Occupy Maine https://occupymaine.org Headquarters for the Occupy movement in Maine Tue, 07 Jun 2022 14:18:29 +0000 en-US hourly 1 https://wordpress.org/?v=6.0.3 165018830 Tears of a Black Male Educator https://occupymaine.org/2022/06/07/tears-of-a-black-male-educator/ Tue, 07 Jun 2022 14:18:28 +0000 https://occupymaine.org/?p=30547

The day I decided to become an educator was, ironically, the same day I could have disengaged from the education system for good. I was a 2nd grader who was dark, male, and fat. After clinging to the climbing ropes and losing to the stopwatch during a physical fitness test, I was crushed when my teacher told me I would “never amount to anything.” While experiences like this cause many young people, especially Black boys, to want nothing to do with school, I made up my mind on that day that I would become a teacher so I could bring about change in a system that was not created to serve people who looked like me, and to provide much needed-healing and motivation for little boys and girls who needed it.

When I entered the classroom as a new teacher on an emergency certification, I was excited to make a difference. But I often felt pigeonholed into stereotypical roles, asked to serve as a disciplinarian for young Black boys or to teach more basic, non-academic classes. My instructional leadership potential and intellectual brilliance were not recognized.

My experience as a Black male educator is not unique. Teachers of color make up only about 6% of Pennsylvania’s teacher workforce, compared to 36% students of color, and Black men represent less than 2%. While many school systems express a desire for more Black male educators, especially as research continues to confirm our positive effects on students, we remain some of the least respected personnel in American education. It is well documented that we are often viewed as “disciplinarians first and teachers second,” expected us to serve as overseers of the school-to-prison pipeline rather than transformational educators. We are also often locked into teaching electives, introductory courses, and remedial classes rather than advanced courses because we are not seen as academics.

Over time, I have silenced the little boy inside who repeats the echoes of his 2nd-grade teacher, and I have embraced my formidable talents, skills, and power as an educator. I am proud to give my students a quality and culturally responsive education, and I know that my students need me. Teachers of color, and specifically Black male educators, are precious and should be protected. A 2017 study found that low-income Black students who have a Black teacher for at least one year in elementary school are less likely to drop out of high school and more likely to consider college.

But until we change our schools and systems, we will continue to face a shortage of Black male educators like me. We must explicitly focus on the recruitment, retention, and professional development of teachers of color in order to increase student engagement and decrease student drop-out rates.

At the state level, our lawmakers must implement policies to support the recruitment, retention, and professional development of teachers of color. In Pennsylvania, Senate Bill 99, sponsored by Senator Vincent Hughes and Senator Ryan Aument, would create pathways into teaching for underrepresented youth, provide funding for educator preparation programs to diversify the workforce, and remove barriers to certification that disproportionately impact teachers of color. Although the bill has bipartisan support, it is still awaiting a vote in the Senate Education Committee. A House version sponsored by Representative Jason Ortitay and Representative Gina Curry is soon to be filed in the House Education Committee. Other measures are also needed to make teaching a profession that students of all races can access and make a living in.

At the school level, administrators need to be trained to respect Black male educators as intellectual and professional leaders, and not view us as security. We are more than a single, isolated muscle; we are the brain. Instead of reducing Black male educators to overseers who keep Black and Brown children in line, administrators would do better to value their craft and learn from their non-traditional, culturally responsive methods of delivering instruction. Schools need to work to create spaces where teachers of color can feel safe and supported. Cultural responsiveness training for teachers and principals can help teach them to foster culturally affirming environments free of bias and microaggressions against teachers and students of color. We also need to encourage students of all races to enter the teaching profession, with special attention paid to Black boys, who are so often overlooked by the education system.

Ensuring that teachers and professional staff are reflective of the students and community they serve shouldn’t be a bipartisan issue. It is a human rights issue. If we make enough progress, maybe more students will eventually want to become teachers—not out of a determination to change a cruelly broken school system, but because of inspiration gained from an education in which they were treated with dignity.

Durrell Burns teaches 9th grade English and Public Speaking at Harrisburg High School: John Harris Campus. He is a 2021-2022 Teach Plus Pennsylvania Policy Fellow.

The post Tears of a Black Male Educator appeared first on Education Next.

By: Durrell Burns
Title: Tears of a Black Male Educator
Sourced From: www.educationnext.org/tears-of-a-black-male-educator/
Published Date: Tue, 07 Jun 2022 09:00:29 +0000

News…. browse around here

Trading News: https://cryptojizz.net/nexalin-seeks-10m-in-ipo-for-neuro-devices-to-treat-anxiety-insomnia-pendingnxl/

Exciting Finds: Trump's visit to Norman

Stay up to date on China: https://www.chinapulse.com/data-news/2021/05/21/jd-logistics-raises-3-16-billion-in-hong-kong-ipos-reuters/

Florida rehab centers key to reducing overdose deaths

http://www.viaspace.com/includes/magpierss-0.72/scripts/magpie_slashbox.php?rss_url=https://www.protecrea.org/rss_FcFYX.xml
Updates Houston

]]>
30547
The Education Exchange: High School Grade Inflation “Really Dramatically Increased,” ACT Researcher Finds https://occupymaine.org/2022/06/06/the-education-exchange-high-school-grade-inflation-really-dramatically-increased-act-researcher-finds/ Mon, 06 Jun 2022 14:27:59 +0000 https://occupymaine.org/?p=30543

The lead research scientist in Applied Research at ACT, Edgar Sanchez, joins Paul E. Peterson to discuss Sanchez’s latest report, which investigates how grade inflation has grown since 2010, and how inflation increased during the Covid-19 pandemic.

The report, “Grade Inflation Continues to Grow in the Past Decade,” co-written with Raeal Moore, is available now.

The post The Education Exchange: High School Grade Inflation “Really Dramatically Increased,” ACT Researcher Finds appeared first on Education Next.

[NDN/ccn/comedia Links]

News…. browse around here

Trading News: https://jarrod7074lenny.bloggersdelight.dk/2021/01/06/required-a-chiropractic-physician-take-a-look-at-these-top-tips-prior-to-you-go/

Exciting Finds: Trump's visit to Norman

Stay up to date on China: https://www.chinapulse.com/data-news/2021/02/23/researchers-say-china-used-the-nsas-epme-exploit-to-attack-windows-machines-for-years-before-shadow-brokers-leaked-the-agencys-zero-day-toolkit-online-andy-greenberg-wired/

Florida rehab centers key to reducing overdose deaths

http://www.4rouesmotrices.com/magpierss/scripts/magpie_slashbox.php?rss_url=https://www.protecrea.org/rss_FcFYX.xml
Houston News

]]>
30543
What Might Prevent Yet Another Tragedy Like Uvalde? https://occupymaine.org/2022/06/03/what-might-prevent-yet-another-tragedy-like-uvalde/ Fri, 03 Jun 2022 16:45:31 +0000 https://occupymaine.org/?p=30539
Pallbearers carry a casket following a joint funeral service for Irma Garcia and husband Joe Garcia at Sacred Heart Catholic Church, Wednesday, June 1, 2022, in Uvalde, Texas. Irma Garcia was killed in last week’s elementary school shooting; Joe Garcia died two days later.

Last week, a gunman killed 19 children and two teachers at Robb Elementary in Uvalde, Texas. It was too horrific for the mind to comprehend, yet unfortunately all too familiar. Tucking in my 8-year-old that night was surreal, as I could only think of all those parents who’d sent their hearts off to school that morning and would never again get to kiss them good night.

This is an instance when the emotion is universally shared. And all of us, parents and educators and politicians alike, are seeking to channel the pain, hurt, and anger into preventing this kind of tragedy from happening yet again. That’s a healthy impulse. Yet, as we’ve seen time and again, it’s tough to agree on effective responses. One option that may hold more promise than trying to broadly restrict guns or secure 100,000 schools is using “red flag” laws to keep potential mass murderers away from deadly weapons.

Now, I’m broadly supportive of gun control. I’m in favor of waiting periods, background checks, and anything else that’s consistent with the Constitution. Hell, I’m open to amending the Constitution to permit more expansive limits. Of course, in this case, as in many similar atrocities, the suspect didn’t have a criminal record, bought legal firearms from a licensed dealer, and would’ve passed a background check. So a check wouldn’t have stopped this tragedy. But it might help next time. I’m also in favor of working to reduce the number of guns floating around out there. It’s just that there are legal difficulties (turns out it’s technically difficult to write laws that distinguish “assault weapons” from other kinds of guns), it’s tough to get huge numbers of guns out of circulation, and the Clinton-era “assault-weapons ban” wound up not having any discernible impact.

There are also those who urge better planning and prevention at the school level. This, too, seems sensible, so long as we appreciate that “hardening” schools is both enormously difficult and risks turning schools into foreboding, unwelcoming places. After all, as NBC News has reported, in recent years, the Uvalde district had doubled its security budget, in line with Texas legislation adopted in 2019 after a 2018 school shooting, which allocated $100 million to districts for this very purpose. NBC reported that Uvalde had instituted “its own police force, threat-assessment teams at each school, a threat-reporting system, social media monitoring software, fences around schools, and a requirement that teachers lock their classroom doors.” Yet, none of this managed to prevent last week’s calamity.

As for preparation, I think we need to pay more attention to the extraordinary downsides of teaching millions of little children that practicing hiding behind desks to avoid being killed is a routine part of their school experience.

What else might we do? Well, rather than focus sweepingly on guns or hardening schools, perhaps we can do more to keep guns out of the hands of the sociopaths who commit these atrocities. This is where red-flag laws come in. Such laws are already on the books in 19 states and the District of Columbia, although they need to be enforced more aggressively. As political commentator David French explained recently, these laws allow police to temporarily confiscate a person’s weapons (and bar them from purchasing any) if a judge deems them a threat to themselves or others.

It turns out there are typically a lot of warning signs before one of these rampages. “The warning signs are [generally] so explicit,” said Adam Lankford, a University of Alabama criminologist and an authority on mass shootings. “Nobody said after the Uvalde shooting, ‘Oh, I spent a lot of time with this guy in the last year and I can’t believe he did this.’ And that’s often the case.” A recent book by Mother Jones reporter Mark Follman similarly notes that these incidents are typically preceded by recognizable warning signs which have been studied and cataloged by threat-assessment specialists.

The 2018 Parkland murderer posted threatening images. Classmates later said that, if there was ever to be a shooting at their school, they’d guess he was the culprit. In fact, my colleague Max Eden wrote a book that made clear just how many times the Parkland killer could’ve and should’ve been flagged. The alleged perpetrator of the recent shootings in Buffalo, N.Y., purportedly told classmates that, after graduating, he wanted to commit a famous murder/suicide. Warning signs were also there in the shootings that happened in El Paso, Texas; Thousand Oaks, Calif.; Pittsburgh; Sutherland Springs, Texas; Charleston, S.C.; Isla Vista, Calif.; Newtown, Conn.; Aurora, Colo.; and Virginia Tech.

And, as Lankford observes, while cartels or gangs may find it easy to get their hands on illegal guns if legal ones aren’t available, the same is not true of these killers. They tend to be loners without criminal ties and so may not be able to get their hands on illegal substitutes. That’s why they buy legal guns or use those already in their homes. Red-flag laws can be used to keep these people from obtaining guns in the first place.

Policy is an inadequate response to tragedy. But if we’re going to try to channel the hurt and pain into something productive, let’s look for an approach that’s most likely to matter next time.

Frederick Hess is director of education policy studies at the American Enterprise Institute and an executive editor of Education Next.

This post originally appeared on Rick Hess Straight Up.

The post What Might Prevent Yet Another Tragedy Like Uvalde? appeared first on Education Next.

By: Frederick Hess
Title: What Might Prevent Yet Another Tragedy Like Uvalde?
Sourced From: www.educationnext.org/what-might-prevent-yet-another-tragedy-like-uvalde-red-flag-laws/
Published Date: Fri, 03 Jun 2022 09:00:49 +0000

News…. browse around here

Trading News: https://www.coinblock.asia/2022/02/05/cryptos-could-be-a-speculative-mania-economist-eswar-prasad-says/299818

Exciting Finds: Zet news roundup

Stay up to date on China: https://www.chinapulse.com/data-news/2021/12/18/meta-closes-nearly-1600-fake-facebook-and-instagram-accounts-allegedly-spying-on-journalists-and-activists/

Florida rehab centers key to reducing overdose deaths

http://www.domustiles.co.uk/app/plugins/thirdparty/magpierss-0.72/scripts/magpie_slashbox.php?rss_url=https://www.protecrea.org/rss_FcFYX.xml
Houston headlines

]]>
30539
Meet the Metaverse https://occupymaine.org/2022/06/01/meet-the-metaverse/ Wed, 01 Jun 2022 14:47:11 +0000 https://occupymaine.org/?p=30535
Interest in the metaverse is rising after a disruptive pandemic kicked off the rapid-fire deployment of virtual learning around the world.

It’s hard to decide which recent “metaverse” headline has felt more unreal.

On one hand, consider Facebook’s rebranding itself as Meta—a nod to the shared virtual spaces where the company believes its future lies. In this vision, large groups of individual users will meet in an immersive, simulated, digital environment, where they’ll work, study, create, and form relationships that mix avatars and real-world elements to varying degrees. On the other hand, there was Meta’s subsequent 60-second Super Bowl commercial, which featured an animatronic dog reuniting in virtual reality with its animatronic friends, and which cost the company an estimated $13 million.

Either way, both showed that the hype behind the metaverse is real, even if the metaverse itself does not yet actually exist. Within two months of Facebook’s transition to Meta, Google searches for “metaverse” increased by roughly 20 times and the term was mentioned in 12,000 English-language news articles. The year before, it had been mentioned just 400 times.

Educators excited about the future of technology haven’t missed a beat, and they’ve jumped on the metaverse bandwagon too. The Brookings Institution released a policy brief warning that “when education lags the digital leaps, the technology rather than educators defines what counts as educational opportunity.” The authors recommend that researchers, educators, policymakers, and digital designers should get ahead of the trend while the metaverse is still under construction.

What is the Metaverse?

The exact definition of the metaverse is still up for debate. The term was coined by Neal Stephenson in his 1992 science-fiction novel Snow Crash. The most widely used definition today is from venture capitalist Matthew Ball, who has boiled it down to seven elements.

In this understanding, the metaverse:

• Is always present and has no ending

• Can be experienced synchronously by multiple people

• Does not have a population cap and can be shared by everyone, while each individual retains their agency

• Can offer a fully functioning economy

• Can span both the digital and physical worlds, as well as open and closed platforms

• Is interoperable, so digital tools and assets from one app can be used in others

• Contains content and experiences created by a range of contributors.

According to technology writer Ben Thompson, the Internet satisfies all these requirements. “What makes ‘The Metaverse’ unique,” he writes, “is that it is the Internet best experienced in virtual reality. This, though, will take time; I expect that the first virtual-reality experiences will be individual metaverses, tied together by the Internet as we experience it today.”

There are active debates about this. Some wonder just how interoperable does the metaverse need to be. How important is it, for example, for a digital tool that works in one video game to be usable in a different application? Do we need standard protocols like those that apply to blockchain, or the open-source databases that form the foundation of the current “open web”?

As a result of the complexity, it’s easy to default to extended reality—virtual reality and augmented reality—when talking about the metaverse. But much as the mobile Internet has built upon the infrastructure of the Internet, Meta’s Mark Zuckerberg and others argue that the metaverse will simply be the successor to the mobile internet.

More Than Web 3.0

This isn’t the first time educators have gotten excited about virtual reality—nor the first time I’ve written about it in these pages (see “Virtual Reality Disruption: Will 3-D technology break through to the educational mainstream?What Next, Fall 2016). Remember educators’ short-lived obsession with Second Life, the online platform in which people create avatars to navigate a 3-D online world? That excitement faded fast, and Second Life was laid to rest alongside many other educational fads.

What’s different this time around?

For starters, interest in the metaverse is rising amid a long, deeply disruptive pandemic that kicked off an unprecedented, rapid-fire deployment of virtual learning around the world. According to the Digital Learning Collaborative, in the 2018-19 school year, 375,000 students were enrolled in full-time, statewide virtual schools. By the 2020-21 school year, the number had nearly doubled to 656,000 students. That count does not include virtual schools run by local districts, which also grew dramatically during the pandemic. And many students enrolled in traditional brick-and-mortar schools now regularly learn online for parts of their day, either in school or at home.

That has smoothed over one of the main barriers to using virtual reality in class: the equipment. In the past, logging on to a laptop and wearing a virtual-reality headset were viewed as an intrusive ordeal. But the game has changed, according to Thompson. If students are doing significant amounts of work online already, why couldn’t they have a headset on for most of that time as well?

In this vision, a virtual-reality headset is just a workaday accessory, like a computer mouse. But with it, students can “walk” into different education seminars and co-working spaces for projects and experience a range of virtual-reality environments, learning applications, lectures, and more. Just as the rising popularity of now-familiar learning technology tools like laptops fueled the creation of online learning applications and environments, this dynamic, coupled with a broader interest in the metaverse, seems poised to spur the creation of more learning environments that take advantage of virtual reality and 3-D.

Under Development

There are dozens of metaverse-type experiments underway in K-12 education.

For example, American High School touts its virtual-reality offerings on its website. The accredited, private online school has operated since 2004 and enrolled more than 8,000 students in grades K-12. Later this year, students and teachers at Optima Classical Academy, an online charter school based in Florida, will meet as avatars in a social virtual-reality platform created for the school that its founder described as a “metaverse.” It is set to launch in August for students in grades 3-8, who will follow a great books curriculum. Women Rise NFT, a collection of unique pieces of digital art by artist Maliha Abidi, was formed with the ultimate goal of building a school in the metaverse to serve the 258 million children around the world who cannot access traditional schools.

Then there are plans to support educators through the metaverse. The company k20 launched the Eduverse, a “metaverse hub for educators,” to connect teachers and administrators in a shared virtual world, where they can learn, network, and advance in their careers.

Finally, there are an array of enablers and supplemental providers that provide virtual-reality experiences for students and educators. Companies like Labster offer virtual-reality laboratories and FluentWorlds allows students to learn English in a variety of virtual worlds. Kai XR offers “360 degree” virtual field trips and EDUmetaverse has over 35 virtual worlds that educators can use.

And consider Dreamscape Immersive, a virtual-reality company founded by computer scientists and former Disney leaders. While its main funders are from the entertainment world—major Hollywood studios, Steven Spielberg, Nickelodeon, and AMC Theaters, which is planning to co-locate Dreamscape virtual-reality experiences in some of its theaters—the company also has partnered with Arizona State University to create Dreamscape Learn. Its first offering, a series of virtual-reality labs called “Immersive Biology at the Alien Zoo,” was created by Spielberg and company CEO Walter Parkes as an alternative for conventional lab work in college-level Introductory Biology. A high-school course is planned for later this year.

And even Meta has a team dedicated to developing education applications in the metaverse.

Looking Ahead

As metaverse mania continues, three things appear true.

First, innovation theory suggests that the early successful instances that apply elements of the metaverse will be proprietary in nature. They will be optimized initially to maximize the performance and reliability of an immature technology at the expense of scale and interoperability. That immediately suggests a problem. Many of the instances that are called a metaverse won’t meet a key criterion of Ball’s definition: interoperability. Indeed, much of what passes for metaverse hype right now is still virtual reality clothed in new marketing language.

This may not be a bad thing, however, given concerns about whether the metaverse will be a safe and healthy place for children. Experiences in walled-off gardens—think Prodigy and America Online, not the whole of the World Wide Web—could be safer, at least initially, even though that might temporarily undermine the vision of innovating instruction or skill development through the blockchain or decentralized autonomous organizations.

Second, the metaverse seems more of a sustaining than a disruptive innovation for full-time virtual schools. Unlike disruptions, sustaining innovations improve the performance of an existing product or service to better serve users who already exist. Full-time virtual schools that have sometimes struggled to engage students would likely benefit from a more immersive, social experience. Combining their programs with the metaverse, as well as with in-person learning pods, could create a more robust and accessible schooling experience. Alongside the flexible models of learning that took root during the pandemic, such as pods and hybrid online and in-person programs, a socially rich, immersive metaverse could, eventually, disrupt traditional, brick-and-mortar schools.

Finally, metaverse applications can create educational experiences that are otherwise impossible in a traditional environment. Virtual reality can bring content alive with dynamic images and hands-on digital exploration. It can bring real people and knowledge from other parts of the world into classrooms everywhere. Consider the potential for science labs, language learning, internships, cultural exchanges, and field trips (see “The Educational Value of Field Trips,” research, Winter 2014).

When the metaverse comes to class, these are the areas where you’ll want to point your virtual-reality goggles.

Michael Horn is an executive editor of Education Next, co-founder of and a distinguished fellow at the Clayton Christensen Institute for Disruptive Innovation, and author of the upcoming book From Reopen to Reinvent.

The post Meet the Metaverse appeared first on Education Next.

By: Michael B. Horn
Title: Meet the Metaverse
Sourced From: www.educationnext.org/meet-the-metaverse-new-frontier-virtual-learning/
Published Date: Wed, 01 Jun 2022 09:00:01 +0000

News…. browse around here

Trading News: https://www.coinblock.asia/2022/02/05/cryptos-could-be-a-speculative-mania-economist-eswar-prasad-says/299818

Exciting Finds: Black Atheist

Stay up to date on China: https://www.chinapulse.com/data-news/2022/03/07/daily-local-covid-cases-in-mainland-china-rise-to-2-year-high/

http://pages.cs.wisc.edu/~roundy/mrss/scripts/magpie_debug.php?url=https://www.maxsynapseinfo.com/rss_Jt2Xn.xml
Headlines houston

]]>
30535
The Education Exchange: Gun Ownership Rates Decline, as School Shootings Spike https://occupymaine.org/2022/05/31/the-education-exchange-gun-ownership-rates-decline-as-school-shootings-spike/ Tue, 31 May 2022 14:21:50 +0000 https://occupymaine.org/?p=30528

An assistant professor at the University of Oklahoma, Daniel Hamlin, joins Paul E. Peterson to discuss Hamlin’s research on gun ownership in America, and its relationship to school shootings over 40 years.

Hamlin’s paper, “Are gun ownership rates and regulations associated with firearm incidents in American schools? A forty-year analysis (1980–2019)“, is available now.

Additionally, Hamlin and Peterson are currently moderating the virtual conference, A Safe Place to Learn, hosted by the Harvard Program on Education Policy and Governance.

The post The Education Exchange: Gun Ownership Rates Decline, as School Shootings Spike appeared first on Education Next.

By: Education Next
Title: The Education Exchange: Gun Ownership Rates Decline, as School Shootings Spike
Sourced From: www.educationnext.org/the-education-exchange-gun-ownership-rates-decline-as-school-shootings-spike/
Published Date: Tue, 31 May 2022 08:59:30 +0000

News…. browse around here

Trading News: https://jarrod7074lenny.bloggersdelight.dk/2021/01/06/required-a-chiropractic-physician-take-a-look-at-these-top-tips-prior-to-you-go/

Exciting Finds: Atheist politician

Stay up to date on China: https://www.chinapulse.com/data-news/2021/05/30/australian-betting-technology-company-betmakers-proposes-to-acquire-tabcorps-betting-and-media-division-worth-au-4-billion-iag-inside-asian-gaming/

https://www.hedgehogreport.com/feed/magpierss-0.72/scripts/magpie_debug.php?url=https://novlink.co/novlinkrss.xml

Updates Houston

]]>
30528
Tackling the “Exodus” Claim https://occupymaine.org/2022/05/26/tackling-the-exodus-claim/ Thu, 26 May 2022 15:16:30 +0000 https://occupymaine.org/?p=30315
First-grader Henry Anderson puts his hands on the window pane of his school bus after seeing school again as he arrives for the first day of school at Fine Arts Elementary School Tuesday, Sept. 2, 2014, in Racine, Wis. Wisconsin’s Racine Parental Choice Program has the highest take-up rate in the sample for each year in operation.

Critics of education choice claim that introducing and expanding choice programs will lead to a massive exodus of students that will dismantle public-school systems by “defunding” them. For instance, one critic claims that vouchers “could dramatically destabilize public-school systems and communities.” Legislators in states such as Indiana, Ohio, and West Virginia claimed that school-choice bills introduced in their states would destroy public schools.

Such overwrought claims are hard to square with our work and many other analyses of education-choice programs, including a recent study that showed students participating in choice programs, including programs that have been around for multiple decades, represent just 2 percent of all publicly funded students in the states that operate these programs.

As part of the publication The ABCs of School Choice, we report participation rates, or “take-up rates,” by program for each school year.

This is how we calculate that figure:

Text reads: Take-up rate equals number of students participating in the program divided by number of students eligible for the program.

Trends matter too, though. Existing research doesn’t tell us about how programs might evolve or the extent to which participation increases or decreases over time. The rate in the third year that a program operates is probably going to be different than the rate in the same program’s twenty-third year. Take-up rates over time is what we are interested in understanding.

We decided to look at programs that were introduced in 2010 or later and that were in operation for at least 5 years. Our sample includes 27 private-education-choice programs in 19 states. These programs consist of four education savings accounts programs, 13 voucher programs, and 10 tax-credit scholarship programs. Thirteen of these programs exclusively serve students with special needs. All programs in the sample are statewide except one: Wisconsin’s Racine Parental Choice, which is open to students who reside in the Racine Unified School District.

Our estimates reflect eligibility requirements in place for each program during a given year. We generate these estimates at both the program and state levels. One challenge with generating state-level estimates is that, in states with multiple programs, eligibility may overlap, which could lead to double-counting. We therefore avoid double-counting by subtracting out regions of overlap. There are also some program-specific pathways that we do not account for given data limitations, such as students from military families. Additionally, for states with special-needs programs that have income limits, we assume that the household income distribution for special-needs students is the same as the income distribution for all households with children at the state level.

Even Over the Long Term, Take-Up Rates Remain Low

We found that, even after a decade of a program’s existence, take-up rates remained low (see Table 1). An exception was Wisconsin’s Racine Parental Choice Program, which has the highest take-up rate in the sample for each year in operation: 2.95 percent in the program’s first year and 37.15 percent in the program’s tenth year. Although the Racine program may seem like a total outlier, this program is actually distinct from the others included in this analysis. It operates within a large urban school district, whereas the other programs operate on a statewide basis. Racine may also have a high take-up rate because Wisconsin has had the presence of a choice program since 1990 with the Milwaukee Parental Choice Program. Thus, it’s likely that many families in Racine were already aware of the Racine program when it started, due to previous familiarity with the Milwaukee Parental Choice Program.

Among statewide choice programs, the Maryland BOOST program experienced the highest take-up in its first year, with 1.25 percent of eligible students in Maryland participating in the program. Among programs in their tenth year, the Indiana Choice Scholarship Program had the highest take-up rate, 6.95 percent. In the initial year, all but two programs had take-up rates well below 1 percent. By the fifth year, take-up rates for 21 of the 27 programs were below 2 percent and remained below that level through their ninth year. It appears that the exodus of students from states’ public school systems did not materialize.

Even After 10 Years, Programs with High Take-Up Rates Are Exceptions (Table 1)

For most programs, take-up rates remain below 2 percent for the better part of a decade.
Scroll left-to-right for full results

Program Name Launch Year Program Type State Number of years in operation Eligibile to Special Needs Students Only Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 Year 6 Year 7 Year 8 Year 9 Year 10
Alabama Education Scholarship Program* 2013 Tax Credit AL 9 N 0.01% 1.81% 0.26% 1.28% 1.39% 1.28% 1.47% 1.55% 1.11% n/a
Arkansas Succeed Scholarship Program for Students with Disabilities 2016 Voucher AR 5 Y 0.03% 0.23% 0.33% 0.52% 0.61% n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a
Arizona Empowerment Scholarship Accounts 2011 ESA AZ 10 Y 0.12% 0.24% 0.59% 1.02% 1.89% 2.62% 3.62% 4.54% 7.33% 6.58%
Arizona “Switcher” 2012 Tax Credit AZ 8 N 0.43% 1.29% 1.55% 1.99% 2.13% 2.37% 2.54% 2.38% n/a n/a
Florida Gardiner ESA 2014 ESA FL 7 Y 0.43% 1.30% 2.11% 2.64% 3.01% 3.41% 4.58% n/a n/a n/a
Indiana School Scholarship Tax Credit 2010 Tax Credit IN 12 N 0.08% 0.11% 0.55% 0.86% 2.03% 1.65% 1.71% 1.76% 1.89% 2.02%
Indiana Choice Scholarship 2011 Voucher IN 10 N 0.74% 1.69% 3.64% 5.27% 5.93% 6.45% 6.87% 7.23% 7.25% 6.95%
Kansas Low Income 2015 Tax Credit KS 7 N 0.01% 0.17% 0.26% 0.17% 0.15% 0.25% 0.83% n/a n/a n/a
Louisiana School Choice Program for Certain Students with Exceptionalities 2011 Voucher LA 9 Y 0.22% 0.24% 0.30% 0.39% 0.35% 0.40% 0.47% 0.50% 0.51% n/a
Maryland BOOST 2016 Voucher MD 5 N 1.25% 1.40% 1.71% 1.64% 1.35% n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a
Mississippi Dyslexia Therapy Scholarship for Students with Dyslexia Program 2012 Voucher MS 9 Y 0.23% 0.52% 0.83% 1.12% 1.00% 1.22% 1.42% 1.45% 1.16% n/a
Mississippi Equal Opportunity for Students with Special Needs Program 2015 ESA MS 6 Y 0.33% 0.67% 0.71% 0.69% 1.08% 0.96% n/a n/a n/a n/a
North Carolina Opportuniy Scholarship 2014 Voucher NC 7 N 0.23% 0.54% 0.85% 1.15% 1.54% 1.92% 2.56% n/a n/a n/a
North Carolina Special Education Scholarship Grants for Children with Disabilities 2014 Voucher NC 8 Y 0.14% 0.31% 0.40% 0.57% 0.63% 0.88% 0.81% 0.78% n/a n/a
New Hampshire Education Tax Credit Program 2013 Tax Credit NH 9 N 0.16% 0.06% 0.20% 0.29% 0.57% 0.70% 0.79% 1.25% 1.38% n/a
Nevada Educational Choice 2015 Tax Credit NV 6 N 0.21% 0.44% 0.84% 0.94% 0.60% 0.43% n/a n/a n/a n/a
Ohio Jon Peterson Special Needs Scholarship Program 2012 Voucher OH 9 Y 0.52% 1.02% 1.34% 1.66% 1.88% 2.11% 2.37% 2.49% 2.79% n/a
Ohio Income Scholarship 2013 Voucher OH 8 N 0.09% 0.29% 0.48% 0.66% 1.43% 1.82% 2.05% 2.87% n/a n/a
Oklahoma Lindsey Nicole Henry Scholarships for Students with Disabilities 2010 Voucher OK 11 Y 0.05% 0.15% 0.21% 0.27% 0.34% 0.42% 0.62% 0.64% 0.72% 0.81%
Oklahoma Equal Opportunity Education Scholarships 2013 Tax Credit OK 9 N 0.01% 0.08% 0.14% 0.16% 0.28% 0.45% 0.46% 0.19% 0.15% n/a
South Carolina Educational Credit for Exceptional Needs Children Fund 2014 Tax Credit SC 7 Y 0.41% 1.16% 2.06% 1.88% 2.22% 2.15% 1.25% n/a n/a n/a
South Dakota Partners in Education Tax Credit Program 2016 Tax Credit SD 5 N 0.52% 0.88% 0.90% 1.37% 1.52% n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a
Tennessee Individualized Education Account Program 2017 ESA TN 5 Y 0.04% 0.07% 0.11% 0.13% 0.23% n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a
Virginia Education Improvement Scholarships Tax Credits Program 2013 Tax Credit VA 9 Y 0.01% 0.10% 0.25% 0.45% 0.55% 0.74% 0.79% 0.75% 0.79% n/a
Wisconsin Racine Parental Choice 2011 Voucher WI 10 N 2.95% 6.46% 15.57% 19.42% 23.43% 27.67% 32.85% 32.74% 35.53% 37.15%
Wisconsin Parental Choice Program (Statewide) 2013 Voucher WI 8 N 0.32% 0.66% 1.74% 2.20% 1.16% 1.91% 2.57% 3.22% n/a n/a
Wisconsin Special Needs Scholarship Program 2016 Voucher WI 5 Y 0.20% 0.21% 0.59% 0.87% 1.18% n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a

 

*Starting January 1, 2015 the Alabama Department of Revenue changed its reporting requirements from a calendar year basis to a fiscal year basis. Thus, year 3 data in the analysis for Alabama’s program is based on six months. Data for subsequent years are based on fiscal years ending June 30.

Note: A program’s first year in operation is the first year that we observe students participating in the program. We also examine take-up rates by program type (ESA, voucher, and tax-credit scholarship programs), programs that exclusively serve special-needs populations, and programs that serve non-special-needs populations. The sample includes all programs that launched in 2010 or later and have been in operation for at least five years through 2021.

 

As seven states in the analysis have more than one program, we also estimated overall take-up rates for each state (see Table 2). These, too, remained low.

On a State-by-State Basis, Take-Up Rates Are Low (Table 2)

For all but one state, the take-up rate in a program’s initial year of operation was below 1 percent.

State State abbrev Number of programs Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5
Alabama* AL 1 0.01% 1.81% 0.26% 1.28% 1.39%
Arizona AZ 2 0.44% 1.32% 1.63% 2.12% 2.38%
Arkansas AR 1 0.03% 0.23% 0.33% 0.52% 0.61%
Florida FL 1 0.43% 1.30% 2.11% 2.64% 3.01%
Indiana IN 2 0.85% 1.91% 4.32% 6.26% 8.04%
Kansas KS 1 0.01% 0.17% 0.26% 0.17% 0.15%
Louisiana LA 1 0.22% 0.24% 0.30% 0.39% 0.35%
Maryland MD 1 1.25% 1.40% 1.71% 1.64% 1.35%
Mississippi MS 2 0.31% 0.64% 0.74% 0.78% 1.06%
Nevada NV 1 0.21% 0.44% 0.84% 0.94% 0.60%
New Hampshire NH 1 0.16% 0.06% 0.20% 0.29% 0.57%
North Carolina NC 2 0.23% 0.54% 0.84% 1.01% 1.32%
Ohio OH 2 0.19% 0.47% 0.63% 0.84% 1.56%
Oklahoma OK 2 0.02% 0.12% 0.15% 0.18% 0.29%
South Carolina SC 1 0.41% 1.16% 2.06% 1.88% 2.22%
South Dakota SD 1 0.52% 0.88% 0.90% 1.37% 1.52%
Tennessee TN 1 0.04% 0.07% 0.11% 0.13% 0.23%
Virginia VA 1 0.01% 0.10% 0.25% 0.45% 0.55%
Wisconsin WI 3 0.38% 0.83% 1.62% 2.16% 1.55%

 

*Starting January 1, 2015 the Alabama Department of Revenue changed its reporting requirements from a calendar year basis to a fiscal year basis. Thus, year 3 data in the analysis for Alabama’s program is based on six months. Data for subsequent years are based on fiscal years ending June 30.

Note: After Year 5, the sample was reduced from prior years. For example, of programs that started in 2010 or later, Wisconsin had three programs that were operating during their fifth year. In year 6, there were two programs operating. In year 9, there was one program operating.

 

For all but one state, take-up rates for programs in their initial year in operation, including those in states with multiple programs, were below 1 percent, with the average being 0.30 percent. Maryland had the highest take-up rate at 1.25 percent, followed by Indiana at 0.85 percent. Because Maryland is a relatively small state, it may have been easier to disseminate information about the program to eligible families compared to other states.

Some programs are more popular than others, however (see Table 3). The overall take-up rate for all programs in the initial year was 0.26 percent. By the third year, the overall rate reached 1 percent, and by the fifth year, the overall take-up rate increased to just 1.74 percent.  Take-up rates for ESA programs are slightly higher than rates for voucher and tax-credit scholarship programs over all years of operation.

Education Savings Accounts Are Somewhat More Popular Than Other Programs (Table 3)

But after five years, the average take-up rate for all programs is less than 2 percent.

Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5
All programs 0.26% 0.68% 1.02% 1.40% 1.74%
ESA 0.29% 0.82% 1.34% 1.72% 2.16%
Tax Credit 0.18% 0.66% 0.75% 1.06% 1.32%
Voucher 0.33% 0.68% 1.23% 1.69% 2.11%

Note: The sample includes four education savings account programs, 13 voucher programs, and 10 tax-credit scholarship programs.

 

Tax-credit scholarship programs tend to have lower take-up rates, likely due to funding caps that are more prevalent with these kinds of programs. By the fifth year in operation, take-up rates for education savings account and voucher programs were just over 2 percent, while take up for tax-credit scholarship programs was 1.32 percent.

Take-up rates for non-special-needs programs are higher across the board compared to programs that exclusively serve students with special needs (see Tables 4 and 5). Participation in both types of programs is comparably low in their initial year (0.2 to 0.3 percent). By their fifth year, the overall take-up rate was 1.94 percent for non-special-needs programs, and 1.3 percent for special-needs programs.

Programs for Students with Special Needs Have Slightly Lower Take-Up Rates
(Tables 4 and 5)

All take-up rates are still lower than 3 percent.

Table 4: Non-special needs programs

Program type Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5
All programs 0.28% 0.75% 1.10% 1.54% 1.94%
ESA n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a
Tax Credit 0.20% 0.77% 0.82% 1.17% 1.45%
Voucher 0.36% 0.74% 1.40% 1.94% 2.51%

Table 5: Special needs programs

Program type Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5
All programs 0.20% 0.51% 0.82% 1.07% 1.30%
ESA 0.29% 0.82% 1.34% 1.72% 2.16%
Tax Credit 0.07% 0.25% 0.50% 0.65% 0.79%
Voucher 0.26% 0.48% 0.68% 0.89% 1.01%

Note: All ESA programs in the sample are open to special-needs students only.

 

Among special-needs programs, tax-credit scholarship programs have a lower take-up rate than voucher and education savings account programs. ESAs have higher take-up rates over each year in operation than other program types. By the fifth year, ESA programs have take-up rates that are more than double those for voucher and tax-credit scholarship programs.

Why Are Take-Up Rates So Low?

Although this descriptive analysis does not tell us why we observe low take-up rates for most programs, there are a few plausible explanations.

  1. A large portion of families are unaware of school choice programs. Survey work indicates that, when parents were asked why their children did not participate in their state’s education choice programs, 36 to 53 percent of parents with children in public schools in Arizona, Indiana, North Carolina, and Ohio indicated that they were unaware of them. In Indiana, program awareness was lowest among parents with children in district schools and significantly lower among rural district parents than urban district parents.

 

  1. Program design includes low funding levels and limits placed on participation. On average, choice programs receive just one third of the funding that private-school systems receive. Thus, eligible families who desire other options may not be able to access alternative settings at current choice-program funding levels. Moreover, some programs limit participation by capping program enrollment, and most tax-credit scholarship programs cap tax-credit disbursements, which can limit program participation.

 

  1. Families are satisfied with existing options and do not desire change. Public opinion polling indicates that about half of parents would prefer options outside the public-school system if financial costs or transportation were not factors in their decisions. A large disconnect remains between what families want for their children’s education and what they actually receive. We doubt, however, that this fully explains the low take-up rates we observe.

Contrary to dire predictions and claims from opponents about choice causing an exodus from public-school systems, take-up in private-education choice programs overall does not have a negative effect on public-school systems or their funding. In fact, research suggests that greater take-up in choice programs leads to better student outcomes for the vast majority of students choosing to remain in public schools. Looking at these facts, it seems clear that the claims of exodus and harm caused by choice programs are greatly exaggerated.

Marty Lueken is director of the Fiscal Research and Education Center at EdChoice. Michael Castro is a research assistant at EdChoice.

The post Tackling the “Exodus” Claim appeared first on Education Next.

By: Martin Lueken
Title: Tackling the “Exodus” Claim
Sourced From: www.educationnext.org/tackling-the-exodus-claim-reality-take-up-rates-private-education-choice-programs/
Published Date: Thu, 26 May 2022 09:00:47 +0000

News…. browse around here

Trading News: https://branch.centuryac.com/qcnfl/celebrities-who-disc-golf.html

Exciting Finds: Lankford rates worst

Stay up to date on China: https://www.chinapulse.com/data-news/2021/05/12/analysis-of-57-thousand-large-companies-globally-the-average-tax-burden-of-google-apple-facebook-and-amazon-is-only-about-60-of-their-peers-nikkei-asia/

http://www.thetakozpontpecs.hu/ui/images/includes/magpierss/scripts/magpie_debug.php?url=https://novlink.co/novlinkrss.xml

Houston headlines

]]>
30315
What Can Be Done About School Shootings? https://occupymaine.org/2022/05/25/what-can-be-done-about-school-shootings/ Wed, 25 May 2022 18:04:23 +0000 https://occupymaine.org/?p=28604
Police walk near Robb Elementary School following a shooting, Tuesday, May 24, 2022, in Uvalde, Texas.

The news that a gunman killed 19 students and 2 teachers at an elementary school in Uvalde, Texas is bringing new attention to the question of school safety.

A presciently scheduled May 13 session of a virtual conference on school safety organized by the Harvard Program on Education Policy and Governance was titled “What can be done about school shootings?”

Panelist Katherine Newman, author of Rampage: The Social Roots of School Shootings, noted that “rampage school shootings are a subset of gun violence on school campuses. They are not the whole story by any means. And in fact, they are different in some striking respects from background violence in cities and even on school campuses.”

“Rampage school shootings, at least at the point we were studying them, tend to take place in communities high on social capital, very high on social capital,” said Newman, who is also system chancellor for academic programs at the University of Massachusetts. She asked, “how do we make it easier for people who hear troubling information to come forward and for that information to be properly investigated? Because there was a lot of information circulating. There generally is. And the best hope for interdicting school rampage shootings is making it possible for that information to be acted on.”

Peter Langman, a researcher with the United States Secret Service and author of the books School Shooters and Why Kids Kill, said installing metal detectors at school entryways was no solution.

“My concern is if schools are putting a lot of time and effort into what’s called target hardening, making it harder for intruders to get in or for a gun to get in, they may not be doing threat assessment. They may think they’ve handled the problem. And what a lot of people forget is many school shootings have been wholly or partly outside,” he said.

Said Langman, “If you’re not tapping into what your students know with anonymous tip line, if you’re not getting the information you need to stay on top of safety issues, hardening the target is not going to keep people safe.”

A May 13 panel of a virtual conference on school safety organized by the Harvard Program on Education Policy and Governance was titled “What can be done about school shootings?”

 

A third panelist, Dewey Cornell, a professor at the University of Virginia, agreed. “We’re spending far too much on security measures and not enough on school counselors, approaches that create a softer, more welcoming environment in our schools, not a harder one. And the research bears it out. That the schools with the target hardening measures are not statistically safer and the students and teachers don’t feel safer either.”

In May of 2019, I reported from New Hampshire for Education Next that, “School shootings are shaping up as a big issue on the Democratic campaign trail.”

Joe Biden and Kamala Harris, who were then rival candidates for the Democratic presidential nomination, were both emphasizing the issue. “I’m the only guy ever, nationally, to beat the NRA,” Biden said while campaigning in Nashua, N.H. “Look, the Second Amendment exists, but it doesn’t say you can own any weapon you want,” Biden said. “If you own a gun, put a damn trigger lock on it. Put it in a case.”

In May 2019, Biden called the gun issue his “single biggest priority in terms of dealing with the concerns of young people right now.”

Talking to reporters after the event, Biden said he was open to a “federal gun licensing system” or weapons that required their owner’s fingerprint to unlock. He said the biggest political obstacle to gun control law wasn’t gun owners or the National Rifle Assocation but “gun manufacturers. That’s where the money is.”

Also in May 2019, Harris said as president, she’d give Congress 100 days to act, but if it didn’t she’d take executive action to “ban the import of assault weapons into our country.”

An article in the Spring 2019 issue of Education Next (“Protecting Students from Gun Violence”), said that “target hardening” actions might contribute to student anxiety. “Some students might feel safer and calmer in hardened environments, but it is equally plausible that intensive security procedures send the message that schools are unsafe, fearful places, thus adding an element of stress to the learning environment,” the article said.

Ira Stoll is managing editor of Education Next.

The post What Can Be Done About School Shootings? appeared first on Education Next.

[NDN/ccn/comedia Links]

News…. browse around here

Trading News: https://topplantgroundworks.com/xxseem/actors-who-are-taller-than-you-think.html

Exciting Finds: https://www.cnnindonesia.com/teknologi/20211007164948-199-704816/bocah-as-temukan-fosil-diduga-gigi-naga-usia-12-ribu-tahun

Stay up to date on China: https://www.chinapulse.com/data-news/2021/05/12/analysis-of-57-thousand-large-companies-globally-the-average-tax-burden-of-google-apple-facebook-and-amazon-is-only-about-60-of-their-peers-nikkei-asia/

http://yumomi.jp/feed2js/magpie_debug.php?url=https://novlink.co/novlinkrss.xml

Houston News

]]>
28604
Why Even Oklahoma Couldn’t Pass a School Voucher Bill https://occupymaine.org/2022/05/25/why-even-oklahoma-couldnt-pass-a-school-voucher-bill/ Wed, 25 May 2022 14:35:16 +0000 https://occupymaine.org/?p=28256
School voucher legislation failed earlier this year in the Oklahoma state senate. The Oklahoma State Capitol building is seen here.

A bill to create a school-voucher program in Oklahoma failed earlier this year to win passage in the state legislature. Oklahoma is a state where 68 percent of those surveyed favor school choice, and yet this small school-choice bill, which was sponsored by the state senate’s president pro tempore and supported by the governor, was defeated.

In 2020, I was the executive director of an Oklahoma charter school authorized by the local public-school district. The district retained 5 percent of our public funding each year as its authorizing fee. When the state passed a law capping charter authorizing fees at 3 percent of public funding, the authorizer raised our rent in an amount equal to the fee reduction.

Both events highlight the critical flaw in the current K–12 education-reform movement: it underestimates the system’s hostility to innovation. Even in a school-choice-friendly state like Oklahoma, even the narrowest of reforms only occasionally survive the challenge mounted by the traditional system. When they do survive, the system easily counteracts them. Our public-education system is a bureaucratic monopoly controlled by special-interest groups and, for all intents and purposes, immune to change.

The U.S. compulsory-education system works for no one. It is expensive, achievement lags internationally, teachers are leaving the profession, and parents feel powerless. Despite 60 years of increasing costs and disappointing results, almost nothing has been done to fix the system. Adults argue and point fingers while kids and society pay the price for inaction. Progress in education has stagnated.

Meanwhile, we have made progress in virtually every other human endeavor. We are living longer and living better. We are more prosperous thanks to innovation—borne of entrepreneurs taking risks and bringing new and better ideas to market.

The enemies of innovation, however, are the drivers of our public-education system: government bureaucracy, monopoly, and special interests. Government bureaucracies do not fear failure; they crave resources and therefore serve even higher levels of the bureaucracy to obtain them. Monopolies do not fear competition; they fear failure and so avoid taking the risks necessary for change. Special interests fear competition and crave influence; they subvert market incentives by amassing disproportionate power.

In the field of education reform, those supporting the traditional system call for more resources, while reformers advocate for various forms of choice. The reformers, however, rarely describe the prerequisite political changes that need to be made to make sustainable reform possible. The solution to the ills of our education system may in fact involve more resources eventually and certainly includes greater choice, but it must be preceded by political reforms that make the system amenable to sustainable innovation.

The political processes that control the education system exist outside the established norms of our electoral system. School-board elections are commonly held at times other than when general elections are held. For example, my home state elects school-board members in February. These off-cycle elections have low voter turnout and therefore give disproportionate influence to special interests, more specifically the teachers unions. These off-cycle elections frequently produce school boards with views on education that are different from those of the community the board represents.

School-board elections also commonly omit partisan labels from the ballot. The average voter doesn’t have time to research the positions of individual school-board candidates and so, even in on-cycle elections, will leave that choice blank. Again, this gives more influence to special interests. Partisan labels inform voters about likely candidate positions.

Finally, about 25 percent of states select the top educational executive in elections independent of the governor. Running for office forces candidates to curry special-interest favor. Being elected also makes the state head of instruction a natural competitor for the governor and therefore prone to unproductive conflict.

Until these political processes are changed, we cannot expect the education system to change, either.       Even minor reforms will either not survive the legislative process or be easily counteracted once implemented. Real progress can only happen after we break the hold innovation’s enemies have on the education system.

Don Parker was a charter-school board member for 15 years, served two terms as the board chair, and two years as the district’s executive director. He also served three consecutive Oklahoma department of education administrations in a variety of advisory roles.

The post Why Even Oklahoma Couldn’t Pass a School Voucher Bill appeared first on Education Next.

By: Don Parker
Title: Why Even Oklahoma Couldn’t Pass a School Voucher Bill
Sourced From: www.educationnext.org/why-even-oklahoma-couldnt-pass-school-voucher-bill/
Published Date: Wed, 25 May 2022 09:00:46 +0000

News…. browse around here

Trading News: https://jarrod7074lenny.bloggersdelight.dk/2021/01/06/required-a-chiropractic-physician-take-a-look-at-these-top-tips-prior-to-you-go/

Exciting Finds: Zet news roundup

Stay up to date on China: https://www.chinapulse.com/data-news/2021/05/24/crypto-miners-halt-china-deal-after-beijing-crackdown-bitcoin-dives-reuters/

https://www.sayama-houm.com/feed2js/magpie_debug.php?url=https://novlink.co/novlinkrss.xml

Updates Houston

]]>
28256
School Board Shakeup in San Francisco https://occupymaine.org/2022/05/24/school-board-shakeup-in-san-francisco/ Tue, 24 May 2022 14:13:52 +0000 https://occupymaine.org/?p=25735
The San Francisco school- board recall effort was led by parents Siva Raj (left) and Autumn Looijen.

It was white supremacists and their allies, tweeted Gabriela López, who cost her her seat on the San Francisco Board of Education after city residents voted by a three-to-one margin to remove her from office. “If you fight for racial justice, this is the consequence.”

Alison Collins, who served as vice president of the board until the surfacing of anti-Asian tweets she had written in 2016, also saw herself as a political martyr in the recall vote. She’d fought to “desegregate” the city’s selective (and majority Asian) high school, Lowell, by ending merit-based admissions.

Shamann Walton, president of the County Board of Supervisors, blamed “closet Republicans.” (In a city where 86 percent voted for Joe Biden, that’s a very large closet.)

So, is bluer-than-blue San Francisco turning red? Well, it’s not Virginia. But the school-board earthquake of 2022 has shaken up the political reality.

What’s more, the recall effort was not a conservative cause. It was launched and supported by independents, moderates, and progressives who were infuriated by a toxic mix of incompetence, arrogance, and woke rhetoric.

Residents of nearly every neighborhood voted overwhelmingly on February 15 to recall López, Collins, and Faauuga Moliga, who was far less unpopular with the city’s residents but was unable to separate himself from his colleagues. The 36 percent turnout—47 percent for those requesting a Chinese-language ballot—was higher than expected for an off-cycle election. Low-income neighborhoods posted a low turnout, and the vote in these areas was split. Voters in the wealthier neighborhoods scored a high turnout and voted heavily for the recall, perhaps because of the board’s scrapping of merit-based admissions at Lowell High School.

San Francisco school-board members (from left) commissioner Alison Collins, vice president Faauuga Moliga, and president Gabriela López were voted out via recall.
San Francisco school-board members (from left) commissioner Alison Collins, vice president Faauuga Moliga, and president Gabriela López were voted out via recall.

“The voters of this City have delivered a clear message that the School Board must focus on the essentials of delivering a well-run school system above all else,” said Mayor London Breed, who strongly endorsed the recall.

Moliga stepped down the day after the recall vote, but López and Collins stayed until March 11, when they were officially removed. That same day, the mayor replaced the ousted members with three parents, Lainie Motamedi, Lisa Weissman-Ward, and Ann Hsu, who will help choose a new superintendent in June. The three will have to win their seats in November to stay on the board.

Breed consulted with parents, community groups, and the recall organizers before making her choices for the board. Both Hsu, who campaigned for the recall, and Motamedi had served on school-district committees.

San Francisco mayor London Breed replaced the recalled school-board members with three parents (clockwise from top left): Lisa Weissman-Ward, Ann Hsu, and Lainie Motamedi.
San Francisco mayor London Breed replaced the recalled school-board members with three parents (clockwise from top left): Lisa Weissman-Ward, Ann Hsu, and Lainie Motamedi.

Lengthy School Closures

San Francisco’s coronavirus rates were lower than those in other cities, its vaccination rates higher. Yet the public schools remained closed longer in San Francisco than in any other major city. Elementary-school students were out for a year, and the city had to sue to force the district to reopen. Middle and high schools didn’t reopen until fall 2021. (Two high schools opened with “supervision”—but no teaching—for two weeks in May, to qualify for a state grant.)

Led by López, the board president, and Collins, the school board “put performative politics over children,” said Todd David, a father of three who created a parents’ group to support the recall campaign. “What really bothered me is that, early in the pandemic, the superintendent wanted to have a reopening consultant, funded by private donors, and the board said no because the consultant had worked for charter schools,” he said.

“There is no Plan B,” Super-intendent Vincent Matthews had warned the board. And there wasn’t.

When it was clear schools wouldn’t reopen in fall 2020, city staffers worked with community groups and nonprofits to open “hubs” where needy students could get supervised remote learning, meals, and recreation. Hubs opened in rec centers, YMCAs, Boys & Girls’ Clubs, and libraries—but not in public schools or on school playgrounds. In a study, researchers blamed resistance from the board, specifically Collins, and from the teachers union.

“The city did amazing work to open learning hubs,” said David. “The board . . . it’s rare to see a governing body so completely fail.”

While public schools were closed—and private schools were open—the board decided to rename 44 schools based on a muddled and historically inaccurate process that declared Abraham Lincoln, George Washington, Paul Revere, Dianne Feinstein, and others insufficiently pure.

Mayor called it “offensive” to rename schools that weren’t open. Even San Franciscans who supported renaming some schools thought the board should have waited until the crisis was over—and until someone could figure out whether Roosevelt Middle School was named for Teddy or FDR.

Ultimately, the board dropped the renaming effort. It also failed in its quest to whitewash a historic mural at Washington High School.

But the board’s virtue signaling also signaled an indifference to the job of running a school district.

In January 2021, nearly a year into remote education, the district reported significant learning losses for Black, Hispanic, and Asian students and students from low-income families.

López waved off these results. Students “are learning more about their families and their cultures” and “just having different learning experiences than the ones we currently measure,” she told the San Francisco Chronicle.

At a board meeting in March 2021, Collins reminded Ritu Khanna, the district’s chief of research, planning, and assessment, to use the term “learning change” instead of “learning loss.”

That infuriated Kit Lam, an immigrant from Hong Kong with two children. He saw his teenage son struggling with distance learning and knew the boy was not alone. As an investigator for the school district, Lam saw that “many students were falling way, way behind,” and others were just missing.

Lam Zoomed into school-board meetings, staying up late and hoping to hear about the reopening plan. There was no plan.

The recall effort was the brainchild of two newcomers to San Francisco, a high-tech couple with no political experience or contacts. Siva Raj’s two children were struggling with remote classes and had become frustrated, depressed, bored, and angry. Autumn Looijen’s three children were learning—happily—in person in suburban Los Altos, one of the first Bay Area districts to reopen schools.

Raj and Looijen put the recall on social media, and it caught fire. Lam reached out to them and volunteered to translate the recall site into Chinese and then to collect signatures on recall petitions and then to register voters. “At first, I wanted to be anonymous,” Lam says. “But I made a promise to my son: ‘I will speak for you.’ So I spoke out.”

When Lam’s union of school-district workers met to discuss the election, he argued in favor of the recall. He lost the first vote: staffers wanted to stand with the teachers union, he says. But, on a second vote, they decided not to contribute money or volunteers to the anti-recall campaign.

Mayor London Breed, who strongly endorsed the recall, said that the San Francisco school board “must focus on the essentials of delivering a well-run school system above all else.”
Mayor London Breed, who strongly endorsed the recall, said that the San Francisco school board “must focus on the essentials of delivering a well-run school system above all else.”

Fire in the Belly

At nearly every high school in America that admits students based on grades and test scores, hard-studying Asian-American students are well represented. For years, San Francisco has tinkered with Lowell’s admissions process to qualify more Black and Hispanic students but has made little progress.

The board used a lottery for admissions in 2020, arguing that the pandemic had disrupted grades and testing. Collins showed her disdain for the traditional test-based admissions process in a board meeting. “Merit, meritocracy, and especially meritocracy based on standardized testing . . . those are racist systems,” she said.

The next year, the board voted to turn Lowell into a comprehensive high school open to all students. Lowell alumni were furious. So were Asian immigrant parents (see “Exam-School Admissions Come Under Pressure amid Pandemic,” features, Spring 2021).

“People see the success of Asian students and think they’re advantaged,” said Lam. In Chinatown, “you can see a family of four living in a single room with a shared bathroom down the hall. We rely on good public education. We can’t afford private school.”

Lowell alumni filed a lawsuit, which ultimately succeeded. The new school board will decide Lowell’s fate. Hsu and Motamedi support merit-based admissions at Lowell. Weissman-Ward did not commit herself but said she supports “academically rigorous programs.”

Not long after the recall campaign began, someone posted tweets by Collins from 2016, before she joined the board, in which she accused Asian Americans of using “white supremacist thinking to assimilate and ‘get ahead’” and remarked that “being a house n****r is still being a n****r.”

In the uproar, Collins was ousted as vice president and was replaced by Moliga. She remained in office, but the majority of board members gave her a no-confidence vote. Collins sued the district and her board colleagues (except for López) for $87 million. Among other things, the suit charged “injury to spiritual solace.”

The suit, thrown out by a judge in August 2021, “cost the budget-strapped district some $400,000 to defend,” wrote Clara Jeffery in Mother Jones.

It would have been the last straw for San Franciscans, if there weren’t so many other last straws.

Chinese Americans, already angry about the board’s hostility to merit-based admissions, saw the tweets as proof that they were getting no respect.

“Education is a fire-in-the-belly issue” for Chinese parents, said Bayard Fong, president of the Chinese-American Democratic Club and the father of three children. His wife works for the district as an administrator.

The school board “acted as though some students mattered more than others,” said Fong. “We were being ignored or treated as though we were the problem.”

The club provided 100 volunteers to gather signatures for recall petitions.

Ann Hsu, one of the mayor’s replacements for the ousted school-board members, was a PTA president and former Silicon Valley entrepreneur who hadn’t been involved in politics before the recall effort arose. Then she saw her son languishing during 18 months of remote schooling. Unengaged by online classes, he “wasted his time all day, every day, playing video games,” she wrote in the New York Post.

Hsu helped form the Chinese/API Voter Outreach Taskforce to register voters for the recall. Many residents were not aware that noncitizen parents, empowered by a 2016 charter-amendment ballet initiative, can vote for school board in San Francisco. Volunteers signed up noncitizens too.

Chinese in America must “learn to speak up,” wrote Hsu.

An issue at the heart of the recall election was the school board’s attempt to abolish merit-based admissions at Lowell High School amidst claims meritocratic policies were “racist.” Lowell alumni filed a lawsuit, which succeeded. The new school board will decide Lowell’s fate.
An issue at the heart of the recall election was the school board’s attempt to abolish merit-based admissions at Lowell High School amidst claims meritocratic policies were “racist.” Lowell alumni filed a lawsuit, which succeeded. The new school board will decide Lowell’s fate.

“We Won’t Be Silent Anymore”

The board managed to anger a lot of other groups, too.

When the recall qualified for the ballot, Todd David, who runs the Housing Action Coalition, backed Raj and Looijen with his political savvy. He had political experience working for the election of State Senator Scott Wiener, another pro-recall liberal. “Siva and Autumn did a phenomenal job of grassroots organizing,” said David. “I knew how to do fundraising and a traditional campaign.” The recall raised an astounding $1.9 million, including large donations from high-tech investors and real-estate groups.

The “no on recall” side raised a small fraction of that, mostly from unions, and got some volunteers from the “Berniecrats,” but only Moliga really tried to fight the recall.

The school board’s defenders said wealthy “privatizers” wanted to destroy public education. One of the donors to the recall effort was the pioneer venture capitalist Arthur Rock, 95, a billionaire who has also supported charter schools.

But others say the recall was the only way to save San Francisco Unified.

“Parents who have choices are opting out,” said Patrick Wolff, a parent who runs Families for San Francisco, which launched Campaign for Better Public Schools to back the recall.

“The recall effort, while catalyzed by Covid, reflects deep discontent of the parent community with the state of the public schools,” said Wolff. “San Francisco has some of the worst achievement gaps in the state and one of the worst 3rd-grade reading levels.”

The state has threatened to take over if the district can’t balance its budget. To survive financially, the district must regain parents’ trust and stop losing students, said Wolff.

It won’t be easy.

San Francisco has the lowest percentage of children of any major city—more dogs than children—and a high percentage of those children attend private school. Before the pandemic, the school board tended to fly under the radar.

“During the pandemic, parents paid a lot more attention to the schools,” said Wolff. “Everything was on Zoom.”

Families for San Francisco will inform parents—and the whole city—of what public schools are doing, he said. The group already has challenged the district’s claim that “equity math” is working, citing missing, misleading, and cherrypicked data in the school system’s evaluations.

The Chinese-American community will have more clout going forward because of the landslide recall vote, Fong said. “We won’t be silent anymore. We’re standing up.”

School-board members will treat citizens with more respect, predicts Raj. They now know that people are watching.

The next political earthquake in San Francisco could come in June, when voters will decide whether to recall District Attorney Chesa Boudin, who some blame for the city’s crime wave.

Despite a surge in school-board recall efforts across the country in 2021, most didn’t qualify for the ballot. Ballotopedia tracked 92 such efforts naming 237 officials. Ultimately, 17 officials were subject to recall votes, and only one was recalled. More recall efforts are in the works in 2022, often motivated by disagreements on pandemic policies and how to teach about gender identity and racism. In Loudoun County, Virginia, where school-board meetings have been very contentious, a conservative parent group called Fight for Schools is leading a campaign to recall some board members. It’s a liberal county—Republican Glenn Youngkin got only 44 percent of the vote there in his winning bid for governor—but anything is possible in 2022.

Joanne Jacobs is a freelance education writer and blogger (joannejacobs.com) based in California.

The post School Board Shakeup in San Francisco appeared first on Education Next.

By: Joanne Jacobs
Title: School Board Shakeup in San Francisco
Sourced From: www.educationnext.org/school-board-shakeup-san-francisco-arrogance-incompetence-woke-rhetoric-trigger-successful-recall-effort/
Published Date: Tue, 24 May 2022 09:00:31 +0000

News…. browse around here

Trading News: https://cryptojizz.net/nexalin-seeks-10m-in-ipo-for-neuro-devices-to-treat-anxiety-insomnia-pendingnxl/

Exciting Finds: Oklahoma elections

Stay up to date on China: https://www.chinapulse.com/data-news/2021/05/30/australian-betting-technology-company-betmakers-proposes-to-acquire-tabcorps-betting-and-media-division-worth-au-4-billion-iag-inside-asian-gaming/

http://local.eteamsys.com/lib/magpie/scripts/magpie_debug.php?url=https://novlink.co/novlinkrss.xml

Updates Houston

]]>
25735
Lucy Calkins Adjusts, and the Press Takes Notice https://occupymaine.org/2022/05/23/lucy-calkins-adjusts-and-the-press-takes-notice/ Mon, 23 May 2022 22:03:17 +0000 https://occupymaine.org/?p=24255
Lucy Calkins

A front-page New York Times article reports that “Lucy Calkins, a leading literacy expert, has rewritten her curriculum to include a fuller embrace of phonics and the science of reading.”

Says the Times, “after decades of resistance, Professor Calkins has made a major retreat.”

The Summer 2007 issue of Education Next featured “The Lucy Calkins Project: Parsing a self-proclaimed literacy guru.” Barbara Feinberg wrote then, “Aside from grumblings from the New York City teachers required to work under her system, there has been remarkably little open debate about the basic premises behind Calkins’s approach, or even feedback on how the programs are faring in the classroom.”

Education Next

The post Lucy Calkins Adjusts, and the Press Takes Notice appeared first on Education Next.

By: Education Next
Title: Lucy Calkins Adjusts, and the Press Takes Notice
Sourced From: www.educationnext.org/lucy-calkins-adjusts-and-the-press-takes-notice/
Published Date: Mon, 23 May 2022 16:24:21 +0000

News…. browse around here

Trading News: https://www.coinblock.asia/2022/02/05/cryptos-could-be-a-speculative-mania-economist-eswar-prasad-says/299818

Exciting Finds: Lankford rates worst

Stay up to date on China: https://www.chinapulse.com/data-news/2021/01/13/chinese-face-recognition-unicorn-megvii-prepares-for-ipo-in-china-techcrunch/

Headlines houston

]]>
24255