to an email shared by Rep. Jim Walsh (R-Washington).
“At this time, this group is limited to students who identify as BIPOC,” Principal Shannon Ritter wrote in the January email.
“For these students, this space allows them to hang out, check-in and possibly talk about their experiences as a student in the minority as they build community, connections and confidence.” “It is primarily a safe space for them.”
The club was created as part of a districtwide-wide mentorship program, a spokesperson told local radio talk show KTTH. Centennial Elementary was also in the process of lining up a similar group for its fourth-grade students.
The group was scheduled to meet once a week during lunch. School staff would help facilitate conversations, the district said, but it would mainly be a student-led group that put an “emphasis on historically unrepresented populations.”
But the new club had already caused a rift in the community — white students barred from the club had shown interest in joining the new group, leading administrators to contemplate forming an allied counterpart, according to the email.
Parents and adult community members condemned the initiative, claiming it was only furthering the racial divides it hoped to eliminate.
“How can they advance racial justice, as they claim, by creating racial injustices? This whole way of thinking is so backwards and wrong. What happen (sic) to be kind and treat others with respect?” parent Denise Frank wrote in one of the hundreds of comments left under Walsh’s initial Facebook post.
“How is this not racism when kids are joining a group solely based on race/skin color?” Rebecca Weisenhaus questioned.
“We need to teach it doesn’t matter if we’re different color. Our character is. We are Americans. Stop the racial bullcrap,” said Debbie Gabriel.
Centennial Elementary reversed its BIPOC-only policy Tuesday, about a week after the new group was announced to parents.
“Groups like this are important for elevating voices and are instrumental in helping our district design a responsive educational experience that meets the needs of all students,” a spokesperson told KTTH.
“At the same time, we recognize that they cannot be exclusionary. Moving forward, we will ensure that school leadership and staff are specific about the purpose of these groups, while simultaneously removing any exclusions to participation.”
*************************************************
Virginia Democrats try to block bill banning teachers from hiding students’ transgender status from parents
Republicans in the Virginia House of Delegates passed a bill Tuesday that would put an end to public school districts deliberately keeping parents in the dark about students’ gender transitions, despite all of the Democrats voting against it.
Virginia House Bill 2432, or Sage’s Law, would require schools to inform a parent if a minor student expresses to a school employee that they are experiencing gender incongruence – or that their biological sex differs from how they identify.
Under the bill, schools would also be obligated to inform parents if the student requests that the school affirm their gender transition, as well as obtain at least one parent’s permission before implementing any plan concerning any gender incongruence experienced by a minor, including counseling.
The bill passed the state House Tuesday, with one Republican and all 47 Democrats voting against, and it’s now heading to the state Senate.
Del. Dave LaRock, a Republican who introduced the bill, called it a "common-sense measure" to protect parental rights.
"Today @VaHouse voted 50-48 to send HB2432, Sage's Law, to @VASenate," he tweeted. "I am grateful for my GOP colleagues' support for this bill to ensure parents aren't excluded when a child transitions at school, or charged with abuse/neglect for affirming their child's biological sex."
"I am disappointed that all Democrats voted against this common-sense bill. I urge all Virginians to contact their Senator urging broad bipartisan support for this important legislation," he wrote.
Sage’s Law is named after a transgender teen who ran away from home in Virginia and was reportedly sex trafficked after a Maryland court refused to return the teen home over child abuse allegations that the family "misgendered" the child.
************************************************
Professor claims SUNY colleges are 'brainwashing' students with several mandatory diversity courses
From Florida to now New York, public universities and colleges are requiring new students to take diversity and inclusion courses in order to graduate – but one State University of New York (SUNY) professor is labeling it as "brainwashing."
"We're seeing it all throughout the country," professor and Campus Reform fellow Nicholas Giordano said. "And if we look at it, it's not just the college that we have to worry about. We also see it in the K-12 system, that it's being infused into curriculums throughout that system as well. That's why I say it's moved beyond indoctrination. Now, it's just full-out brainwashing."
Giordano sounded off on "The Evening Edit" Monday after Members of the SUNY Board of Trustees passed a resolution outlining the addition of several required courses, which included a new social justice category.
While the resolution was passed in November 2021, the social justice course requirement goes into effect for all new students seeking a bachelor's degree beginning in the fall of 2023, and will begin in the fall of 2024 for first-time students obtaining an associates degree.
The Suffolk Community College professor claimed he doesn’t believe that most Americans are "aware of what’s happening" inside classrooms.
"In order to graduate, you're going to have to take these diversity, equity, inclusion and social justice courses. In addition, courses are currently being revised at colleges throughout the country to incorporate this, as well," Giordano explained. "So it's not just one course that you're going to be taking, it may be several courses. And this is going on in every degree program that exists out there."
The addition of these programs has been proven to cost state taxpayers millions, with other states such as Florida reportedly spending $28 million during the 2022-2023 calendar year to incorporate diversity and inclusion and critical race theory (CRT) curriculum.
Founding member of the University of Austin, Peter Boghossian joins ‘Varney & Co.’ to discuss how the educational institution will focus on meritocracy and freedom of speech.
"When we look at what they're trying to do, if you look at the learning outcomes," Giordano pointed out, "it's basically set in stone that equity and inclusion and social justice, it's a political agenda that's being pushed. They're stating that the system is institutionally, inherently racist, always has been, always will be; they're promoting the idea of social justice."
"But we all know," the professor continued, "that they're not going to promote sane and legal immigration policies or social justice, or limited government or fiscal responsibility. It's about promoting a political agenda as opposed to thinking critically and getting students to think for themselves as we prepare them to go into the workforce."
Fox Business host Kennedy and panelists Karol Markowicz, Kevin Walling and Hannah Cox discuss President Biden's student loan handout and whether or not college is worth the price. video
Kennedy hits the streets to ask: Is college worth it?
Fox Business host Kennedy and panelists Karol Markowicz, Kevin Walling and Hannah Cox discuss President Biden's student loan handout and whether or not college is worth the price.
While the SUNY system today includes a total of 64 schools throughout the state of New York, Giordano predicted enrollment to decline following the inaugural semester of these required classes, which according to the memorandum, will "analyze the role that complex networks of social structures and systems play in the creation and perpetuation of the dynamics of power, privilege, oppression, and opportunity."
"Colleges have to realize that they're facing enrollment declines. The business sector, the employers, are now saying that there's no degree requirements because they see what's going on at colleges," Giordano said.
***********************************
6 February, 2023
Florida University Conceals Rampant DEI, CRT on Campus, Insider Report Says
A University of Florida insider released a report exclusively to The Epoch Times showing that the university underreported its Diversity, Equity and Inclusion (DEI) programs, even as the governor’s office confirmed universities across the state have spent millions of dollars promoting DEI.
The insider, who spoke to The Epoch Times on condition of anonymity, said the University of Florida (UF) funding numbers turned in at the direction of Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis did not disclose a vast network of personnel and programs pushing DEI, which includes Critical Race Theory (CRT).
He pointed out that as many as 33 DEI liaisons at UF fell under the radar when the university self-reported its DEI programs to the governor’s office.
The insider also noted that the university had ties to a “Youth Gender” program, which he said has conducted 50 mastectomies on teens 16 and older.
Dr. Michael Haller, who heads the gender clinic, said in a June 2022 interview with University of South Florida’s Health News Florida that UF Health provides gender-affirming treatment to approximately 200 patients.
The insider said a local news article printed in August 2022 reported that the Youth Gender Clinic performed mastectomies on teenagers, some of whom were only 16 years old.
He included a report from the “Do No Harm” medical organization that reported that UF’s College of Medicine admission and educational programs were “indoctrinating students using teachings at the core of CRT.”
In a Thursday statement, the governor’s press secretary Byran Griffin said DeSantis’s office believes that DEI and CRT initiatives in the state’s public education institutions are “significantly misreported and underreported,” noting the lack of transparency surrounding the gender clinic.
“Nonetheless, what was reported revealed an extraordinary misuse of taxpayer dollars to promote a political agenda at the expense of academic focus,” Griffin said.
Key findings by the governor’s office released to the media on Thursday showed that taxpayers had financed a chief diversity officer at the UF for $750,000 per year, and another $445,000 for the University of Central Florida’s vice president for DEI and their assistants.
The Center for Environmental Equity and Justice at Florida A&M University cost $1.8 million in tax dollars per year, according to the news release.
The DEI offices at the University of South Florida and Florida International University cost taxpayers another $2 million dollars, according to Griffin.
“As an example of a failure to report completely, we know from their website that UF has a ‘Youth Gender’ program. Unfortunately, this was not reported in their survey response,” Griffin said.
The UF insider said his 67-page report took five months of research and included interviews with staff and students at UF. In most cases, the report included material that documented his sources. With his permission, The Epoch Times provided the report to the governor’s office for comment.
According to the insider, UF spent $3.4 million in total on DEI programs.
The total for DEI programs across the Florida university system was more than $15 million in public funds, according to a spreadsheet he supplied.
His report showed that DEI has tentacles extending into UF colleges of education, journalism, law, and medicine.
**********************************************
Chicago Public Schools Are Corrupt and Unsafe. School Choice Is the Only Solution
Earlier this year, the Chicago Board of Education’s Office of the Inspector General (OIG) released its annual report, which notes, “In Fiscal Year 2022, the OIG received 1,825 complaints alleging misconduct, waste, fraud and financial mismanagement at Chicago Public Schools [CPS], including allegations of adult-on-student sexual misconduct and other misconduct by CPS employees and vendors.”
For the sake of brevity, let’s focus on the three most alarming red flags identified by the report: rampant adult-on-student sexual abuse, extensive fraud concerning the spending of pandemic relief funds, and persistent miscoding of truant students as transfers.
It is only a matter of time before Chicago reaches the tipping point in which public schools will finally have to compete with private schools and all other educational alternatives on an even playing field.
Obviously, the most disconcerting allegation is the apparent widespread sexual abuse inflicted by CPS staff on students. In fiscal year 2022, the OIG received 470 complaints about alleged sexual abuse, including 81 instances of inappropriate touching, 35 of grooming, 33 of sexual abuse, and 26 of sexual acts.
As the report notes, adult-on-student sexual abuse has been a longstanding problem within CPS. In fact, over the past four years, the OIG’s Sexual Allegations Unit (SAU) has opened 1,735 cases. To date, the SAU has closed 1,384 of those cases. However, it has found “policy violations” in only 302. Even more incredibly, only 16 have resulted in criminal charges.
Perhaps most concerning is that even when the SAU found ample evidence of sexual abuse, CPS repeatedly ignored the findings, dismissed the SAU’s recommended actions, and gave the staff members a slap on the wrist. In one example, in which a high school teacher was accused of grooming and the evidence overwhelmingly supported strict disciplinary measures (“The OIG recommended termination of the teacher’s employment and placement of a ‘Do Not Hire’ designation in his personnel file”), CPS decided to give the perpetrator a “Last Chance Agreement, issued a second warning, and made him complete additional training prior to reinstatement.”
If extensive adult-on-student sexual-abuse allegations are not enough to make CPS clean up its act, how about the fact that it has squandered hundreds of millions of dollars in pandemic relief funds on unwarranted teacher bonuses?
Overall, CPS received $2.8 billion in federal pandemic relief funding, which was supposed to be spent on pressing projects such as upgrading HVAC systems. Alas, to date, CPS has spent $1.49 billion of its emergency relief money, with a whopping 77 percent of that amount going to “employee salaries and benefits.”
Unsurprisingly, CPS has a long track record of funneling money to its employees in the forms of “Extra Pay,” “Stipends,” and “Overtime.” Per the report: “In 2021, Extra Pay hit nearly $74 million — a 17 percent increase from the most recent pre-pandemic calendar year of 2019. Over five years, Extra Pay jumped 74 percent — far more than the average teacher’s salary rose over a similar five-year period.”
In other words, CPS has been caught red-handed using federal COVID-19 relief funds to pad their employees’ paychecks rather than using that money for its intended purpose of addressing the adverse academic impacts wrought by public school closures during the pandemic.
Lastly, the report details the ongoing malfeasance concerning “Persistent Miscoding of Student Transfer and Lost Child Data.” In a nutshell, CPS has a bad history of “deliberately miscod[ing] students who were truant as transfers or lost children so that these students’ absences would not count against the school’s attendance rate.”
In 2021, the OIG uncovered more than 5,000 “unverified out-of-district transfers districtwide.” Why does this matter? First, far too many of these unverified transfers eventually get “lost” in the system, meaning they do not enroll in a new school, as they are required to do by law. Second, there is a financial incentive to misreport because schools receive more money if their attendance and graduation rates remain above certain thresholds.
By no means is the OIG report an exhaustive list of all the problems that have manifested in CPS over recent years. Aside from the issues highlighted in the report, CPS is abysmally failing to sufficiently educate the more than 320,000 students it is responsible for.
Last year, CPS spent a record-setting $29,000 per student. On the other hand, the top 20 private schools in the Windy City spent on average $11,442 per student. What’s more, these private schools stayed open for in-person learning throughout the pandemic, their students consistently outperform their public school peers, and incidents of sexual abuse are almost nonexistent.
If ever there were a time for Chicago families to demand universal school choice, wherein funds are allotted directly to students instead of government-run schools, it is now. School choice is a nonpartisan issue that is widely supported by almost all demographic groups, particularly among minority families who are all too often stuck sending their kids to poor-performing schools based solely upon their ZIP codes.
If there is any reason for optimism, consider this: Over the past 11 years, CPS enrollment has been in a precipitous decline. Almost every year, data show that thousands of students are fleeing CPS and enrolling in private or charter schools or being homeschooled. Throughout the nation, the school-choice revolution is gaining momentum. It is only a matter of time before Chicago reaches the tipping point in which public schools will finally have to compete with private schools and all other educational alternatives on an even playing field. That is what school choice is all about, and the results show that it works.
**********************************************
Harvard fires far-Left fat monster
Harvard has scrapped its 'misinformation' research program and severed its ties with the project's controversial director, who used her position to cast doubt over the Hunter Biden laptop story.
The project's leader Dr Joan Donavan is a so-called expert in the dangers of social media misinformation, and has publicly challenged the Hunter Biden laptop story during her time at the university.
She led the project since its inception in 2019 with the aim to 'help newsroom leaders fight misinformation and media manipulation'.
Donavan used her role to cast doubt over the media's coverage of the Hunter Biden laptop story, which saw the president's son's missing laptop appear in a Delaware repair shop containing a treasure trove of illicit images and damaging emails from his work at Ukrainian energy company Burisma.
The story was notably suppressed by several major media corporations ahead of the 2020 presidential election.
The director of Harvard's Shorenstein Center on Media, Politics, and Public Policy announced the institution was cutting ties with Donovan in an email obtained by Semafor.
The email stated that the Technology and Social Change Project, which studied disinformation online, was being shuttered for what the outlet referred to as 'bureaucratic reasons.'
'The Kennedy School's standing policy is that all research projects must be led by a full faculty member,' said the email.
'While there can be limited exceptions, those can't continue indefinitely without a faculty member as the principal project leader and academic head.
According to her Harvard staff page, Donavan supposedly 'leads the field in examining internet and technology studies, online extremism, media manipulation and disinformation campaigns.'
Alongside her focus on the Hunter Biden laptop story, she has also analyzed topics including white nationalism and social change activism online.
Donavan utilized her position within the Harvard project to cast doubt over the Hunter Biden laptop story's veracity after it was first published by the New York Post on the eve of the 2020 presidential election.
Despite the story being stood up in the years following its original publication, Donavan remained defiant in her public skepticism.
***********************************
6 February, 2023
Schooling the Higher Ed Establishment
Gov. Ron DeSantis of Florida has been making news in recent months as a possible presidential candidate and, more importantly, as a state executive intent on improving the quality of life for his constituents—depending on your point of view. Naturally, The New York Times and the line of ducklings that follow it have put the worst possible construction on DeSantis’s actions, deriding his policies as mainly being political posturing aimed at the vast population of slack-jawed dimwits that make up the Republican Party across the country (and in 2016 somehow decided the party’s candidate for president):
On Tuesday, Governor DeSantis, a Republican, took his most aggressive swing yet at the education establishment, announcing a proposed overhaul of the state’s higher education system that would eliminate what he called “ideological conformity.” If enacted, courses in Western civilization would be mandated, diversity and equity programs would be eliminated, and the protections of tenure would be reduced.
The Times notes that DeSantis had already “moved to overhaul the leadership of the New College of Florida, a small liberal arts school in Sarasota that has struggled with enrollment, but calls itself a place for ‘freethinkers.’” (Apparently this passage was written without irony.) The New College “is regarded as among the most progressive of Florida’s 12 public universities,” the Times reports. DeSantis overhauled the college’s board of trustees by appointing conservatives, saying, “If it was a private school, making those choices, that’s fine, I mean, what are you going to do?” the Times quotes him as saying. “But this is paid for by your tax dollars.”
The new appointees include nationally prominent conservatives such as Christopher Rufo of the Manhattan Institute, Matthew Spalding of Hillsdale College, and Ryan Anderson of the Ethics and Public Policy Center, all of whom are strong critics of the drift of education away from what young people need to know and be able to do, and its replacement with political indoctrination into hatred of the United States and its history and institutions. The Times notes Rufo’s “vigorous attacks on ‘critical race theory.’”
The Times reporters acknowledge that DeSantis is not exactly on an island in his displeasure with the recent hard-left turn of the nation’s education system after decades of drift in that direction:
Mr. DeSantis’s embrace of civics education, as well as the establishment of special civics programs at several of the state’s 12 public universities, dovetails with the growth of similar programs around the country, some partially funded by conservative donors.
The programs emphasize the study of Western civilization and economics, as well as the thinking of Western philosophers, frequently focusing on the Greeks and Romans. Critics of the programs say they sometimes gloss over the pitfalls of Western thinking and ignore the philosophies of non-Western civilizations.
What should amaze and delight conservatives is how much success even a little pushback can achieve. The College Board, which creates and manages tests and associated curricula to help institutions of higher education ascertain how likely prospective students are to succeed in college, revised its AP History course to eliminate the most aggressive race-baiting elements, the Times reports:
After heavy criticism from Gov. Ron DeSantis, the College Board released on Wednesday an official curriculum for its new Advanced Placement course in African American Studies—stripped of much of the subject matter that had angered the governor and other conservatives.
The College Board purged the names of many Black writers and scholars associated with critical race theory, the queer experience and Black feminism. It ushered out some politically fraught topics, like Black Lives Matter, from the formal curriculum.
And it added something new: “Black conservatism” is now offered as an idea for a research project.
The Times singles out DeSantis as a motive force behind the change:
The pushback began in January, when Governor DeSantis of Florida, a Republican who is expected to run for president, announced that he would ban the curriculum, citing the draft version. State education officials said it was not historically accurate and violated state law that regulates how race-related issues are taught in public schools.
As I noted above, DeSantis is not alone in this effort to reform higher education. The Times reports:
In another red flag to the College Board, there was the possibility of other opposition: more than two dozen states have adopted some sort of measure against critical race theory, according to a tracking project by the University of California, Los Angeles, law school.
S.T. Karnick: skarnick@heartland.org
*************************************************
Conservatives on campus hit the wall of censor sensibility
Virtually every academic working in an Australian university is today being force-fed a steady diet of views that are widely accepted by those on the political left and yet widely rejected by those on the political right.
For instance, their university administrations will tell them how wonderful “diversity, equity and inclusion” goals are.
Indeed, most will have to sit through some sort of online indoctrination modules, answering trite little multiple-choice answers at the end where the “correct” answer is the left-wing progressive’s preferred answer (and where any schoolchild of average IQ could guess the expected choice).
Now conservatives like me would say the whole diversity bureaucracy – and you would be stunned to learn how much is spent on this in our universities – should be dismantled immediately. I believe in merit. Hire the best person regardless. But under the guise of “diversity, equity and inclusion”, university administrations bring to bear factors other than merit.
Most often what happens is that they take some favoured academic position or student course opening and they begin by looking at the percentage of some favoured group in the wider population. Then they aim to recreate that same level or percentage for the favoured group in these job positions or student places.
This, of course, is the essence of identity politics. You define individuals in group terms by characteristics they share with others in the wider population. And notice that the key characteristics are such things as one’s type of reproductive organs or of skin pigmentation, never political viewpoints.
Notice as well that if simply hiring on merit achieved these identitarian outcomes (as is sometimes implicitly suggested), there would be no need for the huge diversity, equity and inclusion bureaucracy in the first place.
While we’re at it, readers can notice as well that these sort of implicit identitarian quotas are not just restricted to favoured groups, they are also used only for desirable jobs and places.
For instance, on some reckonings men hold about 95 per cent of the jobs that lead to deaths on the job. Highly dangerous jobs, in other words.
You won’t hear identitarian quota-pushers say “hey, not enough women are dying at work so we need to equalise things and get more women into these jobs”. Not just because that’s a stupid attitude but because these quota-pushers only focus on corporate board positions, top-end professorships, MP preselections and the like.
Of course I could make the same sort of point about how left-leaning our universities are across a host of topics and values.
Who thinks any Australian university administration is not wholly behind the voice? Or wasn’t against former prime minister Tony Abbott’s turning back the boats? Or didn’t go all-in supporting lockdowns? The list goes on and on and lines up just about perfectly with the views of left-wing political parties, not right-wing ones.
Which might explain for readers a couple of depressing bits of recent information. Start with last year’s Harvard University poll undertaken by student newspaper The Crimson. It polled Harvard professors in arts and engineering about their political orientation. The results were astounding.
The poll found just 1.4 per cent of Harvard academics, total, said they were politically conservative or very conservative. And remember, in the recent midterm election over half of voters for the House of Representatives voted Republican.
And note, too, that this was an anonymous survey and that it polled engineering professors who are more likely to be conservative than most any other part of the university. That tells you just how incredibly monolithically orthodox anglosphere universities have become, remembering that left-wing progressive views are today’s campus orthodoxy.
Consider the abovementioned voice proposal here in Australia. I’m a law professor who has published widely on Australian and anglosphere constitutional law matters. I’m against the voice. My best guess is that across the whole of Australia’s dozens and dozens of law schools there might be at most four other law professors teaching public law who share my view. So is the idea so self-evidently terrific or is there just almost zero viewpoint diversity on our campuses?
Here’s more bad news. A survey out this month in Britain, by the Legatum Institute, found 35 per cent of British academics self-censor but for conservative academics that figure jumps up to 75 per cent who self-censor.
As for students at university, the Legatum survey found 25 per cent said they self-censor but that jumped up to 59 per cent for conservative students. And it found only one in 10 academics anonymously identifies as right-of-centre.
When former High Court of Australia judge Robert French did his report for the former Coalition government and concluded there was no free speech problem at Australia’s universities, he was right. But only in a technical sense.
When there is so little viewpoint diversity and so few conservatives on campus, and many of those few feel the need to self-censor, of course anyone looking at university policies and free speech legal cases won’t find a problem.
What would a left-leaning academic ever want to say that would incline a probably just as left-leaning university vice-chancellor to want to bring the university’s code of conduct down on him or her?
It’s hard to think of anything at all that could cause those with left-of-centre views any problems. But if you were a junior academic who thought the daily genuflections about acknowledgements of Country were patronising and condescending, would you feel you could say so or refuse to perform them?
Or if you thought lockdowns were thuggish and despotic and counter-productive? Or if you thought vaccine mandates were wholly illiberal? Or if you thought being asked to trumpet support for climate change was against the latest scientific data? Or if you favoured stopping the boats or questioned the new trans orthodoxy? Or if you agreed with former James Cook University professor Peter Ridd (who questioned the scientific research by institutions including the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Authority and Australian Research Council Centre of Excellence)? Or maybe if you believe the voice is a terrible idea that will divide Australians by race and trigger a high chance of judicial activism?
Could you say that without hurting your promotion prospects? Or would you just self-censor? Or maybe leave academic life and contribute to the collapsing viewpoint diversity at our universities? I think we all know the answers to those questions.
https://www.theaustralian.com.au/inquirer/conservatives-on-campus-hit-the-wall-of-censor-sensibility/news-story/47a9e0e8b388dcc38090de3ed3a266d5 ?
****************************************************
Australian universities split on decision to adopt controversial definition of antisemitism
There is no doubt that speech about Jews and Israel is heavily constrained -- too constrained in my view
Australian universities are split on whether to adopt a controversial definition of antisemitism following a push from parliamentary MPs that has been criticised as an “outright attack on academic freedom”.
On 25 January the University of Melbourne became the first institution to publicly announce it would adopt the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance definition of antisemitism as part of its broader “anti-racism commitment”, leading to backlash from the Australia Palestine Advocacy Network who said it had been denied repeated requests for consultation.
The University of Melbourne’s move came after the Parliamentary Friends of IHRA sent an open letter to vice-chancellors in November, urging them to formally adopt the IHRA definition and requesting a response by the end of January.
The IHRA has faced global backlash among Palestinian and Arab scholars who argue its definition of antisemitism, which includes “targeting the state of Israel”, could be used to shut down legitimate criticism of Israel and stifle freedom of expression, citing the banning of events supporting Palestinian rights on campuses after the definition was adopted by universities in the UK.
The Parliamentary Friends of IHRA is headed by the MPs Josh Burns, Allegra Spender and Julian Leeser, and members include the attorney general, Mark Dreyfus, and former ministers Alan Tudge and Paul Fletcher.
The group’s letter said universities weren’t being asked “to restrict academic freedom of speech” but rather “make it clear, in word and deed, that antisemitism and Holocaust denial are false and pernicious ideologies and are not acceptable to your university”.
But the president of the National Tertiary Education Union Sydney branch, Nick Riemer, said the Parliamentary Friends of the IHRA had launched an “outright attack on academic freedom”.
“[The IHRA] will prevent universities doing what they’re meant to do … critically analyse the contemporary world without concern for lobbies,” he said. “A powerful political lobby is trying to stifle the course of free debate in universities.
Guardian Australia can reveal Macquarie University and the University of Wollongong had already changed their policies to include the IHRA statement before the letter.
A source who wished to remain anonymous told Guardian Australia there had been no consultation with academics at Macquarie University before the definition was included into its Equity, Diversity and Inclusion policy over the summer of 2021. Macquarie University was approached for comment.
The University of Wollongong said it adopted the definition in April and said it would have no impact on “academic freedom and freedom of speech”. “Instead, it is a reference for our community members to help understand what may constitute antisemitism,” the university said.
The Australia Palestine Advocacy Network said it was “disturbed” by the lack of transparency.
“Universities that have adopted the definition have not consulted with community groups or stakeholders,” said its president, Nasser Mashni. “Some universities have engaged with us on this issue, but others have either refused to acknowledge our correspondence, or misled us.”
Other universities were split on their response, with some considering the definition and others appearing to rule out a change.
The University of Sydney said it was “carefully considering” the definition and had not made any decisions.
A spokesperson for the Australian National University said it was “aware” of the IHRA definition and was “giving it due consideration”, while the University of Adelaide said “discussion on this matter will continue”.
A University of New South Wales spokesperson said it recognised the definition raised “complex legal and other issues”.
A spokesperson for Griffith University said it recognised antisemitism as a serious form of discrimination but wouldn’t be adopting the definition.
A spokesperson for James Cook University said it already had policies in place and that suitably addressed “the balance between free speech and vilification”, while the University of Queensland said its overarching policy “clearly states” the expectations of the community to prevent discrimination.
Parliamentary Friends of IHRA has also been critiqued by Boycott Divestment and Sanctions Australia for potentially violating rules which specify Parliamentary friends groups must be “apolitical”.
In a letter of complaint on 22 November, BDSA said of 11 examples in the IHRA working definition illustrating antisemitism in practice, seven related to Israel and political debate around it.
The Zionist Federation of Australia said the group was a “reflection of the importance both sides of politics places on the fight against rising antisemitism”.
“We look forward to working hand-in-hand … as we continue to advocate the adoption of the IHRA by businesses and institutions across Australia,” it said.
***********************************
5 February, 2023
Migrant students in NYC schools without proof of vaccinations for anything
The flood of migrant families into New York City is forcing schools to accept children who lack required vaccinations and has possibly led to one outbreak already.
The Simon Baruch Middle School in Gramercy Park had a chickenpox case, according to a Jan. 25 notice from the principal which said students not vaccinated for the illness could not attend school.
A parent at the school said after the announcement, five migrant children were absent for a few days from the class in question.
“When you are talking now about hundreds of children entering a school and coming from countries where we know the same childhood vaccinations are not available— it’s hard to not see where vulnerable families could be put at risk,” the parent said.
A top city health official recently told the City Council that a surprising number of migrant children who had never had a single shot were arriving in the Big Apple.
“We’re seeing so many unvaccinated kids,” Dr. Ted Long, executive director of the NYC Test & Trace Corps, said at a council hearing, speaking generally about the migrant influx.
An estimated 11,000 migrant children have enrolled in Department of Education schools since the summer.
The city Health Department tracks outbreaks of illnesses like chickenpox but refused to say how many it has recorded in city schools since September or comment on the Simon Baruch situation.
Carolina Chicaisa, who arrived in New York from Ecuador on Jan. 8, said her 8-year-old-son, Jareth, has been attending third grade at PS 111 in Hell’s Kitchen since last week without a record of his vaccinations.
“I had proof of them from Ecuador, but I lost them in the jungle on our way here,” Chicaisa said.
She said she took Jareth for blood tests to prove he was vaccinated and was waiting for the results to show to the school, which has been overwhelmed with migrant students. He is allowed to attend class until they get the proof.
Another mom from Ecuador said her son has been attending eighth-grade classes at the City Knoll Middle School, which is located in the same West 53rd Street building as PS 111, for about two months although his shots were not up initially to date.
“A month ago they asked for the vaccine records, and he did have vaccines in Ecuador but he still had to go have six more. I don’t even remember which ones he got,” said the mom who declined to give her name.
Students in kindergarten through fifth grade are required to get the chickenpox vaccine as well as the DTaP, MMR, polio, and hepatitis B shots. At least two doses are required for each of the vaccines.
Students are not required to be vaccinated against COVID-19.
DOE rules say schools must accept kids living in temporary housing, including asylum seekers, even if they can’t immediately show vaccination or academic records, according to guidance sent to principals in September.
“Students transferring from another state or country, including asylum seekers, have 30 days from their enrollment to provide evidence of vaccinations or be in the process of acquiring vaccinations,” the guidance says.
They are allowed to attend school during this 30-day period.
Students who are not migrants or in temporary housing need at least the first dose in a vaccine series to provisionally remain in school. They then need to provide proof that follow-up shots have been scheduled or risk getting excluded from school, according to DOE rules.
“Both DOE and DOH work closely with families to ensure they have access to immunizations services and are in compliance with the school requirements to prevent outbreaks,” DOH spokesman Patrick Gallahue said.
Test & Trace Corps staff have given in excess of 4,600 shots to more than 1,800 kids, a spokesman told The Post.
The Simon Baruch principal did not immediately return a request for comment nor did a DOE spokesman.
https://nypost.com/2023/02/04/migrant-students-dont-need-to-show-proof-of-vaccinations/
********************************************************
Library That Banned Christian Book Story Hour Backs Down After Legal Challenge
The NWEA, which says it provides map-testing assessments to Roman Catholic dioceses and almost two thousand Catholic schools across the country, features articles on its website encouraging educators to help students to “come out” and promoting gender ideology to children.
Formerly known as the Northwest Evaluation Association, the NWEA boasts of developing Pre-K through 12th grade assessments (Measure of Academic Progress or MAP tests) trusted by educators in almost 10,000 schools, districts, and education agencies in 145 countries.
The organization’s website also notes that it partners with over 1,900 Catholic schools: “Nearly 400,000 Catholic school students benefit from MAP Growth data,” the NWEA says in a resource sheet. “Catholic schools nationwide in 84 dioceses trust NWEA for assessments.”
Literature on the organization’s website—written by NWEA staff—pushing gender ideology, drag queens, and other left-wing ideological content suggests that Catholic dioceses and schools might want to take a closer look at their MAP-testing assessments.
Jeremy Tate, the founder and CEO of the Classic Learning Test (CLT), told The Daily Signal that his organization has been in contact with “numerous Catholic school administrators who are now refusing to administer NWEA MAPS assessments to their students. “
“Although MAPS claims that assessments used for Catholic schools will be free from this ideology, administrators are still concerned about administering assessments from a company that recommends ways to introduce drag to five-year olds,” he said.
“In response to the increasingly ideological agendas of many standardized testing companies, CLT has launched a new suite of standardized assessments for third-sixth graders featuring time-tested children’s literature that is removed from the current hot button topics,” Tate added.
The NWEA did not respond to requests for comment for this story. On its policy page, the organization promises to “fight for bold, courageous policy changes that will move the needle for students and educators.”
“It’s unclear from the statement what sorts of ‘policy changes’ NWEA is working toward,” the Lepanto Institute, a Catholic, education-based organization pointed out, “but an examination of their grants, articles, and partnerships indicates that NWEA is fostering the promotion of homosexual and transgender ideologies.”
One NWEA article on “supporting LGBTQ students” cites Republican-led legislation that bans educators from formal instruction about sex and gender for kids before warning: “These are kids who desperately need to understand that the world is better because they’re a part of it.”
“You have the chance to be an adult in their lives—possibly the only adult in their lives—who helps them see that,” the article adds.
That same article tells educators that if a child confides that he or she identifies as LGBTQ+, the proper response to the child is: “Thank you for trusting me, I’m so proud of you.” Not once does the article mention the word parent, father or mother.
NWEA senior writer Erin Ryan recommends 20 LGBTQ+ books for K-12 readers to peruse during Pride Month in another article published on the organization’s website. The books recommended for children in kindergarten through third grade (as young as five years old) feature gay families, pride parades, gay animals, and transgender children.
The NWEA has apparently removed one particularly objectionable recommendation for preschool children from its website: “The Hips on the Drag Queen go Swish Swish Swish.”
That book focuses on drag queens and is apparently set to the tune of the song, “the wheels on the bus go round and round.” Leftist political commentator and drag queen “Lil Miss Hot Mess” wrote the book.
Videos show the drag queen, who is reportedly one of the founding members of Drag Queen Story Hour, reading the book for children, singing and dancing.
“I wrote this book because I wanted everyone to get to experience the magic of drag and to get a little practice shaking their hips or shimmying their shoulders to know how we can feel fabulous inside of our own bodies,” the drag queen said in a episode of “Let’s Learn,” which aired on PBS.
“Being a drag queen is about being bold, shining bright, and showing a little bit of bravery, being willing to step outside the box and to dance to our own beat sometimes.” the drag queen adds.
The NWEA did not immediately respond to a request for comment from The Daily Signal explaining why it removed this book, which includes drag queen characters named “Frida Bea Mee,” “Stinkerbelle,” “Pina Buttah-Geleé,” “Cinderfella,” “Ella Menopipi,” and more.
The book’s colorful illustrations, created by Olga de Dios, depict drag queens, some with facial hair, dancing in exotic outfits.
This NWEA article also recommends young adult books, including a book about a gay Iranian American high schooler diving into a physical relationship with another boy, a book about a teenaged girl’s relationship with another girl that begins in a lesbian bar, “A Queer History of the United States for Young People,” and more.
In another NWEA article, a gay NWEA project manager encourages educators to “invite students to share how they prefer to be addressed in the classroom.”
“This can include their preferred names and pronouns,” Nathan Breeden writes. “Not everyone will take you up on the pronouns part, and that’s OK. The point is to build a foundation of respect through the validation of each student’s identity, showing that each individual has equal value. In the weeks to come, hold yourself and others accountable for learning and using everyone’s preferred names and pronouns. This includes learning the proper pronunciation of names that are less familiar to you.”
NWEA describes itself as”a research-based, not-for-profit organization that supports students and educators worldwide by creating assessment solutions that precisely measure growth and proficiency—and provide insights to help tailor instruction.”
“For 40 years, NWEA has developed Pre-K–12 assessments and professional learning offerings to help advance all students along their optimal learning paths,” the organization’s website says. “Our tools are trusted by educators in more than 9,500 schools, districts, and education agencies in 145 countries.”
************************************************
Biden’s Back Door to Free College
Although President Biden’s attempts to offer free community college for all have been stymied, his administration seems to have found another way to offer free college for more individuals — and not just at community colleges.
The problem with the maneuver is that taxpayers will be left holding the bill while encouraging unaccountable colleges to raise their prices. This isn’t making college affordable or valuable for students. It’s merely charging bad investments to the public.
The origins of the administration’s move lie in what’s known as income-driven repayment. Borrowers who avail themselves of this payment plan reduce their debt payments by paying a fixed percentage of their income, not a set monthly payment.
The original idea behind income-driven repayment was to provide a safety net for struggling borrowers who couldn’t get a good job and couldn’t pay down the federal loans they had accumulated. It wasn’t meant as a get-out-of-debt-free card for most.
In the past month, the White House proposed new regulations that would allow more individuals to exempt more of their income under these plans, as well as halve the percentage of their income they pay to 5 percent from 10 percent.
Under the proposal, if a student’s payments don’t cover the interest, no big deal. Uncle Sam will forgive it. And borrowers will have their loans themselves forgiven after 20 years — or, even more generously, after 10 years if they borrow less than $12,000.
The net result? According to a Brookings Institution analysis, 85 percent of borrowers will reduce their payments, and 70 percent will have a portion of their loan balance forgiven. So much for a targeted safety net.
This may sound like a good deal, especially if you’re hoping Biden’s executive order to forgive student debt is legal. What’s not to like about borrowers unable to get a good job after enrolling in college having their bad debts entirely or partially forgiven?
It may sound like an even better deal if you wished for free community college. After all, according to the administration, community college will now be “free” for 85 percent of borrowers.
But this is a bad set of regulations — and arguably worse than blanket loan forgiveness. The reason is that many more students will have no incentive not to borrow lots of money for college because they know their payments will be capped.
That will be true regardless of whether they attend a community college, a public four-year school, or even a private university. Given that there will be fewer incentives to curb one’s borrowing, schools in turn will have wider latitude to raise their prices.
Not only that, but schools will have free reign to launch programs that don’t help students find good jobs—but do bring in federal largesse with the promise of a free education for students when the government forgives their loans.
That of course will create more debt, only now students won’t be on the hook for much of it. Taxpayers will. This isn’t really “free.” As higher interest rates are demonstrating, the public will get stuck with the bill and tradeoffs in the form of higher taxes or spending cuts.
And we know colleges already love to raise prices much faster than inflation. They also love to spend more. Expenditures at public colleges rose 4.1 percent above inflation from 2009-10 to 2019–20, for example.
What’s more, by effectively gutting the monthly debt payments that students will make relative to their earnings, many programs that shouldn’t be eligible for federal student loans can now escape one of the government’s only accountability mechanisms — monitoring the ratio of a program’s debt-to-earnings.
And that points to the biggest problem in all this. The big winner will be colleges of all stripes, which will be able to bring in far more money with less risk. The Biden administration says it will try to create a list to shame programs that offer little value, but don’t expect that to move the needle.
What would? Tying the ability of college programs to participate in federal student aid programs on the condition that their students get good paying jobs when they leave and repay their debt.
Or Congress could pass new policy to require that colleges share in the risk with taxpayers when student borrowers don’t repay the full amount they borrow. That would make them think twice before launching worthless programs or raising prices.
Anything that encourages colleges to create value by keeping costs low relative to the earnings of their graduates would be better than this proposed regulation. But simply allowing students to take out more money with no skin in the game for schools is a bad bet.
It’s one that will fuel the continuing increase in college costs, cause students to enroll in schools that won’t give them a good return, and will leave taxpayers holding an ever-rising bill with little to show for it.
https://www.nysun.com/article/bidens-back-door-to-free-college
***********************************
3 February, 2023
Ron DeSantis Sends Leftists Screeching With Latest Victory Over Woke Education
Few political leaders today are as adept at sending fragile leftists (who begrudgingly call America home) spiraling into inane screeching as Florida Governor Ron DeSantis. And he might be the most successful culture warrior Republicans and conservatives have had on their bench in recent memory. From taking on Disney to protecting students and promoting individual freedom, his ideological and political opponents have not shown themselves equipped to defeat or even respond well.
This week, DeSantis notched another big victory, this one against woke and biased education — but with far-reaching impacts beyond the borders of his free state of Florida.
As he's done before, DeSantis seems to have set something of a snare for his political foes, hoping to bait them into defending the indefensible simply because to do otherwise would mean agreeing with DeSantis' concerns. That is, it was a brilliant plan that would, independent of the left's reaction, promote academic freedom and actual critical thinking for Florida's students.
This latest kerfuffle came about as a result of the College Board's decision to rework its Advanced Placement curriculum for African American Studies. Like the rest of mainstream educational developments of late, the redevelopment of the course reportedly intended to include woke, unbalanced lessons to integrate things such as the debunked 1619 Project and other Critical Race Theory principles, as well as things like "Marxist approaches to race."
"Reportedly," because the true contents of the curriculum were kept secret by College Board and most of the information about the course came from public comments by those developing the outline for the reworked African American Studies program.
Guy summarized some of the writings from those who got their hands on the curriculum, and those reviews found that it "proselytizes for a socialist transformation of the United States" and attempts to "promote leftist radicalism, with virtually no readings providing even a classically liberal point of view, much less some form of conservatism."
So, when the College Board began the pilot for the new course while keeping most of its contents secret, the DeSantis administration slapped it down. "As presented, the content of this course is inexplicably contrary to Florida law," the Florida Department of Education said, alluding to Florida's Stop WOKE Act that protects students from the racist tenets of CRT. Florida left the door open to future work with the College Board if it would "come back to the table with lawful, historically accurate content."
When Guy eventually obtained the syllabus for the APAAS that included "subjects such as 'intersectionality and activism,' 'black queer studies,' 'postracial racism,' prison 'abolition,' and the 'reparations movement,'" it became even more understandable why the DeSantis administration had concerns.
But the reasonable stance from DeSantis — based on state law and concerns that College Board was not being transparent with the curriculum — didn't mean that the left tempered their out-of-control emotions. They claimed DeSantis was banning African American studies completely, said it was proof of racism, compared him to book-burners, and pointed to DeSantis' alleged anti-intellectualism. Even Biden Press Secretary Karine Jean-Pierre took the bait in a briefing and called DeSantis' position "incomprehensible."
Well, Democrats and leftist academics may have gotten a bit ahead of themselves (again) because it turns out the College Board caved, at least in some areas of the curriculum. On Wednesday morning, College Board announced its new APAAS course would remove Critical Race Theory, queer theory, and black feminism, as Townhall reported. The course will, as an addition, include a research project idea centered on black conservatism.
The leftists who had been frothing about DeSantis' position on the initial biased curriculum, as they usually do when they realize they've lost a battle, did not take the news well. They, also as usual, immediately race-baited and attacked College Board and DeSantis for ending the study of black history on the first day of black history month.
The backlash against the College Board was swift, even though its president, David Coleman, announced the changes while denying political leaders had anything to do with them. That wasn't enough on Wednesday and won't be enough to mollify the leftists whose existence seems to depend on sustained outrage.
So the leftists will continue to screech while DeSantis picks up another success in his administration's work to protect Florida from those who wish to force their leftist principles on its rising generation.
In doing so, DeSantis not only notched an apparent victory against woke academics and secured better educational offerings for Florida students, but he also gave other state executives another playbook to follow as they seek to take control of education away from inane coastal leftists and ensure it fits what parents expect and students need.
********************************************
Social-justice programming for every college student
By Nicholas Giordano
The social-justice warriors are pushing full steam ahead with their plans to turn our classrooms into indoctrination dens. The State University of New York system, in which I’m a political-science professor, just announced expanded “Diversity, Equity, Inclusion, and Social Justice” requirements for every degree program starting in fall 2023.
That’s right — DEISJ classes are required to earn a degree, even in departments outside liberal arts such as math, science and engineering.
These initiatives do nothing more than cultivate division, distort reality, eliminate the power of the individual and insult any fair-minded person. DEISJ is a cultural movement, not an academic discipline, inhibiting academic freedom and doing little to prepare students for the workforce.
This curriculum has no place in education. Americans — parents, students, employers — need to defend our nation’s academic institutions, which are critical to forming a citizenry equipped to uphold our republic through economic productivity and civic engagement.
DEISJ drives are a cancer spreading throughout American institutions. To meet SUNY’s requirements, students must master specific criteria for spotting and responding to “dynamics of power, privilege, oppression, and opportunity” in all aspects of the past and the present.
As the largest university system in the country, with 64 institutions serving nearly 1.3 million students, SUNY is clearly doing its part to create a new generation of public virtue signalers. Unfortunately, it’s just one of many higher-education institutions that would rather students master DEISJ’s core components than prepare for a lifetime career. The University of Massachusetts, Drake University, Brandeis University, Villanova University and the University of California system are among the many schools adopting this radical framework.
SUNY says DEISJ courses “must explicitly address how institutional and societal structures lead to inequities across groups.” Such learning outcomes push the narrative that America is, and will continue to be, a systemically and institutionally racist country. The framework ignores the great strides made over the last two centuries and doesn’t allow any debate.
As a political-science professor, I can say that DEISJ desecrates the American identity and makes a mockery of our national motto, E Pluribus Unum — Out of many, one. From many different people, from different places, we create one nation united by core values such as liberty, self-government, equality and individualism.
Instead, DEISJ initiatives promote a victimhood culture and encourage tribalism by putting identity above country in the name of equity. Their objectives are intellectually shallow and ideologically driven as they mischaracterize America and our history. Even worse, they foster resentment and bitterness towards our country, which has provided so much opportunity despite our past sins.
Higher-education institutions should focus on equipping students with the ability to think critically, developing interpersonal skills and preparing them for the labor market. Given enrollment declines, a trend showing no signs of abating, parents and students should use the power of the purse and choose schools that value sound academic principles over woke ideology.
Alumni can also play a role in defeating DEISJ. Alumni giving makes up 23% of the money colleges and universities raise. Alumni should seriously reconsider their contributions if their alma maters continue to pursue an ideological agenda.
And corporations account for 13% of all college and university contributions. Employers can also withhold cash and continue to look at alternative ways to vet talent — some, like Google, Tesla, Bank of America, General Motors and IBM, have dropped degree requirements, and more are likely to follow. Colleges cannot afford to lose their support.
DEISJ is a lucrative multibillion-dollar industry peddling propaganda and division that we must root out of our education system. Over the last two decades, faculty like me have witnessed the collapse of academia and a drop in academic standards. We can and we must stand up to this madness and say enough is enough. Our country depends on it.
https://nypost.com/2023/02/01/social-justice-programming-for-every-college-student/
*************************************************
Diversity professor verbally attacks student after being triggered by term 'terrorist attack': complaint
A clinical psychologist and professor who teaches a mandatory diversity class at George Washington University allegedly created a hostile environment that promoted violence against civilians, according to a complaint filed with the U.S. Department of Education's Office of Civil Rights.
Dr. Lara Sheehi sits on the board of the USA-Palestine Mental Health Network and practices clinically from "a trans-inclusive feminist and liberation theory model." She "works on race and white supremacy,[and] decolonial struggles."
In one instance raised in the civil rights complaint – Dr. Lara Sheehi – while teaching a course about "diversity awareness" and to "sensitize future therapists to biases" – allegedly verbally attacked a student as they spoke about terrorist attacks in Israel which have killed civilians, including American citizens.
Sheehi "took offense at the student’s use of the term ‘terrorist attack,’" the complaint, which was first reported by the Washington Free Beacon, said. "The professor then claimed that the student’s comment invoked Islamophobia even though the student never mentioned Palestinians, Arabs, or Muslims in her comment."
Dr. Sheehi also brought in a speaker who "advocated violence against Israelis—and by extension Jews," the complaint said.
One Jewish student said they were "crying," and feeling "deeply unsettled and unsafe" after the speaker was brought in.
According to the complaint, when a student told Sheehi they felt "unsafe in a program that would invite a speaker who endorsed violence against Israeli civilians and who, therefore, may celebrate the murder of her Israeli relatives. In response, Professor Sheehi called the student’s comment a 'damaging Islamophobic anti-Palestinian' comment and added that ‘a stone is nothing compared to an army.’"
"[T]he fact of the matter is that a speaker was brought in [by Sheehi] that advocated violence against Israelis—and by extension Jews—and that is antisemitic, yet is being explained away," the student said.
The complaint said the professor retaliated against them when they made complaints to the university.
Sheehi did not immediately respond to a request for comment and George Washington did not immediately answer whether the diversity professor was stripped of academic duties as its own internal investigation begins. However, they referred Fox News to a statement which claimed they were "committed to fostering a welcoming and inclusive environment where all feel safe and free of harassment, hostility or marginalization."
***********************************
2 February, 2023
NYC: Don’t let parents voices, cries for charter schools fall on deaf Democratic ears
Overwhelmingly, city Democratic parents support charter schools and want the state to lift the cap that prevents entirely new ones from opening, reports The Post’s Carl Campanile — yet most of the city’s Democratic representatives in Albany won’t budge.
At least 12 highly promising charters, already cleared by the SUNY Charter School Committee, are just waiting for the Legislature to act before moving ahead. All the city’s existing charters have waiting lists running collectively to the tens of thousands.
But the teachers unions despise charters because they’re mostly not unionized, and their superior performance embarrasses the United Federation of Teachers-run competition. (Of course, “superior performance” is why parents want them.)
But the UFT and its statewide parent, New York State United Teachers, rule Albany: Assembly Speaker Carl Heastie (D-Bronx), once supportive of charters, couldn’t even become speaker until he’d won the unions’ backing — and it’s obvious what he had to promise to get it.
Heck, No. 2 state Senate leader Mike Gianaris (D-Queens) has sung the praises of one charter waiting to open in his district, Urban Dove Team Charter School III, but also refuses to even ease the cap because NYSUT and the UFT won’t have it.
The poll commission by Democrats for Education Reform proves it’s not the public standing in the way: Two-thirds of city parents support lifting the cap; sentiment among Democrats is 2:1, as it is among Hispanic and black New Yorkers.
All that stands between city families and vastly greater educational opportunity is squalid backroom dealing with a single special interest — one that always claims to care about the kids.
Parents of New York, wake up: Your elected leaders are selling out your kids’ future. It’s time to revolt.
************************************************
GOP Charges Ahead on Education
Proving once again that he is in touch with ordinary Americans, Donald Trump selected education for the first video message of his 2024 presidential campaign. On Saturday, Trump emphasized education in addresses in the early primary states of New Hampshire and South Carolina.
School performance fell sharply during the pandemic, as liberal governors shuttered schools for prolonged periods and required masks at the expense of learning. Children became pawns in the tyrannical measures taken under the guise of responding to Covid.
The last full year before Covid was 2019, and it was the last year of 50 million students enrolled in public schools. That total has since fallen, and experts predict a long-term decline in public school enrollment for decades into the future.
Massachusetts, long ranked at the top nationwide in student achievement, has dropped to a 19-year low in its performance as the Democrat-controlled state pushes Leftist ideology in schools. The biggest declines in performance were by minorities and low-income students, and children who did not learn English at home.
Throughout the rest of our country, the decline in student achievement and increase in illiteracy is shocking. In Pennsylvania, the 3rd graders reading with the expected level of proficiency dropped from 60% to 50% over the last three years.
There was a red wave in Ohio in the last election, after Trump held many rallies there. Republicans increased their supermajority in its Senate, attained a supermajority in its House, and won both the governorship and the vacant U.S. Senate seat.
Now it’s time to cash in on that political capital by targeting the Ohio education system, which ranks in the bottom half nationally in learning basic reading and arithmetic skills. The very first bill introduced in the Ohio Senate is to take power away from an independent state board, which has failed to get the job done.
This bill would allow the Republican governor to appoint a new education director to establish curriculum and strong standards for academic achievement. Rather than diffusing responsibility, this legislation would establish one person to be publicly accountable for the failure to teach youngsters how to read and add.
Trump boldly calls for empowering parents to directly elect school principals, to hold them accountable for their failure to teach basic skills. A bestselling book in 1955 was Why Johnny Can’t Read, and the simple answer was because schools are not using the superior method of teaching kids how to read, which is phonics.
Nearly 70 years later, schools are still not using phonics, and as a result perhaps 45 million Americans cannot even fill out a ballot in order to vote as they intend. So instead some of those ballots are being filled out for them by political hacks, who are just fine with more illiteracy.
Young adults have long been bashful about never learning how to read, rather than question why some of their friends can read but they cannot. But as traditional inhibitions disappear on social media, young people are themselves beginning to ask publicly why they were not taught to read.
Those harmed by inadequate schools are a voting bloc that Republicans can and must reach in order to win future elections. Georgia and Arizona are two swing states that Republicans must win in 2024 to capture the White House, and both rank among the ten states having the most illiteracy.
When people cannot read, then they cannot access and process independent political information needed to fill out ballots in an informed way. The higher the illiteracy, the more ballots that are filled out as part of ballot harvesting and massive drop-box dumps, and the more difficult it is to win on principle.
Meanwhile, even a liberal Republican governor has apparently gotten the message that the public is fed up with liberal ideology in school, rather than instruction on basic skills. Last year Utah’s Governor Spencer Cox vetoed a bill that would have prohibited male-bodied athletes from competing in girls’ sports, as did the liberal Republican governor in Indiana.
In both states the Republican legislatures promptly overrode those vetoes that pandered to the Left. Likewise, the Republican Arkansas legislature overrode the veto by its anti-Trump Republican Governor Asa Hutchinson of a bill prohibiting transgender medical interventions on children.
Last week the Republican legislature in Utah passed a bill to prohibit transgender medical interventions on children, and its left-leaning Republican Governor Cox was smart enough to sign it into law the next day after it reached his desk. Lessons learned, with more political ground to gain ahead.
As illiteracy climbs in the United States, this new focus by Republicans on learning is a political necessity. Many traditionally Democrat voters have children in underperforming schools, and they are not learning to read as they should be.
**********************************************************
Lessons in Preferred Pronouns Should Start in Pre-K, Largest Teachers Union Says
The nation’s largest teachers union recommends that educators begin teaching the concepts of preferred personal pronouns and gender identity starting in pre-kindergarten.
“When you look at elementary school students, many people think they are too young to talk about pronouns,” said panelist Matthew Powell, a member of the National Education Association’s Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity Committee, during a webinar last summer.
“However, by asking students their [preferred] pronouns at a young age,” Powell added, so-called education support professionals “can make room for students who may be exploring gender identity and show everyone [that] gender identity should not just be assumed.”
The Daily Signal reviewed the contents of the NEA-hosted panel discussion, held remotely June 23. The title of the webinar was “Using Pronouns to Create a Safe, Welcoming, and Inclusive Environment.”
According to audio and video available online, panelists exchanged pointers on how to teach students from preschool through college about using preferred personal pronouns.
Saul Ramos, a high school teaching assistant on the panel, said during the teachers union’s event that schools should be a place of support for students whose parents don’t accept their gender identity.
“Our educators have a real, big interest in using the correct names and pronouns for students, because we all know once you do start using someone’s correct pronouns, statistically it has shown that the suicide rates dramatically drop,” Ramos said.
‘Completely Baseless’
No evidence of a connection between failure to use preferred personal pronouns and youth suicide exists, Jay Greene, senior research fellow in The Heritage Foundation’s Center for Education Policy, told The Daily Signal. (The Daily Signal is Heritage’s multimedia news organization.)
“The completely baseless suggestion that kids will kill themselves if teachers don’t use certain pronouns is essentially a form of extortion,” said Greene, author of a recent report on youth suicide and transgender medical treatments.
“It is no more credible and should no more be catered to than when people threaten that they’ll kill themselves if they don’t get the latest iPhone,” he said.
NEA, whose website claims it is the largest labor union in the U.S., has a history of pushing radical gender ideology on teachers and students.
The teachers union’s July conference in Chicago called for preferential treatment for those with “nonconforming genders.” In October, the union released a list of possible preferred personal pronouns, including “they,” “ze,” “zem,” and “zir.”
NEA also issued a guide to LGBT rights for teachers that describes “mispronouning” as “a form of harassment.”
‘Welcoming and Safe Place’
The five panelists emphasized the importance of distinguishing biology from gender in the classroom.
“Being thoughtful about how we use our pronouns is a meaningful way we can support students whose gender might be different than what’s on their birth certificate,” Powell told webinar attendees.
Powell recommended asking students of all ages their preferred names and personal pronouns and what they would like to be called to create an inclusive environment for LGBT students.
“Even if students are not accepted at home, oftentimes schools are their only place of hope for a welcoming and safe place,” Powell said.
Heritage’s Greene said teachers should recognize the rights of parents in the education of their own children.
“When teachers decide that they are going to expose children to [preferred personal] pronouns and gender identity regardless of parental preferences, as the NEA recommends, they are breaking faith with parents and undermining the integrity of families,” Greene told The Daily Signal.
The National Education Association didn’t respond to The Daily Signal’s request for comment on this report.
‘Pronouns Are About Respect’
During the webinar, panelist Bobby Travers recommended introducing books that cover preferred personal pronouns and gender identity into libraries starting in pre-K.
Travers suggested using lists of recommended books from Welcoming Schools, an inclusion program offered by the Human Rights Campaign, the powerful LGBT political advocacy group .
These include books marketed for kindergartners regarding transgenderism, such as “I Am Jazz: Understanding Transgender Children,” and gender expression, such as “Love Makes a Family” and “A Day in the Life of Marlon Bundo.” The latter book, the story of a male bunny who likes another male bunny, is a parody of a children’s book by Charlotte Pence, daughter of former Vice President Mike Pence.
The NEA panel also addressed challenges in teaching elementary schoolers about preferred personal pronouns. The panelists suggested working preferred pronouns into English class and encouraged to teachers to include them when introducing themselves to their students.
“At the elementary level, pronouns are about respect,” Powell said. “The greatest thing you can do to show respect is to correctly identify them by their proper names and their proper pronouns they like to be used.”
Powell promoted “I’m Here” badges from the NEA-LGBTQ+ Caucus, which include a “Quick Response,” or QR, code that students may scan to access resources describing abortion as the removal of “pregnancy tissue,” encouraging gender transitions without parental consent, and promoting “sex work.”
NEA members founded the LGBTQ+ Caucus in the 1980s to “provide educators, education support professionals, and students, with safe schools free of anti-LGBTQ+ bias and intolerance, and to provide sound education programs for all students,” according to the union’s website.
“Using [preferred personal] pronouns allows students to be part of the school community,” panel moderator and biology teacher Bill Farmer said. “If they’re not being supported, there’s no way that child can succeed in school.”
‘Misgendering’ Equals Disrespect
The panel talked about how to address students and colleagues who don’t take the pronouns issue seriously. Ramos emphasized that preferred pronouns are nothing to joke about.
“I don’t deal good when someone uses it as a joke because, to me, nothing about it is a joking matter,” he said.
The panel discussed ways to refer to students without using the “gender binary,” including “Hey, folks” or “Listen, everyone,” instead of “Hey, guys.”
As a biology teacher, Farmer said, he teaches the equivalent of “Gender Identity 101” in conglomeration with anatomy lessons. He warned against conflating “biological sex and gender identity.”
“Gender identity is how you see yourself within the greater context of society, separate from the biological component of your physical anatomy,” Farmer said.
Anthony Brisson, senior analyst in NEA’s Human and Civil Rights Department, concluded the panel by encouraging attendees to use everyone’s preferred personal pronouns as a sign of respect and inclusivity. “Misgendering” reflects disrespect, he said.
“Social interactions where a person is addressed by their correct name and pronouns consistent with their gender identity are widely recognized as a basic, yet critical, aspect of gender affirmation,” Brisson said. “Addressing someone by the wrong name or misgendering through the use of incorrect pronouns can feel disrespectful, unsafe, and harmful to the person being misgendered.”
***********************************
1 February, 2023
California’s SB 876: A Missed Opportunity for Education Technology
California’s SB 876 is a bill that would create a state Digital Education Equity Program (DEEP). This program will be run by the California Department of Education, and the sponsors of the bill argue it would give help and training to schools and other educational organizations in using technology in their classrooms.
The bill would require the California Department of Education to authorize grants to each of the state’s 58 county offices of education. Each county office of education would have to tell the department of education what they did with the money, who they helped, and how much money they used every year. (One of the co-authors of this post sat for some years on a county board of education and can testify that county offices don’t have the capacity to properly evaluate grant proposals in this area.)
Much of the impetus for the bill appears to be addressing the “digital divide” in education. The digital divide refers to “the gap between those with sufficient knowledge of and access to technology and those without,” per an American University blog post.
According to the bill’s author:
Educators in many schools lack access to sufficient information and professional development to cost-effectively plan for and implement current and emerging technology to support instruction. ... Without a coordinated State and regional focus on policy, programs, and funding, many districts do not have equal access to the resources needed to select, access, and implement technology in classrooms effectively and to provide students access to these resources from homes.
In theory, DEEP would aim to help schools improve their use of technology in the classroom by providing funding for things like teacher training, resources and equipment, and online instruction. It would supposedly also help align technology use with the state’s education standards.
However, SB 876 still appears to be somewhat vague in its approach. While the bill lays out the general goal of providing technical assistance and teacher professional development to local educational agencies on the implementation of educational technology, it does not offer specific details on how this would be achieved. The Senate Floor Analyses states that DEEP will provide guidelines to “more effectively address locally determined educational needs with the use of technology,” so perhaps the guidelines will curb some of the ambiguity.
One major concern with this proposal is the lack of emphasis on cybersecurity and student digital privacy. Given the recent data breaches that have affected universities and schools, it is crucial that any program related to educational technology prioritizes the protection of sensitive student information. However, the bill does not address these concerns in any meaningful way.
Without relevant technology reforms, this bill falls flat. Research has shown that there is a poor correlation between extra school funds and student outcomes. Simply sending money to school districts won’t improve their performance.
During the pandemic, schools had to confront new remote-learning challenges [remote learning], and at times, schools waded waist-deep in potential student privacy violations and cybersecurity risks. This bill should have been an opportune time to reconsider such Orwellian monitoring of students.
It’s important for schools to take data security seriously, as they have a considerable amount of sensitive information on students and staff. The state should also make it easier for people to take legal action against organizations that don’t properly protect their data. In light of current digital security and student privacy concerns, it would be more beneficial for legislators to focus on developing legislation that addresses these specific issues.
https://blog.independent.org/2023/01/25/education-technology/
***************************************************
Parents Want a Complete Overhaul of the Education System
In the wake of COVID-19, people now overwhelmingly believe that the education system's broader purpose needs to be rethought. This begins with a shift away from standardized testing, college prep and a one-size-fits-all model and toward personalized curricula, practical skills and subject mastery.
A new Purpose of Education Index survey released by the Massachusetts-based national think tank Populace found a radical shift in the way most of us view education and what our children should be getting out of it.
"The findings show the K-12 educational system is wildly unresponsive to what parents and children actually want," said Todd Rose, co-founder and CEO of Populace.
Rose added that people are not looking for something "better" -- they are looking for something fundamentally different. "They want a way out of the one-size-fits-all approach driven by standardized testing models and elite institutions making us compete in a zero-sum game and instead an educational framework geared towards individualized learning, practical skills, and preparation for a meaningful life."
The study was conducted with over 1,000 participants conducted with cooperation from YouGov and data analytics firm Gradient. Respondents were given 57 priorities for K-12 education and ranked them using a conjoint analysis that forces them into trade-off scenarios and avoids the distorting effects of social influence.
The fissure between the public education system and parents began in 2020, when school districts across the country closed at the beginning of the pandemic. Parents, often working in the same room where their children were being educated over Zoom, began to gain a more complete understanding of what and how their children were being taught -- and they did not like what they saw.
Attitudes changed almost overnight as parents got a peek behind the curtain at what their children were being taught, what was emphasized and how out-of-step the system was in preparing their children for the workplace after graduation. An awakening took place as parents soon learned the power teachers unions had, not just over curriculum but also over whether schools would even open.
That disruption has been devastating. Test scores shared with the Associated Press showed that the average student lost over half a year of learning in math and a quarter of a school year in reading. But students in some public-school districts lost twice that in learning.
This has all prompted many parents to move their children out of public schools and into private or parochial schools, most of which are not controlled by teachers unions and stayed open during the pandemic. The overall rate of parents choosing to home-school grew from 5.4% to 11.1%, according to data from the Census Bureau.
For the study, respondents were given 57 priorities for K-12 education and ranked them using a conjoint analysis that forces them into trade-off scenarios and avoids the distorting effects of social influence. Pre-COVID-19, people ranked preparedness for college as one of the highest priorities for a K-12 education. In this recent survey, it was one of the lowest priorities.
The study also showed that 70% believe more things about the educational system should change than stay the same, including 21% who say nearly everything should change.
Respondents said they wanted to see students develop practical skills such as managing personal finances, preparing meals or making appointments as their top priority -- functions that students a generation ago learned in home economics classes.
"Demonstrating basic reading, writing, and arithmetic," "being prepared for a career," and "hav(ing) the skills to be competitive in the local job market" are goals of education that went out of style in the last generation, but now people are more interested in bringing them back than they are in less practical and more short-term goals.
Overall, the report evinces widespread belief that education needs to be fundamentally changed. It needs to prepare students for the workforce, adulthood and success, not necessarily put students into the pipeline for college.
************************************************
Helping 200 Teachers Abandon Indiana’s Largest Teachers Union
On Dec. 20, I helped my 200th teacher leave the Indiana State Teachers Association. This behemoth of a pyramid scheme charges Indiana teachers $1,000 per year to lobby for progressive political goals at the state and national level—while claiming to be integral in salary negotiation and legal defense.
Over the last five years, I’ve enjoyed the privilege of assisting teachers in navigating past the smoke and mirrors to leave the scam masquerading as an essential service for teachers. While the ISTA continues to lament teacher wages in the Indiana Statehouse, it siphons money from the salaries of teachers who gain nothing of value from the transaction.
I’ll never forget the first time I heard a sales pitch from the ISTA. I had just taken a science teaching position at Knightstown Intermediate School in Knightstown, Indiana, and after a lengthy safety briefing from the superintendent, a representative from the ISTA walked up to the front of the high school cafeteria and began to speak.
However, the droning speech wasn’t what cemented the memory forever in my mind—but the response from Knightstown staff. In her opening, the ISTA representative claimed, “The Indiana State Teachers Association provides essential services for all Indiana teachers that make our classrooms a better place!”
The collective chuckling and scorning that ensued from a large faction of teachers caught both the representative and me off guard. I had previously believed that the ISTA had a strong footing in Indiana, and though I wasn’t interested in joining the union, the vast majority of other public school teachers held it in high esteem.
This laughter shook a few who were returning to the district for their second or third year, having fallen for the pitch in previous years and simply renewed their dues. Two weeks later, I was standing with one of those teachers in the hallway after classes had ended for the day—taking part in the age-old tradition of after-school quibbling.
My colleague expressed her frustration about the ISTA taking money out of her paycheck biweekly, and about the local union representative telling her that there was “nothing she could do until it was time to renew dues next year.” The aggravated teacher also noted that since her conversation with the union representative, she had experienced a discernible increase in marketing emails from the ISTA.
I suggested an approach that many teachers would later use dozens of times over the next three years: inform the district payroll officer to cease allowing the ISTA to withdraw union dues. Fifteen minutes later we sat in her classroom, writing an email directing that the ISTA was to lose access to her paycheck. It was several months before the union had realized she had stopped paying and had left.
With the 5-4 Janus v. AFSCME decision a year later, the Supreme Court reaffirmed the free speech and association rights of public school teachers—ruling that teachers could not be compelled to join or remain in a union. Attorneys general in Alaska, Indiana, and Texas followed by issuing guidance that teachers must opt in to have union dues removed from their salaries (instead of needing to opt out).
By the time Janus came down, I had helped about 20 teachers leave the union at this point, but I was not prepared for the incoming flood. I later learned that one teacher I’d helped leave the ISTA had informed a group of friends at a professional development that I was aiding teachers, and word had spread.
Following Attorney General Curtis Hill’s guidance, I began to receive emails, texts, and direct messages on Twitter and Facebook from Hoosier teachers I’d never met who had heard I was willing to help them leave the ISTA. Between 2018 and 2021, I helped an additional 60 teachers leave the union through declining renewal, talking to district payroll, and in one particularly memorable case, announcing an elementary teacher’s departure in the middle of an ISTA meeting.
One article I wrote for the Washington Examiner on the rationale behind negotiating your own salary instead of relying on the unions resulted in quite a few messages from K-12 Hoosier teachers asking about the fastest way to abandon the ISTA.
In 2021, Gov. Eric Holcomb signed a law into effect that required school districts to get permission from teachers each year before deducting union dues from their paycheck. This, coupled with a growing reputation I was earning for exposing ISTA-backed politics in classrooms, put my name in front of dozens of Indiana teachers looking to leave what was becoming known as an expensive, annoying, and pointless club.
Now, Indiana teachers only need to let their banks know that no more money should be allowed to go to the “Easy Pay” system set up by the ISTA. It’s easier than ever to leave.
By the end of 2021, scarcely a week would go by that five to 10 messages and/or emails would arrive in my inboxes asking me to share a friendly phone call with a teacher planning to leave the union. I recently crossed the threshold of having assisted 200 in leaving the ISTA (along with a few dozen aided in leaving other teachers unions), and I took some time to reflect on the ramifications of these actions.
I don’t believe that a $200,000 annual loss means that much to the Indiana State Teachers Association. Two hundred teachers in five years isn’t a death-blow to the 40,000-teacher membership that the ISTA claims to have.
I will point out that in contrast to the ISTA’s boasting, districts across the state are seeing a sharp decline in ISTA membership. Several administrators in both rural and urban districts have told me that they experienced over a 20% drop in union membership since 2016.
The biggest takeaway from my experience in talking to dissatisfied Hoosier teachers is the perception that the ISTA’s offerings are worthless.
The ISTA claims to advocate and to provide better working conditions and increased salaries to its teachers, and many of its local representatives promise that the ISTA will represent teachers in lawsuits and contract negotiations—thus providing safety and security.
Unfortunately, the ISTA is categorically worse at these stated promises than free alternatives that frankly require less effort. Of the 200 teachers I helped leave the ISTA, the vast majority indicated their aggravation at the union’s lack of effort in competent contract negotiation. Regardless of union status, Indiana teachers are constantly asked to sacrifice prep periods and to take over other teachers’ classes without additional compensation—all this without so much as a whimper from the ISTA.
I have received several text messages from Hoosier teachers who, after leaving the union, negotiated better-paying contracts for themselves in Lawrence, New Albany, Crawfordsville, Muncie, Greenwood, and Elkhart, Indiana.
Caleb Wakefield, a teacher in Pike Township in Indianapolis, told The Daily Signal, “The ISTA and [the National Education Association] seem to care more about courting politicians than the members they profess to serve. Most of the critical bargaining is done by local associations, and hardworking educators.”
I’m flattered to say that many teachers I’ve helped leave are happier to be out of the union. Martin Strother, a former teacher at Hamilton Southeastern, told The Daily Signal, “Tony helped a couple of teachers at my school leave the ISTA, and they’ve both been far better for it. No teacher deserves to be taken advantage of by the ISTA.”
While many teachers expressed their worry about discipline-related legal threats when absent from the union, the Attorney General’s Office reminds all public educators annually that in any discipline-related lawsuit, the state of Indiana would represent the teacher for free. There are also better representation options for teachers without the union’s massive price tag and political nonsense. Indiana Professional Educators promises the same legal protections that the ISTA offers at only $107 a year, without lobbying for Democrat policies.
Finally, the tidal wave of political content the ISTA pushes out has become unpalatable for Indiana teachers. While the ISTA has been fearmongering about education reform from libertarian and conservative policymakers for years, the last six years have been particularly toxic. Endless emails, calls to action, and teetering towers of talking points saturate the inboxes of teachers who would prefer to be left alone.
Several scandals have driven teachers to resign, of course. For example, in April 2022, the ISTA elected a man with a disturbingly racist and horny social media presence to be its vice president (following the outrage, he “voluntarily” stepped down).
Local negligence from the ISTA hurts countless teachers. Bree Boyce, a former Indiana special education teacher, told The Daily Signal, “When I was in the classroom and needed them to step up for me, the ISTA did not take the time to understand what was going on. Rather, they manipulated a young and naïve teacher while making the situation worse.”
One Indianapolis teacher, Mark Majeski, told The Daily Signal:
I left ISTA for primarily three reasons. First, the organization places a higher value on Democratic fundraising than on grassroots issues. Secondly, the local leadership is not interested in fighting administrative malfeasance and their dereliction of fiduciary responsibilities (most recently in the form of large amounts of money spent on [social and emotional learning], restorative practice, and the continued wasteful spend on technology that does not promote academic achievement). Finally, ISTA does not fulfill the mission of a traditional union. Rather, it is just a dues paying/fundraising segment of the radical Left of the Democratic Party.
The biggest conclusion I draw from helping 200 teachers leave the Indiana State Teachers Association is something we all can relate to in the last few years. Most teachers leaving the ISTA are exhausted. They’re tired of the endless political preening, progressive pressure, and empty promises that pour out of the mouths of state and national leadership. Most teachers want to be left alone, partnering with students’ homes to create the best academic environment possible. Over 200 teachers in Indiana have told me that the ISTA has become an obstacle to that goal.
https://www.dailysignal.com/2023/01/30/helping-200-teachers-abandon-indianas-largest-teachers-union
***********************************
My other blogs: Main ones below
http://dissectleft.blogspot.com (DISSECTING LEFTISM)
http://antigreen.blogspot.com (GREENIE WATCH)
http://pcwatch.blogspot.com (POLITICAL CORRECTNESS WATCH)
http://australian-politics.blogspot.com/ (AUSTRALIAN POLITICS)
http://snorphty.blogspot.com/ (TONGUE-TIED)
http://jonjayray.com/blogall.html More blogs
*******************************
Sidebars
The notes and pix appearing in the sidebar of the blog that is reproduced above are not reproduced here. The sidebar for this blog can however be found in my archive of sidebars
Most pictures that I use in the body of the blog should stay up throughout the year. But how long they stay up after that is uncertain. At the end of every year therefore I intend to put up a collection of all pictures used my blogs in that year. That should enable missing pictures to be replaced. The archive of last year's pictures on this blog is therefore now up. Note that the filename of the picture is clickable and clicking will bring the picture up. See here (2020). here (2021) and here (2022)
My Home Pages are here (Academic) or here (Personal); Index to blog backups; My Home page supplement; My Alternative Wikipedia; My Blogroll; Menu of my longer writings; Subject index to my short notes. My annual picture page is here; My Recipes;
Email me (John Ray) here.
