اینترنت

بلاگ

  • Why bringing children to the voting booth matters

    Why bringing children to the voting booth matters


    Billie Montague, 2, puts a vote sticker on her nose while watching her mom, Ashley Montague, vote in Newport Beach in 2020. Credit: Allen J. Schaben/Los Angeles Times/Polaris

    Children are not merely passive recipients of voting outcomes; they are capable participants in building a future shaped by informed civic values and active community involvement. We must foster responsible use of their civic knowledge and power for a better future.

    Introducing children to voting from an early age — as young as 5 or 6 — can instill in them a sense of civic responsibility, sparking curiosity about how individual actions influence the broader community, and shaping informed, engaged citizens for the future.

    In my work on diversity, equity and inclusion, I spend much time thinking about misinformation, access barriers and participation roadblocks.

    Voting processes are vulnerable to misinformation tactics aimed at suppressing marginalized voters, including Black, Latino, disabled, rural residents, and the elderly. Voting with children is no exception to this insidious campaign to bar access and participation for every eligible voter. Child care access issues can even act as an indirect form of voter suppression. When parents, particularly single parents or those in underserved areas, are unable to find or afford child care, voting in person may become challenging or impossible. These barriers are compounded in areas with limited polling locations, long wait times, or fewer resources for early or mail-in voting, which are essential accommodations for parents who may otherwise be prevented from casting their vote due to lack of child care. Even when voting accommodations ­— voting by mail or surrendering early ballots at polling places — are available, misinformation around these options can impact parents’ ability to participate.

    Every Californian must be well-informed about the Voter Bill of Rights. We are fortunate to reside in a state that actively implements legislation to enhance accessibility and participation for voters, including future voters. An example is the provision allowing California teens aged 16 and 17 to preregister online, with automatic registration upon turning 18.

    Recognizing the significance of civic engagement among Gen Z (the youngest of whom are 12 years old), it’s noteworthy that they exhibit higher voting rates than previous generations. In 2024, a staggering 41 million Gen Z youth are eligible to vote, with millions more set to join the electorate by 2028.

    Efforts to expand access and participation are crucial because civic engagement, including voting, is essential and has widespread impact. Ultimately, it’s a fundamental right that touches each of us deeply; it’s the sole avenue for every citizen to participate in the democratic process.

    Political socialization is how people learn about politics, form beliefs and understand their civic role. While parents typically pass political views to their children, research shows influence can also go the other way: Children’s awareness of civic issues can shape their parents’ views, a process known as “trickle-up socialization.” As children engage with topics affecting their communities — through school, social media, and peers — they may prompt discussions that lead parents to consider new perspectives. Bringing children to the voting booth reinforces this process, offering them hands-on exposure to democracy, sparking meaningful questions, and fostering family engagement, especially in marginalized communities where awareness and representation are vital.

    However, it’s concerning that American knowledge of civic engagement has declined, with significant gaps in understanding fundamental aspects of government and constitutional rights, as revealed by the Annenberg study released annually on Citizenship Day. The study noted 1 in 3 Americans cannot name the three branches of government, and less than a third can name the rights guaranteed by the First Amendment beyond freedom of speech.

    As parents, we can inspire an informed and engaged generation of citizens. If you haven’t made a family voting plan for the Nov. 5 election, there’s still time to register and participate together. Preparation is critical; here are practical considerations for voting with children in California: 

    Voting with kids in the November presidential election is not only allowed but purposeful, serving as a primer for future elections and instilling democratic values early on.

    •••

    Amira K.S. Barger, MBA, CVA, CFRE, is a diversity, equity and inclusion consultant and an adjunct professor at California State University, East Bay.

    The opinions expressed in this commentary represent those of the author. EdSource welcomes commentaries representing diverse points of view. If you would like to submit a commentary, please review our guidelines and contact us.





    Source link

  • Fact-Checking Trump’s Claims About His First 100 Days

    Fact-Checking Trump’s Claims About His First 100 Days


    Glenn Kessler is the fact-checker for The Washington Post. During Trump’s first term, he documented over 30,000 lies. In this post, he reviews Trump’s statements about his first 100 days.

    He writes:

    President Donald Trump granted a lengthy interview to Time magazine in honor of completing his first 100 days of his second term today. As usual, the interview consisted of bluster and bombast, with hefty doses of B.S. Here’s a guide to the inaccuracies in 32 claims, in the order in which he made them.


    “You know, we’re resetting a table. We were losing $2 trillion a year on trade, and you can’t do that. I mean, at some point somebody has to come along and stop it, because it’s not sustainable.”


    Trump gets two things wrong here. First of all, the goods and services deficit was almost $920 billion in 2024, according to the Commerce Department. So he’s doubling the real number. Second, the United States is not “losing” money on trade deficits. After all these years, Trump still does not grasp this fundamental economic point. Yet he’s basing policy — and steering the United States into economic uncertain times — on this misunderstanding.

    “Many criminals — they emptied their prisons, many countries, almost every country, but not a complete emptying, but some countries a complete emptying of their prison system. But you look all over the world, and I’m not just talking about South America, we’re talking about all over the world. People have been led into our country that are very dangerous.”

    This is poppycock. Immigration experts know of no effort by other countries to empty their prisons and mental institutions. As someone who came to prominence in the late 1970s and early ’80s, Trump appears to be channeling Cuban leader Fidel Castro’s 1980 Mariel boatlift. About 125,000 Cubans were allowed to flee to the United States in 1,700 boats — but there was a backlash when it was discovered that hundreds of refugees had been released from jails and mental health facilities. But there’s no evidence this happened during the Biden administration. Yet again, Trump is basing policy on an invention.


    “We’re taking in billions of dollars of tariffs, by the way. And just to go back to the past, I took in hundreds of billions of dollars of tariffs from China, and then when covid came, I couldn’t institute the full program, but I took in hundreds of billions, and we had no inflation.”

    This is false. Trump’s China tariffs in his first term took in only about $75 billion — not counting $28 billion in aid to farmers who lost their shirts when China stopped buying soybeans, pork and other products. Inflation averaged about 2 percent in Trump’s term, but was about 1.23 percent in 2020 because of the pandemic. According to Customs and Border Protection, as of April 19, the United States has taken in about $14 billion in tariffs under his International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) declarations. But again, Trump has a fundamental misunderstanding. Countries do not pay tariffs; the burden falls mainly on American consumers.


    “Now, if you take a look, the price of groceries are down. The price of energy is down.”

    This is false. The consumer price index for at-home food items increased 0.49 percent from February, while retail gas prices are basically the same since Trump took office in January. The price of oil could drop if there’s a recession, as some economists predict.


    “It was all going through the roof. And we had the highest inflation we’ve ever had as a country, or very close to it. And I believe it was the highest ever. Somebody said it’s the highest in only 48 years. That’s a lot, too, but I believe we had the highest inflation we’ve ever had.”

    This is false. President Joe Biden did not have the highest inflation in U.S. history. Inflation spiked to 9 percent in mid-2022, a 40-year-high, but fell to about 3 percent for the last six months of his term. (For all of 2022, inflation was 6.5 percent.) Inflation was 12.5 percent in 1980, 13.3 percent in 1979 and 18.1 percent in 1946 — and many other years were higher than 6.5 percent.

    Higher prices for goods and services would have happened no matter who was elected president in 2020. Inflation initially spiked because of pandemic-related shocks — increased consumer demand as the pandemic eased and an inability to meet this demand because of supply-chain problems, as companies reduced production when consumers hunkered down during the pandemic. Indeed, inflation rose around the world — with many peer countries doing worse than the United States — because of pandemic-related shocks that rippled across the globe.

    “No wait, just so you understand: How can we sustain and how is it sustainable that our country lost almost $2 trillion on trade in Biden years?”


    Trump’s numbers are wrong. The trade deficit in the Biden years (2021-2024) was $3.5 trillion, but as we noted, no economist would call that a loss. For context, the trade deficit in Trump’s first term was $2.4 trillion — and it went up during his presidency.


    “If you look at, more importantly, the companies, the chip companies, the car companies, the Apple. $500 billion. Apple is investing $500 billion in building plants. They never invested in this country.”


    This is false. Shortly after Biden became president, Apple announced it would invest $430 billion over five years in the United States. In Trump’s first term, Apple announced a $350 billion investment over five years — which Trump repeatedly credited to his policies.


    “Look, that’s what China did to us. They charge us 100 percent. If you look at India — India charges 100-150 percent. If you look at Brazil, if you look at many, many countries, they charge — that’s how they survive. That’s how they got rich.”

    This is false. Before Trump became president the first time, China had minimal tariffs on U.S. products and about 8 percent on the rest of the world, and few products were subject to tariffs, according to the Peterson Institute for International Economics. When Trump imposed tariffs in 2018, China responded with tariffs of about 20 percent, affecting about half of exports. In his second term, Trump has imposed tariffs of 143 percent, and China has responded with 124 percent. China’s tariffs on goods from the rest of the world is now about 6 percent. As for India, its average applied tariff is about 17 percent, according to Office of U.S. Trade Representative, far less than what Trump claims.


    “We’re also, very importantly, because of that, because of the money we’re taking in, those companies are going to come back and they’re going to make their product here. They’re going to go back into North Carolina and start making furniture again.”


    This is dubious. North Carolina has a thriving furniture industry, but it increasingly relies on wood from countries such as Mexico — and exports to Canada. Trump’s tariffs will make raw materials more expensive and retaliatory tariffs will price U.S. products out of the market. Already this month, a North Carolina housewares company that supplies Walmart and Target said it would shut down and fire all its employees, in part because tariffs would make materials from Mexico and Asia too costly.


    “I’ve made 200 [trade] deals.”

    This is false. Trump declined to provide any details, and none have been announced. Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick on Tuesday suggested one deal was close to being completed — but he said it needed approval from the country’s leaders. He declined to name the country.


    “You know, as an example, we have Korea. We pay billions of dollars for the military. Japan, billions for those and others. But that, I’m going to keep us a separate item, the paying of the military.”

    South Korea and Japan pay as well. Trump often suggests other countries take advantage of U.S. military might. But it’s a two-way street. “From 2016 through 2019, the Department of Defense spent roughly $20.9 billion in Japan and $13.4 billion in South Korea to pay military salaries, construct facilities, and perform maintenance,” the Government Accountability Office concluded in 2021. “The governments of Japan and South Korea also provided $12.6 billion and $5.8 billion, respectively, to support the U.S. presence.” The U.S. stations 80,000 troops in the region and the GAO “found that U.S. forces help strengthen alliances, promote a free and open Indo-Pacific region, provide quick response to emergencies, and are essential for U.S. national security.”
    “We have $7 trillion of new plants, factories and other things, investment coming into the United States. And if you look back at past presidents, nobody was anywhere near that. And this is in three months.”

    This is false. At the beginning of April, the White House produced a list of only $1.5 trillion — two-thirds of which came from Apple and an AI project called Stargate that was already under development before Trump took office. Since then, we’ve counted a series of announced investments (Nvidia, Roche, IBM, Abbott Laboratories, Johnson & Johnson and so forth) that total perhaps another $1 trillion, though some may predate Trump and others are still vague. Announcements aren’t the same thing as actually breaking ground, so Trump may be counting his chickens before they hatch.
    “He’s [Chinese leader Xi Jinping] called. And I don’t think that’s a sign of weakness on his behalf.”
    The Chinese government denies this. “I would like to reiterate that China and the U.S. have not engaged in consultations or negotiations regarding tariff issues,” said Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesman Guo Jiakun on Monday.
    “I believe that they made him [Kilmar Abrego García] look like a saint, and then we found out about him. He wasn’t a saint. He was MS-13. He was a wife beater and he had a lot of things that were very bad, you know, very, very bad. When I first heard of the situation, I was not happy, and then I found out that he was a person who was an MS-13 member. And in fact, he had a tattooed right on his — I’m sure you saw that — he had it tattooed right on his knuckles: MS-13.”

    This is exaggerated. Kilmar Abrego García is a Maryland man who was in the country illegally but the administration admits he was wrongly deported to El Salvador — which led to a Supreme Court ruling that the White House must “facilitate” his return. The evidence that he was a member of violent Salvadoran gang Mara Salvatrucha (MS-13) is slim; it is a claim made by the alleged confidential source, and neither the police officer who wrote the report nor the alleged source testified in court, under oath and subject to cross-examination. His wife filed a temporary protective order against him, alleging that he beat her repeatedly, but she did not pursue it and now says the marriage became stronger after counseling. Abrego García did not have MS-13 tattooed on his knuckles. Rather, Trump on social media displayed a photo that superimposed those letters on his knuckles, but there is no evidence the tattoos Abrego García has are related to gang membership.
    “Because I’ve watched in Portland and I watched in Seattle, and I’ve watched in Minneapolis, Minnesota and other places. People do heinous acts, far more serious than what took place on Jan. 6. And nothing happened to these people. Nothing.”
    This is false. Trump justifies his pardoning of Jan. 6, 2021, defendants with a falsehood. People were prosecuted in Seattle and Minneapolis for violence during the 2020 protests after the George Floyd killing, and Trump lauded federal authorities for killing a man suspected in a shooting in Portland.
    In Seattle, two people were killed, according to the Armed Conflict Location and Event Data project (ACLED), a nonprofit. Summer Taylor, a Black Lives Matter activist, died when a car rammed into the protests. Another person, 16-year-old Antonio Mays Jr., was shot in an incident that ACLED said was tied to the broader unrest. (Another fatal shooting of a teen was not connected, ACLED concluded.) Dawit Kelete, 30, who drove into the protest on July 4, 2020, killing Taylor and seriously injuring another person, was sentenced to 78 months in jail. The judge said that while there was no evidence he hit the protesters intentionally, his conduct was “extremely reckless.”

    Mays died in the early morning of June 29, 2020, while driving a stolen Jeep in Seattle’s Capitol Hill Organized Protest zone, which protesters occupied for three weeks after police abandoned the area. No one has been charged in Mays’s death.
    In Minneapolis, one person was killed, according to ACLED. The Max It Pawn Shop was set on fire during protests on May 28, 2020, and then two months later, police discovered a charred body in the wreckage. Surveillance video showed Montez Terriel Lee, 26, pouring an accelerant around the pawn shop and lighting it on fire. Lee was sentenced to 10 years in prison, to be followed by three years of supervised release, the Justice Department said.
    In Portland, Aaron Danielson, an American supporter of a right-wing group, was shot on Aug. 29, 2020, by Michael Reinoehl, an activist who days later was shot and killed by a federal task force. Reinoehl had admitted the killing but claimed he acted in self-defense.
    “Nobody mentions the fact that the unselect committee of political scum, the unselect committee, horrible people, they destroyed all evidence, they burned it, they got rid of it, they destroyed it, and they deleted all evidence.”

    This is false. The House Select Committee that investigated the Jan. 6 attack on the U.S. Capitol said some videos and sensitive evidence were not included in an archive to protect witnesses. But more than 100 depositions, transcripts and other documents are available online and open to inspection.
    “Well, I’ll tell ya, I certainly don’t mind having a tax increase, and the only reason I wouldn’t support it is because I saw Bush where they said, where he said ‘Read my lips’ and he lost an election. He would have lost it anyway, but he lost an election. He got beat up pretty good. I would be honored to pay more, but I don’t want to be in a position where we lose an election because I was generous, but me, as a rich person, would not mind paying and you know, we’re talking about very little.”
    This is dubious. First of all, President Barack Obama raised taxes on the wealthy, and Biden won in 2020 while promising to do it again; George H.W. Bush’s problem was he broke a promise not to raise taxes. Second, as documented by the New York Times, despite his wealth Trump has a long history of paying little or no taxes. “Donald J. Trump paid $750 in federal income taxes the year he won the presidency. In his first year in the White House, he paid another $750,” the newspaper reported. “He had paid no income taxes at all in 10 of the previous 15 years — largely because he reported losing much more money than he made.”
    “I don’t think they’re going to cut $800 billion. They’re going to look at waste, fraud, and abuse.”

    This is false. The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office issued a report that an analysis by KFF, a nonprofit health-policy organization, says the only way to reduce congressional spending, as mandated by the House GOP budget resolution, would be to cut $880 billion from planned Medicaid spending over 10 years.

    Trump signs an executive order in the Oval Office on April 23. (Demetrius Freeman/The Washington Post)
    “Well, I watched Nancy Pelosi get rich through insider information, and I would be okay with it [sign a bill banning congressional stock trading]. If they send that to me, I would do it.”
    This is false. There is no evidence the former House speaker used inside information while trading stocks — which would be a crime. Her office said she owns no stocks, and investments listed in her financial disclosure statement belong to her husband, Paul, a venture capitalist and property investor.
    “DOGE has been a very big success. We found hundreds of billions of dollars of waste, fraud, and abuse. Billions of dollars being given to politicians, single politicians based on the environment. It’s a scam. It’s illegal, in my opinion, so much of the stuff that we found, but I think DOGE has been a big success from that standpoint.”

    This is false. Even the Department of Government Efficiency website, which has been found to be riddled with errors and double-counting, lists $160 billion in savings. The overall impact is still unclear. Experts think the sharp cutbacks in enforcement at the IRS ordered by DOGE might result in lower revenue, wiping out any of the claimed budget savings.
    “Stacey Abrams got $2 billion on the environment. They had $100 in the account and she got $2 billion just before these people left — and had to do with something that she knows nothing about.”
    This is false. Abrams helped ensure Trump’s 2020 election loss in Georgia by registering more than 800,000 voters in the state — many of them people of color — so he has a particular animus toward the former minority leader of the Georgia House of Representatives. But she did not receive $2 billion. She was an adviser to a consortium of five major players in housing, climate and community investment that won $1.9 billion in grants for clean-energy projects. As for the “$100 in the account,” the nonprofit entity filed a form with the IRS in 2023 showing $100 in revenue — but the application process just started that year and grants were not awarded until 2024.
    “I had a great election. Won all seven swing states, won millions and millions of votes. Won millions of votes. They say it was the most consequential election in 129 years. I don’t know if that’s right, but it was certainly a big win, and that’s despite cheating that took place, by the way, because there was plenty of cheating that took place.”

    This needs context. Trump won 77.3 million votes, or 49.81 percent, compared with Vice President Kamala Harris’s 75 million votes, or 48.33 percent, for a difference of 1.48 percentage points. He did win the seven swing states — giving him a 312-226 victory in the electoral college — but the popular-vote margin was narrow, and he did not win a majority of the vote. His reference to 129 years is interesting. He’s referring to the 1896 victory of William McKinley, his political idol, but most historians would count other elections as more consequential. Oh, and there’s no evidence of “plenty of cheating.” That’s false too.
    “This war has been going on for three years. It’s a war that would have never happened if I was president. It’s Biden’s war. It’s not my war. I have nothing to do with it. I would have never had this war. This war would have never happened. Putin would have never done it. This war would have never happened … Oct. 7 would have never happened. Would have never happened.”
    This is fantasy. There is no evidence that the February 2022 invasion of Ukraine or the October 2023 Hamas attack on Israel would not have happened if Trump had been president. In fact, before Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, Trump called Russian President Vladimir Putin a “genius” and “very savvy” for advancing on Ukraine.
    “You got to say, that’s pretty savvy,” Trump said on a conservative talk radio show of Putin’s decision to declare certain breakaway regions in Ukraine as independent. “And you know what the response was from Biden? There was no response. They didn’t have one for that. No, it’s very sad. Very sad.” “This is genius,” Trump said. “Putin declares a big portion of the Ukraine … as independent. Oh, that’s wonderful.”

    “Well, Crimea went to the Russians. It was handed to them by Barack Hussein Obama, and not by me. … Would it have been taken from me like it was taken from Obama? No, it wouldn’t have happened. Crimea, if I were president, it would not have been taken.”
    This is false. Obama did not hand Crimea to Russia; it was annexed by Putin in 2014 over Obama’s objections. Obama rallied European leaders to sanction Russia for grabbing it, even though Crimea had many Russian speakers and had historically been part of Russia. (In 1783, Catherine the Great achieved Russia’s longtime goal of having a warm-water port, Sevastopol, by seizing Crimea from the Ottoman Empire.)
    Crimea was populated mostly by Tatars until Russian dictator Joseph Stalin deported the whole population in 1944. According to the last official Ukrainian census, in 2001, 60 percent of Crimea’s population was Russian, 24 percent Ukrainian and 10 percent Tatar. Despite a majority-Russian population, Crimea voted to join Ukraine after the Soviet Union collapsed, though it was approved by a relatively narrow majority (54 percent) compared with other areas of Ukraine.
    “We lose $200 to $250 billion a year supporting Canada. … We’re taking care of their military. We’re taking care of every aspect of their lives.”

    This is false. In 2024, the deficit in trade in goods and services with Canada was about $45 billion. (Even so, a trade deficit is not a subsidy.) White House officials claim that Trump is also counting military expenditures allegedly spent on behalf of Canada, but when we did the math, the total never came close to $200 billion, let alone $250 billion.
    “There was no money for Hamas. There was no money for Hezbollah. There was no money. Iran was broke under Trump. … They had no money, and they told Hamas, we’re not giving you any money. When Biden came and he took off all the sanctions, he let China and everybody else buy all the oil, Iran developed $300 billion in cash over a four-year period. They started funding terror again, including Hamas. Hamas was out of business. Hezbollah was out of business. Iran had no money under me. I blame the Biden administration, because they allowed Iran to get back into the game without working a deal.”
    This is misleading. There is no evidence that Iran, which has suffered economically from sanctions over its nuclear program, sent billions of dollars to Hamas. Trump’s State Department calculated in 2020 that Iran sends Hamas and two other militant groups $100 million a year. So far, there is no report showing that the amount of funding from Iran to Hamas increased under Biden. Experts said that it would have been difficult for Trump, if he had been reelected in 2020, to maintain sanctions on Iran as they erode over time. In particular, China became adept at evading U.S. sanctions by arranging for many buyers of Iranian oil to be small, semi-independent refineries known as “teapots.” Such entities accounted for about one-fifth of China’s worldwide oil imports, according to Reuters.
    “I happen to like the [Saudi] people very much, and the Crown Prince and the King — I like all of them, but they’ve agreed to invest a trillion dollars in our economy. $1 trillion.”

    This is false. Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman said he pledged $600 billion after a call with Trump in January. We will see if this comes to fruition.

    In Trump’s first term, he grandly announced he had scored more than $350 billion of business deals during a trip to Saudi Arabia — which he later claimed would create more than 500,000 jobs. (This was his excuse for not punishing the kingdom for ordering the murder of Washington Post contributor Jamal Khashoggi.) Not only were those job numbers wildly inflated, it turned out most of the jobs that would be created were in Saudi Arabia — not the United States.


    “They did nothing with the Abraham Accords. We had four countries in there, it was all set. We would have had it packed. Now we’re going to start it again. The Abraham Accords is a tremendous success, but Biden just sat with it.”

    This is false. Biden endorsed the Abraham Accords — the normalization of relations between Israel and Arab countries — and focused on bringing Saudi Arabia on board. But the process halted with the Hamas attack on Oct. 7, 2023. In fact, the attack may have been launched to thwart expansion of the Abraham Accords, which suggested normalization was possible with Israel’s neighbors while ignoring the grievances of Palestinians.

    “Tremendous antisemitism at every one of those rallies. Tremendous, and I agree with free speech, but not riots all over every college in America. Tremendous antisemitism going on in this country. … They can protest, but they can’t destroy the schools like they did with Columbia and others.”
    Trump’s words differ from his government’s actions. Numerous foreign students appear to have been targeted for deportation because of their opinions. For instance, Rümeysa Öztürk, a Tufts University PhD student, was detained last month by Homeland Security agents and sent to a detention center in Louisiana. She co-wrote an opinion article in the student newspaper criticizing the university response to protests over Gaza and urged that it respect resolutions passed by the university senate, including acknowledging “Palestinian genocide” and divesting from companies with ties to Israel. DHS has provided no evidence she participated in protests, let alone violent ones. Even a profile of her on the pro-Israel Canary Mission, which highlights the op-ed, does not make such a claim.
    (About our rating scale)
    Send us facts to check by filling out this form
    Sign up for The Fact Checker weekly newsletter
    The Fact Checker is a verified signatory to the International Fact-Checking Network code of principles



    Source link

  • California’s future demands higher-ed coordination now

    California’s future demands higher-ed coordination now


    Credit: Larry Gordon / EdSource

    Despite being the nation’s economic powerhouse with the largest postsecondary system in America, California stands alone among all 50 states without a higher education coordinating entity. This gap has resulted in missed opportunities and unrealized potential — and it’s a systemic failure that leaves real people behind every day.

    Ask Fred P., who applied for unemployment when he lost his job during the pandemic. What California’s systems failed to tell him was that he qualified for the Golden State Education and Training Grant designed to help displaced workers like him. As his savings dwindled and bills mounted, available support remained hidden in bureaucratic silos. Fred only discovered the program months after his unemployment benefits expired — and only because his partner happened to work in state policy and budget.

    Meanwhile, millions of other Californians, without such connections, remain unaware of potential pathways to economic mobility and continue to fall through the cracks of our state’s disconnected education and workforce systems. During the pandemic, over 19 million Californians lost jobs and applied for unemployment, yet very few were informed they qualified for this scholarship program, which should have connected them to training opportunities for career advancement. California allocated $500 million to this program, but two years later, only $20 million had reached just 6,100 individuals. Why? Because the agency administering scholarships couldn’t identify unemployed workers, and the unemployment office couldn’t connect people to the available education funding. Two state systems, both serving Californians, but operating in silos, left resources untapped and communities unsupported.

    This fragmentation creates a maze that widens opportunity gaps, particularly for those without the social capital or resources to guide them through complex systems. At the start of the pandemic, over 5 million Californians intended to enroll in college in the next two years, but many — especially especially Latino, Black, Native American residents, first-generation college students, Californians with children, and those working low-wage jobs — face a gauntlet of barriers that numerous disjointed access programs fail to address. Meanwhile, more than a billion dollars in education and workforce development funding goes unused, while Californians seeking better opportunities have trouble finding quality training opportunities to reach their career goals, and employers struggle to find qualified workers for open positions.

    These disconnected systems don’t just create inconvenience — they perpetuate cycles of poverty. For Californians living on the margins, the cost associated with college —an established path to economic mobility — is a huge barrier and makes it seem out of reach. Meanwhile, over a hundred programs exist that could defray the financial burden and increase college access. But, without coordination, these public benefit programs designed to improve economic stability remain inaccessible to those who need them most. When systems don’t talk to each other, the promise of these programs remains unfulfilled, leaving workers, families and employers struggling in an economy that demands better solutions.

    The solution is clear: coordination. And it’s now within reach. Both Gov. Gavin’s administration and key legislative champion Assemblymember Mike Fong have aligned in their support of establishing the California Education Interagency Council. This council would bridge the divides between our TK-12 education, higher education, workforce development, and social services systems, creating a coherent ecosystem that powers economic growth and resilience for individuals and the state.

    This isn’t about adding bureaucracy — it’s about setting up the needed infrastructure to fulfill the promise of economic mobility and good jobs for Californians — the driving reason so many pursue higher education in the first place. With this council in place:

    • Unemployed workers would be connected to education and training programs that would strengthen their re-entry to the workforce.
    • Residents experiencing financial hardship who receive public benefits would enter into education pathways that lead to living-wage careers, creating intergenerational economic mobility.
    • Students would easily navigate clear paths from high school through college to meaningful employment.
    • Schools and colleges would receive actionable labor market insights to shape programming.
    • Employers would find skilled workers to fill critical positions, strengthening California’s economy.

    Collectively, these outcomes strengthen California by fostering a robust economy and thriving communities built on shared prosperity.

    Finally, the council would enhance accountability by tracking outcomes across systems, identifying what works and what doesn’t, and ensuring programs reach their intended recipients. A coordinated approach is especially critical now, during challenging budget times. California must ensure every dollar works. The proposed council would maximize returns on billions of existing investments by eliminating redundancies, filling workforce gaps, and ensuring that programs help the people they are designed to serve.

    For too long, we’ve relied on spot-fixes and piecemeal solutions. We’ve watched promising initiatives fall short of their potential. The time has come, with alignment between the governor’s office and the Legislature, to build the coordination infrastructure that connects Californians with opportunity. Our state’s promises of prosperity and bright futures depend on it.

    •••

    Su Jin Jez is CEO of California Competes, a nonprofit working to solve California’s higher education and workforce issues through research, advocacy and collective action.

    The opinions expressed in this commentary represent those of the author. EdSource welcomes commentaries representing diverse points of view. If you would like to submit a commentary, please review our guidelines and contact us.





    Source link

  • California foundations launch initiative to boost youth civic engagement 

    California foundations launch initiative to boost youth civic engagement 


    As Californians gear up for elections that have the potential to shape the lives of young people in fundamental ways, a consortium of mostly California foundations have set up a fund to elevate the role of public schools in promoting civic leadership and democratic participation. 

    It is a key part of what the nearly dozen foundations who are participating in the project are calling the California Thriving Youth Initiative, a multiyear effort “to support the learning, leadership, and well-being of adolescents in California.”

    The goal is to “create the conditions for young people, especially students of color, to practice civic engagement and democracy inside and outside public school,” said Kathryn Bradley, director of the Purpose of Education Fund at the Stuart Foundation.

    The foundation initiated the effort with a seed investment of $30 million, which will be administered by the Los Angeles-based California Community Foundation,

    “Nothing is more important than young people participating in and improving our democracy,” said Jesse Hahnel of the Crankstart Foundation, one of the other foundations participating in the initiative.  

    Even though young people will be affected by government policies for longer than any other age group — and thus arguably have more of a stake in election outcomes than any other age group — they have historically lagged behind in their voting patterns. 

    In the 2020 elections, for example, 47% of 18- to 24-year-olds voted in California, compared with 67% of voters 65 and older.

    The good news is that, in recent years, more and more of them are casting ballots. Just a decade before, a mere 18% of eligible 18– to 24-year-olds voted in the national elections. 

    The Stuart Foundation’s Bradley says there is a need to think about civic education more broadly than just traditional civics or American government classes. 

    Students, she said, need opportunities for civic engagement that “allow them to practice democracy right now.”

    To that end, a range of promising approaches have emerged in recent years, which the initiative hopes to build on. Since 2020, for example,  California students have been able to earn a “State Seal of Civic Engagement” that is affixed to their high school diploma. It is now one of a half-dozen states offering a similar certification.  

    To be awarded the seal, students must demonstrate “excellence in civic education,” which includes completing a civic engagement project of some kind, in addition to completing courses in history, government and civics. 

    Encouragingly, the number of seals has more than doubled to nearly 13,000 in 2022-23. But these represent just over 2% of California’s nearly 400,000 students who graduate each year, and so far, only a small proportion of California high schools are participating in the program. 

    Debunking stereotypes that today’s generation isn’t overly interested in community engagement, a recent national survey by the nonprofit YouthTruth showed that 60% of high school students “want to help others and work across differences to improve society.”  But it also found that fewer than half said they had learned the necessary skills in school in order to do so.

    What’s more, civic participation varied by parents’ education levels and students’ racial or ethnic background. “Those with parents holding advanced degrees stand out as most civically prepared, while Latino students are significantly less civically empowered than other racial groups,” the survey found. 

    Schools have a central role to play in changing that, and Bradley points to numerous examples in California where schools are engaging students from all backgrounds in civic education projects. 

    At the most recent annual Civics Day in Long Beach Unified, students described how they had successfully worked to get trash cans placed at their local beach. Students had to contact the local Public Works Department, which involved sending emails and making phone calls. “They were able to identify the levers of change in their community, and the people of influence that they needed to reach,” Bradley said. 

    At Oakland High, a goal of the Law and Justice Pathway Students is to help “students become active participants in advocating for positive social change in their community.” In Mallory Logan’s social studies class, students have researched homelessness in their school and district and had an impact on the district’s staffing patterns to assist unhoused students. 

    As part of Project Soapbox, organized by the decades-old Mikva Challenge, students in the Anaheim Union High School District issue calls to action on topics such as the death penalty, gun laws and college tuition.  It is just one of numerous civic education initiatives underway in Orange County schools.

    “These initiatives show that young people do have strong civic dispositions, that they want to help others, they want to work across lines of difference,” said Bradley. “They just need more opportunities within their schools and within their core content coursework to do it.”

    In addition to promoting civic engagement, the foundation partnership is also launching a “Youth Thriving Through Learning Fund,” which will support initiatives to help adolescents in California “actively pursue their goals for careers, work and civic life.” 

    “Today’s students are building the communities we will all live in together in the future,” said Kent McGuire of the Hewlett Foundation, one of the partnering foundations. “In this critical moment, when our public institutions are under attack, we need to do everything we can to support them.” 

    Four foundations involved with this initiative  — the Stuart Foundation, the Hewlett Foundation, the College Futures Foundation, and the McClatchy Foundation — are among over 20  foundations providing support to EdSource. EdSource maintains full control of its editorial content. 





    Source link

  • Trump Plans to Revise U.S. History in the Smithsonian and All Other Federal Sites

    Trump Plans to Revise U.S. History in the Smithsonian and All Other Federal Sites


    On March 27, Trump issued an executive order authorizing the cleansing of the Smithsonian Museums and other federal sites of anything that detracts from American greatness and patriotism.

    Trump makes clear that he doesn’t want anything displayed that implies that racism exists. He specifically targets the 21 museums of Smithsonian Institute. He wants all exhibits to remind the public of America’s greatness. Any exhibits that don’t, he says, should be removed.

    The executive order says, in part:

    It is the policy of my Administration to restore Federal sites dedicated to history, including parks and museums, to solemn and uplifting public monuments that remind Americans of our extraordinary heritage, consistent progress toward becoming a more perfect Union, and unmatched record of advancing liberty, prosperity, and human flourishing.  Museums in our Nation’s capital should be places where individuals go to learn — not to be subjected to ideological indoctrination or divisive narratives that distort our shared history.

    The executive order assigns to Vice-President JD Vance the job of cleansing the Smithsonian museums and all federal parks and cultural institutions of all derogatory content about our history. In doing this, Vance will be assisted by one Lindsey Halligan, Esq.

    Who is Lindsey Halligan, the woman who will determine which parts of the nation’s story should be told? If you open the link, you will see that she is a beautiful woman with long blond hair. But that’s not all.

    The Washington Post explained:

    The first question is: What is improper ideology, exactly?

    The second: Who is Lindsey Halligan, Esq.?

    We have her on the phone, actually. She’s calling from the White House.

    “I would say that improper ideology would be weaponizing history,” Halligan says. “We don’t need to overemphasize the negative to teach people that certain aspects of our nation’s history may have been bad.” That overemphasis “just makes us grow further and further apart.”

    As for the second question: Halligan, 35, is a Trump attorney who seems to have tasked herself as a sort of commissioner — or expurgator, according to critics — of a premier cultural institution.

    After moving to D.C. just before the inauguration to continue working for Trump as a special assistant and senior associate staff secretary, Halligan visited local cultural institutions, including the Smithsonian museums of Natural History, American History and American Art. She didn’t like everything she saw. Some exhibits, in her view, did not reflect the America she knows and loves.

    “And so I talked to the president about it,” Halligan says, “and suggested an executive order, and he gave me his blessing, and here we are.”

    Here we are: A former Fox News host is leading the Pentagon. A vaccine skeptic is running the Department of Health and Human Services. A former professional wrestling executive is head of the Department of Education.

    And Lindsey Halligan, Esq., could turn a major cultural institution upside down.

    How did she arrive at this point? Halligan grew up in Broomfield, Colorado, and went to a private Catholic high school, Holy Family, where she excelled at softball and basketball. Her parents worked in the audiology industry. Halligan’s sister, Gavin, a family-law attorney in Colorado, ran for a state House seat as a Republican in 2016 in a blue district and lost.

    Halligan attended Regis University, a Jesuit university in Denver, where she studied politics and broadcast journalism. She was always interested in history, she says — particularly the Civil War and the westward expansion of the country.

    She competed in the Miss Colorado USA pageant, making the semifinals in 2009 and earning third runner-up in 2010, according to photos and records of the events. This was back when Trump co-owned the organization that puts on the Miss Universe pageant, for which Miss Colorado USA is a preliminary event.



    Source link

  • Berkeley, Oakland teens cast first votes in school board elections

    Berkeley, Oakland teens cast first votes in school board elections


    A poster at Oakland High School encourages 16- and 17-year-olds to vote in the school board election. These posters are displayed throughout the campus.

    Credit: Andrew Reed / EdSource

    While the upcoming presidential election crowds voters’ minds, a new demographic will be casting their ballots for the first time this November. Both the cities of Berkeley and Oakland announced in August that 16 and 17-year-old constituents are now eligible to vote in local school board races.

    Berkeley voters approved Measure Y in 2016 by just over 70% of the vote. In Oakland, Measure QQ — which indicates similar youth voting stipulations as its Berkeley counterpart — was approved in 2020 with 68% of the vote.

    Years after the approval, continued community advocacy from organizations like Oakland Kids First has helped push the Alameda County Registrar of Voters to finalize a system to register 16- and 17-year-old voters.

    At a school board candidate forum on Oct. 22 hosted by Fremont High School and organized by Oakland Youth Vote, students, teachers, administrators, organizers and school board candidates from Oakland Unified School District gathered to register voters and learn more about the candidates running in local school board contests.

    Nearly all the school board candidates from districts 1, 3, 5 and 7 were present, and each was given a chance to introduce themselves and discuss their priorities and platforms within a time-limited format moderated by students from Fremont High School.

    After the student moderators and administrators gave introductions and explanations on registration, voting and the school board, the moderators emphasized the importance of voting in making student voices heard. They cited the efforts of community organizations like the Oakland Youth Commission and Californians for Justice in their success.

    Organizers and candidates spoke to students at the Oakland Youth Voting Forum on Oct. 22.
    Credit: Emily Hamill / EdSource

    “Your vote has the power to bring us closer to your vision and make your dream a reality,” said a student moderator. “This makes history, but it was only possible because we have been fighting for the last five years. We have earned this — it is a right.”

    Forum presenters highlighted what they considered the most important issues to Oakland students — access to health and wellness, community-centered schools, and essential life skills — all of which outlined concerns from over 1,400 student survey forms gathered from across the district. 

    The remainder of the forum consisted of the student moderators asking the candidates questions about how they plan to represent student concerns for equitable resource distribution, holistic mental health and wellness checks, school safety and budget deficits.

    Oakland Tech senior Ariana Astorga Vega and sophomore Amina Tongun, both members of the All City Council, or the ACC, attended the forum and emphasized the importance of students using their newfound voting rights, which are limited to the Oakland Unified School District (OUSD board races. The ACC is made up of 11 peer-elected high school students to represent student concerns to OUSD.

    “Even though I can’t vote yet because I have not turned 16, I’m here as a part of the ACC to support the local youth vote,” Tongun said. “I feel like it’s really special because we get to vote as young people and our voices are being heard. That’s one of the main reasons that I joined the ACC, because I really believe in advocating for young people and helping their voices be heard.” 

    Vega echoed Tongun’s opinion about the new voting rights, and her appreciation for being able to be “a part of that change.” 

    The two have also been involved in the ACC’s efforts to encourage youth voting, including streamlining social media posts about it and putting up fliers reading “Breaking News: 16-17 year-olds can now vote!” across district’s schools. 

    Although they have run into obstacles, like student disinterest due to not knowing how to vote and what the implications are, Vega and Tongun hope their community’s continued efforts to raise awareness and education will motivate their peers to take action.

    Maya Rapier, an organizer with Oakland Kids First, who also attended the forum, has been committed to the purpose. By helping distribute voter registration forms, spread awareness about the forum, and even implement a new voting curriculum into OUSD schools, Rapier said the organization has helped the district register over 1,000 student voters.

    “I genuinely feel like Oakland is such a beautiful place with such a beautiful community of voters who deserve so much, but there’s a history here of students being underserved and under-resourced,” Rapier said. “Students know their own experiences best, so for them to be able to be in the schools real-time, notice an issue, take that to the representative, and know that they have the power to bring attention to it, means a lot.”

    Rapier added, “I’m a former student of OUSD, and I’m really inspired by the students here and the work that they’ve been doing.”

    Fremont High School Principal Nidya Baez echoed these sentiments, expressing that her student body “feels responsible” for representing families and community members who cannot vote. She has worked to help “eliminate (obstacles like) the fear factor” by partnering with local coalitions to organize class presentations, lunchtime tabling and events like the candidate forum. 

    At Berkeley High School (BHS), students, with faculty help, have spearheaded youth voter registration and education. On Oct. 8, students from the BHS Civic Leaders Club organized a school board candidate forum with assistance from John Villavicencio, the director of student activities. The students invited the candidates to speak at the high school and allowed time for students to ask questions. 

    Villavicencio added that other BHS student organizations have led efforts in encouraging students to register to vote and done the groundwork by taking mail-in voter registration forms to classrooms. He also noted efforts from Josh Daniels, a former member of both the Oakland and Berkeley unified school district boards, who organized a weekly Zoom call between student leaders, student organizations and nonprofits in support of the youth vote to discuss efforts in their respective school districts. 

    During one weekly meeting, Oakland Youth Vote shared a curriculum members had put together detailing what the school board does, introducing the OUSD school board, emphasizing the importance of youth voting and assisting in registering students to vote. 

    After hearing about the curriculum Oakland Youth Vote created, Villavicencio encouraged Berkeley to create something similar. BHS teacher librarian Allyson Bogie offered to help, and created a shortened two-day curriculum tailored to Berkeley Unified. After review from the superintendent’s office, student leaders, teachers and administrators, the curriculum was shared with teachers who could use it in their classrooms. 

    “I wanted to make sure any teachers who wanted a tool to talk about youth voting, and getting kids registered, and the history of it, had something really easy to use,” Bogie said. “I believe it’s important for kids to vote, and I want to support the teachers, and that’s part of my role as a librarian.”

    According to Villavicencio, there have been several hurdles to overcome in convincing students to register, and to understand why this opportunity is special. Some students did not know their own Social Security numbers, complicating the registration process, while others have never heard of the school board or don’t know what the school board does, making it difficult to teach students about the impact of their vote.

    Villavicencio said they could “easily reach 1,000 pre-registration” out of about 1,800 potential BHS students who could register to vote. As of Oct. 22, 491 students were registered, leaving him “slightly disappointed,” he said. 

    “(Some students) are very passionate about activism and also engaging in the community,” Villavicencio said, but the overall sentiment is “lukewarm.” Bogie noted that she doesn’t think students view it negatively but has noticed a lot of students who also “aren’t that interested.” 

    Looking forward, Bogie hopes to see “continuing student momentum” for future elections. 

    “It’s commendable, what’s being done,” Villavicencio said. “And it’s crazy to say that there could be a lot more done.” 

    Emily Hamill is a third-year student at UC Berkeley double-majoring in comparative literature and media studies and minoring in journalism. Kelcie Lee is a second-year student at UC Berkeley majoring in history and sociology. Both are members of EdSource’s California Student Journalism Corps.

    California Student Journalism Corps member Jo Moon, a junior at UC Berkeley studying political economy, gender and women’s studies and Korean, contributed to this story.





    Source link

  • Get More Home Tuition Leads in Your Area – Proven Strategies

    Get More Home Tuition Leads in Your Area – Proven Strategies


    Imagine this: you’re great at teaching. You’ve helped students score better, understand faster, and even love subjects they once feared. But despite your talent, your phone isn’t buzzing with inquiries. No new tuitions. No leads. Just waiting.

    Sounds familiar?

    If you’re a home tutor or running your own tuition classes, you already know — being good at teaching is not enough. You have to be found. You have to stand out. You have to connect with the right parents and students who need you right now.

    So, let’s break down some real, tried-and-tested strategies to help you get more tuition leads in your area.

    1. Start Where You Are: Local Visibility is Everything

    Before trying to dominate the internet, dominate your neighborhood.

    • Print Flyers: Yes, old school works. Design a simple, clean flyer and distribute it near schools, local grocery stores, stationery shops, apartment notice boards, and coaching centers.
    • Word of Mouth: Tell your friends, family, neighbors, and current students’ parents to recommend you. Sometimes, the best leads are one phone call away — you just need to ask.

    Pro Tip: Offer a small discount for the first month to anyone who comes via a referral. This motivates people to talk about your classes.

    2. List Yourself on Local Tuition Platforms

    If your name isn’t searchable, you don’t exist. Simple.

    • Get listed on platforms like TheTuitionTeacher.com, UrbanPro, or other local tutor directories.
    • Make sure your profile has:
      • A clear photograph
      • A short, genuine introduction
      • Subjects and classes you teach
      • Your location, timings, and contact details

    Most parents these days begin their search for a tutor online — don’t miss the boat.

    3. Show, Don’t Just Tell: Build Social Proof

    You don’t need a fancy website. Just simple proof that you can teach and you get results.

    • Ask current or past students/parents for short testimonials.
    • Create a free Instagram or Facebook page for your tutoring. Post:
      • Quick tips or fun facts related to your subject
      • Student success stories
      • Study hacks
      • Photos of handwritten notes or solved doubt

    Even posting once a week builds trust. It shows you’re active, approachable, and professional.

    4. Get Smart with WhatsApp & SMS

    Don’t underestimate the power of a small, polite WhatsApp message.

    • Collect phone numbers from local WhatsApp groups (school groups, parent groups, locality groups).
    • Send a message like: “Hi! I’m a tutor based in [Your Area], currently teaching Class 9 & 10 Science. I have a few slots open this month. If you or someone you know is looking for help in studies, feel free to reach out. Happy to help!”

    Keep it short. Don’t spam. Send in gaps. And always offer value, not just a sales pitch.

    5. Partner with Schools, Bookshops & Stationery Stores

    Form meaningful offline partnerships.

    • Talk to local school teachers or principals (especially in private schools) and ask if they can refer students who need extra help.
    • Ask stationery shop owners if you can leave a stack of flyers or a small poster at their counter. In return, offer to promote their store to your students.

    This creates a win-win, and trust me, people remember those who support them locally.

    6. Offer a Free Demo Class — But Make It Memorable

    Don’t just give a free class. Give them a glimpse into your teaching magic.

    • Prepare a short, high-impact lesson.
    • Use visuals, ask engaging questions, and show how you simplify difficult concepts.
    • End with a clear takeaway: “In my classes, we don’t just study — we understand.”

    A great demo class is your strongest pitch.

    7. Follow Up Like a Professional

    Sometimes, a parent might say “We’ll think about it.”

    Follow up in 3 days.

    Don’t wait endlessly. Send a message like

    Persistence (without being pushy) shows commitment.

    “Hi [Parent’s Name], just checking in to see if you had any more questions about my classes. I’ve got 2 slots open and would love to help your child. Let me know!”

    8. Stay Patient, Stay Consistent

    Lastly — remember, lead generation is not luck. It’s momentum.

    Every flyer, every message, every call adds up. Maybe not today. But over time, you’ll become the go-to tutor in your area.

    “Success in tuition is not just about knowledge — it’s about visibility, trust, and consistency.“

    Final Thoughts

    Whether you’re teaching from your living room or running full-fledged batches, the tuition business is all about one thing: impact.

    And the more people you reach, the more students you can help.

    So start small, but start today.

    Want to reach more students faster?
    Get listed on TheTuitionTeacher.com — and let parents in your area discover your expertise in minutes.

    👉 If you’re a tutor based in Lucknow and looking to get more home tuition leads, TheTuitionTeacher can help you connect with the right students. Whether you’re just starting or trying to grow your tutoring business — this is the platform where your journey begins.



    Source link

  • California climate initiative could unlock new opportunities for community college students

    California climate initiative could unlock new opportunities for community college students


    Courtesy: California Community Colleges Chancellor’s Office

    With each passing year, we learn how a changing climate can affect our lives. For most Californians, two things stand out: bigger, more destructive wildfires and long-term threats to our precious water supply.

    There are proven solutions to these challenges, enabling us to shift to prevention instead of simply responding to growing natural disasters fueled by climate change. The longer we wait to make this change, the greater the consequences and the costs.

    Proposition 4, on the Nov. 5 ballot, represents a strategic investment in California’s environment, its economy and its people. The $10 billion bond measure dedicates $1.5 billion to preventing wildfires and smoke by creating fire breaks near communities, improving forest health to reduce wildfire intensity, supporting specialized firefighting equipment, and deploying early detection and response systems. To protect safe drinking water supplies, it provides $3.8 billion to treat groundwater contaminants, recharge aquifers, rebuild crumbling water infrastructure, and restore watersheds. 

    It also provides an important opportunity for California’s community colleges and the students we serve.

    Proposition 4 will create important jobs in an evolving green economy. The question is how we build the workforce needed to do the work ahead.

    California’s Community Colleges are uniquely positioned to ensure Proposition 4 dollars are leveraged to usher in this new workforce. If it passes, students will see new opportunities in career technical education programs that align with industry needs, including:

    • Expansion of clean energy training programs: Proposition 4 could support programs in solar energy installation, wind turbine maintenance and battery storage technology. By equipping students with these skills, community colleges can prepare them for high-demand jobs in the renewable energy sector, which is projected to grow as California expands its clean energy infrastructure.
    • Green construction and sustainable building techniques: The bond could provide resources to expand programs in sustainable construction, teaching students energy-efficient building methods and retrofitting techniques. These skills are crucial as California ramps up efforts to build climate-resilient infrastructure, creating jobs for students in green construction.
    • Water management and conservation technology: As the state faces ongoing water challenges, Proposition 4 could help community colleges develop programs focused on water conservation and management. Students trained in operating water technologies and wastewater treatment would be in high demand across various sectors, especially agriculture and public utilities.
    • Electric vehicle (EV) maintenance and infrastructure: With the rapid shift toward electric vehicles, funding from Proposition 4 could be used to expand EV technology programs, preparing students to service EVs and maintain charging stations. This would align with the state’s push to phase out gasoline-powered vehicles, creating opportunities for students in a growing market.
    • Work-based learning and internships in climate projects: Proposition 4 could enable partnerships between community colleges and green industry employers to provide internships and hands-on experience. Students could work on real-world projects in renewable energy, water management, or green construction, giving them practical skills and a competitive edge in the job market.

    By dedicating at least 40% of its investment to disadvantaged communities, Proposition 4 ensures that these communities must be part of the work ahead, not witnesses to it.

    As an educator, I see opportunity. California’s 116 community colleges are distributed across the state and are deeply embedded in their communities, particularly those in rural areas. When natural disasters strike, these communities find shelter at their community college campuses.  Proposition 4 is a chance for California to build out its climate infrastructure efficiently by leaning on its community colleges in two ways: (1) sites for infrastructure deployment and (2) for workforce development. By expanding access to green job training programs, Proposition 4 will enable Californians from all backgrounds to participate in climate jobs of the future.

    The students in our community colleges today will be the innovators, technicians and leaders of tomorrow. Proposition 4, through its focus on climate resilience, offers the chance to support these students in gaining the skills they need to succeed in an evolving job market while preventing wildfires, providing safe drinking water, protecting California’s iconic natural heritage, and contributing to the state’s clean energy transition. If we invest in them now, we invest in California’s future.

    •••

    Sonya Christian is the chancellor of the California Community Colleges, the largest system of higher education in the United States.

    The opinions expressed in this commentary represent those of the author. EdSource welcomes commentaries representing diverse points of view. If you would like to submit a commentary, please review our guidelines and contact us.





    Source link

  • Turning out California student voters with quizzes, coffee sleeves and door-knocking

    Turning out California student voters with quizzes, coffee sleeves and door-knocking


    Cal Poly Pomona students host a voter registration table.

    Credit: Courtesy of ASI, Cal Poly Pomona

    Every Monday for the past few weeks, Cal Poly Pomona student Melvyn Hernandez has been manning a table outside the Bronco Student Center to register fellow students to vote. He comes prepared with snacks, prizes and a quiz testing students’ election year know-how.

    “When it comes to things like Super Tuesday, or what a swing state is, or even who the major candidates are for the elections, a lot of students don’t really have the time to be aware of that,” said Hernandez, an architecture major. “A lot of students — even with how publicized the different debates and everything are– they’re too busy to be following it.” 

    Hernandez and volunteers across California’s colleges and universities are trying to add something important to the endless to-do list of the typical college student this fall: A crash course in Elections 101. In a year when barriers to students voting in states like North Carolina and Arizona have made headlines, California students are getting out the word about key election deadlines and directing their peers to nearby polling places. They’re also raising awareness about down-ballot contests that directly affect students’ lives — such as a proposed minimum wage increase — but which could get lost in the noise of a contentious presidential race.

    Students and administrators involved in nonpartisan voter-turnout efforts at California State University campuses said their task this election cycle is to provide reliable information to a population that’s simultaneously pressed for time and overwhelmed by the volume of biased political messages. Students said another challenge is to galvanize potential voters disappointed by their options in the presidential race — and perhaps turned off from voting altogether.

    “That’s the point of why we’re here,” Hernandez tells students if they’re embarrassed to admit they don’t know much about nominees and ballot measures. “So that you are aware and you can go ahead and further pursue finding out more about the candidates.”

    Similar efforts are underway at many University of California (UC) campuses, community colleges and private schools.

    Youth voter turnout has historically lagged the rates among older voters. But recent elections have seen larger shares of young voters. The Center for Information & Research on Civic Learning and Engagement (CIRCLE) at Tufts University estimates that 50% of voters age 18 to 29 voted in the 2020 election, up 11 points from 2016. That rate still trailed voter participation among older voters, though; 69% of voters 35 to 64 and 74% of voters 65 and older turned out in 2020. 

    But young voters are not a monolith. Those with a bachelor’s degree or more tend to vote at higher rates than peers with a high school education or equivalent, according to a CIRCLE analysis. Which college a student attends matters, too, though not as much. A 2024 working paper by a group of higher education researchers reports that enrolling at a top-rated research university or a liberal arts college increases students’ probability of voting relative to students enrolled at a two-year college. 

    A recognition that colleges should play a role in supporting young voters is part of the impetus behind the California Secretary of State’s California University and College Ballot Bowl Competition, a program that seeks to harness intercollegiate rivalry to encourage voter registration. 

    Going Deeper

    You can look up the nearest polling place to you, including those on or near University of California and California Community College campuses, here. A list of early voting and vote-by-mail drop-off locations is here.

    On-campus voting locations are another way to ease what could be students’ first time filling out a ballot. This year, for example, all Cal State campuses are home to one or more ballot drop-off locations, and many also serve as vote centers.

    College students attending school outside their home county or state usually have a choice of where to register to vote. In California, students can register in the county where they’ve relocated for school or in the home county where their family lives.

    Jackie Wu, a former Orange County election official who has worked with Cal State Fullerton on civic engagement, said that university administrators shouldn’t settle for low voter participation on campus just as they wouldn’t pass up a chance to increase slumping graduation rates.

    College “is our last opportunity, in a structured system, to encourage voting and civic participation,” she said.

    Offering students ‘little hints and pebbles’ 

    Striking the right tone in an election awareness campaign can be a delicate balance for college administrators and student volunteers. 

    They’ve got to educate low-information would-be voters — the students who don’t know the answers to Hernandez’s questionnaire. Yet, they have to be mindful that omnipresent political advertising can leave students unsure of what to believe. And, of course, universities have to offer fastidiously nonpartisan messages, even in a polarized political climate saturated with sensationalist campaigning in the mad dash before Election Day.

    “There’s so much pressure put on everyone. You know, ‘The election is really important. Make sure you turn out to vote. The future depends on it,” said Wu. “A lot of times (students) may not feel like they know where to ask for help and who they can go to for help that isn’t trying to pressure them to vote a certain way.”

    The solution: Lots of voter education events and some casual nudges.

    Besides voter registration booths, Cal State students this fall have helped organize panels about ballot propositions and forums where students can mingle with candidates for local office. Cal State Fullerton student government even had a table at the weekly on-campus farmer’s market to register voters, Wu said.

    A custom coffee sleeve distributed at Cal Poly Pomona ahead of the 2024 election reminds students to vote.
    Credit: Courtesy of Cal Poly Pomona

    Small reminders help, too. Jeanne Tran-Martin, Cal State’s interim director of student affairs programs, said some schools encourage students to confirm whether they are registered to vote by placing a link in their online student dashboards. This year, Cal Poly Pomona ordered custom coffee cup sleeves with a QR code linking to TurboVote, a website where students can register to vote. 

    “We’re not trying to get in anyone’s face and saying, ‘This is so important. Why aren’t you doing this?’” said Michelle Ellis Viorato, the campus’s civic and voter empowerment coordinator. “We’re just trying to drop little hints and pebbles to get people to think about, ‘Oh right, this is coming up. I need to remember to do this.’”

    The low-key messaging could help Cal Poly Pomona to reach this fall’s voter turnout goal of 72%. That would be a slight increase from the school’s 70% voting rate in the last presidential election, according to a report by Tufts University’s Institute for Democracy & Higher Education, which estimates voter participation by merging student records and voting files. (You can look up the voter turnout records of selected other campuses here.)

    For students already registered, breaking down the steps to cast a ballot can help to relieve some election-season jitters. 

    At Cal Poly San Luis Obispo, where about 94% of students were from outside the county and roughly 15% were from outside California as of last fall, voter registration volunteers have been fielding lots of questions about when and where students can find their ballots. 

    Tanner Schinderle, the secretary of executive staff at Associated Students, the school’s student government, said volunteers help students to think through their options, like getting absentee ballots, asking a parent to mail them their ballot or registering in San Luis Obispo County.

    Encouraging students to ‘look down your ballot’

    Voter registration has been a sprint at Cal Poly San Luis Obispo, which kicked off the fall term on Sept. 16, a late start compared with universities that operate on semesters rather than quarters.  

    Associated Students has averaged two to three voter registration drives per week, Schinderle estimates, thanks to more than 80 students trained on the process. Those students have been running a voter registration booth in the University Union Plaza. Volunteers also knocked on the doors of virtually every first-year student living on campus, Schinderle said, offering voter registration help. 

    The overall reaction has been positive, he added. But several students interviewed for this story said they’ve encountered peers frustrated with national politics.

    “There’s a common attitude of, ‘Pick the lesser of two evils,’” said Cade Wheeler, a mechanical engineering student who is Cal Poly Pomona’s student body president.

    Alejandra Lopez Sanchez, who serves as secretary of external affairs at Cal Poly Pomona Associated Students, said a few of the students she met at an on-campus voter outreach event in October remarked they weren’t sure if they would vote in this election. 

    “Especially for the presidential candidates, they’re like, ‘Who am I supposed to vote for if I don’t like either of them?’” she said.

    But voters who look past the race for the presidency will find statewide contests that could make a concrete difference in students’ lives. Proposition 2, for example, would authorize a $10 billion state construction bond for TK-12 schools and community colleges. And for students working minimum wage jobs, Proposition 32 would set higher wage floors.  

    Speakers from the Rose Institute for State and Local Government at Claremont McKenna College share a presentation about ballot measures at a university housing complex at Cal Poly Pomona.
    Courtesy of Cal Poly Pomona

    Weston Patrick, the secretary of external affairs at the Cal Poly San Luis Obispo’s Associated Students, finds the best tactic is to refocus students on local races in San Luis Obispo that influence public transit systems, housing and other areas important to students.

    “That was kind of a guiding principle, telling students, ‘Hey, if you’re not feeling thrilled about your choices at the top of the ballot’ — which we certainly did get some of that sentiment from some students — ‘look down your ballot,’” he said.

    That’s why Patrick was excited to see students strike up conversations with candidates for San Luis Obispo City Council at an event Associated Students hosted on campus. (It probably didn’t hurt that students could grab a free doughnut if they talked to one or more candidates.)

    Iese Esera, president of the systemwide Cal State Student Association, said he hopes strong campus voter turnout will influence legislators shaping legislation relevant to students, like how much the state invests in higher education. 

    “We are tax-paying citizens who also pay tuition, for example, who also have to afford the same cost of living that you do and that our parents do,” Esera said.

    Weighing the election’s impact on jobs and cost of living

    Students said their peers are most concerned about how the election could impact students’ tuition, cost of living and career outlook.  

    “In my generation, a lot of us talk about how expensive everything is, especially in California,” said Megan Shadrick, Cal Poly Pomona Associated Students vice president. “It can be pretty discouraging as we’re trying to move forward into our careers.”

    A national survey of more than 1,000 college students by Inside Higher Ed and Generation Lab in September found that 52% of respondents ranked the economy and cost of living as their top issue at the ballot box this year. 

    Efforts to make voting easier could benefit students who are short on time because they’re working multiple jobs or managing a long commute.

    One thing to know is that California voters can mail their ballots, drop them at any ballot box or deliver them to any polling place in the state. Similarly, Tran-Martin likes to remind students who plan to vote in person that if you are waiting in line to vote when the polls close at 8 p.m., you will still get to cast your ballot.

    And when all else fails, a little positive peer pressure can help.

    Bahar Ahmadi, a student studying environmental engineering at Cal Poly Pomona, volunteered at an election fair held on Oct. 10. Reached about a week later, Ahmadi, a first-time voter, said she might join a group of friends for moral support as they drop off ballots together. 

    “I feel like the first time doing it might feel intimidating alone,” she said.





    Source link

  • Texas: Governor Abbott Celebrates His Big Voucher Win and Lies About It

    Texas: Governor Abbott Celebrates His Big Voucher Win and Lies About It


    Governor Gregg Abbott signed his big voucher bill into law yesterday, repeating promises he has made that are most certainly false. He claimed that vouchers will put Texas on a path to being the number one school system in the nation. Several other states have large voucher programs–e.g., Florida, Arizona, and Ohio–and none of them is the number one rated school system in the nation.

    If anything, vouchers and charter schools break up the common school system that states pledge in their constitutions to support. Public schools are one system, regulated by the state, subject to elected local school boards. Charter schools are another, lightly regulated by the state, some for-profit, some as corporate chains, managed by private boards. Voucher schools are a third system, almost entirely deregulated, not required to accept all students, as public schools are. Voucher schools are not required to have certified teachers, as public schools are. Voucher schools are exempt from state testing. Most voucher schools are religious schools, managed by their religious leader. Private and religious schools choose their students.

    Vouchers have been a big issue since the early 1990s. The first voucher program was launched in Milwaukee in 1990. The second started in Cleveland in 1996, ostensibly to save poor kids from failing public schools. Neither Cleveland nor Milwaukee is a high-performing district.

    What we have learned in the past 30-35 years about vouchers is this:

    1. Most students who use vouchers were already enrolled in nonpublic schools.
    2. The students who transfer from public to private schools are likely to fall behind their peers in public schools. Many return to public schools.
    3. The public does not want their taxes to be spent on religious schools or on the children of affluent families. In nearly two dozen state referenda, voters defeated vouchers every time.
    4. The academic performance of students who leave public schools to attend nonpublic schools is either the same or much worse than students in public schools.
    5. Vouchers drain funding from public schools, where the vast majority of students are enrolled. This, the majority of students will have larger classes and fewer electives to subsidize vouchers.
    6. Vouchers are expensive. Arizona is projecting a cost of $1 billion annually. Florida currently is paying $4 billion annually.

    To learn more about the research, read Joshua Cowen’s book The Privateers: How Billionaires Created a Culture War and Sold School Vouchers (Harvard Educatuon Press).

    Governor Abbott surely knows these facts, but he determined that vouchers were his highest priority. Certainly they make him the champion of parents who send their children to private and religious school. All will be eligible for a subsidy from the state. And Abbott delivered for the billionaires who funded his voucher campaign.

    Edward McKinley of the Houston Chronicle wrote:

    Gov. Greg Abbott signed a $1 billion school voucher program into law Saturday, cementing the biggest legislative victory of his decade in office before a huge crowd including families, legislators and GOP donors.

    Abbott framed the ceremony as the climax of a multiyear effort by himself and advocates around the state, and touted the state’s new program as the largest to ever launch in the nation. 

    “Today is the culmination of a movement that has swept across our state and across our country,” he said, using the speech to call out parents in the crowd who had already pulled their students from “low-performing” public schools to put them into private ones. “It’s time we put our children on a pathway to have the number one-ranked education system in the United States of America.”

    He put pen to paper at a wooden desk in front of the Governor’s Mansion, as a gaggle of children stood around him wearing their private school colors and logos. Someone shouted, “Thank you, governor!” before the crowd of nearly 1,400 people erupted in applause. Abbott pumped his fist in the air. 

    The ceremony marked a major moment for the third-term Republican, who threw his full political weight and millions of campaign dollars into a push for private school vouchers, overcoming a legislative blockade that had lasted for decades. The bill he signed into law will give Texas students roughly $10,000 a year that they can put toward private school tuition, tutoring, textbooks and other expenses…

    Texas Education Agency Commissioner Mike Morath and Pennsylvania billionaire Jeff Yass mingled in the crowd. Yass contributed more than $12 million to Abbott’s campaign last cycle, as the governor sought to unseat anti-voucher Republicans in the 2024 primary election.

    Abbott was joined on stage by U.S. Sen. John Cornyn, Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick, House Speaker Dustin Burrows and the House and Senate authors of the bill. Also in attendance were private school leaders, including Joel Enge, director of Kingdom Life Academy. 

    After Abbott’s address, Enge told the crowd he founded his Christian school after working in public schools in a low-income area of Tyler and watching children fall behind. His speech had the feel of a sermon.

    “Children who have been beaten down by the struggles in the academic system that did not fit the system will now be empowered as they begin to find the right school setting that’s going to support them and to allow them to grow in confidence in who God created them to be,” he yelled, to raucous cheers. “Amen!…”

    Hours earlier, Democratic legislators, union leaders and public educators gathered in the parking lot of the AFL-CIO building across the street from the governor’s mansion, where they had a much different message. 

    Echoing lines used throughout committee hearings and legislative debates for the past few years, they warned that vouchers would hurt already struggling neighborhood public schools by stripping away their funding. About two dozen people swayed under the direct sun, waving signs that said “public dollars belong in public schools” and “students over billionaires.” 

    “Today, big money won and the students of Texas lost,” said state Rep. James Talarico, an Austin Democrat. “Remember this day next time a school closes in your neighborhood. Remember this day next time a beloved teacher quits because they can’t support their family on their salary.”

    Several speakers pointed out that while Republicans fast-tracked the voucher bill, they have yet to agree on a package to increase funding to public schools and raise teacher pay.

    State Rep. Gina Hinojosa, an Austin Democrat, said she hoped this defeat could sow the seeds of future victories. Abbott and most legislators are up for reelection next year.

    “He may have won this battle, but the war is not over,” she said. “There will be a vote on vouchers and he can’t stop it, and it will be in November 2026.”

    What’s in the bill

    The new law stands to remake education in Texas, granting parents access to more than $10,000 in state funds to pay for private school tuition and expenses, or $2,000 for homeschoolers. The first year of operation will begin in 2027, and in the run-up, the state will choose nonprofits to run the program, develop the application process and pick which families will have access.

    All students will be eligible, although families making more than 500% of the federal poverty line, about $160,750 in income for a family of four, cannot take up more than 20% of the funds. The funds will be tied roughly to the amount of money the students would have received in public schools, meaning students with disabilities will receive extra.

    School vouchers have become a signature of Abbott’s three terms in office. 

    After the COVID-19 pandemic, other Republican-controlled states such as Florida, Arizona, Iowa and Indiana created or expanded their own voucher programs. But school choice advocates repeatedly fell short in Texas thanks to an alliance between Democrats and rural Republicans. Bills passed the Senate but failed to gain traction in the House. 

    Then, in May 2022, Abbott announced in a speech at San Antonio’s Southside that he’d be throwing his full weight behind the policy. Even as public schools struggled to keep teachers in the classroom and balance their budgets, the governor told lawmakers he wouldn’t approve extra funds until a voucher bill made it to his desk. When it didn’t happen, even in special sessions, he took to the campaign trail, spending millions to unseat about a dozen key GOP lawmakers who stood in his way.

    This session, he enlisted President Donald Trump’s help at the last minute to rally Republican House members, some of whom said they felt forced to back the policy.

    Critics warn the state’s voucher program lacks safeguards to ensure it reaches the children it was designed to help and say they expect many of the slots to go to students already in private schools, which can pick and choose who they educate. The majority of private schools in Texas are religiously affiliated, and the average tuition costs upwards of $10,900, according to Private School Review.

    Though $1 billion is set aside for the program in the first biennium, the nonpartisan Legislative Budget Board projects it could grow exponentially in the next decade amid huge demand from students currently in private or home schools.

    It remains to be seen how many private schools will accept the vouchers, but many advocated their passage, including Catholic, Jewish and Muslim schools.

    Although Abbott has said repeatedly that the program won’t pull funds from public schools, because schools are funded based on attendance, the LBB analysis showed that the program would reduce state payments to public schools by more than $1 billion by 2030. 



    Source link