The 1 Change the Government Could Make to Drive Down College Prices

Sen. Mike Lee   

Over the past 20 years, the price of wireless service has fallen 46 percent, the price of software has fallen 68 percent, the price of televisions has fallen 96 percent, and the quality of these services and technologies has improved markedly.

But over that same time, the price of college tuition has risen 199 percent, and most parents would agree that the quality has not greatly improved.

But if prices typically fall as competition spurs quality advancement, as seen by the technological achievement of the last two decades, how has that not happened in education?

There is no one simple answer to this question, but the different regulatory environment facing higher education is a significant factor.

One hundred years ago, there were six regional, voluntary, nongovernmental institutions that helped universities and secondary schools coordinate curricula, degrees, and transfer credits. These institutions had no power to prevent the creation of higher education institutions.

This changed with the 1952 GI Bill.

After congressional investigators found thousands of sham colleges were created overnight to take advantage of the benefits provided in the first 1944 GI Bill, the federal government turned these voluntary institutions into accreditors.

As the federal government steadily ramped up its financial support for higher education benefits, it continued outsourcing the vetting of higher education institutions to these regional accreditors.

This makeshift system worked well for decades, but in recent years these regional accreditors have come under heavy criticism for both lax oversight over some online institutions and a heavy hand in killing some promising innovations.

No regulator is ever going to be perfect, but if they are going to be gatekeepers for a sector of the economy as important as higher education, they must be transparent and accountable to the American people.

Unfortunately, our nation’s regional accreditors are neither. They do not share how they make their accrediting decisions with anyone and their board members do not face accountability at the ballot box.

This needs to change.

That is why I have introduced the Higher Education Reform and Opportunity Act. This bill would allow states to create their own accreditation system for institutions that want to be eligible for federal financial aid dollars.

Each state could then be as open or closed to higher education innovation as they saw fit. They could even stick with their current regional accreditors if they chose to do so.

But they could also enable innovators like Purdue University President Mitch Daniels, who recently signed a deal with the online provider Kaplan University, to go even further in their mission to expand higher education access to those who had limited access before.

Our higher education system should not be held captive to 100-year-old institutions that were never intended to be regulatory gatekeepers in the first place.

Instead, we should allow those communities that want to experiment with higher education policy the freedom and accountability to do so.

SOURCE 






SJW Indoctrination via Middle School Math

When it comes to the crusade to create and raise up another generation of social justice warriors chomping at the bit to change the world … or something … then it’s imperative to use all available avenues to further the indoctrination agenda. In this case, teaching middle school math.

Teach for America has partnered with the free online course company EdX to offer a six-week course designed to help teachers develop middle school math lessons that incorporate “social justice” issues. The website describes the course as designed to “help you blend secondary math instruction with topics such as inequity, poverty and privilege to transform students into global thinkers and mathematicians.” And to think kids used to ask of math, “When am I ever going to use this?”

Examples for lessons include “Unpaid Work Hours in the Home by Gender,” and “Race and Imprisonment Rates in the United States.” It only gets worse. The course describes “Mathematical Ethics” as follows:

Mathematical ethics recognizes that, for centuries, mathematics has been used as a dehumanizing tool. Does one’s IQ fall on the lower half of the bell curve? Mathematics tells us that individual is intellectually lacking. Mathematics formulae also differentiate between the classifications of a war or a genocide and have even been used to trick indigenous peoples out of land and property.

Ah, the dastardly deeds of algebra-wielding villains!

One of the most ironic and patently absurd claims made by the creators of the course is that it’s neither agenda-driven nor does it “impose” beliefs upon students. No, they argue, “We share the understanding that social justice is recognizing and acting upon our individual and collective ability to create positive change.” Was a more politically loaded statement ever uttered?

SOURCE 


      


Mixed response to Pence at Notre Dame

A group of students at the University of Notre Dame chose to walk out of Vice President Mike Pence’s speech during their commencement ceremony.

According to footage captured by WNDU, a large group of students chose to stand up and leave the stadium where their commencement was being held when Pence was introduced.

Students expressed plans to stage the walkout with the hashtag, “#WalkoutND.”

Notre Dame broke with their longstanding tradition of inviting the president to deliver the commencement address during his first year in office, seemingly trying to avoid potential controversy surrounding Trump, and invited Pence instead.

While some students clearly weren’t happy with the replacement either, one attendee reported that members of the crowd boo’ed the students who walked out.

SOURCE