PragerU Is Now in Schools. Teacher Unions Are Fuming

For more than a decade, we at PragerU have been dedicated to helping America’s next generation live and think better by producing pro-America educational content that doesn’t just reach billions of people each and every year, but also changes hearts and changes minds.

And now, with our recently announced partnerships with the states of Florida, Texas, and Oklahoma, PragerU is now in schools.

Last month, Florida approved PragerU as an educational vendor in the state, allowing teachers throughout Florida to use PragerU materials directly in their classrooms without any fear of reprimand or reprisal.

Immediately, the Left devolved into a tailspin. Joy Reid of MSNBC labeled us a “racist” organization. California Gov. Gavin Newsom derided us as “propaganda.” And if this isn’t just the icing on the cake, NBC accused us of perpetuating “indoctrination by cartoon,” referring to our animated series “Leo and Layla’s History Adventures” and our financial literacy series “Cash Course.”

And this tailspin shows little indication of ending anytime soon, especially in light of Texas’ decision to approve PragerU as a vendor and Oklahoma’s decision last week to join the fray as well.

With all of the Left’s recent outrage, I’ll admit, it has left me pondering: Since when did the Left give a darn about indoctrination?

Since when did they hold signs outside of school board meetings—like they did in New Hampshire as the State Board of Education deliberated on a proposal to allow PragerU’s financial literacy videos and lesson plans to be counted for course credit for high school students—that read “Education NOT Indoctrination”?

And since when was financial literacy “indoctrination”? Since when did the word “indoctrination” even exist in the vernacular of the Left and the deep-pocketed union bosses they’re beholden to?

I’m still struggling to answer that one.

Because if the Left really cared about indoctrination—and I’m placing a lot of emphasis here on the really—where were their protests when critical race theory seeped into America’s schools, casting white children as oppressors, black children as victims, and America as a perpetual villain?

Where were the Left’s condemnations when a California high school teacher forced her students to watch a “Pride” video during math class and threatened punishment if they didn’t comply? It was a video so inappropriate that one student asked in a video that has since gone viral, “Why are you showing this to kids?”

The answers to these questions are simple: Never and nowhere to be found. Because, to answer my earlier question, the Left doesn’t actually care about indoctrination.

What they have a problem with is competition. For decades, the Left has been allowed unfettered and unmitigated access to America’s classrooms and, by extension, to the hearts and minds of America’s children.

With little (if any) challenge, they have been allowed to promote dangerous and false ideas, from the notion that America is a systemically racist country whose history is defined by little more than slavery to nonsensical fallacies that portray gender as no more than a social construct or an antiquity of the past.

The Left isn’t lashing out at PragerU because they’re concerned about “indoctrination.” They’re lashing out because they’re concerned that their monopoly on the psyche of America’s young people might finally be coming to an end, and because as PragerU enters more and more classrooms throughout the country, they fear that America’s children might finally (and much to their chagrin) hear the other side to the one-sided agenda they have long perpetuated.

But do you know what the irony in all of this is? While the Left has never shied away from injecting politics into the classroom, that has never been the goal of PragerU.

Our goal has been—and will always be—to simply inject truth. Nothing more, nothing less.

https://www.dailysignal.com/2023/09/11/left-laughably-calls-prageru-school-programs-indoctrination-fears-threat-its-monopoly/

******************************************

Harvard's woke student newspaper claims limiting applicants to 200-words penalizes students from 'marginalized backgrounds'

Harvard's student newspaper has claimed that a new admissions test is racist and discriminatory, because the 200-word limit for the essays do not give applicant from 'non-traditional backgrounds' enough space to explain themselves.

The Crimson this week, run by Cara Chang, published an op-ed written by its editorial board.

They argued that replacing the previous one optional open-ended essay and two optional short essays with five compulsory 200-word segments was discriminatory.

'Shortening the essays has a disparate impact that falls heaviest on those from marginalized backgrounds,' the board writes.

'Learning to package yourself within a shorter amount of space is a product of advanced education; longer essays more equitably allow applicants to discuss their experiences in full, particularly if they are from non-traditional backgrounds and require more space to elaborate on nuanced qualifications.'

By contrast, the authors argue, 'longer essays more equitably allow applicants to discuss their experiences in full, particularly if they are from non-traditional backgrounds and require more space to elaborate on nuanced qualifications.'

They argue that 'trauma dumping' is acceptable, describing it as 'explaining how past life experiences have shaped who you are'.

'Those who have undergone traumatic experiences should not have to fear that writing about the experiences that shaped them looks like a beg for admission,' they state.

The board adds that some of the questions are also flawed.

The authors point to the question: 'Briefly describe an intellectual experience that was important to you.'

They write: 'This question seemingly privileges applicants from well-resourced backgrounds for whom additional academic opportunities were plentiful in high school.'

Two members of the Harvard editorial board, Ruby J.J. Huang and Joshua Ochieng, disagreed with their colleagues and co-wrote a dissenting op-ed.

Huang and Ochieng argue that the new five short essays actually make Harvard more accessible.

'The new five prompts ask applicants to talk about different aspects of themselves, from their intellectual interests, extracurriculars, and family responsibilities to their life experiences,' they write.

'These prompts give clear guidance on what Harvard wants to know about its applicants.

'For a student with limited experience in writing an application, the prompts assuage the burden of trying to determine the aspects of their life that are of interest to Harvard.'

And they argue that it is an over-simplification to say that shorter essays are harder to craft.

'Writing is an idiosyncratic process that, dependent on a myriad of factors, will require different skills from different people,' they state.

'For some, brevity may be necessary to get the point across, while for others, a little elaboration may drive the point home.'

The discussion came following the June decision by the Supreme Court to end affirmative action in college applications - seen by supporters as one of the key achievements of the Civil Rights Movement of the 1960s.

As a result, universities can no longer consider applicants' race or ethnicity as they seek to correct long-standing inequalities resulting from America's segregationist past, with the aim of boosting black, Hispanic and Native American enrollment.

Universities are now wrestling with how to make their student body more diverse, within the law.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12526965/harvard-crimson-affirmative-action-applications-word-limits-discrimination.html

****************************************************

College Lacrosse Coach Ousted From Position After Speaking Up Against Male Athletes Competing Against Women

Far-Left Oberlin at work again

After speaking out against biological men competing in women's sports, Oberlin College’s head women’s lacrosse coach was “reassigned” to a desk job. (Photo: Wirestock/Getty Images)
Oberlin College’s head women’s lacrosse coach, Kim Russell, has been “reassigned” to a desk job after she spoke out against allowing biological men to compete in women’s sports, the Independent Women’s Forum reported.

Russell shared a post on social media praising Emma Weyant as the “real winner” when Weyant placed second after transgender athlete Lia Thomas during the 500-yard freestyle at the 2022 NCAA women’s swimming championship.

Two weeks after the Independent Women’s Forum released a documentary about Oberlin’s response to her post, the college has given her a new role as an “Employee Wellness Project Manager,” where she will have virtually no contact with students, according to the Independent Women’s Forum.

“I have been taken out of the role of coach, which is what I’ve done for 27 years,” Russell told Fox News Tuesday on “America’s Newsroom.” “I’ve been a P.E. teacher, a coach, and a teacher of programs of wellness, yoga, all sorts of things, kickboxing … and [have been] asked to take a role as employee wellness program manager, which would have no contact with students and be creating things—which is paperwork.”

Russell alleged in August that she was “burned at the stake” by the college for standing up for women’s rights in athletics, and that administrators and students had repeatedly attacked her for her personal opinions on biological men competing in women’s sports. Russell deplored the current state of women’s rights in the United States and said that the newer generations of women do not appreciate what older women fought for, according to the Independent Women’s Forum.

“I am so passionate about this because the reason we have these opportunities to play and coach and to do the things we do is because of the women who came before me, who fought for Title IX, who fought for us to have these opportunities,” Russell told Fox News. “And I don’t think that the younger generation even understands that these opportunities weren’t here years ago.”

“Hearing Kim Russell is no longer allowed to interact with students is so disappointing,” Paula Scanlan, a former teammate of Thomas and a spokeswoman for the Independent Women’s Forum, told the Independent Women’s Forum. “It’s unbelievable that saying women’s sports are for females only would lead Oberlin College to take such an extreme step—it’s a reprimand and punishment.”

Russell and Oberlin College did not immediately respond to the Daily Caller News Foundation’s request for comment.

https://www.dailysignal.com/2023/09/13/college-lacrosse-coach-ousted-from-position-after-speaking-up-against-male-athletes-competing-against-women

******************************************************

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

******************************************************