Thursday, September 24, 2020


Behind Closed Doors: The True Impact of Virtual Learning on our Families and our Future

This morning, my son, a high school senior doing virtual learning, texted me, “I didn’t get out of bed for first period.” I replied, “Yikes!” To which he shot back, “It’s okay, I just did the class from bed.”

This cannot be a thing! Kids should not be going to school from their beds!

A few hours later, a friend on Facebook posted: “I’m totally winning at this parenting thing! I slept through my alarm and logged onto my son’s calendar time right as they were saying goodbye to everybody. So, he got marked tardy for today. And then I was trying to help my daughter with her math, but I don’t know the current math jargon, so I wasn’t able to explain it without making her cry. It’s only 11:00 am. This is going to be a stellar day.”

Another girlfriend posted in a Facebook group dedicated to reopening schools: “I went in to check on my 9th grader because she was yelling at her class – well it was at her computer. She was in tears telling me she was going to have to drop out or fail because there are too many tabs, and too much technology, and she doesn’t understand where she is supposed to find all her work. She said she asked for help but got kicked out of the group and couldn’t get back on and when she tried to talk to the teacher, they couldn’t hear her. ‘I can’t turn it in because I can’t find it. I can’t understand it when I do find it. Why can’t they just give me a sheet of work to do, I can do that, but I can’t do this computer stuff. It’s going to kill me.’ And I’ve been in tears since.”

Another friend, a therapist who works with youth, said all of her patient visits are done remotely and many of the young people she visits with online are home alone. “Yesterday I spoke to a 12-year old patient who is home with three younger siblings,” she said.

Whether parents are home, at work, or working from home, virtual learning is not working for anyone.

A parent at the office cannot fully focus on their job because they are worried about their child at home. Similarly, it is difficult for a parent to productively work from home if they have children who need help.

In the short term the schools closures and larger economic shut down resulted in a 37 percent drop in non-farm worker output from May to July and nation’s economy contracting by 31.7 percent in the second quarter.

With the economy now on the rebound, those losses appear to be temporary, however, scholars from The Brookings Institution looked into the long-term consequences of virtual learning and it’s not good. From the COVID-19 cost of school closures report finding “lost earnings of $1,337 per year per student: a present value loss of earnings of $33,464 (63 percent of a year’s salary at current average wage rates)… [and] a look at the impact on the whole of the country is much more sobering. In this model, the cost to the United States in future earnings of four months of lost education is $2.5 trillion—12.7 percent of annual GDP… Extrapolating to the global level, on the basis that the U.S. economy represents about one-quarter of global output, these data suggest the world could lose as much as $10 trillion over the coming generation as a result of school closures today.”

The human and economic costs of virtual learning are real. Our kids are losing years right now. By ignoring them we are placing our future in peril — and the cost may be more than we can bear.

SOURCE

Congress must help parents financially while public schools are shuttered

For parents, Labor Day weekend marks the end of summer and the beginning of the new school year. It’s typically an exciting time. Parents are school shopping, filling the supply list and attending orientation to meet the new teacher. It also marks a time of year when many parents go back to work full time or are relieved from the financial burdens of paying for summer camps and day care.

This Labor Day, however, many parents were left to worry about finding an alternative to shuttered schools. Where do parents turn when “back to school” isn’t an option?

Parents across the country are pleading with their school districts to reopen. Hard working, paycheck-to-paycheck American families already on very tight budgets have been forced since March either to stay home and forgo work or pay for child care that they could barely afford. They are hanging on by the skin of their teeth.

These families are being pressured to make financial sacrifices, not for health reasons, but to avoid leaving their children unsupervised. We are not talking about “Do we go on vacation or not?” or “Do we remodel the kitchen?” We are talking about families who must decide whether to pay rent or buy food for the week. School closures are leaving the most vulnerable, underserved families and children to fend for themselves.

The potential consequences for the “achievement gap” are even more devastating. The gap between education outcomes for lower and higher income students is an issue that states have been battling for years and one that has been compounded by the implementation of Common Core State Standards. These standards are flawed and risk pushing many students into deeper slumps or stagnating their academic progress.

Learning deficits in the earlier grades could have irreversible consequences if not addressed immediately. Before the pandemic, roughly one in three students was proficient in reading by the fourth grade. If children are unable to build a strong reading comprehension foundation in their early years, they often get left behind and struggle to catch up, suffering the effects throughout the rest of their education.

Lawmakers showed some signs of understanding the current reality for American families, with Senate Republicans’ latest coronavirus proposal including at least $5 billion in provisions aimed at school choice. However, the main provision still does not put funds directly in the hands of families; instead, it funnels funds to states that in turn funnel funds to scholarship-granting organizations. Although well-intentioned, this is the very type of bureaucracy families cannot afford at a crisis moment like this.

Congress should help solve the public education crisis by putting any federal education funds directly in the hands of parents, a path Sen. Rand Paul, Kentucky Republican, and Rep. Chip Roy, Texas Repubican, outline in their bicameral SCHOOL Act, S. 4432 and H.R. 8054. Instead of channelling money into systems, parents should have access to funds that would allow them to seek education in alternative settings, such as private schools or learning co-ops. Doing so would encourage state and localities to do the same.

During the last six months, many governors and school boards have squandered valuable time resisting reopening for the 2020-21 school year. They have spent more time coming up with excuses for why it could not be done instead of using that same energy to innovate and get the job done for students.

SOURCE

Federal Judge Doesn’t Know How College Admissions Work

U.S. district judge Nathaniel Gorton recently sentenced Lori Loughlin and her husband, Mossimo Giannulli, to prison for two months and five months, respectively, in the college admissions scandal. That case is now over. What is not over is the misimpression the judge has publicly advanced on how college admissions work in reality. He made the following public observation about college admissions, heightened by the stature of his office:

“Higher education in this country aspires to be a meritocracy.” No; in countless ways, that is not true.

About the Toby MacFarlane sentence Judge Gorton said: “Although I perceive no calculable loss to USC and ACT, there was certainly a loss to the overall educational system in this country,” a loss that “most assuredly was significant.”

Not accurate. He called MacFarlane “a thief.” Thousands of thieves, then, are in universities throughout the country.

The judge chastised one Varsity Blues participant, declaring that the participant had lied and cheated to get “around the rules that apply to everyone else.” No, the rules already did not apply equally to thousands of college applicants.

Let us count the unequal ways to get into college:

One, be an athlete. There are presently 490,000 athletes competing in NCAA athletics. By Judge Gorton’s logic, all of them were academically superior to competing applicants.

Two, be a legacy applicant—that is, the relative of an alumnus likely to be wealthy. The institutions will be hoping for future financial contributions. Ten to 25 percent of college student populations were legacy applicants given special preference. The percentage is not exact because university administrators are not eager to state the number: they know that their admissions policies are discriminatory, favoring the rich. Meritocracy is not the focus; money is.

Three, be a minority applicant. In today’s zeitgeist, applicants within the universe of identity politics, cancel culture, woke preferences, diversity, political correctness, and affirmative action will be helped mightily in gaining admission to college. Asian students, though, are sometimes discriminated against, say, at Yale University because there are too many on campus. The bean-counters discriminate. Meritocracy is not the focus; social justice is.

Four, be from out of state or out of country. Colleges aggressively seek out-of-staters because they pay higher tuition. An in-stater pays, say, $12,000, while an out-of-stater pays $30,000 or $40,000 more. And out-of-country students pay even more than out-of-staters. Again, meritocracy is not the focus, and money is.

Five, be a male. You might think being a male is a negative qualification in this age of sex identity, but ratios suggest otherwise: in public colleges, the ratio of males to females is 43.6 to 56.4. In private schools, it’s 42.2 to 57.5. College admissions officers will want more male applicants in order to reach closer parity to women.

Applicants in these five categories do not cheat the system; they get admitted legally through double standards. Even if Lori Loughlin’s daughters were legitimate rowing athletes, why should they get admitted to college owing to a double standard?

We will never know how much Judge Gorton’s incomplete knowledge about college admissions influenced his sentencing. All the Varsity Blues cases are yet to be adjudicated in his court. Judge Gorton’s apparent lack of knowledge about unequal processes of admissions could conceivably have affected his sentencing judgment. But as a famous lawyer once said, “don’t tell me what the law is; tell me who the judge is.” Judges have biases. I was chief of staff for Chief Justice Warren Burger, working intimately for or with him for over nine years. I know what his biases were. And we all know that the present Supreme Court has four liberals and five conservatives.

SOURCE

Academia’s Diversity, Equity & Inclusion Trifecta Threatens Us All

The academy was once known for its manifold benefits to America. Great scientific and medical discoveries, sustained theories of economics and management, social psychological insights and a deeper understanding of classical texts are but a few. Its new perpetual genuflection to diversity, equity and inclusion and propagation of neo-Marxism across academic areas aren’t among them. As Heather Mac Donald has argued, the academy now advocates and produces stifling intellectual conformity, becoming the ideological seedbed for our summer violence and elite justifications

Dinesh D’Souza says that thanks to the academy, “Socialism in America today has turned black against white, female against male, homosexual and transsexual against heterosexual, and illegals against legal immigrants and American citizens.”

My university recently sent a proclamation to employees expressing solidarity for the rioting that has taken place across America, lionizing the “peaceful” protests. Jeremy Carl argues “The damage such neo-Marxist programs are doing to our nation’s social fabric is beyond academic comprehension or interest.” Empirical research by Paul Cassell strongly suggests that “a ‘Minneapolis Effect’ has struck—i.e., in the wake of anti-police protests following George Floyd’s death in Minneapolis, police officers are being re-deployed from anti-gun efforts and are retreating from proactive law enforcement tactics. This reduction in law enforcement efforts targeted at firearms crimes has led to, perhaps predictably, an increase in firearms crimes.”

Robert Maranto critiques the academy’s blind eye/tone-deafness to non-politicized human /problems concluding, “this misallocation of research puts political activism over empirical problem-solving. Activist academics signal that they care about the disadvantaged, but often the real goal is appealing to peers and funders…who dominate academic research.”

The recent rioting springing from police shootings of criminals of color impelled the academy to double down on diversity, equity and inclusion—the academic trifecta. My state university is a worthy illustration where both faculty and administration advocate for subordinating course instruction, content and theory to focus on diversity, racial equity and inclusion.

Diversity

Academics have shilled postmodernism to students, progressive politicians and the administrative state. Its la gran mentira is that racism, sexism, economic inequality, unequal outcomes, etc. must be ameliorated through institutional guilt and being woke. US News & World Report even has a “Campus Diversity Index” weighing the racial and ethnic diversity of college campuses for all to see. The answer is always more diversity.

Health and Human Services author Rachel S. Franklin argues, however, “the conceptualization and measurement of ethnic and racial diversity in higher education appears to be often based on normative values rather than solid benchmarks.” These data suggest diversity membership can be demonstrated simply by having a favored last name.

For example, people with Hispanic last names are given preference in the academy, mainstream media and “woke” society. As classics professor Bruce Thornton points out in Searching for Joaquin: Myth, Murieta and History in California, having a Spanish name like Cruz or Rubio, gives one elite standing in America over names like Graham or Smith, despite their “whiteness” being indistinguishable. Victor Davis Hanson concludes in Mexifornia, “part of the genius of the postmodern term ‘Hispanic’ is that it gives quite a lot of cover for well-heeled Europeans and South Americans to receive preferences over native-born Americans.” Apart from breeding new academic departments, journals and research grants, the “la raza” foil has failed miserably to ease high Hispanic drop-out rates from high school, incarceration rates and unwed motherhood.

Who could blame African Americans for reaping the same benefits? Barack Obama, the offspring of a black father and white mother (the U.S. Census Bureau’s categorization is mixed race) is labeled “America’s first black president.” African names given or adopted now promise racial diversity– Ta-Nehisi Coates, Keyshawn Johnson, LeBron James, Tanisha Coetzee, Ludacris, Shaquille O’Neal, etc.

Equity

The academy’s equity and diversity obsession has made it significantly less diverse intellectually. An Inside Higher Ed article about ensuring equity defined it euphemistically as “promoting race, gender, social class and sexual orientation.” The Association of American Colleges & Universities (AAC&U) considers one of its most important missions to be “the understanding of diversity and equity as fundamental goals of higher education.” Only a few private universities ignore equity and diversity goals in their missions. Overpaid equity & diversity administrators with substantial influence regulate.

Equity became equal outcomes not equal opportunity. In Discrimination and Disparities, Thomas Sowell argues that unequal distributions of income, employment and other social outcomes prove neither discrimination nor genetic deficiencies, but frequently involve luck. Two important questions are ignored when pushing this mindless progressive trifecta: 1) What can be done about inequality and at what cost? 2) What should we do collectively about the group and what should we leave up to individuals themselves?

Inclusion

Columbia University’s “Guide for Inclusive Teaching” states that “Excellence in teaching and learning necessitates the inclusion of every student’s unique identities, experiences, and talents.” While wonderfully accommodating, it is ideological scree. It would take professors two weeks of student surveying to just catalog each student’s unique identity, experience and talents, and another month to meld this mélange into class content, if it were even possible.

The question of how much diversity and inclusion is enough is neglected. Illustrating this point, I offer a thought experiment about a typical department in a public university. This department has four scholars of color (including three women and a black man), five white women, an openly gay man, and nine straight white men. Such a department ticks all the inclusion and diversity boxes. Yet many good students rail against being guilt-tripped for their whiteness/maleness. Suppose further that when one of the white males (a token Capitalist) retires, his replacement is a neo-Marxist white female. Could it be that there is simply never enough diversity or inclusion in this department or university–an endless solution in search of a real problem?

The Missing Element

This hypothetical department’s deal with the trifecta devil seems to have robbed them, the university and students of what may be their greatest need: true intellectual diversity.

For this very reason, Jonathan Haidt and scholars of different political persuasions organized the Heterodox Academy with over 4000 members, including me. Its goal is to establish in the academy true intellectual and viewpoint diversity through vigorous argumentation because of huge, unmet demand. Heterodox asserts that “in many fields, scholars’ backgrounds and commitments are insufficiently diverse. As a result, important questions and ideas may go unexplored, key assumptions unchallenged, and the natural human tendencies towards motivated reasoning, confirmation bias, and tribalism can go unchecked. This undermines research quality and the impartiality of peer review; it can also corrupt committee decisions about admissions, hiring, promotion, and curriculum design…” resulting from the academic trifecta.

As Heather Mac Donald has said, “Every university twists itself into knots to admit, hire, and promote as many black students and faculty as it possibly can, in light of the fierce bidding war among colleges for underrepresented minorities. To declare from the highest reaches of the academy that racism is the defining and all-explaining feature of American society is to adopt a political position, not to state a scientific truth.”

With the academy and wokedom’s unquestioned acceptance of the “racism” explanation for all self-defeating choices, there is little chance of addressing the underlying behaviors that lie behind much racial disparity.

SOURCE

No comments: