برچسب: for

  • Fareed Zakaria: Trump’s War on Science Is Bad for America

    Fareed Zakaria: Trump’s War on Science Is Bad for America


    TRUMP’S ATTACK on science has the backing of fundamentalist evangelical Christians, and especially virulent The New Apostolic Reformation (NAR). In fact, however, anti-science is anti-Christian, and the traditional Christian denominations which represent the large majority of Christians have even accepted as dogma that the human body and all other forms of life have evolved in a Drawinian manner. The media ignores this acceptance because the media likes to portray conflict. Take a look at the following: SAINT AUGUSTINE SAYS THAT ANTI-SCIENCE IS ANTI-CHRISTIAN —

    Christians today should heed the warning that St. Augustine gave to his fellow Christians: “It is a disgraceful and a dangerous thing for an unbeliever to hear a Christian talking nonsense about scientific topics. Many non-Christians are well-versed in scientific knowledge, so they can detect the ignorance in such a Christian and laugh it to scorn. The danger to Christianity is obvious: The failure to conform to demonstrated scientific knowledge opens the Christian, and Christianity as a whole, to ridicule. If non-Christians find a Christian mistaken on a scientific subject that they know well and hear such a Christian maintaining his foolish opinions, how are they going to believe our teachings in matters concerning the resurrection of the dead, the hope of eternal life, and the kingdom of heaven?”

    In short, St. Augustine was pointing out that God gave humans intellects and that Christians shouldn’t let anti-science political ideology make Christianity look foolish to the vast majority of people and cause them to turn their back on Christianity, which is one of the main reasons why fewer Americans profess any religion.

    Traditional Christian Churches To Which Nearly All Christians Belong Have Accepted the Science of Evolution — here are some of the official Christian church positions on their acceptance of evolution:

    The CATHOLIC CHURCH: Half of all Christians in the world are Catholic, and in the 1950 Papal Encyclical “Humani Generis,” Pope Pius XII declared that the human body came “from pre-existent and living matter” that evolved through a sequence of stages before God instilled a spiritual soul into the human body. Catholics accept that Genesis is not literal and are only bound by faith to believe that the natural evolution of the human body was a God-guided process, and that the spiritual human soul that inhabits the physical human body didn’t evolve, but is created by God.

    The EPISCOPAL CHURCH declared in its 67th General Assembly:

    “Whereas, the state legislatures of several states have recently passed so-called ‘balanced treatment’ laws requiring the teaching of ‘Creation Science’ whenever evolutionary models are taught; and

    Whereas, in many other states political pressures are developing for such “balanced treatment” laws; and

    “Whereas, the dogma of ‘Creationism’ and ‘Creation Science’ as understood in the above contexts has been discredited by scientific and theologic studies and rejected in the statements of many church leaders; and

    “Whereas, ‘Creationism’ and ‘Creation Science’ is not limited to just the origin of life, but intends to monitor public school courses, such as biology, life science, anthropology, sociology, and often also English, physics, chemistry, world history, philosophy, and social studies; therefore be it

    “Resolved: that the 67th General Convention affirm the glorious ability of God to create in any manner, whether men understand it or not, and in this affirmation reject the limited insight and rigid dogmatism of the ‘Creationist’ movement, and be it further

    “Resolved: by 67th General Convention of the Episcopal Church, 1982, that the Presiding Bishop appoint a Committee to organize Episcopalians and to cooperate with all Episcopalians to encourage actively urge their state legislators not to be persuaded by arguments and pressures of the ‘Creationists’ into legislating any form of ‘balanced treatment’ laws or any law requiring the teaching of ‘Creation Science’.”

    The LUTHERAN WORLD FEDERATION declared in its Encyclopedia of the Lutheran Church, Vol. I, 1965, that: “An assessment of the prevailing situation makes it clear that evolution’s assumptions are as much around us as the air we breathe and no more escapable. At the same time theology’s affirmations are being made as responsibly as ever. In this sense both science and religion are here to stay, and the demands of either are great enough to keep most (if not all) from daring to profess competence in both. To preserve their own integrity both science and religion need to remain in a healthful tension of respect toward one another and to engage in a searching debate which no more permits theologians to pose as scientists than it permits scientists to pose as theologians.”

    The UNITED METHODIST CHURCH declared at its 1984 Annual Conference that:

    “Whereas, ‘Scientific’ creationism seeks to prove that natural history conforms absolutely to the Genesis account of origins; and,

    “Whereas, adherence to immutable theories is fundamentally antithetical to the nature of science; and,

    “Whereas, ‘Scientific’ creationism seeks covertly to promote a particular religious dogma; and,

    “Whereas, the promulgation of religious dogma in public schools is contrary to the First Amendment to the United States Constitution; therefore,

    “Be it resolved that The Iowa Annual Conference opposes efforts to introduce ‘scientific’ creationism into the science curriculum of the public schools.”

    The UNITED PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH in the USA declared at its 1982 General Assembly that:

    “Whereas, the dispute is not really over biology or faith, but is essentially about Biblical interpretation, particularly over two irreconcilable viewpoints regarding the characteristics of Biblical literature and the nature of Biblical authority:

    “Therefore, the United Presbyterian Church in the U.S.A. General Assembly: Affirms that, despite efforts to establish ‘creationism’ or creation science’ as a valid science, it is teaching based upon a particular religious dogma; and,

    “Calls upon Presbyterians, and upon legislators and school board members, to resist all efforts to establish any requirements upon teachers and schools to teach ‘creationism’ or ‘creation science’.”

    The above Christian churches represent the overwhelming majority of Christians.

    Like



    Source link

  • How we obtained and examined contracts for school resource officers

    How we obtained and examined contracts for school resource officers


    We began by sending requests for contracts and memoranda of understanding with law enforcement agencies under the California Public Records Act to nearly 20%  – 178 – school districts across the state, in urban, suburban, and rural communities.

    We sent requests to 103 unified school districts, 37 high school districts, and 38 elementary school districts.

    We received responses from 157 districts; we are continuing to pursue responses from the remaining 21. We asked for contracts entered into between 2018 and June 2024 and analyzed the most recent contract provided by each district, some of which extend as far as 2027.

    Of the districts that responded to our requests, 68 said they had no applicable documents. Sixty-five districts had no assigned school resource officers; three had officers on campus but no contracts with cities and counties for policing services. The 89 districts with responsive documents provided contracts, including supplemental material such as memoranda of understanding, as PDFs and other document file types. 

    We analyzed the 118 responsive documents – many districts had agreements with multiple law enforcement agencies – and extracted a collection of data points including contract length, costs to the district, reporting requirements, and resource officers’ duties, among other topics.

    Additionally, to verify and clarify notable points, we reviewed videos of school board meetings, interviewed experts on policing and government transparency, as well as school board members, school superintendents, law enforcement officers, parents and students.

    The resulting data was combined with demographic and accountability information from the California Department of Education and analyzed to identify the commonalities, trends, and outliers explained in our stories.

    Teacher pay data was collected from Form J-90s that school districts submit to the state with teacher pay scales. To determine the salary for a  mid-career teacher, we used data from the “BA+60” field on those forms.

    If you have questions, please email data journalist Daniel Willis at dwillis@edsource.org.

    digging into the documents

    Our collection of district contracts that informed this story can be browsed and downloaded below.





    Source link

  • How one rural county pays for its resource officers

    How one rural county pays for its resource officers


    A Trinity High School student in Weaverville conducts a science experiment with the assistance of school resource officer Taylor Halsey, while fellow resource officer Greg Lindly observes.

    Credit: Timbre Beck / EdSource

    While some districts commit millions of dollars to resource officers, others struggle to find funding.

    Trinity County, population 16,500, has cobbled together a school policing program using a state grant funded by taxes on marijuana sales.

    The grant helps pay for two resource officers who cover nine widely spaced districts across the county’s 3,208 square miles, most of it national forest. Checking on one school requires a five-hour drive round trip on mountain roads, County Superintendent of Schools Fabio Robles said.

    The officers, a deputy sheriff and a juvenile probation officer, balance their work at schools with other law enforcement duties.

    They can only get to some schools a few times a year. “It’s a challenge,” Robles said in an interview in Weaverville, the county seat. The sheriff’s office and the probation department did not allow the officers to be interviewed for this story.

    Only one district has a contract with the county. Trinity Alps Unified agreed to an open-ended agreement with the county in 2020. That agreement doesn’t address school discipline.

    Robles said he wants to revisit the issue of contracts, but his priority is to keep the resource officer program running.

    “We’ve taken a step back lately,” Robles said of formal agreements between the districts and the counties. Contracts “are something we should re-look at,” he said.





    Source link

  • Joyce Vance: Stand Up and Speak Out for the Rule of Law!

    Joyce Vance: Stand Up and Speak Out for the Rule of Law!


    Joyce Vance was the U.S. Attorney for the Northern District of Alabama. She writes a smart blog called Civil Discourse, in which she writes about court cases and the law, in language accessible to non-lawyers. In this post, she explains how massive protests can change the course of history.

    She writes:

    This coming Tuesday marks Donald Trump’s 100th day in office, a tenure that has led to a steady decline in the economy. If we use that measure, which many voters said led them to vote for Trump, these first 100 days have been a failure. Even as Trump has successfully seized power from Congress and some organizations have bent the knee to his every request, lawyers are winning in court, and some law firms, businesses, universities, and individuals are standing up to the president who would rather be a king. Trump may not have lost the first 100 days, but he hasn’t exactly won them either. Our democracy has been weakened, but it can still be saved.

    Thursday is May Day, May 1st. There will be renewed protest marches across the country, many of them focused on Americans’ increasing awareness that the fundamentals of democracy, which we’ve taken for granted for so long, are in danger. It’s not just due process concerns, although that is an enormous part of it, as the deportations continue. Last week we learned that included some involved American citizen children and children with cancer, with Secretary Rubio offering a sorry rejoinder on Meet the Press this morning, blaming the mothers who took young children back to their countries of origin with them, rather than being forced to abandon them. There are plenty of reasons to march.

    This will not be the first time Americans have engaged in mass protests on May Day. In 1971, tens of thousands of people took to the streets in Washington, D.C., to protest the Vietnam War. They began on May 3 and continued for two more days. By the time the protest ended, more than 12,000 protestors had been arrested. The protesters’ goal was to cause a traffic jam that would keep government employees from getting to work; their slogan was “If the government won’t stop the war, we’ll stop the government.”

    Mass protests that are large and sustained have an impact on even an entrenched presidency. They did with Nixon. The White House Historical Association’s official version of events concludes that “the enormity of the protest pushed Nixon to accelerate the nation’s exit from Vietnam.” 

    Even though it’s a different era, protests are bound to get to the thin-skinned president whose staffers, during his first term in office, had to prepare folders of positive stories about Trump for him to review twice each day. Imagine having thousands of people protesting within earshot of the White House. It must be even more galling because these protests are nonviolent and aim to support democracy through a legitimate exercise of First Amendment rights. They make a powerful statement, in contrast to a president who has abandoned the rule of law. 

    In 1970, two-thirds of Americans had come to believe U.S. involvement in the Vietnam War was a mistake. We are not quite there yet when it comes to people’s view of the Trump administration. The most recent NBC News Stay Tuned Poll shows only 45% of Americans approve of the job Trump is doing. But, when asked about how strongly they hold their beliefs about the president, “the vehemence of the opposition outweighs the intensity of support from the president’s MAGA base.” Twenty-three percent of Americans said they were “furious” about what Trump is doing.

    Thursday is also Law Day, an annual celebration of the rule of law. Although it has been in effect since 1958, it doesn’t usually receive much attention. This year, lawyers across the country have big plans for the day—make sure you look to see what’s going on in your area. President Dwight Eisenhower established Law Day as a day of national dedication to the principles of government under law. State Bar Associations hold essay competitions for school children, and there are state and national dinners most years. In 2025, Law Day takes on special significance as Americans’ concerns about due process come to the forefront. How fitting that the May Day protests sync with the Law Day commemoration. 

    I’ve been doing a lot of research and writing about the origins of Law Day for my book (Giving Up Is Unforgivable, due out October 21), so I’ll leave that for another time, but I want to make sure everyone knows about Law Day. This year, many lawyers across the country will retake their oath to show their support for the rule of law. There is no reason the rest of the country can’t participate too!

    The president issues a proclamation every year for Law Day. Trump did during his first term in office, too. In 2019, the proclamation began, “On Law Day, we renew our commitment to the rule of law and our Constitution. The rule of law requires that no one be above the obligations of the law or beneath its protections, and it stands as a bulwark against the arbitrary use of government power.” Unfortunately, he never lived up to those sentiments. On Thursday, we can look for the proclamation and point out the inconsistencies between what we expect from our presidents and how this one is behaving. The hypocrisy is always full force, and we shouldn’t shy away from pointing it out.

    Due process is the sleeper issue of the second Trump presidency. No one really expected democracy issues, let alone concepts like the rule of law and due process to animate a country’s protests. But it’s increasingly clear that Americans are smart, and when we are well-informed, we have no difficulty assessing what matters and what is true. We see more and more of that as Americans carry signs that say “No Kings” and “Due Process” at local rallies. All of us can be advocates for democracy, not just the lawyers among us.

    Here at Civil Discourse, we all understand the importance of this. We need to make sure the rest of the country does too. Until the Trump administration is over, it has to be Law Day every day. 

    In 2024, the Law Day theme was “Voices of Democracy,” recognizing that the people are the rulers in a democracy. Americans express their views without fear of retribution because of the First Amendment and vote in elections to select their leaders. It’s up to us to make sure it stays that way.

    This week will bring more briefings in the Abrego-Garcia case and others. There will be outrages, like the fact that Trump has a website hawking merchandise, literally selling the presidency. It’s not just the $50 price tag on the hat; there’s also the slogan, “Trump 2028,” a reference to Trump’s not-so-subtle hints that he’d like to serve a Constitution-busting third term in office. It’s not a joke. It never is with him.

    So, make sure you take some time this week to celebrate Law Day. Invite people over. Go for a walk with friends or neighbors and share your views. Talk with your kids. Democracy is not automatic; it’s a participatory sport we must all play in together, one with critically important outcomes. Democracy is important. Let’s make sure we play for keeps.

    We’re in this together,

    Joyce



    Source link

  • Author of federal mental health law has advice for California

    Author of federal mental health law has advice for California


    Seventh-graders work together on homework in their school library.

    Credit: Allison Shelley / EDUimages

    Mental health has been at the center of former U.S. Rep. Patrick J. Kennedy’s personal journey to recovery from addiction as well as his public career as a policymaker, author and advocate. 

    In 2008, while representing Rhode Island in the U.S. House of Representatives, Kennedy was the lead author of the Mental Health Parity and Addiction Equity Act, a federal law that requires health insurance companies to provide equal coverage for mental health and addiction care and general physical health care, such as diabetes or cancer treatment.

    Forner U.S. Rep, Patrick J. Kennedy, D-R.I.

    Kennedy, who has long been vocal about pursuing treatment for his substance use and bipolar disorder, remains an advocate for greater access to mental health care.  Earlier this year, he published his book “Profiles in Mental Health Courage” — a reference to his late uncle and former President John F. Kennedy’s classic “Profiles in Courage” — detailing how people from diverse backgrounds across the country have taken on mental illness and addiction. In October, he was a keynote speaker at the annual student wellness conference Wellness Together in Anaheim, where he spoke about his advocacy as founder of the mental health policy nonprofit The Kennedy Forum.

    “As we turn the corner on stigma related to suicide and overdose, we need to finally focus a lot more on solutions early on in a person’s life,” Kennedy said in an interview with EdSource. Not only are young people less likely to seek help due to stigma, but are also less likely to be properly insured, incurring high out-of-pocket costs for treatment when they need it.

    For Kennedy, the key to addressing the youth mental health and addiction crisis is increasing and sustaining funding for care on the local, state and federal levels. He emphasized that schools desperately need the bulk of that funding, given that early intervention significantly reduces a child’s chance of developing a serious mental illness in adulthood.

    California has, in recent years, invested heavily in expanding mental health support for children and adolescents. The state’s next challenge, Kennedy said, is sustaining these crucial services. 

    In 2019, the state embarked on a $4.7 billion Children and Youth Behavioral Health Initiative, focused mainly on recruiting and training new mental health providers across the state’s school system. To help sustain these programs, the state Department of Health Care Services plans to make new public school-based mental health services billable to both Medi-Cal and commercial health insurance, making California’s multi-payer fee schedule one of the largest school reimbursement programs in the country. 

    EdSource interviewed Kennedy about expanding mental health care for students and families. His remarks have been edited for length and clarity. 

    How do we address the enduring impact of stigma on our health and education systems?

    We need greater literacy (regarding mental health) across the board. Many don’t know these mental illnesses as brain illnesses, and they don’t understand that they’re treatable. If we knew we could treat them successfully, which we can, especially if we go in early, how can we think about them differently? We don’t let cancer get to stage four to treat it. We screen it, screen it, screen it. It’s embedded in my medical chart. My doctor asks me 15 ways about my risk for stroke and cancer. We need to do that with mental health. 

    We could address so much of this if we just incorporated better mental health services within our community. So many families have their mental health symptoms exacerbated by lack of stable housing, no supportive employment and a lack of community to help. They become isolated, which is the worst thing for those struggling with their mental health.

    Why does the Mental Health Parity and Addiction Equity Act matter for young people today?

    It used to be the case where, if you had a mental illness, you had to pay higher co-pays, premiums and deductibles to get mental health treatment than you would to get diabetes treatment or asthma treatment. Unlike for physical illnesses, insurance companies would cap the total of dollars you could spend as a patient on mental health. The Mental Health Parity and Addiction Equity Act established that insurance companies could not discriminate and treat the brain any differently than any other organ of the body. 

    Ultimately, we can’t treat everyone based upon bake sales. We have to change the metrics of what constitutes value in our mental health system. We have to get this embedded in regular insurance. 

    How can California ensure that new school-based coverage for mental health care is effective in the long term?

    We have to figure out how to reorient the insurance process so that there’s a way of capturing the return on investment from an earlier investment. The state is the one that has the most to say about overall state coverage for mental health early on, in order to reduce future obligations on the state’s part, which means picking up the pieces of a broken population that hasn’t properly been supported by coverage through early intervention services. 

    We need to get organized as voters. There’s not a family out there that doesn’t have these issues affecting a member of their family, who hasn’t lost a loved one to suicide or overdose. There’s a huge need for mental health treatment because we keep waiting till people are in a crisis. Why not make this a public health issue and really embed resources in elementary and secondary schools so students can take care of themselves? 

    What role should the federal government play in addressing youth mental health?

    We need to have Federally Qualified Health Centers in every public school in America. They could open satellites in each of the schools that can help treat kids where they are. A lot of kids, particularly from minority communities, are not going to get mental health care after school. You could bring tele-mental health into a school nurse’s office, so it’s not just where you get an aspirin, but a real clinic in the school where you could be meeting kids’ health needs writ large. You’d also need ongoing intensive care to connect them to the community health center outside. 

    We already fund Federally Qualified Health Centers. It’s supported on a bipartisan basis. It covers the uninsured as well as the insured. These centers and Certified Community Behavioral Health Centers cover a lot of rural areas and health deserts, and they can provide general counseling and support services. They have a board of directors, who are all people in the community who know the resources in the community and can pull together a more wraparound, holistic approach. 

    So many kids come to school from homes where there’s violence, addiction or mental illness. We need to reach the whole family. In many states where Republicans don’t have good benefits for their people, the centers provide a valuable safety valve for their constituents to get health care. We just need to take that model to scale in schools. The easiest thing is to run all of these through existing bureaucracies, so you’re not trying to create a new system from whole cloth.

    How can students help address mental health? 

    I would say to young people that there are two major ways they can really help the system. One, they can learn about how to prevent mental health challenges themselves through learning about their own brain and learning coping skills and problem-solving skills. We can focus on a lot more upstream, or proactive, mechanisms early in a student’s life, when they can start to build different coping skills and learn how to manage their emotions. 

    And second, if they’re interested in going into the mental health space, they can create a much better track to get into the mental health field. We just don’t have enough hands on deck to really meet the enormity of the need for those who desperately need treatment. Not only do we need to build that infrastructure and access, but also build a workforce pipeline for those trying to go into the field in greater numbers. 

    It’s got everything to do with young people. These are illnesses where 50% of them occur before the age of 14, and 75% occur before the age of 25. They’re illnesses of the young; they can take you hostage and take out whole parts of your life, when, ordinarily, you’d be in the most productive period in your life as a young person.





    Source link

  • Why many colleges are giving more credit for learning outside the classroom

    Why many colleges are giving more credit for learning outside the classroom


    Alice Keeney was in the Navy from 2003 through 2012, where she learned how to safely operate the nuclear propulsion plants that power submarines and aircraft carriers.

    When she enlisted in the Navy in 2003, Alice Keeney attended naval nuclear power school. 

    There, she learned how to safely operate the nuclear propulsion plants that powered submarines or aircraft carriers — knowledge that she used when she was deployed outside the Arabian Gulf as a nuclear surface warfare officer in the late 2000s. 

    Keeney’s expertise in nuclear theory and practice was valued enough that she became an instructor in the Navy, and she trained the first 22 women who became submarine volunteers.

    Keeney specifically chose this path into the Navy because she believed it would give her skills that are valued in the civilian world. She spent many 12-hour days in school — not counting homework — studying advanced physics, math, chemistry and reactor core nuclear principles. She expected she could skip a few semesters ahead in college — and maybe even have enough funding from her G.I. Bill left over to attend graduate school. But it wasn’t that easy.  

    When she enrolled in chemical engineering at Cal Poly Pomona in 2012, Keeney was dismayed to learn that nothing on her Joint Services transcripts, a document that describes military training in a way that makes sense to colleges or employers, amounted to a single college credit.

    “It was frustrating to look at my transcript — for somebody who has the experience I have, who has the training that I have,” Keeney said. “There were classes listed like general chemistry — I should never have had to take that.”

    The benefits of getting credit for prior learning

    When students start college later in life, they often bring unique knowledge and skills with them. The military is the most common way — at least it is now — but that experience can also come through a job, a hobby or even volunteering.

    Increasingly, universities and colleges are working on ways to award credit to students for what they have learned outside the classroom. California’s community colleges and Cal State University system, in particular, have expanded this over the past decade, formally recognizing this experience, known as credit for prior learning (CPL).

    This week, Gov. Gavin Newsom praised the practice during a news conference about the state’s effort to improve career education. He is promoting a shift toward what he calls a “skillset mindset,” where Californians can demonstrate their skills and knowledge beyond grades or a credential, whether those skills were picked up in school, the military or volunteering.

    He lauded the community colleges for ensuring that military members don’t have to “take basic requirements for education that they’ve already received in the military,” he said. “They get credit for prior learning.”

    How students receive credit can vary widely, depending on the discipline. Students might take a challenge test. A portfolio review by a faculty member might be appropriate for business or art courses. Some jobs require certifications that can transfer into course credit.

    Research shows that students who receive credit for what they’ve learned outside a classroom save time and valuable tuition dollars. A national study by the Council for Adult and Experiential Learning (CAEL) found that students who entered college with 12 credits through prior learning could save anywhere from $1,500 to $10,500 and shave nine to 14 months off their time in college. 

    There are also psychological benefits for students who start college with credits under their belts. 

    “Students begin their college careers with a sense of momentum and accomplishment,” said Tina Barlolong, a veteran and credit-for-prior-learning counselor at Palomar College in San Diego.

    This might help to explain why 49% of students who received this credit for prior learning completed their degree compared with 27% of students who received no credit, according to the study by the Council for Adult and Experiential Learning. The national study followed more than 200,000 students, largely over the age of 25, at 72 institutions for over seven years, beginning in 2011.

    “That student immediately feels valued, they feel seen, and they’re going to take more advanced level classes, they’re more likely to take more units,” said Su Jin Jez, CEO of the nonprofit California Competes, a nonpartisan policy and research organization. 

    Students who receive credit for prior learning avoid the sense of deflation that Keeney felt when she realized that she would be required to take courses, like general chemistry, that she had long surpassed as a nuclear propulsion plant supervisor in the Navy. That may send students the message that college isn’t for them, Jez said.

    “We spend all this money on them and put them in harm’s way,” said James Cahill, an advocate for credit for prior learning for vets. “They come home and are told [their experience is] worthless.”

    Meeting workforce demand

    This is a subject that hits close to home for Jez. Her father spent two decades as a plane mechanic in the Air Force, but when he tried to attend a community college, he struggled to prove that he had the knowledge and skills to skip ahead in his coursework. Because he couldn’t get college credit, he opted to become a letter carrier.

    “We did fine, but he would have earned more,” Jez said. It’s not just her father who lost out, she said; the workforce also lost a worker with highly specialized and in-demand skills.

    This is what has motivated Cahill to advocate at both the state and federal level for veterans to be awarded college credit for their military training. Cahill’s son served as a medic in Iraq, but he received no credit for his military training when he enrolled as a premed student at Sacramento State. Cahill said his son burned through his G.I. Bill money by taking a lot of classes on topics he had already put into practice on the battlefield.

    Cahill testified about this issue at the height of the pandemic when the shortage of nurses became a crisis.

    “If they had had these laws in place, imagine how many nurses could have backfilled,” he said. “Imagine how many teachers and law enforcement and the language that [veterans] bring to a college campus.”

    Credit for prior learning isn’t a new concept. Since at least World War II, the American Council on Education has evaluated military training to help veterans transition to civilian life. But there are still no federal guidelines requiring colleges and universities to honor veterans with credit.

    Recently, credit for prior learning has begun to receive renewed attention as a way to encourage students to enroll — or re-enroll — in college to finish their bachelor’s or other post-secondary degree. One group of students with some college credit but no degree has caught the attention of colleges and universities, especially in the wake of pandemic-era enrollment losses. 

    About 1 in 5 adults in California over age 25 have attended college but do not have a degree. These are students that were at one point interested in a credential, but were, for a variety of reasons, sidelined.

    One of those students was Benjamin King. His first attempt at college didn’t go well, he said; early fatherhood threw a wrench into his plans. He planned on returning to school but then found a well-paying computer programming job that was stable — until the company downsized, and he became jobless.

    “At that point, I was at this crossroads where I was trying to figure out: Do I want to continue on my programming journey or do I want to go in a different direction?” he said.

    King enrolled in Palomar College to explore his options. It wasn’t his programming background that called to him, but his passion for photography. He took a job on campus running the photography lab. He enjoyed mentoring students and offering advice from the vantage of being an older student.

    “The faculty really saw the way I was interacting with the younger students and how I was able to help them out,” he said. 

    He was encouraged to apply for an adjunct faculty position in the photography department. There was one problem: He didn’t yet have an associate degree needed for the position, and the clock was ticking for when applications would close.

    Faculty encouraged him to petition for college credit through the prior learning program. Palomar College’s work to expand its process has paid huge dividends for veterans and even active duty members, but it also helped King, who had no military experience.

    King put together a portfolio of his photography that the faculty reviewed. This enabled him to get credit for several photography courses, finish his degree quickly and ultimately, land the adjunct faculty position. 

    Now he enjoys teaching photography courses and continuing to mentor students. Recently, a pregnant student came to him concerned about her future. He was able to assure her that he had been in a similar boat — and that it wasn’t the end of the road for him.

    “I enjoyed programming and still do it for fun,” King said. “But I get much more fulfillment from this job.”

    California slowly improves

    Trying to get credit for prior learning can be difficult. It’s not just students who need help navigating this arena — even many counselors or faculty don’t know what’s happening on their own campuses, according to Wilson Finch, vice president of initiatives at the Council for Adult and Experiential Learning.

    Finch compares the national landscape of credit for prior learning to an overgrown garden: “It needs a good pruning and cleanup just to make it useful for people.”

    Public universities and colleges in California have been doing some of that pruning. Legislation over the past decade has encouraged public universities to do more.

    Veterans have been a key target of legislation. They make up a small percentage of the student population, but — at least for now — the majority of students who are receiving credit for prior learning. Most begin their academic careers at community colleges.

    In 2012, legislators passed a bill requiring the chancellor of California Community Colleges to determine which courses could be completed using military credit. But state Sen. Richard Roth, D-Riverside, complained that three years after the law was supposed to be implemented, community colleges “still lack a uniform policy for the awarding of course credit for military education, training and experience.”

    The Senate passed Roth’s bill, SB 1071, requiring community colleges at the district level to create a consistent policy aimed at awarding veterans credit. Another bill, AB 1002, passed in 2021, was aimed at the CSU and UC systems.

    Cahill said he is frustrated to see Newsom only now promoting what had been signed into law before he took office.

    “The delay meant that thousands of veterans got no college credit,” he said.

    Advocates say that efforts to improve and expand credit for prior learning will benefit the larger student population outside the military. In fact, the 2020 study by the Council for Adult and Experiential Learning found that when non-veteran students received credit for prior learning, nearly three-quarters completed their credential.

    But a 2018 survey from the California Community College Chancellor’s Office noted that 81% of credit awarded at community colleges was for military training compared with 13% for job training.

    The Chancellor’s Office would like to see that change. It has set an ambitious goal of ensuring that at least 250,000 Californians receive credit for prior learning by 2030, with most of those credits going to non-veterans. The Mapping Articulated Pathways (MAP) Initiative supports community colleges in these efforts through training, technology and policy.

    Streamlining the process for veterans to get credit for prior learning has sparked an effort to improve the system as a whole, according to Brent Foster, Cal State’s assistant vice chancellor and state university dean of academic programs. Each campus in the CSU system now has its own policy.

    “That was the whole reason many of us went back to the drawing board with CPL,” Foster said.

    Public colleges and universities now largely have their own policies for credit for prior learning. But that doesn’t mean it’s been fully implemented.

    “It’s not a light switch you flip, and it just runs,” Foster said. “You have to make sure the bones are good.”

    Counselors, faculty members and other staff are key in making sure that students even know that they might be eligible for the credit. The 2018 survey by the Chancellor’s Office found that the main barrier was a lack of awareness.

    “It’s an important reminder as we intake students,” Foster said, “that we need to look at the whole student and what kinds of experiences might help them graduate faster and save money.” 

    At Cal Poly Pomona, that means that administrators involved in promoting credit for prior learning have been holding discussions with groups on campus, such as faculty, department chairs and advisers to get feedback, and, perhaps most importantly, a buy-in, according to José Lozano, articulation officer in the Cal Poly Pomona registrar’s office.

    Changes at Cal Poly Pomona have come too late for Keeney to avoid taking classes she didn’t need. To save money, she ended up finishing her senior year through an online college. But her story became a case study for improving the credit for prior learning process — not just at Cal Poly but other CSU and community college campuses, according to Elke Azpeitia, director of the Veterans Resource Center at Cal Poly Pomona.

    Keeney said beyond policy, it’s important that people inside the system understand why credit for prior learning is so important.

    “I think having allies in universities who see value in education that isn’t just structured in a college scenario or university scenario,” Keeney said. “That’s a big thing.” 





    Source link

  • State takes another step toward mandatory testing for reading difficulties in 2025

    State takes another step toward mandatory testing for reading difficulties in 2025


    Students at Theodore Roosevelt Elementary School in the Burbank Unified School District practice their reading skills.

    Credit: Jordan Strauss/AP Images

    A panel of reading experts has designated the tests that school districts can use to identify reading difficulties that kindergartners through second graders may have, starting next fall.

    Gov. Gavin Newsom’s announcement Tuesday of the selection of the reading risk screeners marks a milestone in the nearly decadelong campaign to mandate that all young students be measured for potential reading challenges, including dyslexia. California will become one of the last states to require universal literacy screening when it takes effect in 2025-26.

    To learn more

    For Frequently Asked Questions about the screening instruments for risk of reading difficulties, go here.

    For more about the screeners selected for district use, go here.

    For the letter on screening sent to district, county office and charter school superintendents, go here.

    For more on the Reading Difficulties Risk Screener Selection Panel, go here.

    Between now and then, districts will select which of four approved reading screeners they will use, and all staff members designated as the testers will undergo state-led training. The Legislature funded $25 million for that effort.

    “I know from my own challenges with dyslexia that when we help children read, we help them succeed,” Gov. Gavin Newsom said in a statement.

    Students will be tested annually in kindergarten through second grade. In authorizing the screeners, the Legislature and Newsom emphasized that screening will not serve as a diagnosis for reading disabilities, including dyslexia, which is estimated to affect 5% to 15% of readers. Instead, the results could lead to further evaluation and will be used for classroom supports and interventions for individual students. Parents will also receive the findings of the screenings.

    “This is a significant step toward early identification and intervention for students showing early signs of difficulty learning to read. We believe that with strong implementation, educators will be better equipped to support all learners, fostering a more inclusive environment where every child has the opportunity to thrive,” said Megan Potente, co-director of Decoding Dyslexia CA, which led the effort for universal screening. 

    A reading-difficulty screener could consist of a series of questions and simple word-reading exercises to measure students’ strengths and needs in phonemic awareness skills, decoding abilities, vocabulary and reading comprehension.  A student may be asked, for example, “What does the ‘sh’ sound like in ‘ship’”?

    Among the four designated screeners chosen is Multitudes, a $28 million, state-funded effort that Newsom championed and the University of California San Francisco Dyslexia Center developed. The 10 to 13-minute initial assessment will serve K–2 grades and be offered in English and Spanish.

    The other three are:

    Young-Suk Kim, an associate dean at UC Irvine’s School of Education, and Yesenia Guerrero, a special education teacher at Lennox School District, led the nine-member Reading Difficulties Risk Screener Selection Panel that held hearings and approved the screeners. The State Board of Education appointed the members.

    The move to establish universal screening dragged out for a decade. The California Teachers Association and advocates for English learners were initially opposed, expressing fear that students who don’t speak English would be over-identified as having a disability and qualifying for special education.

    In 2015, then-Gov. Jerry Brown signed legislation requiring schools to assess students for dyslexia, but students weren’t required to take the evaluation.   

    In 2021, advocates for universal screening were optimistic legislation would pass, but the chair of the Assembly Education Committee, Patrick O’Donnell, refused to give it a hearing.

    “Learning to read is a little like learning to ride a bike. With practice, typical readers gradually learn to read words automatically,” CTA wrote in a letter to O’Donnell.

    Sen. Anthony Portantino, D-Glendale, reintroduced his bill the following year, but instead Newsom included funding and requirements for universal screening in his 2023-24 state budget.

    The Newsom administration and advocates for universal screening reached out to advocates for English learners to incorporate their concerns in the requirements for approving screeners and to include English learner authorities on the selection panel.

    Martha Hernandez, executive director of Californians Together, an organization that advocates for English learners statewide, said Wednesday it was clear that the panel considered the needs of English learners and she is pleased that the majority of the screeners are available in Spanish and English. 

    “Their commitment to addressing the unique needs of English learners was evident throughout the process,” Hernandez said.

    However, she said it is important for the state to provide clear guidance to districts about what level of English proficiency is required in order for students to get accurate results from a screener in English.

    “The vast majority of English learners will be screened only in English, and without evidence that these screeners are valid and reliable across different English proficiency levels, there is a risk of misidentification,” Hernandez said.

    Hernandez said Californians Together emphasized to the panel that it is important for students who are not yet fluent in English to be assessed for reading in both their native language and English, “to capture the full scope of their skills.” In addition, Hernandez said it is crucial for the state Department of Education to offer guidance to districts on selecting or developing a screener in languages other than English or Spanish.

    The article was corrected on Dec. 18 to note that the initial Multitudes assessment takes 10 to 13 minutes, not 20 minutes, depending on the grade; a followup assessment can take an additional 10 minutes.





    Source link

  • Big decisions ahead for new leaders at West Contra Costa Unified 

    Big decisions ahead for new leaders at West Contra Costa Unified 


    Guadalupe Enllana, 43, was sworn in as the new West Contra Costa Unified board member in Area 2.

    Andrew Whitmore/Richmondside

    In a ritual similar to ones happening in school districts across California, two new board members in the West Contra Costa Unified School District along with a reelected incumbent were sworn in at the board’s final meeting of the year — as it braced itself to take on the numerous challenges that await it in 2025. 

    Not unlike its larger neighbors in Oakland and San Francisco, these challenges include declining enrollments, budget deficits, and threatened deportation of undocumented immigrants affecting an unknown number of families in the district.  

    The district, which includes Richmond, El Cerrito, San Pablo and several other East Bay communities, was able to traverse its most immediate challenge — finding school board members to fill the three seats that were on the November ballot. Only one of the seats was contested, and in the other two, the candidates had no opponent, and didn’t even have to appear on the ballot. 

    Guadalupe Enllana, a Richmond native and community advocate, was sworn in Wednesday night to represent Area 2, which covers the Richmond area, one of the nearly dozen cities in the East Bay communities within the district’s boundaries. She beat incumbent Otheree Christian, running for his second term, with nearly 55% of the vote.

    Cinthia Hernandez, who ran unopposed, replaced eight-year incumbent Mister Phillips in Area 3, which covers the San Pablo area. Incumbent Jamela Smith-Folds, who represents Pinole and Hercules in Area 1, was also sworn in for her second term, after running unopposed for the seat. 

    The pattern of unopposed school board seats is one that is occurring across the state. An EdSource analysis found that out of 1,510 school board races it analyzed, in nearly half of them a candidate’s name did not appear on last November’s ballot, either because no one was running for the seat or because a single candidate was running unopposed — making that person an instant winner. 

    One of the biggest decisions the West Contra Costa board will make is hiring a permanent superintendent. At Wednesday night’s meeting, longtime district employee Kim Moses attended her first meeting as interim superintendent, after being appointed by the board in October shortly after  Superintendent Kenneth “Chris” Hurst announced he would be retiring in December after more than three years in the job. Hurst said he was leaving to take care of his mother-law, who he said was facing “serious health challenges.”

    Moses, a West Contra Costa alumna who graduated from Kennedy High School in Richmond, worked in the district for 18 out of the more than 30 years she’s been in education, most recently as its superintendent of business services. She worked for years as a teacher in Oakland, and then as vice principal and principal in the district.

    “I welcome our new trustees. I actually really look forward to working with both of you,” said current board member Demetrio Gonzalez Hoy. “You’re coming in at a time when the board was fairly divided, as you both know. My hope is that with this change of two new board members that it would lead to us working in collaboration.” 

    One of the biggest rifts this year was during a June meeting when the board failed to pass the district’s Local Control Accountability Plan (LCAP) by the end of the fiscal year in June. The LCAP is a required document that describes how funds from the state will be spent, especially on low-income students and English learners. Because the board did not approve the LCAP, they could not vote on its annual budget as the accountability plan must pass first.

    It is believed to be the first time that a district has failed to approve its LCAP by the state-imposed deadline.  As then-Superintendent Hurst said at the time, “This is an unprecedented event in the state of California.”

    In a frenzy of activity district, county and state leaders had to work together to figure out the next steps, complicated by the fact that the state’s education code doesn’t spell out clearly what happens when a board doesn’t approve its accountability plan before June 30. After making revisions, the board was able to approve the updated plan on Aug. 28, nearly two months after the usual deadline.

    At Wednesday’s meeting, the newly constituted board was able to resolve its first split vote, this one for board president. Gonzalez Hoy and another incumbent board member, Leslie Reckler, were both nominated for the position, to replace outgoing board President Smith-Folds, whose term as president had expired. Reckler was elected to the position, voting for herself along with Enllana and Hernandez.  She will serve for one year.

    As a mother of four children, first-time board member Enllana said she had to figure out how to navigate different programs in the district and advocate especially for her child who has special needs. It is what motivated her to run a second time to be on the board after running unsuccessfully in 2020.

    “As parents, we are really left in the dark sometimes about decisions being made on the board that directly affect their children,” she said in an interview with EdSource. “I was a teen mom and at the time (and my child), having special needs, made it really difficult to navigate the (special education) department, how to advocate, and how to get the information I needed and how to ask for it.”

    Enllana said her top priority is to hire a superintendent who values transparency, communicates well with the board and community, and prioritizes data-driven solutions. 

    “We have to make sure that every decision that we’re making on the board is student-focused, because if the students aren’t here, then we have no seat at the table,” Enllana said. “We really need to learn how to communicate with parents, and it’s not going to be a one-size-fits-all approach.”

    As a daughter of Mexican immigrants, Enllana said she’s also hoping to better reach the Spanish-speaking community and engage them in what’s happening at the district level as well as their children’s schools. 

    At Wednesday’s meeting, newly inducted board member Hernandez said she grew up going to West Contra Costa schools and is focused on offering more transparency to families.

    “I’m also dedicated to creating more access to our families and creating resources and making sure our families are walking with us every step of the way,” Hernandez said.

    The defeat of Otheree Christian means there is now only one Black member on the board, in contrast to the three on the previous board. Of its approximately 30,000 students, nearly 60% are Latino, 14% are Asian, 11.5% are Black, and 9.1% are white. Two decades ago, nearly 30% of the student body was Black.

    Louis Freedberg contributed to this story.





    Source link

  • New law could boost Social Security checks for thousands of retired California teachers

    New law could boost Social Security checks for thousands of retired California teachers


    Kindergarten students at George Washington Elementary in Lodi listen to teacher Kristen McDaniel read “Your Teachers Pet Creature” on the first day of school on July 30, 2024.

    Credit: Diana Lambert / EdSource

    The Social Security Fairness Act, signed by President Joe Biden on Sunday, will increase retirement benefits for many educators and other public sector workers, including nearly 290,000 in California.

    The act repeals both the Windfall Elimination Provision and Government Pension Offset laws, which reduced Social Security benefits for workers who are entitled to public pensions, such as firefighters, police officers and teachers, according to the Social Security Department.

    The change in the laws does not mean that California teachers, who do not pay into Social Security, will all get benefits. Instead, teachers who paid into Social Security while working in non-teaching jobs will be eligible for their full Social Security benefits, as will those eligible for spousal and survivor benefits.

    Teachers who had previous careers, or who worked second jobs or summer jobs, benefit from the repeal of the Windfall Elimination Provision, said Staci Maiers, spokesperson for the National Education Association.

    California is one of 15 states that does not enroll its teachers in Social Security. Instead, teachers receive pensions from the California Teachers’ Retirement System, or CalSTRS

    “This is about fairness. These unjust Social Security penalties have robbed public service workers of their hard-earned benefits for far too long,” said Becky Pringle, president of the National Education Association in a media release. “They have hurt educators and their families — and damaged the education profession, making it harder to attract and retain educators. And that means students are impacted, too.” 

    At a press conference Sunday, President Joe Biden said the Social Security Fairness Act would mean an increase on average of $360 a month for workers that have been impacted by the laws. There will also be a lump sum retroactive payment to make up for the benefits that workers should have received in 2024, Biden said. No date has been announced for those payments.

    “The bill I’m signing today is about a simple proposition,” Biden said. “Americans who have worked hard all their lives to earn an honest living should be able to retire with economic security and dignity.”

    “It’s a game-changer for a lot of educators,” said Kathy Wylie, a retired teacher who lives in Mendocino. Wylie, who is a few years away from drawing Social Security, worked for a technology company for 15 years before embarking on a 17-year career in education.

    She expects that the bump in retirement funds could encourage some veteran teachers to retire early.

    Biden signed the legislation following decades of advocacy from the National Education Association, the International Association of Fire Fighters and the California Retired Teachers Association. The bipartisan bill was passed by the U.S. House of Representatives on Nov. 12 and the U.S. Senate on Dec. 21.

    The amendments to the Social Security Act apply to monthly benefits after December 2023. The Social Security Department is evaluating how to implement the new law, according to its website.





    Source link