Category Archives: education

Optimism

Posted on by
Reply

Scott Fitzgerald (R, WI) and Aaron Withe, Freedom Foundation CEO, have it in spades regarding the National Education Association. The headline on their Tuesday Wall Street Journal op-ed illustrates it:

America’s Largest Teachers Union Isn’t Beyond Reform

Yes, it is. The NEA is utterly beyond redemption as its managers insist on pushing CRT, child transgenderism, and more from its pantheon of woke ideologies onto children, all the while deprecating the role of those children’s parents in their kids’ education.

The failure is sealed by NEA President Becky Pringle’s hysterical rant earlier this month at the NEA’s 2023 Representative Assembly, excerpted here.

The NEA is a Congressionally chartered teachers union, and Fitzgerald and Withe think it would be sufficient to amend the union’s charter

by adding 11 accountability and transparency provisions commonly found in other federal charters, such as prohibiting the NEA from engaging in political activities and lobbying, requiring it to submit annual reports to Congress, and requiring that its officers be US citizens.

However, the relationship between a union so chartered and Congress is tenuous at best. Congress doesn’t even supervise its chartered organizations; it only receives nominally annual financial statements. In the NEA’s case, its Congressional charter enjoined the union to promot[e] “the cause of education in the United States.” Yet, by Fitzgerald’s and Withe’s own admission,

[t]he NEA has worked not to fulfill its original purpose but to promote a left-wing social and economic agenda at odds with many Americans’ values. The union has used its institutional heft as leverage to influence nearly every major policy debate, from the debt ceiling and abortion to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and the Second Amendment. Meantime, it has opposed efforts to reform failing schools by such means as school choice, curriculum transparency and performance pay for teachers.

What makes them think the NEA’s management would do any better at obeying an adjusted charter?

No, Congress is better off withdrawing the NEA’s charter altogether. Fitzgerald and Withe and their respective colleagues should work more locally to get the NEA decertified in as many school districts as possible.

Do What I Tell You

Posted on by
Reply

Nice little school you got there. Be too bad if somethin’ was to happen to it.

In response to the Temecula Unified School Board’s decision not to adopt a controversial social studies textbook in May, California [Progressive-Democrat] Governor Gavin Newsom challenged the board’s decision and threatened it with legislative consequences if it does not reverse course.

Here’s Newsom putting it plainly:

If the school board won’t do its job by its next board meeting to ensure kids start the school year with basic materials, the state will deliver the book into the hands of children and their parents—and we’ll send the district the bill and fine them for violating state law.

Nor is it Newsom alone. It’s the Progressive-Democratic Party at large, as illustrated by State Assembly Speaker Robert Rivas (D, 29th District):

The antics of the Temecula Valley Unified School District are intolerable and damaging to its students’ opportunities to grow, prosper, and succeed. Book bans betray the most basic of California’s core values. I hope the members of the school board are able to reflect on their decisions and come to make better decisions for our children’s futures.

Aside from the all-too-typical Progressive-Democrat lie—no books are being banned by Temecula—students’ opportunities to grow, prosper, and succeed depend on their being taught reading, writing, and arithmetic instead of being indoctrinated with the racism and the professional victimhood and oppressor class sewage of CRT.

The antics, to use Rivas’ distortionate term, center on protecting our children, and that’s something the Progressive-Democrat Governor and his cronies object to.

A Bogus Beef

Posted on by
Reply

Some academics object to Texas’ Republican Governor Greg Abbott moving to ban TikTok from Texas government devices and from personal devices used to conduct Texas official business. Texas’ legislature passed the bill creating the ban, and Abbott signed it into law last December. Now a New York State-headquartered organization, ironically named The Knight First Amendment Institute, which is a facility of New York City’s Columbia University, is suing Abbott among other governors, over the ban, claiming free speech violations.

The lawsuit said the state’s decision…is comprising teaching and research. And more specifically, it said it was “seriously impeding” faculty pursuing research into the app—including research that could illuminate or counter concerns about TikTok.

This is, to use the legalese technical term, a crock. It’s also, to use a legal technical term, a frivolous suit.

Banning TikTok in no way inhibits what these academics say or collaborate over, nor does it in any way impede those academics’ speech or collaboration; it only bans one tool, a national security risk, from being used for the speech/collaboration. There are, after all, a plethora of communication and collaboration devices available other than TikTok. To name just a few (located after 10 grueling seconds on Bing search):

  • Slack
  • Zoom
  • Miro
  • MindMeister
  • Loom
  • Asana
  • Notion
  • Microsoft Teams

There are, also, freeware tools like Hugo and Scribe.

It’s hard to believe these So Smart persons aren’t aware of these tools. Maybe they should listen more to the students in their freshman orientation courses.

It’s even harder to understand why these Precious Ones insist on leaving their personal information; their research ideas, techniques, and progresses; their speech and thought available for People’s Republic of China government personnel to freely exploit; they should be called to explain that.

Their free speech interference claim is especially pernicious, given that these august personages are of the same guild that so zealously blocks, even with violence and firings, the speech of those with whom they disagree.

“Undemocratic”

Posted on by
Reply

Wisconsin Governor Tony Evers (D) used his “line-item” veto power to veto part of a legislatively-passed law regarding public school funding. His veto authority actually is less a line-item veto authority than it is a words and phrases veto authority.

Evers, a Democrat, used his veto pen Wednesday to strike out text intended to increase funding for the 2024-25 school years, crossing out the “20” and the hyphen. The updated language allows K-12 schools to raise their revenue per student by $325 a year until 2425.

Lucas Vebber, Deputy Counsel for the Wisconsin Institute of Law & Liberty, says his organization is considering suing the State over the governor’s inherently undemocratic move.

Evers’ move was assuredly undemocratic, but existing law allows the move. Vebber expanded on his beef, and with that expansion, he has a case—and with that case, he may be able to get the law struck down as unconstitutionally (under Wisconsin’s constitution) vague.

Here you have the people who elected the legislature and are represented here in Wisconsin, in the Senate Assembly to write laws, have written a law they intended. The governor’s veto makes it something completely different.

In Wisconsin, as in each of our States and at the Federal level, it’s the legislature that writes the law(s). A governor’s authority, in this context, begins and ends with signing the legislature’s bill into law or vetoing it. Or, as is the case in a few States, a governor’s authority can include vetoing specific parts of the bill and signing the rest into law. Wisconsin allows a governor to veto words and phrases. However, in no State is a governor allowed to rewrite the bill before signing it.

That’s what Evers has done with his carefully chosen words and phrases veto: he’s rewritten a one-year funding law into a 400 year funding law, and that is plainly unconstitutional. Evers’ move also illustrates how flexible is a Wisconsin governor’s words and phrases veto authority: it’s so flexible as to be too vague to pass muster.

The matter likely will end up in front of the Wisconsin Supreme Court. Unfortunately, that court has an activist liberal Justice majority.

“Understand Their Identities”

Posted on by
Reply

In a Fox News article centered on the decision by Georgia’s Professional Standards Commission to remove terms like “equity” and “inclusion” from the State’s teacher preparation standards, Aireane Montgomery, President and CEO of Georgia Educators for Equity & Justice was quoted as objecting.

I cannot imagine thinking that teachers should go into a classroom not having an understanding of how important their students’ identities are[.]

That’s not at risk from the removal of artificial criteria from the State’s teacher professional standards. Regardless, the question of students’ identities is easily resolved.

Have the students recite the Pledge of Allegiance at the start of the first class of each day. Teach them American history, American civics, Western history and civilization.

Teach the students their identity as American children and American citizens. That’s the truly important student identity.

Nor is it really all that hard. It needs only for school boards to enforce standards, teachers to teach to them, and above all, parents to be involved in their kids’ education, beginning with the setting of those standards.