اینترنت

برچسب: for

  • A new path for supporting Black students in higher education

    A new path for supporting Black students in higher education


    National University President Mark D. Milliron, right,,congratulates a graduating student at the university’s 2023 commencement.

    Courtesy: National University

    In the year since the U.S. Supreme Court handed down its decision to end race-conscious college admissions, the predicted impact has become a troubling reality. Many selective universities are reporting significant decreases in Black student enrollment this fall. This latest development continues a broader trend of declining Black postsecondary enrollment, which since 2010 has fallen at all U.S. colleges by nearly 30%.

    These dire enrollment reports are emerging now as a growing number of states are eliminating diversity, equity and inclusion programs and services — and just four years after a nationwide reckoning on racial injustice. Whether colleges have become even more exclusive or if Black students are turning away from higher education, the results are the same: Our nation’s colleges and universities are becoming less diverse — and yet another barrier has been erected on the road toward increasing the number of Americans able to go to and graduate from college.

    Despite bleak national trend lines, the state of California has just enacted a creative policy solution that will shine a spotlight on institutions that excel in educating and serving Black students. Senate Bill 1348, also known as the “Designation of California Black-Serving Institutions Act,” creates a state-level designation (BSI) to recognize the state’s public and independent colleges and universities where at least 10% or 1,500 students are Black.

    The BSI designation is not just about enrollment numbers. It requires institutions to commit to providing essential services and resources to foster Black students’ academic success and meet their basic needs. For this reason, this proposal is a sound and logical policy prescription for California, which has the country’s fifth-largest population of Black people. It’s also a legislative innovation that other state and national policymakers should consider as American higher education is struggling to close completion and equity gaps and college demographics continue to grow more diverse.

    The BSI concept draws inspiration from the success of historically Black colleges and universities (HBCUs) — postsecondary institutions established before 1965 with the principal mission of educating African or Black Americans. Today, the nation’s 107 HBCUs have an impressive track record. They have graduated 40% of the nation’s Black engineers, 50% of America’s black lawyers and 80% of Black judges. Perhaps more than any other institution in this country, HBCUs have helped create economic and social mobility for millions of Black Americans. 

    However, most HBCUs are at least 75 years old — the majority were established in the 19th century — and are rarely found outside the South. For newer colleges and universities outside the South that serve diverse populations, a BSI designation would strengthen institutions and communities in multiple ways. It would offer a state seal of approval to institutions that are committed to serving Black students and willing to hold themselves accountable for the results. It also would help policymakers identify colleges and universities to receive targeted financial support and other resources. 

    This shift is particularly relevant given the changing demographics of today’s college students. Nontraditional, working and military students are fast becoming the norm. A third of today’s undergraduates are 25 or older. A quarter of them are raising children. About 40% of full-time students — and three-quarters of part-time students — are working while they’re in school. Because so many students are older, working full-time or raising families, it’s essential that institutions adapt to this new reality by offering flexible schedules, stackable credentials and comprehensive support services. 

    The BSI designation could be a valuable tool for states beyond California. In states with substantial Black populations but few or no HBCUs (California has just one HBCU, Charles R. Drew University of Medicine and Science), it could help increase college access, improve completion rates and build a more skilled and educated workforce to fuel economic growth.

    California’s proposal to recognize Black-serving institutions is a necessary — and long overdue — step toward acknowledging their critical role in reversing the decline in Black student enrollment and increasing access to higher education for historically underserved communities. Just as HBCUs have broadened access to education, California’s Black-serving institutions bill will reward colleges and universities statewide that are doing the vital work of serving the underserved students our economy and society need. 

    By investing in institutions committed to supporting Black students and other underserved groups, states can help foster stronger, more inclusive colleges and universities. Ensuring that more Black learners are on track to access and complete higher education will help California and other states produce the talented and inclusive workforce they need to compete in today’s fast-changing economy.

    •••

    Mark D. Milliron, Ph.D, is president, National University, a nonprofit private university based in San Diego with campuses across California as well as online. Thomas Stewart, Ph.D, is executive vice president and co-chair of the Social Justice, Equity, Diversity and Inclusion Council, National University.

    The opinions expressed in this commentary represent those of the authors. 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

  • LAUSD unanimously affirms support for immigrant and LGBTQ+ students leading up to Trump’s inauguration 

    LAUSD unanimously affirms support for immigrant and LGBTQ+ students leading up to Trump’s inauguration 


    Credit: Julie Leopo/EdSource

    Este artículo está disponible en Español. Léelo en español.

    As anti-immigrant and anti-LGBTQ+ policies and rhetoric spread across the nation in the wake of Donald Trump’s re-election for presendent, the Los Angeles Unified School District board affirmed its commitment to members of these communities by unanimously passing four resolutions on Tuesday.

    “The district will continue to do everything in its power to protect and defend the kids in our care,” one of the resolutions reads. “Doing so is the responsibility of all LAUSD employees.” 

    Here’s an overview of LAUSD’s efforts from Tuesday’s regular board meeting and what to expect in the two months leading up to Trump’s inauguration. 

    LAUSD as a sanctuary district 

    After Trump vowed to declare a national emergency and bring in the U.S. military to facilitate mass deportations, the district passed a resolution reaffirming that it will remain a sanctuary and safe zone for families. 

    “We survived the pandemic because we stood together,” said Mónica García, who authored the original sanctuary resolution in the 2016-17 academic year and previously served as the president of LAUSD’s board. “… It is so important that, as we may see policies that we do not support … that we stand together in response to the times.”

    Tuesday’s action comes about eight years after the original sanctuary resolution passed; it also requires district Superintendent Alberto Carvalho to present a plan to the board within 60 days, in time for implementation by Jan. 20, when Trump returns to the White House. 

    The resolution says Carvalho’s plan should involve training LAUSD educators, administrators and staff on responding to federal agencies and anybody else who seeks information or attempts to enter a campus. 

    Meanwhile, the resolution insists that LAUSD will “aggressively oppose” any laws forcing school districts to work with federal agencies and personnel involved with immigration enforcement. 

    “The good news is that we have seen it before, and we are in a position to act,” García said at Tuesday’s meeting. “The challenge … [is] there are families who are separated and who are traumatized because of the fear of what is to come. And we will continue to ask them to come to school and give us their very best.” 

    She added, “Whether it is two years or it is four years, it is every day that we exercise love and the power of this institution on behalf of children and families.”  

    A safe place for LGBTQ+ and immigrant communities 

    The second resolution would require LAUSD to add gender identity and expression to the list of groups covered by its “To Enforce the Respectful Treatment of All Persons” policy and require the district to update district policy bulletins as needed.  

    It also calls on the district to support legislation backing immigrant and LGBTQ+ communities — and to provide educational and mental health resources. 

    A response to Project 2025 

    A third resolution passed Tuesday promises that LAUSD will remain “inclusive, safe, and welcoming” for all communities in the face of any “immediate, incalculable, and irreparable harm” to public schools caused by Project 2025, a set of detailed policy proposals authored long before the election by hundreds of high-profile conservatives in the hope that Trump would push them if elected.

    It states that LAUSD will defend all students’ right to a public education and protect them from potential harm. 

    Carvalho will have to report back to the board within 60 days — and present an overview of the potential impacts of Project 2025 as well as a district response, the resolution states.  

    “This resolution is a bold and necessary shield against the looming threats to public education — a public good that we must protect fiercely and defend,” board member Rocío Rivas said Tuesday. 

    A new political education course 

    The fourth resolution emphasizes the importance of turning LAUSD students into critical thinkers capable of discerning facts from falsehoods and ready to participate in the American political system.

    “We’re not talking about [being] a Democrat or a Republican,” said board President Jackie Goldberg, who authored all four resolutions, during her last full board meeting Tuesday. “It’s about understanding the actual way the government works — as opposed to what the Constitution says. And there’s a big difference.”

    The resolution asks Carvalho to look into creating a high-level political education course and report back to the board in 160 days. 

    His considerations, according to the resolution, would include whether the course would serve as a requirement, areas that the curriculum would cover, the types of professional development that would be needed and the ideal grade levels to teach it. 

    The resolution also asks Carvalho to consider any other curricular changes in the grade levels leading up to the course to make sure students are prepared. 

    Anely Cortez Lopez, student board member, said at Tuesday’s meeting, “The understanding of the political landscape of the United States is vital in our schools as we continue as the change-makers of tomorrow.”





    Source link

  • First forecast for 2025-26 school funding: More money with a twist

    First forecast for 2025-26 school funding: More money with a twist


    After years of preparation inside and outside the state Capitol (shown), California has launched a website that gathers all sorts of education and career data in a single, searchable place.

    Credit: Kirby Lee / AP

    Higher revenues than Gov. Gavin Newsom and legislators predicted will likely produce a modest increase in funding in 2025-26 for TK-12 schools and community colleges, the Legislative Analyst’s Office projected on Wednesday. 

    The growth in revenues will also pay down a big portion of the state’s debt to education, with enough to sock away money into a rainy day fund for education that was depleted by the Legislature last year. But at the same time, a rarely invoked constitutional provision would deny schools and community colleges billions in funding that they would otherwise get, the LAO said. 

    The LAO’s annual state budget forecast is the first hint of how much funding schools and community colleges can expect when Newsom releases his budget in early January. How to spend the new funding amid pressure from competing interest groups — always a challenge — will be up to Newsom and the Legislature.

    The LAO is projecting only a $1.5 billion increase (1.3%) for 2025-26 above the $115.3 billion approved in June for 2024-25 for Proposition 98, the quarter-century-old voter-approved formula that determines the minimum amount that must go to schools and community colleges. It comprises 40% of the state’s annual general fund.

    But combined with an additional $3.7 billion freed up from expiring one-time costs and Proposition 98 adjustments, schools and community colleges can anticipate a 2.46% cost-of-living-adjustment for programs like the Local Control Funding Formula, the primary source of spending for TK-12. That will leave $2.8 billion in new, uncommitted spending. (The LAO suggests using a piece of that to wipe off $400 million in “deferrals,” late payments to schools that will be carried over from year to year unless paid off.)

    Even though California’s economy has been slowing and the unemployment rate is higher, the 2024-25 Proposition 98 level is projected to be $118.3 billion, $3 billion more than the Legislature set in June; however, none of the increase will go to the pockets of school districts and community colleges. All of it, by statute, will be deposited into the Proposition 98 reserve account unless the Legislature overrides the law.

    “I think that’s the element of our forecast that will surprise school groups the most,” said Ken Kapphahn, principal fiscal and policy analyst for the LAO. “I think many people do understand revenue is up in 2024-25. What isn’t as well understood is that the increase is going into the reserve and not available for them.”

    “Building reserves is a good use of one-time funding,” he said. “We just saw how valuable those reserves can be when we went through $9.5 billion from the reserve. That was a big reason why the state didn’t have to cut ongoing school programs last year. In some ways, making a deposit makes sense right now; it’s an opportunity to rebuild that reserve.”

    A big increase in tax receipts from capital gains income, which governs when and how much is deposited into the rainy-day fund, is the source of the money, the LAO said. Much of it is from stock options and reflects the wealth gap between well-compensated high-tech employees and other workers.  

    There’s also expected to be enough money by the end of 2024-25 to pay off nearly two-thirds of the $8 billion debt to schools and community colleges in 2022-23, caused by a revenue shortfall resulting from a short Covid-19 recession.

    The Proposition 98 debt to schools is called a “maintenance factor.” Repaying it becomes the top state priority once more revenue becomes available — to the extent of capturing 95 cents of every new dollar in the general fund.  The LAO projects that the maintenance factor will be lowered $4.8 billion this year, leaving $3.3 billion unpaid.

    Proposition 98 is a stunningly complex formula, and the higher 2024-25 funding level will add a new twist. Usually, the Proposition 98 level from one year becomes the base funding level for the next year. But the increase in 2024-25 is expected to be big enough to trigger a rarely used “spike” protection, limiting the increase in 2025-26; without that restriction, Proposition 98 would be $4.1 billion higher than LAO’s forecast. 

    The rationale behind its adoption is to create stability in the non-Proposition 98 side of the general fund. Education advocates view it differently, as a way to fund schools at the minimum constitutionally required level — and no more.

    “The maintenance factor payment increases Prop. 98 on an ongoing basis. On the other hand, the state is making the spike protection adjustment to slow the growth in Prop. 98,” said Kapphahn. “Both of those different formulas are part of the constitution, and they happen to be working in opposite ways.”

    The “spike” clause has been triggered several times before during years of unusual growth in Proposition 98. What would be different this time is that 2025-26 funding of $116.8 billion would be $1.5 billion less than LAO’s projection for 2024-25.

    TK-12 revenue is tied to student attendance, which has been declining in most districts. Attendance statewide fell by nearly 550,000 (9.3%) from 2019-20 to 2021-22 during the height of the Covid pandemic, and has recovered gradually. The LAO expects overall attendance to increase slightly by 12,000 students (0.2%) in 2024-25 and 26,000 (0.5%) in 2025-26 due to the expansion of transitional kindergarten for 4-year-olds. The LAO projects attendance will drop each of the three years after that by about 60,000 students primarily because of a smaller school-age population due to lower births.





    Source link

  • AmeriCorps cuts slash support services, programs for vulnerable communities

    AmeriCorps cuts slash support services, programs for vulnerable communities


    During small group reading instruction, AmeriCorps member Valerie Caballero reminds third graders in Porterville Unified to use their fingers to follow along as they read a passage.

    Lasherica Thornton/ EdSource

    Twenty-three-year-old Valerie Caballero worked with seven third-graders, guiding numerous activities on decoding words, on Thursday at Roche Elementary in Portersville. In another small group of three students, teacher Shelly Noble focused on building reading comprehension. The rest of the class, also in small groups, read independently or completed literacy assignments online, until it was time for the groups to change stations – to go to Caballero or Noble.

    Caballero is one of 85 community members trained as AmeriCorps volunteers to tutor and support over 2,000 students at 10 elementary schools in Porterville Unified. 

    The AmeriCorps program deployed her and others to third to fifth grade classrooms to provide students with additional time for reading and math intervention that they wouldn’t get elsewhere. 

    “Families rely on programs like AmeriCorps to give their child one-on-one support and attention that they need,” Caballero said. 

    Fifth grader Jizelle Alvarado, who has benefited from the AmeriCorps program since her third grade year, said volunteer Stephanie Rector has helped her read at a better pace and to multiply three-digit numbers. Without hesitation, the fifth grader said she and other students would still be struggling with reading and math if not for Rector’s daily support. 

    Last Friday, the program was one of many whose survival became uncertain because of the reduction of federal AmeriCorps grants by the Department of Government Efficiency, or DOGE, under the Trump administration. 

    Nearly $400 million in AmeriCorps funding was cut, jeopardizing more than 1,000 programs and the jobs of tens of thousands of employees, tutors, mentors and volunteers, the national volunteer service organization reported. 

    Attorney General Rob Bonta announced in a statement earlier this week that California has “taken action to hold the Trump Administration and DOGE accountable to the law.” Two dozen states, including California, filed a lawsuit Tuesday against the Trump administration for “dismantling AmeriCorps.” 

    Unless the lawsuit prevails, the AmeriCorps funding cuts – estimated at $60 million for educational, economic, environmental, health and disaster response services in the state – will impact 87 programs and over 5,600 positions, according to Cassandra González-Kester, communications manager for California Volunteers, the state service organization that receives most AmeriCorps grant funding and disperses it to schools, nonprofit organizations and other entities to address critical community needs. 

    “These cuts affect service members who responded to the LA Fires, the tutors and mentors for our young students, as well as those who care for seniors,” she said. “School districts and non-profit organizations throughout the state are already feeling these severe impacts.” 

    But the nearly 14,000-student Porterville Unified has decided to use its own funds to continue the program until May 30, the last day of school — something not all schools and organizations will be able to do, so many communities will be left without critical services. 

    Thousands of students receiving support through AmeriCorps may have those services upended or interrupted – if they haven’t already – by the sudden cancellation of grants by the Trump administration.

    The cuts are hurting the most vulnerable: kids in need of reading and math intervention; students struggling with chronic absenteeism; families experiencing housing instability; and communities recovering from natural disasters. The end of services could exacerbate existing inequalities and worsen future prospects.

    “If we aren’t able to continue this work (beyond this school year),” Warren said, “it’s going to leave a huge void, and our students are definitely going to feel the effects of that.” 

    People supporting their community 

    AmeriCorps, an independent agency of the U.S. government, supports volunteer and service efforts in California and across the country by providing opportunities for community members to meet local needs and address pressing issues, including academic support and intervention for students, youth mentoring as well as homelessness, food insecurity, health and other key areas in communities.

    Due to the range of programs that AmeriCorps supports, thousands of families in California alone will lose services, if they haven’t already. 

    “We recognize the impact this has across all programs and staff, not just in our state but nationwide,” said Monica Ramirez, the executive director of First 5 Madera, which operates the Madera Family Resource Center in the Central San Joaquin Valley.  

    The Madera Family Resource Center, a comprehensive hub for families with children aged 0 to 5, is partially funded by federal AmeriCorps money. The center provides weekly playgroups, preschool readiness programs, developmental screenings and resource referrals to support early childhood development. After getting notice about the AmeriCorps funding cuts, which had, in part, made services possible, the resource center, which extends services to Chowchilla, Eastern Madera County, and the Madera Ranchos, closed its doors this week. 

    Porterville Unified’s ‘Building Communities, Changing Lives’ is largely funded by AmeriCorps. AmeriCorps awarded the district more than $1.6 million in federal funds and the district matched those funds with about $1.2 million this school year. 

    Most of that funding goes toward living stipends for AmeriCorps members, community members and college students who may be tutors, mentors or in other roles. 

    Covering the operating costs for 85 AmeriCorps members who provide 35 hours of weekly student intervention and support is approximately $210,000 for May, an expense the district likely won’t be able to foot without the AmeriCorps funds. 

    “I don’t see another way to move forward without the AmeriCorps funding,” Warren said. 

    State agencies, such as California Volunteers, are trying to fill the void for impacted groups, Fresno State College Corps director Mellissa Jessen-Hiser said. The state, she said, will fund the college corps members’ continued work at places such as the food bank, Poverello House, a homeless shelter in Fresno, and Fresno Unified schools for the rest of the semester. 

    The federal government has provided more than half of the funding for some of California’s AmeriCorps programming, with the agency’s members supporting 17,000 foster youth with education and employment, and tutoring or mentoring 73,833 students in 2023-24, according to California Volunteers. 

    Volunteers play a ‘vital role’ in student progress

    Of the more than 2,000 students that Porterville Unified AmeriCorps members provide one-on-one and small-group instruction, tutoring and intervention to, 1,657 are in need of academic support, based on this year’s district assessments. 

    Members work with at least 25 students each day over 10 months of the school year; they focus on reading and literacy, helping struggling students get to grade level. 

    “It’s going to create a larger learning gap if they’re not receiving this extra support,” said Caballero, the tutor. 

    Based on mid-year data from this school year, 44% of students served by AmeriCorps members have improved by at least one proficiency level on their reading assessment, demonstrating meaningful academic progress, Warren, the program director, reported. 

    Lasherica Thornton/ EdSource
    Lasherica Thornton/ EdSource
    Lasherica Thornton/ EdSource
    Roche Elementary third grade teacher Shelly Noble said students receive at least three rounds of daily reading intervention from their time with her, with AmeriCorps volunteer Valerie Caballero and from the school’s intervention specialist. Through Valerie Porterville Unified’s ‘Building Communities, Changing Lives’ AmeriCorps program, Cabellero not only provides small group instruction but also supports students individually.

    And with an extra person in the classroom working alongside them, teachers gain the ability to focus on the academic struggles of students who need it most.

    Without AmeriCorps, “we will not see the growth in reading and writing that we see because the majority (of the work) will be put on myself,” said Noble, the third grade teacher. 

    The AmeriCorps members also build meaningful connections with students, extending their support beyond academics and making students feel valued, thereby creating an engaging and supportive learning environment. 

    “We’re able to really see the effects of having those members work with those students and the impacts that they’re making,” Warren said. 

    Federal funding cuts trickle down to schools

    The California Reading Corps and Math Corps, or Ampact Educational Programs, across Fresno, San Mateo, San Joaquin, Merced, Tulare, Santa Barbara and Riverside counties have supported thousands of students with academic intervention, including over 6,000 students last school year. AmeriCorps members prepare students for kindergarten, get elementary students on track to grade-level proficiency by third grade and have seventh graders algebra-ready by eighth grade, according to program information for this school year. Its more than $3.1 million in federal funding is one of California’s 87 impacted programs. 

    Thomas Elementary in Fresno Unified, which has used the AmeriCorps reading support program, doesn’t plan to use the Reading Corps next school year due to the possible federal cuts, the district confirmed. 

    Under the 30-year-old Kern Community Mentoring program, three dozen AmeriCorps members have mentored over 700 high-needs students in the urban and rural communities of Kern County each year, according to Robert Meszaros, communications director with the Kern County Superintendent of Schools that administers the program. 

    By providing encouragement, guidance and support, they address the “whole child”, a philosophy that is evident in several AmeriCorps programs, specifically those focused on mentorship. 

    Each year, mentors help at least 20 students improve their academics, attendance, behavior and engagement, and based on data from the program, more than half of the mentees improve their attendance and reduce suspensions. 

    With the cuts to AmeriCorps, Meszaros said, it may mean the loss of the program. 

    Alternative funding, other options

    Programs impacted by the federal funding cuts are exploring options to continue serving the community. Some are seeking support from their state representatives, who can advocate on their behalf at the state and possibly national level. 

    “Not sure what the next steps are,” Warren said. Porterville Unified is looking for alternative funding sources, such as state grants. 

    So is the Kern County education office for the AmeriCorps mentoring program it runs. 

    “Ultimately if that funding can’t be sourced from other resources,” Warren said, ”then it goes away and we’re left with a big void.”

    While it’s unclear at the moment whether the multimillion-dollar cuts will stand, the people working in AmeriCorps programs urged decision-makers to realize the people affected. 

    In the words of Caballero, the Porterville Unified tutor: “think about students’ needs.” 





    Source link

  • Trump nominee for education secretary would come backed with detailed policy agenda

    Trump nominee for education secretary would come backed with detailed policy agenda


    Linda McMahon, former administrator of Small Business Administration, speaking during the Republican National Convention on July 18, 2024, in Milwaukee.

    Credit: AP Photo/J. Scott Applewhite

    President-elect Donald Trump’s selection of a close ally and the co-chair of his transition team indicates that education could be a major priority of his administration, even though it did not feature prominently in the 2024 presidential campaign.

    Linda McMahon, the former CEO of World Wrestling Entertainment, is a leading financial backer Trump has been close to for decades. She is also chair of the board of the little known America First Policy Institute, sometimes referred to as a “shadow transition operation” or “White House in waiting.”

    The institute has issued a detailed education policy agenda that is likely to serve as a guide for McMahon, and the Trump administration in general, should she be confirmed by the U.S. Senate.

    For those reading the political tea leaves, it was notable that in nominating McMahon, Trump did not explicitly charge her with shutting down the U.S. Department of Education, and that the agenda of the America First Policy Institute does not call for it either. Instead, Trump called on her “to spearhead efforts to send education back to the states” an expansive and undefined charge, especially because by law education is already mostly a state and local function.

    Regardless of the fate of the department, the contrast between President Joe Biden’s and Trump’s education agendas — and between McMahon and current Secretary of Education Miguel Cardona — could not be wider. 

    Cardona is a lifelong educator, becoming secretary after a career as a teacher, principal, district administrator, and state commissioner of education. McMahon spent most of her career building the WWE, founded with her husband, Vince McMahon. 

    Cardona’s net worth is estimated by Forbes magazine to be $1 million, most of it tied up in his principal residence, retirement savings, and a 529 college savings account for his children. By contrast, Forbes places McMahon and her husband’s net worth at $2.5 billion. 

    The only thing they seem to have in common is that they are both from Connecticut. 

    But even though McMahon has a slim resume regarding education, she is not entirely an education neophyte. She studied to become a French teacher in college. She has been a trustee of Sacred Heart College, a Catholic college in Fairfield, Connecticut, for years. She was appointed to the Connecticut State Board of Education in 2009, although she left after a year to run for the U.S. Senate in 2010 and again in 2012 — both times unsuccessfully.  

    McMahon is more of a traditional conservative Republican than several of Trump’s other Cabinet nominees. In some ways, she is more similar to Betsy DeVos, another billionaire, who was Trump’s first secretary of education. But unlike DeVos, she has had experience in government, as head of the Small Business Administration during Trump’s first term.   

    In 2019, she left that post, not under a cloud or fleeing vitriol from Trump like many others in his administration, to head the America First PAC, which raised funds for Trump’s re-election bid in 2020. 

    On the explosive issue of “school choice,” publicly, at least, she has mostly called for expanding charter schools, rather than taxpayer-funded vouchers. “I am an advocate for choice through charter schools,” she declared in her 2010 campaign for Senate. 

    She also has some bipartisan instincts, even getting support from the Democratic senators she had previously run against, when they had to approve her nomination to head the Small Business Administration. Sen. Richard Blumenthal called her “a person of serious accomplishment and ability,” and Sen. Chris Murphy described her as a “talented and experienced businessperson.”

    As SBA administrator, she drew high praise from some Democrats for increasing loans to women-owned businesses, and for making the agency more efficient, including from then-Sen. Ben Cardin, D-Md., the ranking member of the Small Business and Entrepreneur Committee.

    Another sign of her bipartisan inclinations came in a September commentary in The Hill newspaper, when she argued for a radical revision of the Pell Grant, the main form of federal student financial aid. 

    While most Pell grants go to full-time students, McMahon argued that the grant should also be available to students enrolled in “high-quality, shorter-term, industry-aligned education programs that could lead to immediate employment in well-paying jobs.” 

    To that end, she endorsed a bill known as the Workforce Pell Act, sponsored by lawmakers usually on far opposite sides of the political aisle — Rep. Virginia Foxx, R-N.C., and Rep. Elise Stefanik, R-N.Y., Rep. Mark DeSaulnier, D-Calif., Bobby Scott, D-Va. 

    Arguably one of her key qualifications is that she and Trump have a positive relationship. Unlike many who served in his first administration and left reviled by their former boss, when she stepped down as SBA administrator, Trump praised her as a “superstar.” “Just so smooth,” he said. “She’s been one of our all-time favorites.”

    But her most important credential may well be her role as chair of the board of the America First Policy Institute, which she helped start.

    Its 150-person staff includes well-known Trump staffers like Kellyanne Conway and its executive director, Chad Wolf, the former secretary of homeland security. Pam Bondi, the head of the institute’s legal arm, was just nominated by Trump to be attorney general in place of Matt Gaetz, who withdrew his nomination.

    Like Project 2025, the conservative blueprint issued by the Heritage Foundation, which Trump has disavowed and says he had no role in crafting, the America First Policy Institute has also drawn up a similar detailed policy framework, including one on education. Yet the institute has not done much to publicize its proposals, which Trump has reportedly appreciated.  

    The institute draws a sharp contrast between its “America First” polices and what it calls “America Last” policies championed by Democrats.

    “America Last” policies, it argues, “prioritize radical ideologies and failing public schools.” These include promoting “transgenderism” and “radical ideologies over core subjects,” while fighting “school choice expansion,” and parent notification policies regarding curriculum and gender identification. 

    The institute calls for reinstating Trump’s 1776 Commission to promote “patriotic civic education” and removing critical race theory and diversity, equity and inclusion from what it alleges are requirements for federal grants.

    And instead of supporting “leftist teachers unions” and teacher tenure, it advocates for “reduced union influence, and increasing flexibility in hiring and firing.”

    For these and other reasons, it is to be expected that key education groups would oppose McMahon’s nomination. 

    “Rather than working to strengthen public schools, expand learning opportunities for students, and support educators, McMahon’s only mission is to eliminate the Department of Education and take away taxpayer dollars from public schools,” said President Becky Pringle, president of the National Education Association, the largest teachers union in the U.S.

    But for conservatives like Frederick Hess, director of education policy studies at the American Enterprise Institute, McMahon is an unknown quantity when it comes to education, and he made a pitch for approaching her nomination with an open mind. “I’m looking forward to learning more about her views and approach to the role in the weeks to come,” he said. “I’d avoid gross assumptions based on biography. Those seeking reflexive celebration or condemnation should look elsewhere. “

    Controversy has already surfaced about her nomination. Media reports point to an October lawsuit in Maryland alleging McMahon and her husband failed to stop a prominent WWE ringside announcer in the 1980s and 1990s from sexually abusing 12- and 13-year-olds known as “ring boys” who were hired to do errands in preparation for wrestling matches.

    What is still an open question is whether Trump will move to eliminate the Department of Education, or how aggressively he will do so. His administration may decide that it is more important to keep the department intact for any number of reasons, including transforming its influential Office of Civil Rights into a weapon to impose his education agenda onto states or schools.

    And it is possible that McMahon will continue to voice her praise for teachers, and for public schools, including charter schools. “We have a very good system of public and private schools,” she said in an interview a decade ago. “I’ve watched some masterful teachers who are innovative and who are reaching kids who are below grade level in many of the subjects.  To see how they get turned around is heartwarming and astounding.”





    Source link

  • For a true meritocracy, education must not be one-size-fits-all

    For a true meritocracy, education must not be one-size-fits-all


    A student in Oakland’s Skyline High School Education and Community Health Pathway sculpts a clay model of the endocrine system.

    Credit: Allison Shelley for American Education

    It’s time to balance out our lopsided education system. Millions of parents and students have long struggled with our one-size-fits-all model, which primarily teaches to, tests for and celebrates students as theorists, not practitioners.

    Our current system acts as a gatekeeper to the middle class by doling out opportunity based on grades and test scores in a traditional classroom setting, but rarely recognizes competencies and interests beyond standardized exams and essays.

    Fifty years ago, students could opt into publicly funded trade schools and apprenticeships or enroll in practice-based classes like home economics and shop in traditional academic schools, which taught skills that led to well-paying jobs in carpentry, culinary arts and other trades. But over time, public funding for such programs dried up. The share of federal spending on vocational instruction as part of elementary and secondary education dropped from roughly 30% in 1970 to just 7.5% in 2022. Even as elementary and secondary education spending ballooned from $5.8 billion a year to $96 billion during this period, the vocational component grew only from $1.8 billion to $7.2 billion.

    Most publicly funded instruction now happens at desks, with grading based on written exams, essays and problem sets rather than demonstrations and hands-on learning. Some students are more prepared than others to succeed in such a system, exacerbating existing inequalities. 

    Research by the Economic Policy Institute found that social class, as defined by parental income, education and job, is the leading predictor for a student’s school readiness: Kindergartners from the highest social class possess more theory-based skills and perform an entire standard deviation higher on math and reading tests than kindergartners from the lowest social class. The gaps are particularly high for Black and Hispanic students, who are more likely than white children to live in poverty. When some students inevitably falter, the system tells them they are failures and offers trade schools and technical colleges as second-tier alternatives they often must pay for themselves.

    It didn’t have to be this way. The United States originally based its system on a German/Prussian model, which prioritized efficiency by tracking students into “academic” or “vocational” tracks at age 10. In that model, still in place in Germany today, students are expected to know what they want to do by adolescence, and many simply end up in the same track as their parents. 

    The United States, hoping to advance a true meritocracy, did not want a system that limited intergenerational mobility in this way, and over the 20th century we adopted a liberal arts approach that was supposed to prioritize economic and social mobility. But in a myopic attempt to get rid of tracking, we inadvertently eliminated vocational education and simply tracked all our students into the academic model. The result? The worst of both worlds for less traditional students who struggle in a sink-or-swim academic system.

    Student outcomes now depend a lot on parents’ backgrounds, just like in Germany.

    There is another possibility. Consider Finland, which in the 1970s switched from the German model to one that teaches a combination of academic and technical subjects until age 16, when students choose a track. The vocational path for students interested in highly -skilled trades includes carpentry and culinary arts, but it also offers applied sciences, health care, and social services, which in the United States would require attending traditional academic universities. 

    Finland’s vocational path is highly competitive and includes matriculation at rigorous polytechnic universities with high-level training in subjects like business, engineering and nursing and quality instructors with connections to actual companies — not an alternative education. With a system that celebrates the value of highly skilled thinkers and workers, Finland recently ranked first out of 143 countries on the World Happiness Report for the seventh consecutive year, and as of 2021, its income inequality is eighth lowest among 37 countries in the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (the United States ranks 23 on the World Happiness Report, and its income inequality is down at 33, beating only Turkey, Mexico, Chile and Costa Rica).

    Of course, the United States is not Finland, and we cannot simply adopt its system. (Though before you discount Finland because of its smaller or more homogeneous population, consider that its size and composition are comparable to many U.S. states, and much of U.S. education policy is decided at the state level.) What we can do is stop deciding who is educated, intelligent and successful based on only one type of student. Instead, we should recognize the value of all students, and offer more mainstream career and technical opportunities across K-12 education. 

    States and the federal government should fund more career and technical education, including apprenticeships, hands-on learning courses and training and recruitment for vocational teachers. They should work with employers, schools, training organizations and other groups to tie education to the workforce needs of their region. 

    Everyone should be given the opportunity to pursue a traditional academic education, but they should also be able to pursue an equally rigorous vocational one, equipped with public resources and support. Only then will the middle class truly be open to all.

    •••

    Eric Chung is a lawyer, a Paul and Daisy Soros Fellow, and a Public Voices Fellow of the OpEd Project. His work focuses on law and policy related to economic mobility and educational opportunity.

    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

  • We must do more to ensure college is worth it for all students

    We must do more to ensure college is worth it for all students


    Credit: People Images / iStock

    The national rhetoric regarding the value of attending a college or university has reached a fever pitch. Being “better off” goes well beyond politics and the price of milk and eggs or an understanding of how tariffs work. Let’s face it: Education provides opportunity, and making higher education work for everyone must be a priority if we are to be a thriving, civilized society. 

    Let’s start with the current disruptive notion that poses the discomfiting question: Is a college degree worth it?

    Many of us working in postsecondary education felt that question didn’t go far enough in looking for the opportunity to improve in new and better ways when the stakes are higher than ever.  

    So, we took that question on as a challenge and expanded it to ask: What is college worth, and how do we measure and improve its value, especially for low- and moderate-income learners? Answers to such questions should prove fruitful, especially given that a new Gallup survey reports Californians overwhelmingly value postsecondary degrees or credentials, particularly because of their career-related benefits. Yet, we know that many are hesitant to enroll in college or university because of the perceived unaffordability of earning a credential or degree.

    This led our organizations to explore what kind of return on investment higher education institutions — part of a stale, antiquated system that does not always deliver on its promise of economic mobility and equity — provide to their learners. The ensuing report produced more nuanced data to inform continuing conversations on the value of postsecondary education, which, frankly, helps learners and their families make decisions on where they want to make a higher education investment from a value and return-on-investment perspective.

    Our first step was to look at the value that California institutions offer their low- and moderate-income learners. We also wanted to know if certain college programs or credentials made a difference.

    After all, learners who choose a postsecondary education should end up better off for it, right? 

    The good news we found was, yes, most students were better off for the most part. The troubling news, though, was that for some students, it was not always, and sometimes, never. 

    We’ve also learned that sometimes a student’s college major can matter just as much for an economic return-on-investment — if not more — than the institution itself. Some programs provide a strong return, but some offer none whatsoever, even leaving some degree or credential graduates making less than a high school graduate.

    For example, we found that almost all programs (97%) offered at public institutions in California show their graduates being able to earn back the costs of obtaining a degree or credential within only five years. Essentially, these graduates earn enough of an “additional income” because of their college degree to make their college program worth it.

    And, also impressive, nearly half of public college programs (48%) allow this within one year’s time. Programs at private nonprofit colleges in California generally take students longer, as only 7% enable graduates to recoup their costs within 12 months. And worrisomely, for-profit colleges show their graduates struggling to recoup their college costs, and nearly a fifth of their programs (17%) show no economic return whatsoever.

    This work is not a denouncement of any specific program or desired area of study, but rather an opportunity for further research to understand why and how these institutions and college programs produce these outcomes and where there may be policy and practical implications.

    A simple example of such a practical change may be for institutions to provide a clearer picture to students before they enroll of how much a specific program will cost — and provide information on how much former students typically earn. Another may be more geared toward college administrators to ensure that they are equipping students with the right skills — and necessary credentials — to pursue and succeed in careers within the geographic region where the institution is located.   

    Institutional leaders and elected officials must lean into discussions that are happening right now about the value of a college education and how it ties to learners’ futures and where improvements can happen.

    While more questions must be answered — and more research will follow — one thing has become abundantly clear: Our higher education system can no longer be enabled by a “this is the way we do things” mentality in places where it is not working.

    Postsecondary attainment must be tied to value, economic mobility and equity, as this is essential to creating a higher education system that drives a robust, inclusive economy that works for all Californians. 

    •••

    Eloy Ortiz Oakley is president and CEO of College Futures Foundation, whose mission is based on a belief in the power of postsecondary opportunity.

    Michael Itzkowitz is founder and president of the HEA Group, a research and consulting agency focused on college access, value, and economic mobility.

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

    EdSource receives funding from many foundations, including The College Futures Foundation. EdSource maintains sole editorial control over the content of its coverage. 





    Source link

  • State Board criticized for soft-pedaling reporting on low student test scores

    State Board criticized for soft-pedaling reporting on low student test scores


    Students exchange ideas in a science classroom.

    Credit: Allison Shelley / EDUimages

    Clarity matters when explaining to parents how their children did on standardized tests. An imprecise characterization of a complicated score can mislead parents into assuming their kids performed better than they did.

    That issue is at the heart of the opposition to draft revisions to descriptions of students’ scores on the Smarter Balanced assessments that are sent home to parents. While the degree of difficulty of the tests and their scoring wouldn’t change, the characterization of the results would, like replacing the term “standard not met” with “inconsistent” for the lowest scores.

    Parent focus groups this week

    The California Department of Education is scheduling three online focus groups to gather thoughts, questions and concerns on proposed changes to how scores on the Smarter Balanced statewide assessments will be reported publicly. The meetings are for parents, teachers and students. 

    Tuesday, Dec. 3, 6 to 7 p,m.: Session 1, in English 

    Wednesday, Dec. 4, 7 to 8 p.m. Session 2, in English for students only

    Thursday, Dec. 5, 6 to 7 p.m. Session 3, in Spanish

    Go here to register and complete this interest form to participate.

    The State Board of Education delayed its adoption at its November meeting because of criticism that the revised wording may compound, not solve, current unclear language.

    Board members listened to children’s advocacy groups who chided state officials for not first consulting with teachers and parents before taking any action — which state officials acknowledged they hadn’t done.

    In a letter to the state board about the proposed changes, particularly the labeling of low test scores, nine student advocacy groups — the Alliance for Students — argued that the revised language “will only serve to obfuscate the data and make it even more challenging for families and advocates to lift the needs of our most underserved students.” Signers of the letter include Teach Plus, Children Now, and Innovate Public Schools.

    Getting the terms right is important for the assessment scores to be useful to parents and teachers, Sarah Lillis, executive director of Teach Plus California, told EdSource. “We want to make sure the signals sent by the descriptors foster dialogue” and encourage parents to ask the right questions. 

    “We echo the concerns of our colleagues,” testified Lindsay Tornatore, representing the California County Superintendents at the board’s Nov. 13 meeting. “Outreach to parents, families and the community should have been prioritized to engage in multiple opportunities prior to the changes being made.”

    In response, the California Department of Education hastily scheduled online presentations this week for parents and teachers, with the expectation that they will consider any recommendations at their next meeting in January.

    How scores are reported

    A student’s scores on the Smarter Balanced tests in English language arts and math and on the California Science Test fall within one of four achievement levels that provide context on how the student performed. Level 4, with the highest attainable scores, is also labeled “Standard Exceeded.” Level 3 is labeled Standard Met; Level 2 is Standard Nearly Met, and Level 1 is Standard Not Met. Many of the dozen states and territories that give Smarter Balanced use the same definitions. 

    The target is to score at least Level 3, which indicates a student is working at grade level. In the 2023-24 results, fewer than half of students achieved Levels 3 or 4: 53% scored at levels 1 or 2 in English language arts, and 64.5% scored at Levels 1 or 2 in math.  The tests are given to students in grades three through eight and grade 11.

    Statewide scores were worse in science, which is given to students in grades five, eight, and once in high school, 69.3% failed to meet Level 3 — the grade-level standard — in 2023-24.

    In response to criticism that the existing labels are vague, imprecise and confusing, Smarter Balanced representatives decided to create a new set of labels and brief descriptions, which states have the option to use. This is particularly so for Level 2 — the “Standard Nearly Met” label. Many parents don’t understand what nearly meeting grade-level standards in particular means. 

    Under the Smarter Balanced draft for the scoring bands, Level 4 would become “Advanced,” Level 3 would be “Proficient,” Level 2 would be “Foundational,” and Level 1 would be “Inconsistent.”

    A draft description for Level 2 in language arts for third to fifth grade would read, “The student demonstrates foundational grade-level skills and shows a basic understanding of and ability to apply the knowledge and skills in English language arts/literacy needed for likely success in future coursework.”

    In letters and in remarks at the board meeting, critics indicated they’re fine with “Advanced” and “Proficient” but are unhappy with the labels Foundational and Inconsistent for Levels 1 and 2.

    “The language is confusing and not engaging for families with the first two levels,” said Joanna French, director of research and policy strategies for Innovate Public Schools. “If a student is not at grade level, be direct about that. You cannot address a problem you cannot see.”

    Tonya Craft-Perry, a 15-year teacher who is active in the Black Parent Network of Innovate Public Schools, said that “’Foundational’ could lead parents to believe their children are doing better than they are. It makes the district and teachers look better, but if a low score requires intervention, a parent needs to know that,” she said.

    Several board members indicated that one easy remedy would be to include language in the revision’s current descriptions. The wording makes clear that a student scoring in Level 2 “may require further development” to demonstrate the knowledge and skills to succeed in future grades or, for older students, in college courses after high school. Students scoring in Level 1 “needs substantial improvement” to succeed.

    News media oversimplifies

    In a two-page explanation, Smarter Balanced blamed the news media for much of the misunderstanding over the current wording of the labels.

    “The media often incorrectly reports that students who aren’t proficient ‘can’t do math’ or ‘can’t read.’ This is not true. The Smarter Balanced assessments are aligned to grade-level content, and students who achieve Levels 2, 3, and 4 do, in fact, demonstrate a continuum of grade-level knowledge and skills,” it said.

    Students at all three of those levels are showing that they “understand core content,” said Linda Darling-Hammond, president of the California State Board of Education, at the board meeting.

    But as scores progress from one level to the next, students convey increasing accuracy and complexity in their knowledge and skills. Smarter Balanced said students demonstrate this in how they respond to more complex reading passages, concepts and advanced vocabulary, or in math, the number of elements in equations and difficult word problems.

    Rob Manwaring, a senior adviser to the advocacy group Children Now, said that the new labels would feed the “reality gap in the perceptions of parents that their kids are doing better than they are” in school. In an often-cited 2023 parent survey in communities nationwide, survey firm Gallup and the nonprofit parent advocacy organization Learning Heroes found that, based on their kids’ report cards, parents’ perceptions were out of whack with how their children did on assessments. In Sacramento County, where 28% of students were proficient in math tests, 85% of parents believed their children were proficient.

    “Now we are suggesting that students scoring below standard are foundational. Many parents will conclude, ‘My kid is doing fine,’” Manwaring said.





    Source link

  • Ballet opens doors for children to chase the joy of dance

    Ballet opens doors for children to chase the joy of dance


    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kNr3iXUvL2s

    Watch Gabriela Rodriguez dance at New Ballet in San Jose.

    Gabriela Rodriguez first glimpsed the magic of ballet in the third grade. The 7-year-old didn’t know a pirouette from a puppet when she first got tapped for the New Ballet School’s First Step program, which brings the joy of dance to low-income students in the San Jose Unified school district. 

    As a tiny tot, she loved to dance with her Wii every day after school. Now she’s 19, studying Level 6, the highest level at the ballet school, and is also a member of the studio company, a stepping stone to becoming a professional ballerina. The supple dancer with a sunny personality seems to float across the studio at a recent “Nutcracker” rehearsal, twirling like a spinning top. 

    Dance has changed her life forever, she says. She’ll never forget the first time she watched the beauty of “Swan Lake” unfurl on stage.

    “It was so beautiful and graceful, I knew I wanted to be up there on stage, wearing a pretty tutu,” said Rodriguez, who lives with her family in East San Jose. “I was also a really hyper kid, so ballet also taught me discipline, how to be still, how to focus.”

    The program shines a spotlight on the sheer love of movement for first, second and third graders at local Title 1 schools — schools that receive federal funding to enhance educational opportunities for low-income families. Roughly 50 children a year receive scholarships that include free ballet classes, including leotards and footwear. Like Rodriguez, many children are recommended for the program by their elementary school teachers. 

    Little dancers in the ballet’s First Step program often make their stage debut in the holiday classic, “The Nutcracker.”
    Credit: San Jose’s New Ballet

    “My mother warned me that it would be a big commitment if I decided to take this route,” said Rodriguez, who dances about three hours a day in addition to nightly ballet rehearsals, “and it is a lot of hard work, physically and mentally as well.” 

    Rodriguez whirls onto center stage this holiday season in the starring role of Clara in “The San Jose Nutcracker.” Based on E.T.A. Hoffmann’s story “The Nutcracker and the King of Mice,” Tchaikovsky’s gem was first danced in St. Petersburg, Russia, in 1892 and has become a yuletide tradition. New Ballet gives the chestnut a local twist, setting the story in turn-of-the-century San Jose, the Valley of the Heart’s Delight.

    Many of the youngsters in the First Step program make their stage debuts as adorable rodents, the minions of the menacing Mouse King in the Christmas classic. They learn about the magic of live performance, how to combat stage fright with rehearsal and how rigor and tenacity can help unleash their individual creativity. Ballet balances the sheer power of kinetic energy with an almost mathematical exercise in precision. 

    “It taught me about discipline,” says Rodriguez. “You have to make sure you get your schoolwork done and your household chores done while you’re spending so much time at the ballet.”

    Rodriguez has now danced in “Nutcracker” nine times as well as recorded the story of “La Boutique Fantasque” for the troupe in Spanish. She also works as a hostess in a restaurant to make ends meet.

    “I want to pursue dance for as long as I can,” Rodriguez said. She fantasizes about training at New York’s storied Juilliard School but fears the cost would be prohibitive. “If I went, I’d be the first in my family to go to college.”

    Young dancers in the ballet’s First Step program get to take classes, to learn the joy of dance without spending a fortune.
    Credit: San Jose’s New Ballet

    The high price of arts and culture today keeps many cash-strapped audience members away. That’s why equity is part of the mission of New Ballet. Founder Dalia Rawson believes the arts are an expression of our collective humanity that belongs to all of us, not a luxury for the privileged few.

    “There’s nothing frivolous about dance,” said Rawson, executive artistic director of the ballet. “Dancing is part of everybody’s human experience. We believe dance is for everybody. It feeds everybody’s soul. If you don’t dance, you’re not connecting to a part of yourself.”

    As our society becomes ever more sedentary, some experts warn, we may be losing touch with the essential need to move our bodies. Children, in particular, need physical activity to stimulate the brain, enhance concentration and boost learning. Dance is an invitation to marry movement with the creative impulse, to make poetry out of motion. 

    “Dance is something that all humans need,” said Rawson. “We all thrive when we’re connected to our body. And it’s good for your soul. It’s good for your heart. It’s good for your sense of who you are as a human.”

    The thrust of the program isn’t so much to cultivate professional dancers and artists as it is to spread the alchemy of arts education, its ability to boost engagement and cognition at a time when chronic absenteeism has skyrocketed.  

    “We look for kids who have that little spark,” said Laura Burton, director of outreach for the ballet. “That’s something that you want to see grow, because especially at this age, we don’t need to see them do a plié. Does that kid have the heart and the passion? We bring them in and we have two or three classes that we run specifically for them. They get to take the whole semester free of charge.”

    Knowing who their audience is, what their niche is, is central to their vision of the ballet. The troupe is all about speaking to their unique community. 

    Tiny dancers in the ballet’s First Step program get to take classes, to learn the joy of dance without spending a fortune.
    Credit: San Jose’s New Ballet

    “We are not trying to compete with San Francisco Ballet,” said Rawson. “We never will. It’s a $60 million budget, and it’s not hard to get there. If you want to see one of the best ballet companies in the entire world, you can get there in an hour.” 

    New Ballet focuses instead on opening doors to the next generation, to children and families who can’t pay a fortune for a night of dance. 

    “We try to make it fun, easy and accessible,” said Rawson. “We don’t have the budget to pay top dancer salaries, but we hire dancers who bring something really special to the stage. We don’t discriminate by body type or anything else.” 

    These dancers, like Rodriguez, are true believers in the power of dance to uplift the soul. New Ballet dancers often hold down outside gigs to support their artistic pursuits. 

    “What they share is they want to be here,” said Rawson. “They love to dance. They’re passionate about ballet. That to me is more important than the perfect line of your leg.”’

    Rodriguez, for one, dreams of one day teaching dance to children and adults with disabilities, people who may not realize that you don’t have to be a world-class athlete to chase the joy of dance.

    “Why not?” she says. “If you start late, you can still dance. If you’re missing something, you can still dance. There’s modifications for everybody out there. Anyone can dance if they truly want to. There’s always a way.” 





    Source link

  • 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