برچسب: Demand

  • CBS Sells Out, Capitulates to Trump’s Demand for Payoff

    CBS Sells Out, Capitulates to Trump’s Demand for Payoff


    During the 2024 Presidential campaign, “60 Minutes” invited both Trump and Harris to sit for an interview. Harris accepted, Trump declined. The interview took about an hour. As is customary, the editors cut the interview back to 20 minutes, the customary time slot.

    CBS used a short response from Harris about the war in Gaza to promote the show. In the show itself, the promotional clip was replaced by a different response. To the editors, it was a distinction without a difference, a routine editorial decision.

    Trump, however, saw the switch in the short clip and the longer one as a financial opportunity. He sued “60 Minutes” and CBS for $10 billion (later raised to $20 billion) for portraying Harris in a favorable light, interfering in the election, and damaging his campaign.

    Since he won the election, it’s hard to see how he could demonstrate that his campaign was damaged. Most outside observers thought it was a frivolous lawsuit and would be tossed out if it ever went to trial.

    But Trump persisted because the owner of CBS and its parent company Paramount, Shari Redstone, needed the FCC’s approval to complete a deal to be purchased by another company. Trump could tell his friend Brendan Carr to approve the deal or to block it. Shari Redstone would be a billionaire if the deal went through.

    A veteran producer at “60 Minutes” resigned in anticipation of corporate leaders selling out their premier news program. The president of CBS News followed him out the door.

    As expected, corporate caved to Trump. CBS will pay $16 million towards the cost of his Presidential library. He once again humbled the press. He did it to ABC, he did it to META, he did it to The Washington Post.

    Will any mainstream media dare to criticize him?

    Larry Edelman of The Boston Globe wrote about Trump’s humbling of the most respected news program on network TV:

    💵 A sell-out

    The show is almost over for National Amusements, the entertainment conglomerate with humble beginnings as a Dedham drive-in movie theater chain.

    Unlike most Hollywood endings, this one is a downer.

    Shame on Shari Redstone.

    Recap: Redstone is the daughter of Sumner Redstone, the larger-than-life dealmaker who transformed the theater company started by his father into the holding company that owns CBS, MTV, Nickelodeon, and the Paramount movie studio.

    On Tuesday, Paramount Global, controlled by Shari Redstone, said it agreed to pay $16 million to settle President Trump’s widely criticized lawsuit stemming from the “60 Minutes” interview of Vice President Kamala Harris during last year’s election campaign. The payment, after legal fees, will go to Trump’s presidential library.

    Why it matters: It’s impossible not to see this as an unabashed payoff intended to win the Federal Communications Commission’s approval of Redstone’s multibillion-dollar deal to sell Paramount to Skydance Media, the studio behind movies including “Top Gun: Maverick” and “Mission: Impossible – Dead Reckoning Part One.”

    Everyone involved denied the settlement was a quid pro quo. If you believe that, I have some Trump meme coins to sell you.

    In a $10 billion lawsuit against CBS last year, Trump alleged that “60 Minutes,” part of CBS News, deceptively edited the Harris interview in order to interfere with the election.

    Legal experts said Trump’s chances of winning the case were slim to none given CBS’s First Amendment protections for what was considered routine editing. But his election victory in November gave him enormous leverage over Redstone.

    Reaction: “With Paramount folding to Donald Trump at the same time the company needs his administration’s approval for its billion-dollar merger, this could be bribery in plain sight,” Massachusetts Senator Elizabeth Warren said in a statement after the settlement was announced.

    “CBS and Paramount Global realized the strength of this historic case and had no choice but to settle,” a spokesperson for Trump’s lawyers said. The president was holding “the fake news accountable,” the spokesperson said. 

    Of course, the lawsuit was all about putting the news media under the president’s thumb.

    “The enemy of the people” — Trump’s words — is a power base Trump wants desperately to neutralize, along with other perceived foes such as elite universities and big law firms.

    Columbia University and law firms including Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton & Garrison have already caved. Harvard University had no choice but to come to the negotiating table, though it also is battling the White House in court.

    “The President is using government to intimidate news outlets that publish stories he doesn’t like,” the conservative editorial board of The Wall Street Journal wrote.

    For what it’s worth: The two points I’d like to make here may seem obvious but are worth repeating.

    First: The ownership of news outlets by big corporations is a double-edged sword. 

    Yes, they can provide financial shelter from devastation wrought by Google and Meta — and the brewing storm coming from artificial intelligence. 

    But they also own bigger — and more profitable — businesses that need to maintain at least a civil relationship with the federal government.

    That’s why Disney ended Trump’s dubious defamation case against ABC News by agreeing to “donate” $15 million to the presidential library, and why Meta, the parent of Facebook, coughed up $25 million to settle a Trump lawsuit over the company’s suspension of his accounts after the Jan. 6 attack on the US Capitol. 

    Second: Private sector extortion — multiple law firms promised $100 million in pro-bono work for causes favored by Trump — dovetails with the president’s use of the power of the office to make money for himself and his family.

    Trump’s crypto ventures, including the shameless $TRUMP and $MELANIA meme coins, have added at least $620 million to his fortune in a few months, Bloomberg reported this week. Then there are all those real estate deals in the Middle East, the Qatari jet, and the licensed products, from bibles to a mobile phone service.

    Shari Redstone’s $16 million payment is chump change by comparison. And it makes perfect business sense. It smooths the way for National Amusements to salvage at least $1.75 billion from the sale of its stake in Paramount. Sumner Redstone, a consummate dealmaker, would have done the same thing.

    Skydance, by the way, was launched by another child of a billionaire, David Ellison.

    His father, Larry Ellison, founded software giant Oracle and is worth nearly $250 billion. Oracle is negotiating to take a role in the sale of TikTok by its Chinese owner, a transaction being orchestrated by Trump.

    Small world, eh?

    Final thought: After nearly 90 years in business, National Amusements, now based in Norwood, is going out with a whimper, not a bang.

    The company has struggled with heavy debt, declining cable network profits, and huge costs for building out its streaming business. Paramount’s market value has dropped to $9 billion from $26 billion when Viacom recombined with CBS to form the new company in 2019.

    To get the Skydance rescue deal done, Redstone, 71, sold out the journalists at CBS News — the onetime home of Edward R. Murrow and Walter Cronkite, and still one of the most respected names in the business.

    That’s one bummer of an ending.



    Source link

  • Property-poor districts demand fairer funding for school facilities

    Property-poor districts demand fairer funding for school facilities


    Construction site at Murray Elementary in Dublin Unified in 2022.

    Credit: Andrew Reed / EdSource

    A public-interest law firm threatened Wednesday to sue Gov. Gavin Newsom and state officials unless they create a fairer system of subsidizing the costs of school facilities. That system must be as equitable as the Local Control Funding Formula, the decade-old formula for funding schools’ operating budgets, Public Advocates demanded in a lengthy letter.  

    At a news conference announcing their demand, Public Advocates and school board members, superintendents and parents with decrepit, inadequate and unhealthy school buildings charged that the state’s school facilities program discriminates against districts with low property values. Districts with high property values gobble up most of the state’s matching subsidies to modernize schools, while property-poor districts serving low-income families can’t afford local school bonds to qualify for state subsidies to build comparable facilities, they said.

    “It is our clear call to get this right,” said Gary Hardie, a school board member in Lynwood Unified in Los Angeles County. “We have not solved our facilities needs — not because we don’t fight each and every day for our young people, but we are up against policies that prevent us from doing the best we can do for our community.” 

    Hardie is one of four potential plaintiffs in a lawsuit. The others are Building Healthy Communities – Monterey County, Inland Congregations United for Change, and True North Organizing Network, which works with families across Tribal Lands and the broader North Coast region.

    In  1971, the California Supreme Court struck down the school funding system based on local property taxes as violating the constitutional right of students in low-wealth districts to have an equal education. In the letter to Newsom, Public Advocates argued the current system of funding school facilities is no better than the property-tax-based system that the court rejected in the Serrano v. Priest decision. 

    “Study after study has acknowledged the open secret here: Some districts get to build swimming pools and performing arts centers, while others suffer through leaky roofs and black mold,” said John Affeldt, Public Advocates’ managing attorney and director of education equity. Citing a 2022 study by the Public Policy Institute of California, he said that lower-wealth districts have received nearly 60% less state modernization funding than higher-wealth districts since 1998.

    “The discriminatory design of the state’s facility funding system is no accident,” he said. “It has been intentionally baked into the system, and its disparate results are wholly foreseeable.”

    Hardie, a native of Lynwood, called his city “culturally rich” but under-resourced as a result of federal redlining policies that divided Lynwood’s Black and brown communities with highways that lowered property values. 

    Lynwood Superintendent Gudiel Crosthwaite said that this week the district of 12,000 students “had about 40 classrooms that were leaking due to the rains, and last year it was a different 60 classrooms.”  While other districts are modernizing labs and performing arts theaters, he said Lynwood was forced to demolish the only major auditorium in the city because of the building’s condition. In the district, 99% of students are Black or Hispanic, and 94% are from low-income families.

    Going Deeper
    Credit: bike-R on flickr

    Read more EdSource coverage about school facilities funding, planning and construction. California school districts rely on state and local bonds and developer fees to fund facilities. As this funding has fluctuated over time, research has found significant disparities in their capacity to keep up facilities that adequately meet students’ needs.

    Public Advocates’ 21-page demand letter coincides with the start of negotiations between legislative leaders and the Newsom administration over the size and details of a school facilities bond for the November ballot. Two bills must be reconciled. Assembly Bill 247, by Assemblymember Al Muratsuchi, D-Torrance, calls for a $14 billion TK-12 and community college state bond. Senate Bill 28, by Sen. Steven Glazer, D-Orinda, calls for a $15 billion bond that includes funding for UC and CSU.

    Neither bill, at this point, gives a funding breakdown. However, AB 247 includes a possible framework for reform, with a point system that favors low-wealth and low-family income districts with a slightly larger state subsidy. Affeldt, of Public Advocates, dismisses this as inadequate for failing to provide enough funding to address the stark disparities in the current system.

    There is little disagreement that a state school bond is needed. Money from the last state school bond, Proposition 51 (2016), with $7 billion in state support for K-12 and $2 billion for community colleges, has been allocated, and about $2 billion in state-approved projects are in the queue for the next round. There is also a demand to remove lead in school water and to shield schools from the impacts of climate change through better air filtration systems, flood protection and heat abatement.

    Under the state program, districts pass local bonds through property taxes, and the state matches the money through a state-funded bond issue paid off through state taxes. For new construction, the state splits the cost. For modernization projects — renovating facilities at least 25 years old and portables at least 20 years old — the district pays 40% and the state 60% of a project’s cost.

    Public Advocates is calling for addressing only the modernization program, not new construction. Affeldt said that the 60% guarantee for all districts, regardless of their ability to raise far more money than property-poor districts, provides substantially more modernization funds per pupil to higher-wealth districts.

    The current facility program also includes a hardship program for small districts with so little assessed property that they can’t afford a school bond. However, the current qualifying criteria — a maximum of $5 million of assessed value — are strict and don’t account for the high construction costs in remote areas. AB 247 would raise the limit to $15 billion. 

    Between 1998 and 2016, the state provided $42 billion of the $166 billion that school districts raised for new construction and modernization, according to a report by Jeff Vincent, who co-directs the Center for Cities + Schools at UC Berkeley and has done extensive research into the school facility program and its disparities.

    Spokespersons for Newsom and Muratsuchi did not respond Wednesday to a request for comment.

    Long-standing complaints

    The issues raised by Public Advocates are not new.

    In 2016, then-Gov. Jerry Brown called for major changes in the facilities program, and opposed the measure when school districts and construction lobbies wouldn’t compromise. Brown wanted to concentrate state aid on low-income, low-property-wealth districts and end the first-come, first-served basis for allocating state matches, which he said favored wealthy and big districts, like Los Angeles Unified, with large facilities planners that can quickly apply. Voters passed the $9 billion Proposition 51 ($7 billion for K-12 schools and $2 billion for community colleges) anyway.

    In 2018, Vincent co-authored a study that documented the disparities among districts’ ability to raise money through local bonds. He found that districts with the most assessed property value raised more than triple the amount of bond revenue per student than districts with the least assessed value per student.

    With calls for reform escalating, Newsom took up the cause in negotiating a $15 million bond for the March 2020 ballot. The down-to-the-wire talks led to concessions. Instead of first-come, first-served, the bond issue set priorities for state funding. They started with districts facing critical health and safety issues, like mold in schools or seismic hazards, small districts facing financial hardship, schools needing lead abatement, and districts facing overcrowding.

    The agreement also established a ranking system that factored in school districts’ ability to fund construction, as measured by bonding capacity per student and the percentage of students who are low-income, fosters, homeless, and English learners — the same measure for extra state money under the Local Control Funding Formula. Based on their point total, districts could qualify for a bonus 1% to 5% of state funding above the 60% match for modernization and 50% match for new construction.

    The changes were not implemented after voters rejected the bond issue 47% to 53%. It was the first defeat of a statewide school bond in more than 40 years. Some attributed the loss to anxiety over Covid, whose infections were making the news; others blamed its unfortunate but coincidental title —Proposition 13 — and confusion with the 1978 tax-cutting initiative.

    In September 2020, after Newsom and school districts reached a deal on what would become Proposition 13, Vincent told EdSource, “State leaders took the much-needed first step in putting forth a new program and a new wealth-adjusted funding formula. However, providing poor districts with a few more percentage points of funding may not remedy the inequities we’ve seen. It will be important to watch things closely in coming years.”

    Public Advocates and the complainants say now is the time for the much-needed second step. 

    If negotiations fail, a lawsuit in the fall could complicate the chances of passage, if not derail, a bond measure in November. Knowing that, Affeldt said, “I hope that the serious threat of litigation and negative publicity that will come with that will make all of the players realize that we need a more aggressive overhaul of the system.”





    Source link

  • LAUSD union members rally, demand an end to alleged ‘Carvalho cuts’

    LAUSD union members rally, demand an end to alleged ‘Carvalho cuts’


    Members of UTLA and SEIU Local 99 rally outside of Los Angeles Unified School District headquarters on May 7, 2024.

    Credit: Delilah Brumer / EdSource

    Thousands of Los Angeles Unified School District teachers and employees took to the street outside the district headquarters on Tuesday to demand an end to what they describe as the “Carvalho cuts,” referring to the superintendent. 

    Members of both United Teachers Los Angeles (UTLA) and SEIU Local 99, which represents roughly 30,000 workers in LAUSD, anticipate staffing and program cuts in the upcoming academic year, despite Los Angeles Unified having roughly $6.3 billion in its reserves. 

    “We’re out here making sure the district hears us and funds our positions properly,” said Conrado Guerrero, the SEIU Local 99 president, who has served as a building engineer in LAUSD for 27 years.

    “We’re so understaffed,” he said outside a district board meeting on Tuesday. “We’re being overworked, and they’re underpaying us. After a while, you just become a robot from working and don’t have time to be with your family.”

    UTLA also claims in a news release that the district has failed to set aside enough money to keep its current staffing and services and is instead planning to “reclaim an unprecedented portion of ‘carryover funds’ that schools rely on to address budget shortfalls.” 

    Amid declining enrollment, Superintendent Alberto Carvalho told The 74 in an interview in December that LAUSD was implementing a targeted hiring freeze and may have to consider consolidating or closing some of its schools as pandemic aid funds run dry. 

    “Los Angeles Unified is committed to prioritizing investments that directly impact student learning and achievement,” an LAUSD spokesperson said in a statement to EdSource on Tuesday. “We are exploring a multi-faceted approach that combines fiscal responsibility with strategic resource allocation.  

    “We will protect our workforce and the historic compensation increases that were negotiated, and we will protect programs for our students.” 

    If the cuts take place, union members fear these positions, among others, could be at risk: 

    • special education assistants
    • campus aides
    • school supervision aides
    • pupil services 
    • attendance counselors
    • psychiatric social workers
    • school psychologists
    • library aides
    • IT and tech support staff
    • Art and music teachers

    The unions have stated that on top of reducing students’ access to services such as mental health and special needs support, the cuts will also lead to messy or dirty classrooms and larger class sizes. 

    Support for programs like the district’s Black Student Achievement Plan, community schools and English language learner programs could also take a hit, they say. 

    Cheryl Zarate, an eighth grade teacher at Thomas Starr King Middle School, said she found out about the cuts from her school principal and immediately felt “devastated.” 

    Thomas Starr King Middle School alone could lose as many as six campus aides, two counselors, school climate advocates, custodians and an assistant principal, Zarate said. School psychologists, she added, will no longer be available every day — and will only be on campus twice a week.

    These cuts, Zarate said, would have a particularly negative effect on students with disabilities and those who are struggling with mental health challenges. 

    “It scares me and the other educators to know that we have middle school students who go through mental fatigue and anxiety and, God forbid, have suicidal ideations,” Zarate said. 

    “Are we supposed to schedule out when a student is going to have a mental breakdown?” 

    Zarate added that LAUSD should be focused on keeping and supporting the staff, not prioritizing other initiatives such as the diagnostic assessment tool called iReady and its newly launched AI tool, Ed

    “All these projects … are not relevant to what we asked and fought for, which is a full-time staff … mental health, safety, a greener campus for our students,” Zarate said. 

    “That’s what we deserve. That’s what the students deserve.”

    Amid a sea of UTLA red and SEIU purple, the rally’s participants shook tambourines, waved pompoms and chanted “stop the cuts.”

    Among them was William Chavez, a social science teacher at Wilson High School, who has worked in LAUSD for a decade. 

    “We’re sending a clear, unified message to the superintendent and the school board that these deep cuts are unfair and unjust,” Chavez said. “We’ll all have to wear more hats. We’ll have to do even more work, and something’s got to give, and that really hurts the students.”

    Delilah Brumer is a sophomore at Los Angeles Pierce College majoring in journalism and political science and a member of EdSource’s California Student Journalism Corps.





    Source link

  • Rising autism rates in California elementary schools demand evidence-based practices

    Rising autism rates in California elementary schools demand evidence-based practices


    Credit: Alison Yin / EdSource

    Recent data from the Centers for Disease Control reveals that 1 in 22 four-year-old children in California are on the autism spectrum, significantly surpassing the national average. This increase, attributed in part to early diagnosis in California, underscores the pressing need for effective interventions in our schools.

    At Peres K-8 School in Richmond, lower elementary teachers have witnessed the rise in autism cases. Over the past two years, more students are grappling with emotional dysregulation, sensory issues and negative behaviors, prompting a surge in referrals for interventions and special education services. The strain on classroom teachers is palpable as they endeavor to meet the diverse needs of students on the autism spectrum while also attending to their other students.

    This challenge is not unique to Peres; West Contra Costa Unified School District faces similar trends in many of its schools. In response, the district’s special education department has endeavored to equip its teachers with skills to manage these complex classrooms. Efforts include compensating special education teachers for completing online courses on the Autism Focused Intervention Resources and Modules website, offering coaching on evidence-based strategies, and adopting a social skills curriculum tailored to address social communication deficits prevalent among students with autism. However, resource limitations and high demand for support have limited the impact of these initiatives.

    Behavioral issues pose significant hurdles to learning for both students with autism and their peers. For instance, a student on the spectrum may repetitively touch a peer due to social communication deficits, which, if left unaddressed, could escalate into more severe behaviors. Similarly, sensory needs may lead another student with autism to frequently leave their chair, disrupting the learning environment. Additionally, transitions between activities are common triggers for negative behaviors such as screaming or attempting to escape from the classroom.

    As a former special education teacher in a class for students with extensive support needs, I recognize the critical importance of promptly addressing behavioral challenges to prevent disruptions that could affect not only the student’s learning experience but also that of the entire class. Collaboration among educators, support providers and families is paramount, particularly for families from low-income backgrounds who may lack resources. Providing families with practical, research-based strategies they can implement at home fosters continuity and promotes student success.

    Now, as a special education teacher specializing in mild-to-moderate disabilities, I am more dedicated than ever to advocating for evidence-based practices that have been shown to be effective for learners with autism. For example, strategies grounded in research, such as visual supports and reinforcement, have demonstrated efficacy in managing classroom behavior and enhancing learning outcomes.

    The California Autism Professional Training Network (CAPTAIN) champions the use of evidence-based practices statewide. Collaborating with diverse agencies, the network promotes interventions backed by scientific research, aiming to enhance outcomes for students with autism. Alongside visual supports and reinforcement, there are 26 other identified evidence-based practices accessible through the Autism Focused Intervention Resources and Modules (AFIRM) website. As an extension of the National Professional Development Center on Autism Spectrum Disorder, the AFIRM website offers modules on planning for, using and monitoring evidence-based practices for learners with autism spectrum disorder from birth to 22 years of age. This resource serves as a valuable tool for educators striving to effectively implement evidence-based strategies.

    While mastering these approaches may initially seem daunting, proficiency develops with practice. The long-term benefits of employing evidence-based practices are immeasurable, offering students with autism the opportunity to thrive alongside their peers in inclusive educational settings.

    It is essential to acknowledge that autism is a spectrum, and a diagnosis does not automatically necessitate extensive support. With customized accommodations and assistance, students on the autism spectrum can thrive in the general education setting. Through dedicated collaborative efforts and the implementation of evidence-based practices, educators and families can pave the way for success in mainstream classrooms. It is imperative for districts to prioritize resources for professional development and coaching on evidence-based practices, ensuring that all students, including those with autism spectrum disorder, receive the necessary support to flourish in inclusive environments.

    Every student, regardless of ability, deserves an educational environment where they can thrive. Let us commit to creating supportive and inclusive spaces where students on the autism spectrum can reach their full potential alongside their peers.

    •••

    Jenine Catudio is an education specialist for students with mild-moderate needs at Peres K-8 School in Richmond. From 2016-2021, Catudio, who was also a CAPTAIN Cadre member, served as a special education teacher in an extensive support needs classroom in the same school.

    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

  • High schools demand clarity about UC’s new math policies 

    High schools demand clarity about UC’s new math policies 


    High school students work together to solve a series of math problems.

    Credit: Allison Shelley for American Education

    Twice this year, the University of California faculty broadly reaffirmed which high school math courses are required for admissions. However, many school counselors and students, along with the president of the State Board of Education, complain they’re confused by a lack of details.  

    High schools want to know if their specific course offerings comply with UC requirements. Depending on a student’s interests and intended majors, counselors want to know which courses to recommend. And students want to know if taking less Algebra-intensive math classes like statistics and data science could affect their chances of getting admitted the campus of their choice.

    Schools and districts must have “clear, timely and consistent information” so that students and families “understand the impact of their choices,” wrote State Board of Education President Linda Darling-Hammond in a July 15 letter to the UC board of regents.

    Prodded by a regents committee, administrators with the University of California Office of the President last week promised to provide more clarity by the end of the summer.

    “I feel like we’re not coming at this from a student perspective. I feel we’re coming at this from an academic perspective, and I would really encourage all of us to maybe flip that a little bit, put yourselves in the shoes of a rising sophomore, a rising junior,” regent Alfonso Salazar, who is president of the UC Alumni Associations, said at the meeting. “That would be incredibly helpful because people are very nervous and concerned.” 

    The confusion centers on the ongoing debate over whether AP Statistics or data science can be substituted for Algebra 2.  Over the past decade, the UC faculty committee that determines course requirements approved AP Statistics and, more recently, introductory data science courses as substitutes for Algebra 2, which UC requires for admission. Those decisions will also apply to California State University, whose A-G course requirements for admission are nearly identical for the 23 CSU campuses.

    But faced with strong objections from science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM) professors, the faculty committee did a hurried about-face in July 2023, days before the state board adopted a math framework that outlined sequences of high school math courses. The faculty committee voted that AP Stats and introductory data science would no longer “validate” or substitute for Algebra 2, starting in the fall of 2025.

    The STEM community argued that the courses lacked sufficient Algebra 2 content to prepare students for precalculus, which is a precursor to calculus. Majoring in data science, computer science, and STEM all require calculus. Students who take introductory data science would be under the illusion they are ready to major in data science. UC and many CSU campuses don’t offer catch-up courses in Algebra 2. 

    Since 1999, the number of students majoring in STEM more than tripled, from 14,081 to 48,851 in 2022. The proportion of STEM majors at UC increased from 32% to 44% of all majors, according to UC data.

    Where does data science fit in?

    The immediate impact of the decision is expected to be limited, since more than 99% of applicants to UC have taken Algebra 2 anyway, according to UC data. But interest in data science, in a world of burgeoning AI and uses for big datasets, has been mushrooming, and promoters pointed to introductory data as a way to skip Algebra 2.

    The faculty committee, the Board of Admissions and Relations with Schools or BOARS, reaffirmed that position in February when it accepted a faculty workgroup’s report. The report examined the content of AP Statistics and the three most popular introductory data science courses and found “that none of these courses labeled as ‘data science’ even come close to meeting the required standard to be a ‘more advanced’ course (Algebra 2). They should be called “data literacy” courses, it said.

    But where, Darling-Hammond asked in her letter, does that leave the status of potentially hundreds of other courses in data science, financial math and non-AP statistics that UC previously validated as satisfying Algebra 2? 

    “Most districts will be starting the new school year in less than a month without sufficient clarity regarding the mathematics courses they will offer moving forward,” she wrote. “But the committee’s criteria and process are not yet fully transparent, and it has only evaluated four courses out of the hundreds that have previously been approved.”

    One complication facing BOARS and staff within the UC Office of the President, which annually evaluates courses that school districts submit for approval, is that there are no state standards for data literacy. Each course must be examined independently.

    Darling-Hammond’s letter raised a critical, intertwined issue: How will UC categorize introductory data science and other courses as fourth-year high school math courses?

    Neither UC nor CSU requires that high school graduates take four years of math, but they highly recommend it. According to UC data, about 80% of UC applicants take at least one course in advanced math beyond Algebra 2, usually precalculus or both precalculus and AP Statistics. The report did not include comparable CSU data.

    BOARS created a second, 12-member faculty workgroup of STEM professors to examine what math courses will best prepare students to succeed at UC in whatever field they choose. A report in June agreed that the current three required foundational math courses make sense: Algebra I, Geometry, and Algebra 2, or Math 3 in districts that offer an integrated math sequence. It also emphasized that “to be recommended for a fourth year of mathematics study, (a course) must build substantially on the content of the lower-level sequence.”

    With that in mind, the report, which BOARS adopted, divided high school math courses into four categories:

    • Category 1 consists of the foundational math courses
    • Category 2 courses, which include Precalculus and Calculus, best prepare students interested in STEM fields.
    • Category 3, which also builds on foundational courses, are courses suited for students interested in quantitative social sciences, such as psychology and history. It singles out AP Stats, but not data science.
    • Category 4, a catch-all for other courses in quantitative reasoning, would include data literacy. These courses “will continue broadening students’ interest and confidence in math” and may be appropriate for arts and humanities majors.

    Tension over fourth year designations

    Advocates for introductory data science argue that many of their courses cover the same Common Core statistic standards as AP Statistics yet could be cast into the lowest category. Counselors may discourage students from taking data science, and districts may retreat from offering it. That would stunt the growth of data science at a time when other states are encouraging it, said Aly Martinez, who helped design a two-year high school introductory data science and statistics course for San Diego Unified, using  CourseKata, a college course.

    “Other states are thinking about a wider range of rigorous math courses. California is not doing that. Many districts have done these innovations and seen success. It’s frustrating; it feels like California is closing the door versus opening it,” said Martinez, who is now the chief program officer for the national nonprofit Student Achievement Partners.

    Cole Samson, incoming president of the California Mathematics Council, seconded the call for more clarity. The latest UC faculty report “absolutely causes some confusion; it did not outline enough for the next steps,” he said.  

    High schools that submit math courses for approval in fall 2025 will need clear guidance and feedback on how to revise courses, said Sampson, who is director of curriculum, instruction and accountability for the Kern County superintendent of schools. Whether courses are approved or how they are categorized will affect student choices and master schedules. “UC should be mindful of local impacts,” he said.

    UC Provost Katherine Newman acknowledged the need for more information at the regents meeting. “There’s work to be done to communicate what those recommendations mean, she said, adding “I don’t sense amongst my colleagues any hostility toward data science.” On the contrary, she said that UC will work with “our K through 12 partners” to bolster data science courses so that students are well-prepared when they enter UC.

    At the end of their June report, the UC math faculty members acknowledged that many high school students find math courses, especially Algebra 2, “overfull of content” and uninteresting. They suggested the UC form another committee to look deeper into how high school math courses can be improved to help students better understand the mathematical concepts. Members should include faculty with expertise in improving the quality of K-12 math.

    Another workgroup examining math content, consisting of faculty from UC, CSU and community colleges, may examine this issue of alternative math courses in a report due later this summer.

    Sampson said he would welcome that broader opportunity. Many students view Algebra 2 as irrelevant and dull, he said. “It needs a makeover,” he said. “I would champion designing new courses.”

    he article was clarified to note that introductory data science courses contain far less algebra content than Algebra II but are not necessarily less rigorous. It noted that UC’s and CSU’s course requirements for admission are nearly identical, but have minor differences. The misidentification of Provost Katherine Newman was corrected.





    Source link

  • Communities demand transparency after Ed, LAUSD’s AI chatbot, fails 

    Communities demand transparency after Ed, LAUSD’s AI chatbot, fails 


    An LAUSD student tries out Ed, the district’s new AI assistant for students.

    Credit: Los Angeles Unified / X

    Roughly a month after the Los Angeles Unified School District revoked its AI chatbot, Ed, communities of parents, teachers and experts are demanding that the school district respond to their concern that the short-lived association with AllHere, the company that built and supported the program, has potentially compromised data on the district’s larger educational priorities. 

    “While we welcome technological advancements, it’s crucial to engage in transparent discussions with educators, educational staff, parents, and policymakers about the risks and impacts of AI in schools,” said Cecily Myart-Cruz, president of United Teachers Los Angeles (UTLA), in a statement. 

    UTLA also encouraged the district to engage outside counsel and move forward with an investigation. Myart-Cruz also emphasized in the statement that any AI tools moving forward are part of collective bargaining. 

    School board member Rocío Rivas said in a July 31 Facebook post that the district has “initiated investigations” to look into allegations of compromised data. 

    A spokesperson for LAUSD said on July 15 that regardless of what happens to AllHere, student data will be protected by security measures that forbid the company from storing student data outside the U.S., unless the district grants the company permission to do so. 

    The lead-up

    In March, LAUSD rolled out the red carpet to introduce Ed, a smiling sun chatbot designed to serve as a personal assistant for students — capable of connecting them to mental health resources, informing them of cafeteria menus and waking them up in the morning. 

    The district has repeatedly justified its decision to use AllHere.

    “Los Angeles Unified launched a rigorous and competitive RFP (request for proposal) process and adhered to the District’s procurement process,” a district spokesperson told EdSource. “What we intended to develop did not readily exist as an off-the-shelf product, and we needed to build this from the ground up.” 

    The district considered three entities — AllHere, Afirma and Kokomo 24/7, which LAUSD collaborated with to provide telehealth services — and paid AllHere roughly $3 million for the product. 

    Carvalho said the bot was also designed to nudge students who are falling behind and allow them to click on resources for help. He also reassured the March event’s attendees that agencies at various levels — local, state and national — would help monitor any cybersecurity concerns. 

    At the time, he acknowledged that Ed might endure some challenges but that the district was committed to its success. 

    “Just like humans are not perfect — although sometimes, in certain political circles, some say they are — the technology produced by humans isn’t perfect either,” Carvalho said at the March event. 

    “With all of the protections against the vulnerabilities, there is always a concern. That’s why we are over vigilant,” he said.

    Ed was supposed to be rolled out in phases — beginning with the district’s 100 priority schools

    Three months later, on June 14, alarms began to sound, and AllHere had furloughed the bulk of its staff due to financial challenges, The 74 reported. Meanwhile, the CEO left. 

    In response — and because AllHere staff were unable to supervise it — the district removed the chatbot feature. LAUSD, however, still owns Ed, the district spokesperson confirmed, and the resource is still largely available to families. 

    The LAUSD spokesperson said Ed’s chatbot will return to families when the “human-in-the-loop aspect is re-established.” 

    “Los Angeles Unified was surprised by the financial disruption to AllHere. We were not made aware of any red flags concerning the organization, its solvency, or any financial issues,” the district spokesperson said. 

    “We had every confidence in their ability to develop a solid product. We, like other districts, were notified of their financial collapse and immediately ceased payment for a pending invoice.”

    The spokesperson also said that the district has not found a connection between what happened at AllHere and a data breach known as the Snowflake incident, adding that AllHere “does not maintain data on Snowflake.”

    Concerns over potentially compromised data have remained in the LAUSD community since, leading the district to begin investigating. 

    The pushback 

    While Los Angeles Unified remains committed to Ed, community members and experts at the University of Southern California (USC) Rossier School of Education continue to express their concern about student safety and the district’s priorities.

    “All we want are smaller class sizes and happy teachers. Basic stuff,” said Joanna Belson, the parent of a senior at North Hollywood High School, whose sister teaches in the district. “We don’t want Ed. We don’t want AI.”

    She added that the district should instead spend its money on expanding music and arts education — and extending sports programs to middle schools. 

    Echoing Belson, Alicia Baltazar, another LAUSD parent, voiced concerns about any potential data compromise, saying the district’s newfound emphasis on AI contradicts its new decision to ban cellphones in school. She added that the district should instead spend the money on bolstering its staff. 

    “I don’t know … how I’m going to tell my kid: ‘Stay off your cellphone. Don’t touch that at all. But here, use your laptop all day long. Use your chatbot,’” she said. 

    For Yasemin Copur-Gencturk, a professor at USC, the concerns lie in the technology itself. 

    Copur-Gencturk said there’s no evidence that the tool can accomplish what the district said it can do: promote academic recovery. 

    “AI has incredible potential to transform education and improve educational outcomes. There is no doubt about that. But there is a big ‘if,’” Copur-Gencturk said. “And I think many are ignoring that part. Most of the AI-based tools are not designed based on what we have learned from research on teaching and learning.”

    She said, for example, that AI tends to take each learning goal separately, without considering how concepts build on or connect to one another. This is particularly common in subjects like mathematics and could negatively impact students’ learning experience. 

    School districts, she said, should not spend large sums of money on AI unless they are certain the necessary security measures are in place and will have the positive academic impact they are seeking. 

    “There’s a notion that as long as artificial intelligence is involved, or a newer technology is involved, it will solve the problems,” Copur-Gencturk said. “Unfortunately, life is not that simple. We really need to, as educators, as administrators, we really need to be more cautious.”

    Beyond Los Angeles Unified

    While LAUSD has struggled with its rollout of Ed, districts across the nation that are contemplating incorporating AI could feel the effects, said Robin Lake, the director of the nonprofit Center for Reinventing Public Education

    “We never want to see things like that happen, and it’s obviously a setback for LAUSD in their goals for that tool,” Lake said. “But it’s also potentially a setback for other districts around the country who might look to LAUSD and think, ‘Oh, no, I don’t want to take any risks at all around AI, because I don’t want to end up in the newspaper.’” 

    She also said LAUSD’s story could serve as a reminder for other districts to roll out any AI features more slowly and more carefully, especially amid a “gold rush of providers” and a desire to remain ahead of the curve. 

    Lake also emphasized the importance of the education communities coming together to communicate their needs to education technology companies — and stressed the need for state and federal governments to provide better guidance to help ensure AI is woven into education equitably. 

    Despite the challenges, however, Lake maintained that AI has incredible potential to transform education — and that a “couple blowups” experienced by one district should not deter others from pursuing AI tools. 

    “Could AI help transform the teaching profession? Could AI help address student mental health crises? Could AI help improve assessments in education?” Lake said. 

    “There’s so many, so many possibilities. There’s still big questions around all of them, but as times get tighter around money, as federal funding goes away, we really must look to all potential solutions, and AI should be one of those.” 





    Source link

  • Top Subjects in Demand for Home Tutors in Lucknow

    Top Subjects in Demand for Home Tutors in Lucknow


    In a bustling city like Lucknow, education has always held a place of utmost importance. With increasing competition and high academic expectations, personalized learning solutions like home tutors in Lucknow have gained immense popularity. Whether it’s foundational learning for young children, mastering core concepts for board exams, or excelling in competitive exams, home tutoring remains a reliable solution.

    Students and parents today seek subject-specific tutors who can tailor lessons according to their unique learning needs. Platforms like thetuitionteacher have emerged as the go-to solution for finding skilled tutors across a wide range of subjects. But which subjects are in demand the most in Lucknow? Let’s explore this further.

    The Rise of Home Tutors in Lucknow

    The education landscape in Lucknow has evolved dramatically in recent years. With large class sizes in schools and a lack of individualized attention, many parents now prefer home tutors for their children. Tutors not only help clarify concepts but also instill confidence in learners. The growing need for personalized teaching has made platforms like thetuitionteacher an essential resource for finding qualified educators.

    Top Subjects in Demand for Home Tutors in Lucknow

    Mathematics

    Mathematics continues to top the list of subjects in demand for home tutors in Lucknow. Often viewed as one of the trickiest subjects, students across all classes seek assistance to strengthen their math skills. Whether it’s basic arithmetic for younger kids or advanced calculus for senior students, home tutors play a crucial role in simplifying concepts.

    Key areas of demand include:

    • Arithmetic and algebra for Classes 6-8
    • Geometry and trigonometry for Classes 9-10
    • Calculus, matrices, and statistics for Classes 11-12

    Science

    The subject of science, especially for students in middle and high school, has always been a focal point for parents and educators. From understanding basic concepts in physics, chemistry, and biology to preparing for board exams, science tutors are highly sought after.

    Students benefit from home tutors in science because they provide hands-on explanations, experiments, and conceptual clarity, which can be missing in crowded classrooms.

    Popular Focus Areas:

    • Physics: Mechanics, thermodynamics, electricity
    • Chemistry: Organic and inorganic chemistry
    • Biology: Human anatomy, botany, and zoology

    English

    English has become another subject where students require specialized tutoring. With global opportunities expanding, mastering the English language is essential for academic and professional growth.

    Home tutors help students improve their grammar, vocabulary, comprehension, and writing skills. For senior students, tutors often focus on exam preparation, essay writing, and creative skills to meet syllabus requirements.

    Key Skills in Demand:

    • Grammar and language basics for junior students
    • Writing skills: essays, letters, and reports
    • Advanced comprehension and analysis for higher classes

    Social Studies

    Subjects like history, geography, political science, and economics form the foundation of the school curriculum. Yet, many students struggle with the memorization and conceptual understanding required to excel in these subjects.

    Home tutors for social studies focus on making these topics more engaging and relatable. By connecting textbook knowledge to real-world examples, tutors ensure students develop a keen interest in the subject.

    Areas of Interest:

    • Indian history and world history
    • Civics and political science concepts
    • Geography: maps, physical geography, and environmental studies

    Commerce and Economics

    With growing aspirations for careers in finance, business, and management, subjects like commerce and economics are now highly sought after. Tutors help students understand theoretical and practical aspects, preparing them for both school-level exams and future career pathways.

    High-Demand Topics:

    • Accountancy: Financial accounting, ledger entries
    • Economics: Microeconomics and macroeconomics
    • Business studies: Management principles, entrepreneurship

    Computer Science

    In today’s technology-driven world, computer science is a must-have skill for students. From basic computer literacy to advanced programming languages like Python, Java, and C++, home tutors for computer science are increasingly in demand in Lucknow.

    Students preparing for competitive exams or pursuing advanced courses often require personalized guidance to strengthen their coding and technical skills.

    Hindi and Sanskrit

    Regional and traditional languages like Hindi and Sanskrit remain critical subjects for many students. While Hindi is part of the core syllabus across schools, Sanskrit is also studied as an optional language.

    Home tutors for Hindi and Sanskrit focus on:

    • Grammar and vocabulary improvement
    • Poetry and prose comprehension
    • Exam-oriented writing and reading practice

    Competitive Exam Preparation

    The demand for home tutors is not limited to school subjects. With competitive exams like JEE, NEET, SSC, and IAS, students in Lucknow often need subject-matter experts to guide them. Tutors help aspirants with:

    • Structured study plans
    • Concept reinforcement and problem-solving
    • Mock tests and revision strategies

    Platforms like thetuitionteacher connect students with experts specializing in these exams, ensuring focused preparation and better results.

    Foreign Languages

    Learning foreign languages like French, German, and Spanish has become increasingly popular among Lucknow’s students. Whether for academic reasons, career prospects, or cultural enrichment, the demand for foreign language tutors is steadily rising.

    Why Foreign Language Tutors are in Demand:

    • Personalized speaking, reading, and writing practice
    • Exam preparation for international certifications
    • Career-focused language fluency

    Primary School Subjects

    For younger children, foundational learning in subjects like mathematics, science, and English is crucial. Parents often seek patient and skilled tutors who can provide a nurturing learning environment. Tutors for primary school students focus on:

    • Basic literacy and numeracy skills
    • Conceptual learning through activities
    • Homework assistance and regular practice

    Why Choose thetuitionteacher for Home Tutors in Lucknow?

    1. Experienced and Verified Tutors: thetuitionteacher ensures all tutors are qualified and experienced in their respective subjects.
    2. Customized Learning Solutions: Personalized attention helps students improve their weak areas and build confidence.
    3. Wide Range of Subjects: From school subjects to competitive exams, the platform caters to diverse learning needs.
    4. Flexible Learning: Tutors provide lessons at convenient times, ensuring flexibility for both students and parents.
    5. Affordable Options: Quality education doesn’t have to come at a steep price.

    The Benefits of Home Tutoring for Students

    Home tutoring has numerous advantages:

    • Individualized Attention: Students learn at their own pace without the pressure of a classroom environment.
    • Better Understanding: Tutors clarify doubts and reinforce concepts through customized methods.
    • Exam Preparation: Focused revision and test series ensure better exam results.
    • Confidence Building: Personalized guidance helps students gain confidence in their abilities.

    thetuitionteacher – A Step Toward Academic Success

    The increasing demand for home tutors in Lucknow reflects a growing awareness of quality education and personalized learning. With platforms like thetuitionteacher, finding the right tutor for any subject has become easier than ever. Whether it’s mastering math, excelling in science, or preparing for competitive exams, tutors provide the much-needed support for academic excellence.

    Conclusion

    The demand for home tutors in Lucknow is steadily rising as parents and students prioritize personalized education. Subjects like mathematics, science, and competitive exam preparation continue to dominate the list of requirements. Platforms like thetuitionteacher make it seamless to find qualified tutors who can cater to these needs. For students seeking academic success and skill mastery, home tutors provide an invaluable resource that bridges the gap between learning challenges and achievement.



    Source link

  • Wisconsin: State Chief Jill Underly Rejects Secretary McMahon’s Anti-DEI Demand

    Wisconsin: State Chief Jill Underly Rejects Secretary McMahon’s Anti-DEI Demand


    Wisconsin Public Radio reported that State Superintendent Jill Underly has announced that the state will not comply with a letter from U.S. Secretary of Education Linda McMahon in which she directed states to agree with the Trump administration about stamping out diversity, equity, and inclusion. Trump wants to eliminate DEI, which would involve reversing compliance with existing civil rights law. In addition, although McMahon may not know it, she is violating federal law by attempting to influence curriculum and instruction in the schools.

    Thank you, Superintendent Underly!

    WPR reported:

    Wisconsin school districts won’t comply with a directive from the Trump administration to eliminate diversity, equity and inclusion programs until districts have more information.

    On Wednesday, state Superintendent Jill Underly asked the U.S. Department of Education for clarification on both the intent and legality of an April 3 directive that schools sign a letter acknowledging they’re following the government’s interpretation of civil rights laws.

    Schools were given 10 days to do so, or be at risk of losing Title I funding. The federal government later extended the deadline to April 24. 

    This school year, Wisconsin received about $216 million in Title I funds. About $82 million of that money went to Milwaukee Public Schools.

    Underly said the request from the Department of Education potentially violates required procedural steps, is unnecessarily redundant and appears designed to intimidate school districts by threatening to withhold critical education funding.

    “We cannot stand by while the current administration threatens our schools with unnecessary and potentially unlawful mandates based on political beliefs,” Underly said in a statement. “Our responsibility is to ensure Wisconsin students receive the best education possible, and that means allowing schools to make local decisions based on what is best for their kids and their communities.”

    On Feb. 14, the U.S. Department of Education sent a “Dear Colleague” letter giving educational institutions 14 days to eliminate diversity initiatives or risk losing federal funding.

    At that time, the state DPI issued guidance to school districts encouraging a “measured and thoughtful approach, rather than immediate or reactionary responses to the federal government’s concerns.”

    Secretary of Education Linda McMahon has not clearly defined what the administration considers a violation of civil rights law. The February letter said institutions must “cease using race preferences and stereotypes as a factor in their admissions, hiring, promotion, scholarship.”

    In a related document addressing frequently asked questions about how the administration would interpret Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, the agency said: “Many schools have advanced discriminatory policies and practices under the banner of ‘DEI’ initiatives.” 

    The document went on to say that schools could engage in historical observances like Black History Month, “so long as they do not engage in racial exclusion or discrimination.”



    Source link