Friday, June 26, 2020


Insane: Black Female Principal of Prominent Chicago High School Under Pressure to Resign for Warning Against Violence and Looting

Amid all manner of unhinged derangement coursing through our society in this season of tumult, this still reads as satire.  Alas, satire seems to be facing cancellation at the hands of reality.  In which a progressive black woman is under pressure to step down from her leadership position because she is outwardly opposed to criminal conduct:

The principal of a well-known Chicago high school is under pressure to resign because, among other ‘problematic’ acts, she’s urged students to “not participate in violence or looting.” She, a black woman, is thus far refusing

Joyce Kenner of Whitney Young Magnet High School has been at the center of controversy before but now is facing criticism of her handling of recent unrest.

Kenner, who previously worked for the Rev. Jesse Jackson’s Rainbow PUSH Coalition, has not been immune to criticism for her response to Floyd’s death and more broadly her leadership at Whitney Young, where she also spent five years as assistant principal.

Now, after 25 years at the helm of Whitney Young, she finds herself the target of an online petition, posted by unnamed “disappointed alumni,” calling for her to resign, claiming she has “silenced student activists speaking against all forms of injustice. Her silence and her enabling of the systematic oppression that her black and low-income students face should be condemned.” So far it’s gained more than 800 signatures...

Some who signed the resignation petition cited her history at Whitney Young, claiming she has “worked to sweep the injustices ... under the rug” and “consistently puts the perception of the school by the general public over the well-being of her students.” Other critics have focused on more recent events. Several students told the Tribune they were offended by statements Kenner made in a video address about unrest sparked by George Floyd’s killing, in which she asked that if students do protest, they not participate in violence or looting, and said the way to seek change is to get a degree and get a "seat at the table.”

There is a radical, emergent school of thought that claims it's racist for anyone to tell communities of color how not to channel their outrage, even if such admonitions entail discouraging or denouncing violent rioting. To see this nonsense being deployed against someone with Kenner's background and position is jaw-dropping.

To put a finer point on it, of course a high school principal should warn her students against participating in destructive, violent, criminal behavior.  It's extreme and reckless to argue otherwise.  Imagine actually saying out loud that an authority figure discouraging young people to engage in violent and criminal behavior represents proof that she's not interested in the "well-being of her students."  Perverse.  And yet the braying for Kenner's scalp has grown loud enough that it merited an article in her city's most prominent newspaper.  Fortunately, so far, she is defiantly standing up to the mob:

Kenner says she’s “never tried to silence a student,” citing her open-door policy as the reason she’s still at Whitney Young. Further, she calls it “nonsense” to say she doesn’t support Black Lives Matter. “You could go by your experience, and the only thing I've ever tried to do is get our black kids educated so they have the opportunity to be part of this world,” Kenner said. She said she received dozens of messages from parents and alumni who support her and want her to stay. “Nobody is going to push me out. I’m not resigning. I still have a lot of work to do for my African American students,” Kenner said.

Let's hope she sticks to this. What childish, emotionalist, slash-and-burn mobs need more than ever are adults willing to look them square in the eye and say 'no,' then refuse to flinch.  Far too many people are knuckling under and capitulating, including the leaders of the Chicago-based Poetry Foundation -- which has been roiled by an utterly ludicrous struggle session that stemmed from an insufficiently woke statement about black lives, leading to the unceremonious self-defenestration of its top officials. 

Be sure to note the appearance of the Orwellian 'language as violence' trope at the center of this conflagration.  On the subject of rioting, Chicago's mayor (who was caught on tape blasting an alderman's criticisms and emotional pleas to halt rioters' destruction of certain neighborhoods) has acknowledged that luring businesses back into the city will be a challenge:

Chicago Mayor Lori Lightfoot said it would take a "Herculean effort" to keep businesses open in disadvantaged neighborhoods after looting and damage that occurred during the first weekend of protests following the death of George Floyd. "I've been on calls and text messages with people all day who fought hard to bring economic development to areas of the city, only to see the Walgreens, the CVS, the grocery store, everything vanish in an eye blink," Lightfoot said on a May 31 call with distraught aldermen. "It's going to take a Herculean effort on the part of all of us to convince businesses not to disappear, to come back. We're prepared to fight that fight." 

Walmart can't confirm it will reopen its Chatham location on the city's South Side after it was ransacked...Target couldn't confirm it would reopen a nearby location either, The Chicago Sun-Times reported. Looting damage in metropolitan areas, including Chicago, between May 29 and June 3 totaled more than $400 million...

In Minneapolis, some businesses have announced they won't be coming back to the smoldering wreckage left in the wake of violent upheaval -- and in the wake of the city's failed leadership and insane move toward repealing and replacing the police, it would appear as though some residents are ready to head for the exits, too:

All of this, incidentally, reinforces the righteousness and practicality of Principal Kenner's stance.  People should be listening to her, not seeking her ouster.  I'll leave you with this grimly humorous point about the New York Times' descent into sectarian madness.  An op/ed from a Senator advancing a mainstream idea?  Dangerous, unforgivable, fireable.  Worthy of endless recriminations, wild spin and editorial policy reviews.  An op/ed calling for the the literal defunding of law enforcement?  Meh:

SOURCE 





Columbus Statue Vandal Suspect Is a Public School Teacher

A public school teacher in Pawtucket, Rhode Island, is accused of vandalizing a statue of Christopher Columbus.

Around 1:30 a.m. local time on Saturday, police observed two individuals exit a vehicle and throw paint on a statue of Christopher Columbus near Columbus Square. City officials had wisely boarded up the statue after observing leftists vandalizing statues all over the country.

The two suspects then fled the scene towards a vehicle waiting in a nearby lot. Police caught up to the vehicle and took three individuals into custody, the two suspects and the driver. Police reportedly found an open container of white and purple paint, rubber gloves, and several masks in the backseat area.

The two suspects were identified as 34-year-old Derrick Garforth, a public school teacher, and 28-year-old Charlotte Whittingham. The driver was identified as 26-year-old Mackenzie Innis. To their credit, the suspects didn't assault the officers or try and shoot the cops with their own tasers, so they were safely arrested without incident. All three individuals are now charged with the desecration of a grave/monument, a felony.

Meanwhile, the mobs tearing down statues all over the country, including ones of abolitionists, like Matthias Baldwin, remain at large.

Garforth works as a teacher at Joseph Jenks Junior High School in Pawtucket, Rhode Island. Hopefully, he teaches art, not history.

The superintendent of the Pawtucket School Department, Dr. Cheryl McWilliams, told ABC6 News, "I have just learned about this and the School Department is investigating it." So it sounds like they're taking it very seriously.

SOURCE 






Australia: Course for pre-school teachers that requires them to study 'non-binary living' and 'queer thinking' is slammed for 'trying to indoctrinate children'

Outspoken politician Mark Latham has blasted a professional development course for preschool teachers which includes modules centered around 'non-binary living' and 'queer thinking'.

The controversial former Labor leader who is now in charge of New South Wales' One Nation Party described the training as 'political indoctrination'.

He is now planning to introduce a private member's bill in state parliament to ban the promotion of gender fluidity in schools.

'It is pure social engineering with very young children taught things that should be left to discussion with their parents later in life,' Mr Latham told the Daily Telegraph.

'What they are trying to run here is a political indoctrination camp for three and four year olds.'

Back in January 2019, The New South Wales Education Standards Authority granted the education consultancy company, Multiverse, accreditation to teach early childhood educator courses in areas such as painting, drawing and storytelling.

The New South Wales Education Standards Authority (NESA) said they are now examining the accreditation process to determine whether the course is outside the company's mandate.

'(We are) investigating to confirm that the course referred to meets the requirements of Multiverse's endorsement as a provider of NESA-registered professional development,' a NESA spokeswoman said yesterday.

The course in question is titled, 'My Friend Has Two Mums: Gender Sexuality in Early Childhood'.

The $220 course, taught through a secret 'safe space' Facebook group, includes modules such as Queer Thinking in Early Childhood, A Transgender Early Childhood Educator, Living Non-Binary and Aboriginal Queerness and Queeness.

Despite the criticism, Multiverse says it's merely adjusting to modern times and seeking to educate pre-school teachers about inclusivity. 'As society changes, the issues we face in early childhood change,' Multiverse says on their website. 'Things we may have never thought of impacting on our work, now do. Things like sexuality and gender.

'Our services are now working with children who identify with a different gender, with same sex parents, with openly gay and lesbian educators. And, importantly how we deal with these issues are part of the National Quality Standard!'

About 30 early-age educators have taken the course.

SOURCE  


Thursday, June 25, 2020


Insane: Black Female Principal of Prominent Chicago High School Under Pressure to Resign for Warning Against Violence and Looting

Amid all manner of unhinged derangement coursing through our society in this season of tumult, this still reads as satire.  Alas, satire seems to be facing cancellation at the hands of reality.  In which a progressive black woman is under pressure to step down from her leadership position because she is outwardly opposed to criminal conduct:

The principal of a well-known Chicago high school is under pressure to resign because, among other ‘problematic’ acts, she’s urged students to “not participate in violence or looting.” She, a black woman, is thus far refusing

Joyce Kenner of Whitney Young Magnet High School has been at the center of controversy before but now is facing criticism of her handling of recent unrest.

Kenner, who previously worked for the Rev. Jesse Jackson’s Rainbow PUSH Coalition, has not been immune to criticism for her response to Floyd’s death and more broadly her leadership at Whitney Young, where she also spent five years as assistant principal.

Now, after 25 years at the helm of Whitney Young, she finds herself the target of an online petition, posted by unnamed “disappointed alumni,” calling for her to resign, claiming she has “silenced student activists speaking against all forms of injustice. Her silence and her enabling of the systematic oppression that her black and low-income students face should be condemned.” So far it’s gained more than 800 signatures...

Some who signed the resignation petition cited her history at Whitney Young, claiming she has “worked to sweep the injustices ... under the rug” and “consistently puts the perception of the school by the general public over the well-being of her students.” Other critics have focused on more recent events. Several students told the Tribune they were offended by statements Kenner made in a video address about unrest sparked by George Floyd’s killing, in which she asked that if students do protest, they not participate in violence or looting, and said the way to seek change is to get a degree and get a "seat at the table.”

There is a radical, emergent school of thought that claims it's racist for anyone to tell communities of color how not to channel their outrage, even if such admonitions entail discouraging or denouncing violent rioting. To see this nonsense being deployed against someone with Kenner's background and position is jaw-dropping.

To put a finer point on it, of course a high school principal should warn her students against participating in destructive, violent, criminal behavior.  It's extreme and reckless to argue otherwise.  Imagine actually saying out loud that an authority figure discouraging young people to engage in violent and criminal behavior represents proof that she's not interested in the "well-being of her students."  Perverse.  And yet the braying for Kenner's scalp has grown loud enough that it merited an article in her city's most prominent newspaper.  Fortunately, so far, she is defiantly standing up to the mob:

Kenner says she’s “never tried to silence a student,” citing her open-door policy as the reason she’s still at Whitney Young. Further, she calls it “nonsense” to say she doesn’t support Black Lives Matter. “You could go by your experience, and the only thing I've ever tried to do is get our black kids educated so they have the opportunity to be part of this world,” Kenner said. She said she received dozens of messages from parents and alumni who support her and want her to stay. “Nobody is going to push me out. I’m not resigning. I still have a lot of work to do for my African American students,” Kenner said.

Let's hope she sticks to this. What childish, emotionalist, slash-and-burn mobs need more than ever are adults willing to look them square in the eye and say 'no,' then refuse to flinch.  Far too many people are knuckling under and capitulating, including the leaders of the Chicago-based Poetry Foundation -- which has been roiled by an utterly ludicrous struggle session that stemmed from an insufficiently woke statement about black lives, leading to the unceremonious self-defenestration of its top officials. 

Be sure to note the appearance of the Orwellian 'language as violence' trope at the center of this conflagration.  On the subject of rioting, Chicago's mayor (who was caught on tape blasting an alderman's criticisms and emotional pleas to halt rioters' destruction of certain neighborhoods) has acknowledged that luring businesses back into the city will be a challenge:

Chicago Mayor Lori Lightfoot said it would take a "Herculean effort" to keep businesses open in disadvantaged neighborhoods after looting and damage that occurred during the first weekend of protests following the death of George Floyd. "I've been on calls and text messages with people all day who fought hard to bring economic development to areas of the city, only to see the Walgreens, the CVS, the grocery store, everything vanish in an eye blink," Lightfoot said on a May 31 call with distraught aldermen. "It's going to take a Herculean effort on the part of all of us to convince businesses not to disappear, to come back. We're prepared to fight that fight." 

Walmart can't confirm it will reopen its Chatham location on the city's South Side after it was ransacked...Target couldn't confirm it would reopen a nearby location either, The Chicago Sun-Times reported. Looting damage in metropolitan areas, including Chicago, between May 29 and June 3 totaled more than $400 million...

In Minneapolis, some businesses have announced they won't be coming back to the smoldering wreckage left in the wake of violent upheaval -- and in the wake of the city's failed leadership and insane move toward repealing and replacing the police, it would appear as though some residents are ready to head for the exits, too:

All of this, incidentally, reinforces the righteousness and practicality of Principal Kenner's stance.  People should be listening to her, not seeking her ouster.  I'll leave you with this grimly humorous point about the New York Times' descent into sectarian madness.  An op/ed from a Senator advancing a mainstream idea?  Dangerous, unforgivable, fireable.  Worthy of endless recriminations, wild spin and editorial policy reviews.  An op/ed calling for the the literal defunding of law enforcement?  Meh:

SOURCE 





Columbus Statue Vandal Suspect Is a Public School Teacher

A public school teacher in Pawtucket, Rhode Island, is accused of vandalizing a statue of Christopher Columbus.

Around 1:30 a.m. local time on Saturday, police observed two individuals exit a vehicle and throw paint on a statue of Christopher Columbus near Columbus Square. City officials had wisely boarded up the statue after observing leftists vandalizing statues all over the country.

The two suspects then fled the scene towards a vehicle waiting in a nearby lot. Police caught up to the vehicle and took three individuals into custody, the two suspects and the driver. Police reportedly found an open container of white and purple paint, rubber gloves, and several masks in the backseat area.

The two suspects were identified as 34-year-old Derrick Garforth, a public school teacher, and 28-year-old Charlotte Whittingham. The driver was identified as 26-year-old Mackenzie Innis. To their credit, the suspects didn't assault the officers or try and shoot the cops with their own tasers, so they were safely arrested without incident. All three individuals are now charged with the desecration of a grave/monument, a felony.

Meanwhile, the mobs tearing down statues all over the country, including ones of abolitionists, like Matthias Baldwin, remain at large.

Garforth works as a teacher at Joseph Jenks Junior High School in Pawtucket, Rhode Island. Hopefully, he teaches art, not history.

The superintendent of the Pawtucket School Department, Dr. Cheryl McWilliams, told ABC6 News, "I have just learned about this and the School Department is investigating it." So it sounds like they're taking it very seriously.

SOURCE 






Australia: Course for pre-school teachers that requires them to study 'non-binary living' and 'queer thinking' is slammed for 'trying to indoctrinate children'

Outspoken politician Mark Latham has blasted a professional development course for preschool teachers which includes modules centered around 'non-binary living' and 'queer thinking'.

The controversial former Labor leader who is now in charge of New South Wales' One Nation Party described the training as 'political indoctrination'.

He is now planning to introduce a private member's bill in state parliament to ban the promotion of gender fluidity in schools.

'It is pure social engineering with very young children taught things that should be left to discussion with their parents later in life,' Mr Latham told the Daily Telegraph.

'What they are trying to run here is a political indoctrination camp for three and four year olds.'

Back in January 2019, The New South Wales Education Standards Authority granted the education consultancy company, Multiverse, accreditation to teach early childhood educator courses in areas such as painting, drawing and storytelling.

The New South Wales Education Standards Authority (NESA) said they are now examining the accreditation process to determine whether the course is outside the company's mandate.

'(We are) investigating to confirm that the course referred to meets the requirements of Multiverse's endorsement as a provider of NESA-registered professional development,' a NESA spokeswoman said yesterday.

The course in question is titled, 'My Friend Has Two Mums: Gender Sexuality in Early Childhood'.

The $220 course, taught through a secret 'safe space' Facebook group, includes modules such as Queer Thinking in Early Childhood, A Transgender Early Childhood Educator, Living Non-Binary and Aboriginal Queerness and Queeness.

Despite the criticism, Multiverse says it's merely adjusting to modern times and seeking to educate pre-school teachers about inclusivity. 'As society changes, the issues we face in early childhood change,' Multiverse says on their website. 'Things we may have never thought of impacting on our work, now do. Things like sexuality and gender.

'Our services are now working with children who identify with a different gender, with same sex parents, with openly gay and lesbian educators. And, importantly how we deal with these issues are part of the National Quality Standard!'

About 30 early-age educators have taken the course.

SOURCE  



Wednesday, June 24, 2020


Academia Fans The Flames Of Social Disorder

Those of us who thought higher education could do little damage while it was shut down were sadly mistaken.

As Antifa-led demonstrators burned and looted American cities in the wake of the tragic murder of George Floyd by a Minneapolis cop, academia, like the rest of the American Left, never let a crisis go to waste, even one they helped engender.

“Fittingly, the ideological handmaiden of this violence — academia — has already sprung into action,” Heather Mac Donald wrote in City Journal on May 31, 2020. “The chancellors and presidents of Harvard, the University of Arizona, the University of Pennsylvania, and Yale, among others, released statements over the weekend assuring their black students of their schools’ commitment to racial equity, in light of the George Floyd death — an event wholly unrelated to the academic.”

“No college leader denounced the violence.” City Journal is published by The Manhattan Institute for Policy Research.

In fact, Rudy Fichtenbaum, president of the American Association of University Professors (AAUP) saw in the riots an opportunity to bash police everywhere. “The AAUP supports the right of all citizens to engage in peaceful protests and calls for an end to police violence against protesters,” he wrote on the Academe blog maintained by the AAUP.

Notably, the avowedly progressive John K. Wilson, a contributing editor at Academe, took a markedly different position: “Too many people on the left revere the street protest as the epitome of working for social change,” he wrote. “They harken back to the days of the Civil Rights Movement and imagine that protests on the streets are an effective tool for social change. That’s rarely the case anymore. The truth is that most street protests are useless, and the rest of them (like all of the protests this week) are usually worse than useless.”

Another contributing editor to Academe, Hank Reichman, downplayed the violence and tried to apportion blame across the political spectrum even though conservatives present at the demonstration are really hard to find, unless they’re cleverly disguised as Antifa organizers.

“No right-thinking person can fail to condemn the looting, arson, and window-smashing that have marred the overwhelmingly peaceful protests that have swept the nation for the past week in the wake of the brutal slaying of George Floyd by Minneapolis police officers,” he wrote.  “These criminal actions may have been carried out by a handful of political extremists, left and right, who probably envision these events as prelude to some fantastical revolution or civil war.”

For his part, Fichtenbaum did take blame for the violence, sort of, and offered academia as a solution to the problem it helped create: “We also recognize that our institutions of higher education have been part of the problem, but they can be part of the solution by marshaling the expertise of faculty and the energy of students in developing meaningful approaches to mitigating racism and inequality in our society.”

Apparently, academia sees in the riots a more reliable source of cash than a federal bailout. “UCLA’s chancellor Gene Block, as well as the school’s $400,000 a year Vice Chancellor for Equity, Diversity, and Inclusion and a parade of deans, announced that the Office of Equity, Diversity, and Inclusion and the school’s legions of Equity Advisors would be coming up with new programs for ‘virtual reflection spaces’ in which to ‘humbly acknowledge the pain,’” Mac Donald writes. “The school’s Resources for Racial Trauma would be beefed up.”

“The academic diversity bureaucracy has now been given a whole new excuse for existence and can be assured that it will escape the cost-cutting chopping block, even as universities beg the federal government for more coronavirus bailout money.”

SOURCE 






La: Nicholls State University president has no idea how the First Amendment works

In a June 8 email to his students and faculty, Nicholls State University President Jay Clune wrote that “[f]ree speech does not protect hate speech.”

That’s not true.

The Foundation for Individual Rights in Education reminded Clune Friday that there is no hate speech exception to the First Amendment and that his false characterization of free speech not only impermissibly chills speech, but can open up the public university to costly lawsuits and criticism from civil liberties organizations.

“It’s a common refrain — that the First Amendment doesn’t protect hate speech,” said Adam Steinbaugh, author of FIRE’s letter to Nicholls. “The problem is, that’s wrong. Some hateful expression is not protected because it falls into one of the other exceptions to the First Amendment, but there is no categorical ‘hate speech’ exception. Everybody has their own definition of ‘hate speech,’ and a university president should not mislead students and faculty about what the Constitution permits him to do.”

FIRE’s letter examines the main problem with Clune’s assertion: that there are very few exceptions to the First Amendment — and “hate speech” is not one of them. FIRE has long encouraged students to combat speech they find offensive with their own speech, not calls for censorship. However well-intended Clune’s goals might be, they will almost certainly erode the rights of all students and faculty at the public university, including black, indigenous, and people of color.

As a public institution, Nicholls State is legally required to uphold student and faculty First Amendment rights. The university holds a “yellow light” free speech rating from FIRE, meaning it maintains policies that could too easily encourage administrative abuse, arbitrary application, and censorship.

From FIRE’s letter: “In times of great social and political upheaval, our governmental and educational institutions face substantial pressure to foreclose on expression protected by the First Amendment. This, however, is when institutions must be most vigilant in refusing to do so. Penalizing protected expression is not a cure for the underlying challenges faced by society, and abandoning a robust defense of freedom of expression will inure to the detriment of rights across political, social, and ideological spectrums.”

Instead of promising “the swiftest, harshest action” in stomping out constitutionally-protected speech, Clune should swiftly assure his students that Nicholls State will not try to dismantle student and faculty First Amendment rights, and instead find other ways to address student and faculty concerns about discrimination.

SOURCE 





Australia: 'There is so much fear in the lyrics': School children are forced to learn a chilling song about the killer coronavirus

Parents are furious after children as young as seven were forced to learn a disturbing song about 'people dying alone' from COVID-19 .

Year two students, aged between seven and eight, were taught the 'COVID-19 song' at Bogangar Public School in Tweed Heads in northern NSW for a month.

Outraged that children were learning the distressing song, Brenda Steel shared a picture of the lyric sheet to Facebook on Sunday.    

'This (the song lyrics) was pulled out of my friend's son's bag. They are learning this for assembly. YEAR 2. This is nothing but mind control to instill fear and conformity,' Ms Steel captioned the post. 

The song's morbid lyrics describe 'people dying alone, connected to family only by phone' due to social distancing restrictions. 'News was scary tonight, the future is not so bright. Invisible killer stalking its prey, message was clear, stay home today!' the lyrics read. 'We've been forced into the ring against this pandemic monster thing - officials set out to control, protecting the young and the old.'   

After building up fear, the end message of the song is for children to practice social distancing by not congregating and isolating when possible.

Mother Rachel Mathison said she was 'shocked' her year two son Kash was learning the song for a month before she found out.

'It's a very depressing song, there's so much fear in the lyrics,' Ms Mathison told The Daily Telegraph. 'I felt awful when I read it so I can only imagine how an eight-year-old would feel not only reading it, but having to memorise it.' 

'The song's made up by the school should now be sent to parents for feedback – it's actually a very sad day when you need to start monitoring the activities that go on at your local school.'

After considerable backlash from parents, Bogangar Public School Principal Muriel Kelly apologised to parents in a letter. 'It has come to our attention that the Year 2 song students have started learning is a sensitive topic,' Mrs Kelly wrote in the letter.

'The students were entering the Australian Children's Music Foundation singing and songwriting competition. 'To enable this to continue, a new song is being co-written with year 2 under the guidance of their teachers.'

SOURCE  


Tuesday, June 23, 2020


Why Students Have Turned Away from History

I think the reason why students take less history these days is that teaching it has largely been taken over by Leftists.  And what they teach is one long whine -- which is boring.  Patriotic history would be much more popular

I taught history from 1976 through 2013 at Harvard, Carnegie-Mellon, the Naval War College, and Williams College. The 37 years of my career coincided with a drastic change in the nature of history as it is taught in our colleges and universities. That led to an extraordinary decline in student interest in history, reflected in majors and course enrollments.

In 2019, I published my autobiography, A Life in History. At the end of the book, I presented figures on changes in undergraduate history enrollments at a number of major institutions from 1965 through 2017. Harvard and Radcliffe together had graduated about 270 history majors in 1965, with about 30 full-time history faculty. In 2017 the department had 47 full-time members and graduated 45 history majors. Columbia history majors in the same years fell from 76 to 68 even though the graduating class increased from 569 to 1135. Swarthmore history majors fell from 33 to 22 (despite a 30 percent increase in the size of the class), and Wellesley fell from 53 out of 381 seniors to 12 out of 547.

In all those institutions, the number of history faculty increased, while the total number of students they taught fell.

I believe that the main reason for the decline in history is that students don’t care for the product the faculty is offering. Most history courses are now too specialized and often politically slanted to interest them.

The roots of what has happened to history go back to the 1960s, when the Vietnam War convinced a critical mass of college students that they could safely ignore whatever the older generation said. That war was indeed a catastrophe, but that single strategic mistake did not, as so many of my contemporaries thought, discredit the entire government, society, and intellectual tradition within which it took place.

Many, however, decided that imperialism, not the defense of freedom, was the basis of American foreign policy; that universities were cogs in that imperialist machine, not sites to pursue knowledge for its own sake; and that racism was fundamental to American life, instead of an aberration our parents’ generation had been working to eliminate.

Many such young men and women went into academia and spent their lives elaborating on those themes. The nature of their new scholarship began to emerge in the 1980s.

In 1985, Theodore Draper, then probably the leading historian of American Communism, reviewed a series of new books on that topic by younger historians in the New York Review of Books. All had several things in common. The authors identified themselves proudly as veterans of the New Left of the 1960s and argued that their politics allowed them to see things about American Communism in the 1930s and 1940s that older historians had missed.

They claimed to be writing “social history,” rather than older, antiquated “political history,” and focusing on the lives, thoughts, and feelings of ordinary Communists. And they argued that the Communists they had discovered were not, as Draper and others had found, simple tools of Moscow, but rather representatives of “authentic American radicalism.”

One of the biggest problems in their work was that when one examined their sources for that last claim, one found that they didn’t really prove it—often, indeed, they seemed to confirm Moscow’s primacy.

But Draper missed two things. First, he did not realize that this new approach was becoming the mainstream approach among historians of women and minority groups, who also argued that their own identity gave them insights that white males could not have. They also said it was more important to focus on “marginalized” men and women than on the leaders of political and economic institutions. Second, while Draper noted that the authors he was critiquing were just coming up for tenure, he didn’t realize that their ideas would become totally mainstream within two decades.

In the 1970s and 1980s, when social history became fashionable, its practitioners sold it as an attempt to learn more about workers, peasants, and other less-visible social sectors that traditional political history had tended to slight. Feminists and nonwhite scholars picked up that ball and ran with it, arguing that they represented identities that white male historians had ignored, and whose voices now needed to be heard.

By the turn of the new century, even to study the political leadership of Western countries in detail had become suspect in history because it supposedly reinforced white male hegemony in society.

The long-term impact of those changes emerges when one looks at what historians do study today. The program of the last annual meeting of the American Historical Association lists 300 different panels on different historical topics. Only 15 of those 300—2.5 percent—deal with political history.

We must, however, look at those panels individually to understand what “political history” now means.

The sessions dealt with:

the funding of Sesame Street in the 1970s;

the authorship of Wikipedia articles about women’s suffrage in the US;

ideas of female monarchy in the Middle Ages;

the intellectual influence of the right after 1945 in various countries;

the recent immigrant rights movement in the US;

Fascist and Communist ideas of war during the Sino-Japanese conflict in the 1930s;

several populist episodes in recent American politics;

a panel discussion of historians and presidential misconduct;

various nonwhite feminist political movements;

a panel on the gender of power;

the politics of gun control;

women and religious liberty in early America;

a panel on writing the history of American conservatism under Donald Trump; and

human rights and state constitutions, 1796-1861.

In short, only three panels touched on major national issues in the US, and not a single one deals with a Western European political issue of any kind. None dealt with presidential leadership, the passage and impact of a major piece of legislation, or the origins, course, and results of war.

Because of this shift, we know much less about the politics and diplomacy of the last 40 years or so than we do about earlier periods. Whereas dozens of serious archival books had been written on the politics of the 1930s and 1940s by the time I was in graduate school, there are practically no serious studies of US political and diplomatic history since 1980 or so today.

Almost no one is either trained to write them or given a tenure-track job for having done so.

I had been teaching the history of warfare at the Naval War College for 16 years in 2006 when a political scientist at Williams College invited me to spend a year in a new chair in American diplomatic history that he had managed to create. I found later that when he initially floated his plans to the chair of the history department, she asked why he wanted to do that, since “that’s not what historians do anymore.”

Yet, during my year there, the courses I taught on the US and the two world wars and on Vietnam were extremely popular, and some students regretted that there were not more of them available.

As departments became larger and faculty became more specialized, the distinction between undergraduate and graduate education was lost.

Meanwhile, I saw the impact of the changes reflected in AHA programs on undergraduate curriculums. As departments became larger and faculty became more specialized, the distinction between undergraduate and graduate education was lost.

A historian of gender and sexuality in France (to select a random example that does not refer to a specific individual) offered undergraduate courses on gender and sexuality in France, without feeling any obligation to educate students about critical political events. Such courses predictably drew small enrollments, but faculty didn’t care.

At departmental lunches, I heard faculty report that their class had half a dozen students in them without a shred of embarrassment—much less any analysis of whether their contribution to teaching was earning their salary.

At one such meeting, a prominent faculty member plugged a talk by a visiting British historian about the significance of the powder puff in 1920s Britain. The talk was built around an arrest of a suspected gay man who was carrying a powder puff, and the presenter riffed on industrialization, consumerism, commodification, and transgressive sexuality.

A few days later I asked a student who had been there what he thought about it. He had more traditional historical interests, but he said that 90 percent of the history courses at Williams were of that type.

Now in retirement, I have embarked upon a new project: a political history of the United States based upon the inaugural addresses and State of the Union addresses of our presidents. I have been reminded that from Washington forward, American political leadership and the people saw themselves as conducting a great experiment in free, representative government, which might set an example for the world.

One doesn’t have to view American history uncritically or ignore our frequent failures to live up to our ideals to regard this story as a fascinating and inspiring one. Yet that is the story that most university history courses today choose to ignore, in favor of meditations that reflect the personal interests of the faculty rather than the needs or interests of the students.

That is why history and the humanities have lost the central place they occupied in our universities a half-century ago, and why they will have so much trouble regaining it.

SOURCE 






Will Jewish and Christian Schools Teach the Truth About America and Racism?

Dennis Prager

When I went to yeshiva day schools, America was celebrated.  America was regarded, in the description of Menachem Schneerson (the Lubavitcher rebbe), the most influential rabbi of the 20th century, as a "medina shel chesed" -- "a country of kindness."

He knew, as all American Jews knew, that there were many anti-Semites in America, that America should have done more for the Jews of Europe, that universities like Harvard limited the number of Jewish students, that prestigious law firms and country clubs barred Jews, etc. So, then, why did he describe America as a country of kindness? Why did my yeshiva in Brooklyn put on plays honoring George Washington? Why did my Orthodox Jewish day school utilize texts not only celebrating America but affirming America as a "melting pot"? Why did a Jew, Irving Berlin, write "God bless America"?

The primary reason was that these Jews knew what the rest of the world was like. They had the wisdom to compare America with other countries, not, as the foolish, nihilistic left does, to utopia. Compared with the rest of the world, America was -- and remains -- a medina shel chesed.

Was it such a country for every one of its citizens? Of course not. At the time Rabbi Schneerson described America as a "country of kindness," the southern half of America enforced immoral and degrading Jim Crow laws, and racism was common in the North as well. I have noted the anti-Semitism in American life at that time. And gays were often ostracized and degraded.

But the Torah teaches us that we are not to compare the past with the present. That is why Noah, the man God saves from the Flood, is described in Genesis as righteous "in his generations." If Noah were to be compared with people in later generations, he would be found wanting. Abraham, the man chosen by God to be the father of His People, had a concubine and lied about his wife to save his own life. But only fools -- like all those who want to tear down monuments to George Washington and Thomas Jefferson -- would dismiss Abraham's greatness. Jacob, the man God renamed "Israel," owned slaves. Should Jews cease calling themselves the "children of Israel"? Should the State of Israel change its name?

That is what Jewish -- and all religious -- schools should be teaching when discussing Washington or Jefferson having slaves. If we are to dismiss the greatness of two of the founders of the freest country in human history -- not to mention the best non-Jewish country Jews have ever lived in -- then we should do likewise to the Jewish patriarchs. Moses had a fellow Israelite executed for publicly violating the Sabbath. Should his sculpture be removed from the Supreme Court? Will Jewish day schools start dismissing the greatness of all our ancestors? If they start doing this to Washington and Jefferson, they should be consistent.

Or should they do what the Torah does? While never ignoring the flaws of giants, remember why they were giants.

Will Jewish and Christian schools -- there is no hope for wisdom in secular schools -- teach that every society in world history, including African, Native American and Arab societies, all practiced slavery? If not, why not? Isn't it morally and factually dishonest to teach only about slavery in America?

What should be taught is that America's and the Western world's uniqueness did not lie in having slaves. Slavery was universal. Therefore, the morally serious person asks who abolished slavery, not who practiced it. But the left -- as opposed to liberals and conservatives -- is not now, nor ever has been, morally serious.

When you ask the only morally significant question -- who abolished slavery? -- the answer is America and some other Western countries. And then you should teach the reason: because of Western values rooted in the Bible. One would think that fact would be central to the curriculum of every Jewish and Christian school that takes their religion seriously. But much of contemporary Christianity and Judaism -- including Jewish and Christian schools -- has been influenced more by the left than by Christianity or Judaism.

If your school cares about truth, it should try to teach all the facts while acknowledging the history of racism and including the history of police racism. One such fact is that in August 2019, the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences concluded there is "no significant evidence of antiblack disparity in the likelihood of being fatally shot by police."

A Jewish school might also wish to note that, according to a 2016 Anti-Defamation League survey, "'anti-Semitic views' among black respondents were materially more common than among whites." The Washington Post reported two years earlier, "'entrenched anti-Semitic views' are far more common among African Americans and Latinos than among others."

Indeed, in 1991, black attacks on Jews in Crown Heights, New York City, were so violent that former Mayor Ed Koch, New York Times' executive editor A.M. Rosenthal and others called it a "pogrom." Brandeis University historian Edward S. Shapiro wrote it was "the most serious anti-Semitic incident in American history." Will Jewish schools smear American society as "systemically" racist while making believe blacks are the only victims?

One reason this is important is so students will understand that "all whites are racist" is as vile a charge as "all blacks are anti-Semitic."

Finally, will Jewish and Christian schools teach the central teaching of both faiths -- that Adam had no race? As the sages put it: "Why was only a single specimen of man created first? To teach us that ... no race or class may claim a nobler ancestry, saying, 'Our father was born first.'" In other words, the Bible's demand is that we be colorblind.

"There are only two races," Viktor Frankl wrote, "the race of the decent and the race of the indecent."

No Jewish or Christian parent should send their child to a Jewish or Christian school that teaches otherwise.

SOURCE 






A Baker’s Dozen reasons to keep your children out of “public” schools

The Lockdown has had one very strong positive benefit – even with some negatives.  Tens of millions of parents have seen their children’s schools lock their children out.  Especially the government-run, tax-funded (GRTF) institutions.  So tens of millions of children have been locked up in these close cousins to prisons for 6-10 hours a day.  According to surveys by Home School Legal Defense Association and other groups, many parents have decided that they do NOT want to send their kids back to these places of horror.

So let us consider…

A Baker’s Dozen ™ reasons to KEEP your children OUT of the public schools (government-run, tax-funded schools) and home school them.

GRTF schools try to teach them “values” about sex, which amount to “anything goes” and the only responsibility you have is to accept that “no is no” from the other partner (or partners).

GRTF schools try to teach them values about other moral issues, like honesty and fair dealing, with the examples set by teacher’s unions, politicians on school boards, and seeing other students con and threaten teachers and classmates.

GRTF schools try to teach them values about health care and medicine, like the incredible worth and absolute necessity of vaccination and contraception and abortion, while teaching them to fear everyone will give them some disease if they do not maintain “social distancing.”

GRTF schools try to teach them values about mental health, gender, and diversity: that emotions always trump reason, logic, and facts; that you can be any gender and sex you feel like, and that diversity is only bad when it specifically includes traditional values.

GRTF schools try to teach them values of the environment, safety, and peace: that mankind is not part of the environment except as humans destroy it, that safety (again, like gender, defined by what you feel) is paramount, and peace must take priority over freedom (and human rights).

GRTF schools present their teachers and other staff as role models, even while they tell their teachers and staff to shut up about things like race and religion and morality.

GRTF schools try to replace the children’s parents with other authority figures, including teachers, administrators, politicians, and perverts.

GRTF schools try to get children to treat the State like God, even to the point of worship – but only as long as the State (government) implements their so-called liberal (“progressive”) ideas and values.

GRTF schools hold up immoral and ineffective people as role models, especially those who fit into a very few favored groups – like homosexuals, feminists, and left-wing dictators.

GRTF schools trash moral, courageous and successful people, claiming that they can’t be role models because they must be considered in light of 21st Century “standards” (as defined by “progressives”) and not their own times.

GRTF schools will not try to teach children to be smart, sharp, independent, strong, free, responsible, or different from other children in any important way, because then they would question (the right kind of) authority figures and not submit to the State and their betters.

GRTF schools will try to teach children to be “creative” in ways that are destructive to themselves, others, and traditional society and values, as well as property and health and life (both public and private).

GRTF schools have demonstrated for more than a half-century that they are incapable of doing any of the things that they are theoretically doing – teaching children basic life skills and knowledge about the world around them. At the same time, the GRTF school beg for more and more money to try again and again.

GRTF schools seek to replace the family and religion and the role of parents in every possible way with the dictat of government and “professionals” – those who have degrees in “education” and “child-rearing” and child psychology and all the rest, but whom never had a single child for which they were truly responsible, or any practical experience.

The result is the world we see around us, where relatively minor illnesses are presented as neo-biblical plagues, where people protest and riot and loot to demonstrate that “black lives matter” while destroying the businesses and lives of people of color and destroy the very services on which those people depend.

Parents, count your blessings that your children were not forced to be in school for 500 to 700 hours in 2020.  If you feel that you cannot teach them yourselves, visit your local churches or businesses or civic groups, who will gladly find someone for you to partner with in teaching your young girls and boys. But keep them free from the horrors of GRTF schools.

SOURCE 



Monday, June 22, 2020


Activist Academics Threaten the Integrity of Higher Ed

The rise of activist professors has shaped the culture in higher ed for decades. As activists have become more prominent, a familiar process has changed academic departments, pushing scholars out and replacing them with professors who think in political terms and prioritize social change.

A new Martin Center policy brief, ‘Witches’ and ‘Viruses:’ The Activist-Academic Threat and a Policy Response, looks at that process and how activists conceive of their project. Joy Pullmann and Sumantra Maitra analyze two feminist papers that present strategies for capturing institutions and using universities to further political change. The politicization problem doesn’t stay within one or two marginal departments, either—it creeps across the many arms of the university and beyond, they argue:

This process results in an ideological monoculture in several disciplines and departments, threatening more and more of academia. After activists change the academic culture, they can educate their replacements and other students who will become activists in government, media, nongovernmental organizations, the corporate world, and other professions.

As the papers (published in high-ranking, not obscure, journals) show, activist academics are explicit about their desire to use colleges to further their political ideals. It is not some marginal accusation of a conspiracy by conservatives. Many academics are reluctant to hire professors who hold explicitly conservative ideas. Instances of de-platforming conservatives and liberals alike have grown more common in recent years.

The opposition to free speech on campus is a warning sign that activists are a growing force to be reckoned with and are becoming bolder. Tolerating their behavior on campus harms the integrity of scholarship and the value of a college education for students.

The first paper analyzed by Pullmann and Maitra argues that feminist scholars should attach themselves to interdisciplinary projects and shape students as a way to expand into “traditional and entrenched fields.” That way, professors and students can grow their reach and influence beyond women’s studies departments and shape more of the academy. The second paper encourages feminist scholars to “behave like insurgents” and form small groups to serve as a collective to push political goals and take power in departments and administrative institutions.

The transformative effect of this activist approach is great. Political litmus tests, such as diversity statements for hiring, would become routine and mandatory at thousands of public institutions. The free speech culture on campuses would decline as more university rules to silence speech deemed rude or offensive would be approved. De facto peer pressure would fill in the gaps left by de jure campus rules to silence the tongues of non-conforming students and professors.

Rather than a campus for developing moral character or advancing scientific knowledge, college would become a sanitized space for fomenting political change and providing mediocre job training.

If conservatives, liberals, and libertarians alike want to preserve higher education as a bastion for truth and an open society, reforms are needed to stop the activists who want to transform the college campus into a platform to spread their political vision.

To begin, Pullmann and Maitra argue, reforms need to bring financial pressure on colleges:

A key first step would be to ensure that taxpayers do not fund ideological disciplines. While government interference in education is not recommended, it is indeed the government’s duty to ensure that the tax dollars contribute to the pursuit of knowledge—not activism… Enshrining a “no politics and activism in education” policy would also streamline programs and restore more genuine scholarship and professionalism.

Faculty and administrative leaders have shown themselves to be reluctant in recognizing politicization as a problem. Until boards of trustees or college presidents restore campus neutrality, state legislatures and governors may have to step in and protect the public interest.

Public largesse for the university is conditional to promote the public good, not a provincial interest that has gained power within the university.

One way that university governing boards could show their dedication to free inquiry and de-politicizing campus, Pullmann and Maitra point out, is to fund independent reviews to root out university-sponsored activism.

Academic work is at the core of higher education; leaders need to protect it against the infringements of ideology. Students deserve a rigorous education that challenges them while it grounds them in truths discovered by the past and in more recent times.

Feeding them, instead, political beliefs to produce a kind of uniformity does them a disservice. A politicized campus also limits the types of research professors can pursue and the questions they can ask. Respected professors, deans, and college presidents need to stand up for academic freedom across the university.

“It’s critical to show how activists use academic departments to capture institutions (both on the faculty and the administrative sides),” Pullman and Maitra write. “For leaders who want to protect institutions against a political takeover, some workable and achievable policies can help them preserve a free academy.”

After a deeper analysis of activist academics, Pullman and Maitra suggest other reforms that could stem the decline in higher ed. What is needed is renewal, not complacency.

SOURCE 





UK: Parents slam school after 13-year-old children were told to plan their own FUNERAL as homework - including choosing flowers and a coffin

Parents were furious after their 13-year-old children were told to plan their own funeral for their homework, including picking out flowers and a coffin. 

The religious studies homework was given to Year Eight students St Paul's Catholic School in Leicester during lockdown.

The pupils were given a form where they had to make choices for their funeral and give reasons why, including picking their favourite music or hymn and choosing flowers for a memorial.

They also had to decide whether they would be buried or cremated and pick their own coffin, The Sun reported.

The assignment asked: 'Where would you like your body to be buried? Your ashes scattered?'

Other questions asked the children who they would invite and what kind of clothing would they want guests to wear.

Concerned mother Gemma Marston posted a picture of the homework on Facebook and said: 'Anyone else feel that getting them to plan their own funeral is a bit too much? Or am I being over the top?'

Parents responded to Gemma saying they would be 'livid' if their child received this assignment.

One person said: 'Yes kids needs to start understanding death but at least discuss this with the parents first! And homework? Does that imply a lesson was as taught on this?'

Other parents felt 13-year-olds were too young to be given this type of assignment, particularly during the coronavirus pandemic, when many families have had loved ones die.

Tabby Mcgailey said: 'This is disgusting especially seeing as we are in a pandemic and 1,000s are dying.'

One Facebook user said: 'Especially at a time like this 50,000 people have died, not to mention the children have been stuck in at home.'

A teacher also responded to the post, saying: 'I wouldn't do this. Some children can be very susceptible to ideas about death and funerals.

'You don't always know if one of your pupils has had a recent loss and this sort of thing can be very triggering for pupils.' 

The school have since contacted Ms Marston and apologised, saying that the homework had been sent out 'in error'.

SOURCE 






Australia: Cost of a humanities degree set to DOUBLE while students will pay less to study nursing and IT

The price of an arts degree is set to double while students with better job prospects will pay less for their education in a huge university overhaul.

Education Minister Dan Tehan will today announce school leavers will get financial incentives to choose 'job-relevant' degrees such as IT, health, teaching, science and mathematics from 2021.

Nursing qualifications will cost just $3,700 per year while IT, science and engineering degrees will drop by $2,000 per year.

Meanwhile humanities degrees are expected to jump from $6,804 per year to $14,500.

The cost of a maths or agriculture degree will fall by 61 per cent, while students in humanities will pay 113 per cent more.

Teaching and nursing degrees are expected to drop by 45 per cent, while a law degree will cost 28 per cent more. 

There will also be 39,000 new places available to prospective students next year, with Mr Tehan expected to say it will 'give students a choice'.

'Their degree will be cheaper if they choose to study in areas where there is expected growth in job opportunities,' Mr Tehan will say in a speech to the National Press Club.

The ranks of the unemployed swelled to 927,600 - the highest number since December 1993

The overhaul comes as Australia's employment rate hit a two-decade high, surging to 7.1 per cent in May.

Up to 227,700 Australians last month either lost their job or felt so bleak about their prospects they gave up looking for work following the COVID-19 shutdowns.

'We are facing the biggest employment challenge since the Great Depression,' Mr Tehan will say.

'And the biggest impact will be felt by young Australians. They are relying on us to give them the opportunity to succeed in the jobs of the future.'

New official payroll figures show 980,000 jobs were lost between mid-March, before the coronavirus shutdowns, and the end of May.

The official jobless ranks are now the highest since December 1993.

Following the grim economic news, Prime Minister Scott declared: 'This is the biggest economic challenge this country has ever faced.'

He said the figures were 'heartbreaking,' adding: 'The sad truth is these numbers are not surprising in these circumstances.'

Mr Morrison said these 'are our dark times'.  'I can see that ray of light … but we have to keep moving towards it and work harder each and every day.' 

Inner-city Sydney and Melbourne have been the worst-hit by COVID-19, with new Australian Bureau of Statistics maps showing one in ten or 10.6 per cent of jobs in these areas were lost in just 11 weeks.

SOURCE  


Sunday, June 21, 2020


Unbelievable: Here's What New York City Is Teaching Fourth Graders About Race

Elementary schools in New York City saw the killing of George Floyd not just as a tragedy but as an opportunity to teach kids progressive talking points about race and white privilege. In the days and weeks following the Memorial Day death of Floyd, protests and calls for police reform gripped the nation as liberal leaders clamored to placate the masses.

School leaders in NYC, which has seen violence, rioting, looting, and daily protests, saw the unrest as a moment to reach out to their pupils and attempt to discuss "systemic racism." One New York mother, whose son is in the fourth grade at a public school, described the shock and horror she experienced when she observed her child's virtual education about inherent racism and his own alleged white privilege.

Writing for the Post Millennial, Libby Emmons said that her son recently sat down for a virtual learning session with his teachers and was shocked that the lesson on deck was going to cover white privilege and systemic racism. In the fourth grade, she said, none of the kids had yet learned about American slavery or the civil rights movement in the 1960s.

Emmons' son is the only white child in his class, and for him, she wrote, the experience was particularly uncomfortable.

For the kids who are Chinese, Arab, or whose families come from Mexico, Central and South America, the lesson on racism between whites and blacks was just another study section that came with right and wrong answers. They learned that the country to which their parents had decided to journey from their homes abroad was founded on racist ideology and that, because it is permanently ingrained, there’s nothing that can be done about it. My son learned that he is perpetuating the problem of racism, and that he doesn’t even know how he’s doing it, and that his whole family is racist, even if they don’t think they are. The kids also learned that there’s no way to fix it.

Other than a few packets during Black History Month, fourth graders have not yet learned about the Civil Rights movement or the enslavement of Africans and their descendants in bondage. But they are now learning that the United States is founded on racism, that racism is the pervasive undercurrent in American governance, law enforcement, social interaction, employment, literature, arts, entertainment, real estate, and education.

Teachers then assessed the children's comprehension of the situation at hand, learning that the kids only vaguely knew that Floyd had been killed by police and what the difference between protesting and looting was. When one child incorrectly stated that Floyd was chased by police before he died, a teacher corrected her and described, in graphic detail, exactly what happened when Derek Chauvin leaned on Floyd's neck for nearly nine minutes.

After the shocking description of a man's tragic death to a class of nine and ten-year-olds, instructors segued into the meat of their lesson plan: systemic racism. They began with a video provided by the New York City Department of Education.

[The video] shows the social differences between a white boy and a black boy in terms of education and wealth due to prejudicial practices on the parts of banks, realtors, school funding, and employers. The video points out the barbaric practices of redlining, whereby black families were kept out of certain neighborhoods, and how property taxes have a direct impact on school funding.  Those are facts. The analysis was not.

“A big part of systemic racism,” the video says, “is implicit bias. These are prejudices in society that people are not aware that they have.” It states that “Unfortunately, the biggest problem of systemic racism is that there’s no single person or entity responsible for it. Which makes it very hard to solve.”

“Systemic problems,” the video says, “require systemic solutions. Luckily, we’re all part of the system, which means that we all have a role to play in making it better.”

The children responded to the video by expressing feelings of sorrow toward the animated black child who faced significantly more hardships than the white child in the video. After one student inquired why racism still persists even though it is a known problem, the teacher said that systemic racism begins in white homes with white family members.

“Unfortunately,” a teacher said, “a lot of racism stems from the home. And just like the video, a lot of people’s grandparents were raised a certain way, and things were different back then, and then their parents learn it and their children learn it, and we need to stop it. And it’s hard, too, because you learn first from your parents and from your family, and we need to learn how to love everyone, and skin color should not matter at all, so this is what we’re trying to do, we need to be the change, and we need to make a difference. And you need to form your own opinions.”

What my son heard was that he is racist and doesn’t even know it, and that his parents and grandparents provided this legacy to him. I told him that we need to treat all people with respect, kindness, and with a generosity of heart, and that skin colour is not indicative of a person’s heart.

In the second part of the lesson, children were shown a video produced by The New York Times that featured a variety of white people apologizing for their whiteness and explaining that the very fact that they were white made them a racist. Emmons wrote that her son felt particularly isolated by this experience.

It was when the teachers raised the issue of white privilege that my son said he felt weird being the only white kid in the conference. He couldn’t tell if he was supposed to feel bad for the kids who are mistreated or feel bad about himself for being racist or if there was anything he could do about it anyway since these problems are ingrained and that he would be racist even if he didn’t think he was.

No answer was given as to what action these kids should take to either be not racist or to see that racism does not throttle our country for generations onward.

Without solutions and with a new sense of self-consciousness, the children's two-day lesson concluded. But while her son was left to ponder whether he, at 10, was harboring previously unknown feelings of racism toward his friends and classmates, Emmons was fuming.

This kind of indoctrination will not make white kids think differently about their own biases, but will instead create biases where there perhaps were none before, and that goes doubly for the children who are in immigrant families. Dividing kids by race leads kids to think they should divide themselves by race, emotionally, socially, and institutionally. It’s easy to prove this, just look at the segregated graduation ceremonies and proms in schools today.

Having reached out to her son's teachers for an on the record comment on what she had just seen, she was rebuffed, saying her attempt to share the teacher's objective with the general public was not "appropriate."

I reached out to my son’s teachers for comment, and they responded saying, “I am not comfortable and cannot comment on the record but I would be happy to discuss any concerns you have as a parent and not as a journalist. For the conversations we had we followed the Chancellor’s regulations and guidelines on addressing the issue… I feel that it's not really appropriate to be using our classroom as research.”

I can totally relate, since the indoctrination of my 10-year-old into the world of critical race theory seems “not really appropriate” to me.

SOURCE 






COVID-19 Should Incentivize States to Make Education Dollars Student-Centered

We are seeing some rays of optimism after the COVID-19 pandemic has forced school districts to close for months: Montana and Texas have become the first states to allow districts to reopen some of their schools.

Unfortunately, we are also seeing more negative effects.

The government response to COVID-19 resulted in school closures and a weakened economy, which forced many states to brace for budget fallouts in light of unexpected revenue losses.

Right on cue, special-interest groups responded to state budget changes by loudly clamoring for more federal dollars for traditional public schools.

Federal bailouts, however, are not an appropriate response. As noted by Lindsey Burke, my colleague and director of Heritage’s Center for Education Policy:

Congress should not be sending blank checks to states and localities, which would only serve to bail out many states that are financially mismanaged and to prop up excessive levels of state and local government spending, and could set a dangerous precedent for the future.

Instead, states should allow districts to reopen schools as soon as possible.

Localities should reopen schools with strict health protocols and flexible truancy policies to ensure that students and their communities remain safe and healthy, as argued by Jonathan Butcher and Amy Anderson in Newsday.

At the same time, policymakers should focus on more flexible school choice alternatives.

One-size-fits-all education systems have demonstrated they are largely ill equipped to shift instruction online or have emergency management plans in place for when they must shut down.

Instead of funding this outdated paradigm, states should adopt a more flexible spending model where education dollars are student-centered and nimble.

That includes options like education savings accounts, which enable families to put their child’s share of education funding toward education expenses of their choice.

These parent-controlled accounts can be used for private school tuition, online learning, private tutors, transportation related to education, and textbooks, among other services.

That flexibility makes education savings accounts particularly well-suited to meet the needs of students when schools shut down.

Education savings accounts successfully operate in five different states today. In Arizona, eligible children receive 90% (approximately $6,000) of the education dollars that they would have received if they had attended one of the state’s district schools.

“[Education savings accounts] give parents a kind of ‘money-back guarantee’ if they want to opt out of their zoned public schools and choose other options,” explains Kathryn Hickok, vice president of the Cascade Policy Institute.

Additionally, policymakers should make sure that families can continue to access their education choice options after the pandemic. Children should not lose their eligibility to participate in school choice options once they have qualified.

Options like education savings accounts are based on the idea that education dollars should fund students, rather than physical school buildings. The dollars should follow each student to a learning option that is the right fit for them.

Such policy is not only a boon to students, but is now critical as private schools around the country are struggling to survive in the wake of COVID-19.

Innovative states like North Carolina have turned to school choice to alleviate some of the fiscal constraints caused by COVID-19. The state recently introduced a proposal that provides emergency tax credit scholarships for private schools and homeschooling families.

Under the North Carolina proposal, families that were eligible for the CARES Act stimulus checks or who have seen a 10% reduction in their adjusted gross income would be eligible for state-funded tax credit scholarships. These families could receive a $2,500 scholarship to pay for private school tuition.

Similarly, homeschooling families could receive a $500 tax credit scholarship.

This proposal would be a boon for many North Carolina families, particularly those in which a parent has lost a job due to the coronavirus shutdowns. 

In recent months, COVID-19 has forced families to sail in uncharted waters. This experience provides us with a helpful reminder that children are best served when their education funds are student-centered instead of institution-centered.

As state policymakers prepare for the 2020-21 school year, they should remember the lessons of this past spring, and provide families with access to flexible education options.

SOURCE 






Australia: Cost of Humanities degree set to DOUBLE while students will pay less to study nursing and IT

The price of an arts degree is set to double while students with better job prospects will pay less for their education in a huge university overhaul.

Education Minister Dan Tehan will today announce school leavers will get financial incentives to choose 'job-relevant' degrees such as IT, health, teaching, science and mathematics from 2021.

Nursing qualifications will cost just $3,700 per year while IT, science and engineering degrees will drop by $2,000 per year.

Meanwhile humanities degrees are expected to jump from $6,804 per year to $14,500.

The cost of a maths or agriculture degree will fall by 61 per cent, while students in humanities will pay 113 per cent more.

Teaching and nursing degrees are expected to drop by 45 per cent, while a law degree will cost 28 per cent more. 

There will also be 39,000 new places available to prospective students next year, with Mr Tehan expected to say it will 'give students a choice'.

'Their degree will be cheaper if they choose to study in areas where there is expected growth in job opportunities,' Mr Tehan will say in a speech to the National Press Club.

The ranks of the unemployed swelled to 927,600 - the highest number since December 1993

The overhaul comes as Australia's employment rate hit a two-decade high, surging to 7.1 per cent in May.

Up to 227,700 Australians last month either lost their job or felt so bleak about their prospects they gave up looking for work following the COVID-19 shutdowns.

'We are facing the biggest employment challenge since the Great Depression,' Mr Tehan will say.

'And the biggest impact will be felt by young Australians. They are relying on us to give them the opportunity to succeed in the jobs of the future.'

New official payroll figures show 980,000 jobs were lost between mid-March, before the coronavirus shutdowns, and the end of May.

The official jobless ranks are now the highest since December 1993.

Following the grim economic news, Prime Minister Scott declared: 'This is the biggest economic challenge this country has ever faced.'

He said the figures were 'heartbreaking,' adding: 'The sad truth is these numbers are not surprising in these circumstances.'

Mr Morrison said these 'are our dark times'.  'I can see that ray of light … but we have to keep moving towards it and work harder each and every day.' 

Inner-city Sydney and Melbourne have been the worst-hit by COVID-19, with new Australian Bureau of Statistics maps showing one in ten or 10.6 per cent of jobs in these areas were lost in just 11 weeks.

SOURCE