Archives for the month of: June, 2020

In a stunning surprise, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that LGBT workers are protected by the Civil Rights Act. In the biggest surprise, the decision was 6-3 and was written by Trump appointee Neil Gorsuch.

What a nice surprise for Pride Month!

Adam Liptak of the New York Times wrote:

The Supreme Court ruled Monday that a landmark civil rights law protects gay and transgender workers from workplace discrimination, handing the movement for L.G.B.T. equality a stunning victory.

The vote was 6 to 3, with Justice Neil M. Gorsuch writing the majority opinion. He was joined by Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. and Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Stephen G. Breyer, Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan.

The case concerned Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which bars employment discrimination based on race, religion, national origin and sex. The question for the justices was whether that last prohibition — discrimination “because of sex”— applies to many millions of gay and transgender workers.

The decision, covering two cases, was the court’s first on L.G.B.T. rights since the retirement in 2018 of Justice Anthony M. Kennedy, who wrote the majority opinions in all four of the court’s major gay rights decisions.

Those decisions were grounded in constitutional law. The new cases, by contrast, concerned statutory interpretation.

Lawyers for employers and the Trump administration argued that the common understanding of sex discrimination in 1964 was bias against women or men and did not encompass discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity. If Congress wanted to protect gay and transgender workers, they said, it could pass a new law.

Lawyers for the workers responded that discrimination against employees based on sexual orientation or transgender status must as a matter of logic take account of sex.

The court considered two sets of cases. The first concerned a pair of lawsuits from gay men who said they were fired because of their sexual orientation. The second was about a suit from a transgender woman, Aimee Stephens, who said her employer fired her when she announced that she would embrace her gender identity at work.

The cases concerning gay rights are Bostock v. Clayton County, Ga., No. 17-1618, and Altitude Express Inc. v. Zarda, No. 17-1623.

The first case was filed by Gerald Bostock, a gay man who was fired from a government program that helped neglected and abused children in Clayton County, Ga., just south of Atlanta, after he joined a gay softball league.

The second was brought by a skydiving instructor, Donald Zarda, who also said he was fired because he was gay. His dismissal followed a complaint from a female customer who had expressed concerns about being strapped to Mr. Zarda during a tandem dive. Mr. Zarda, hoping to reassure the customer, told her that he was “100 percent gay.”

Mr. Zarda died in a 2014 skydiving accident, and his estate pursued his case.

Most federal appeals courts have interpreted Title VII to exclude sexual orientation discrimination. But two of them, in New York and Chicago, have ruled that discrimination against gay men and lesbians is a form of sex discrimination.

In 2018, a divided 13-judge panel of the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, in New York, allowed Mr. Zarda’s lawsuit to proceed. Writing for the majority, Chief Judge Robert A. Katzmann concluded that “sexual orientation discrimination is motivated, at least in part, by sex and is thus a subset of sex discrimination.”

Erica L. Green of the New York Times wrote a detailed expose of charter schools, some with the backing of billionaire donors like Bill Gates and Michael Bloomberg, that have sought and received federal coronavirus aid intended for small businesses. Thus, they collect funding as “public schools,” yet collect federal aid as small businesses. Peer-reviewed studies have shown that charter schools, at least in Texas, already have more funding than public schools. The Bullis School, mentioned in the article, pleads poverty and need, but local public school parents and the local school board have long complained that the charter operates as an exclusive publicly-funded private school for rich families in Los Altos, California, who each contribute $5,000 to subsidize the school. Excellent investigative reporting by Erica Green.
Kudos to Marla Kilfoyle, grassroots coordinator for the Network for Public Education (veteran teacher and former national Director of the BATS), who scoured board minutes of charters to compile a partial list of those that took PPP funding meant for small businesses. The Trump administration refuses to release the names of recipients of coronacmvirus funding.

Green writes:

WASHINGTON — Charter schools, including some with healthy cash balances and billionaire backers like Michael Bloomberg and Bill Gates, have quietly accepted millions of dollars in emergency coronavirus relief from a fund created to help struggling small businesses stay afloat.

Since their inception, charter schools have straddled the line between public schools and private entities. The coronavirus has forced them to choose.

And dozens of them — potentially more because the Treasury Department has not disclosed a list — have decided for the purpose of coronavirus relief that they are businesses, applying for aid even as they continue to enjoy funding from school budgets, tax-free status and, in some cases, healthy cash balances and the support of billionaire backers.

That has let them tap the Paycheck Protection Program, which Congress intended to keep businesses and nonprofits from shedding jobs and closing their doors. Parents, activists and researchers have identified at least $50 million in forgivable loans flowing to the schools, which, like all schools, are facing steep budget cuts next year as tax revenue, tuition payments and donations dry up.

“To me, either you’re a fish or a fowl — you can’t say you’re a public school one day, but now because it’s advantageous, say you’re a business,” said Carol Burris, the executive director of the Network for Public Education, a group that scrutinizes charter school management, and whose early donors included a teachers’ union.

The group identified at least $48 million in funds from the Paycheck Protection Program going to 27 charter schools across the country by watching virtual school board meetings and poring over meeting minutes and news reports, which were also reviewed by The New York Times.

“They’re saying they want this money to protect their fund balance when you have people in soup lines,” Ms. Burris said.

To charter school critics like Ms. Burris, the bailout underscores the long-held sense that charter schools do not play by the same rules that apply to their conventional public school counterparts.

Charter leaders say traditional schools have long benefited from capital that they cannot obtain.

“Those who are questioning our eligibility for this program are those who question whether we should get money at all,” said Nina Rees, the president and chief executive of the National Alliance for Public Charter Schools.

But privately, the charters have been girding for a public-relations nightmare.

Blake Warner, a board member of Summit Public Schools, a charter chain on the West Coast, said during a virtual board meeting last month that he did not know how taking the Paycheck Protection Program loan would affect the schools’ position in the “charter school versus not-charter school war being waged in California.”

“But I do think that since P.R. is 90 percent of the issue, that is a pretty significant consideration,” he said.

Mr. Warner also expressed concern that the schools could face criminal penalties for claiming they faced “economic uncertainty.”

“If there is a risk that we run, it is the cash balances that sit on our balance sheet today, with the benefit of hindsight, somebody coming in and saying, ‘You didn’t need it,’” he said.

Elite private schools have already faced criticism for taking the coronavirus relief loans. But private schools were largely shut out of emergency aid, and their revenue streams, such as tuition, donations and endowments, are shrinking. Dozens of private schools have already announced closings related to or caused by the coronavirus crisis.

Charter schools are different. Although they are independently run, they operate as part of local school districts, do not charge tuition and are open to all students, albeit through lotteries. Like traditional public schools, they generally receive per-pupil funding from their districts, and as such, they were eligible to receive a share of billions of dollars in relief that Congress allocated to public education.

But because a vast majority are run by nonprofit companies, they also qualified for the Paycheck Protection Program.

Charter recipients of the forgivable loans include wealthy networks like Summit, whose most recent tax filings show it had assets totaling $43 million and an endowment, and it paid its chief executive nearly $500,000. The charter network receives donations from the philanthropic organizations of Mr. Bloomberg and Bill and Melinda Gates, and the Bezos Family Foundation. And its business-savvy California board of directors includes Meg Whitman, the chief executive of Quibi and former chief executive of eBay.

In many cases, charter school leaders have openly acknowledged that they did not apply for the funds because they were in dire financial straits. The board chairman of one Oakland, Calif., charter school network, Education for Change Public Schools, said its $5 million loan would be a “cheap form of cash-flow financing.”

In North Carolina, the founding board member of one charter school, Pine Springs Preparatory Academy, told Ms. Burris that it was “like a private school for wealthy kids” — it accepted $550,000. In Washington, D.C., several charter schools have refused to say whether they took the loans. One San Diego charter was awarded a $2.25 million loan in May, then laid off a third of its teachers. One of the terms of the program is the loans convert to grants if recipients retain or rehire employees.

Parents and researchers in Oakland have tracked about $19 million awarded to charters in the Oakland Unified School District. A report released Monday by In the Public Interest, a policy and research group that scrutinizes the privatization of public goods, found that 70 percent of the district’s 43 charter schools had accepted the funding. Combined with federal relief funds available to all public schools, the report says, the district’s charter schools would receive at least $23 million in federal funding, which breaks down to an average of nearly $2,000 more per student than traditional schools.

“We have money for small businesses, we have money for schools. And when they’re using both of these sources for the same need, it’s doing a real disservice to the community,” said Clare Crawford, a senior policy adviser at the research group.

The report was done in partnership with a parent group, Parents United for Public Schools, whose members aggressively tracked the Paycheck Protection Program funds. The group’s co-founder, Kim Davis, came across the charter funding by accident while on a charter school meeting held on Zoom, and said she was “stunned.”

“Virtually all families in Oakland are doing GoFundMe because someone lost their job, and in part, it’s because their business did layoffs and didn’t have P.P.P.,” Ms. Davis said.

The National Alliance for Public Charter Schools lobbied hard to ensure Congress included the schools in the program, in part because charters schools in several states are not guaranteed district-level funding, let alone the $13.5 billion in emergency funds that Congress gave states wide discretion over….

Francis La Poll, the chairman of the board at Bullis Charter School in Silicon Valley, said that his school took a $2 million loan to help mitigate the impact of an anticipated 8 percent cut in state funding.

The school receives about $5,000 less per student than traditional schools, which its foundation, a separate entity, seeks to make up by asking parents to voluntarily donate $5,000 per year. Mr. La Poll said he turned to the program after the school’s foundation; Bullis had to cancel some upcoming fund-raisers because of the pandemic, and banks were reluctant to lend to the school because of the pandemic, and banks were reluctant to lend to the school because it did not have a history of borrowing.

“Charter school teachers are teachers, too,” Mr. La Poll said. “Are they not to be protected? Are they not part of the economy?”

But behind that certainty has been soul-searching. Summit’s chief executive, Diane Tavenner, brushed away several concerns at the May meeting, including “public shaming.” She urged the board to take the funds, saying that “the benefits far outweigh the risks.”

The board ultimately accepted the loan, identified only as more than $2 million because it is subject to audit, at its May 18 meeting. By that time, Ms. Tavenner said the money had come in, and with the recent announcement from Gov. Gavin Newsom of California of 10 percent budget cuts next year, “further bolsters our case, as a nonprofit that’s operating schools, of our economic uncertainty.”

She said the board could respond to critics by asserting that traditional schools have “always had access to resources that we’ve never had, and so this is our version of those resources that will create a bit of a level playing field.”

A spokeswoman declined to divulge the amount of the loan, but said Summit “met the requirements for the program, applied for the program, qualified for the program and accepted the loan award.”

When board members at Education for Change Public Schools, which runs seven schools in Oakland, debated whether to accept their $5.25 million P.P.P. loan last month, Mike Barr, a board member, warned that the organization could not “double-dip.” It would have to “treat this as a loan” and not cash that could not be used to pay teachers more or plug budget gaps, he said.

That was when the organization’s board chairman, Nick Driver, said the loan could be a “cheap form of cash-flow financing,” because it was low interest, according to a recording of the meeting reviewed by The Times. He also raised an “optics issue,” where “anti-charter folks are making this about charter schools getting money from the federal government when they’re not getting any.”

“I freaking welcome that conversation,” Mr. Barr replied.

In an interview, Hae-Sin Thomas, the chief executive of Education for Change, said the loan would be used by the school — where 90 percent of students come from low-income families — to support students whose families have been hit hardest by the virus.

The network is facing a $4 million cut in state funding, and the staff members who are at risk of being laid off are the ones “doing the hard work of managing the 5-year-old temper tantrums, the 8-year-old who is having a hard day and storms out of class,” Ms. Thomas said.

“Every dollar that I can legally get to ensure stability for my community, I would be hard-pressed not to take,” she said. “It’s going to be a rough fall.”

The board of The Learning Community, a public charter school in Rhode Island, “struggled mightily” with its decision to turn down a $1.3 million loan, said Sarah Friedman, the school’s co-director.

The school faces “tremendous needs,” she said, with 84 percent of its students qualifying for subsidized meals and 100 percent coming from the communities hit hardest by Covid-19.

“While we are technically a nonprofit, our primary identity, mission and value is as a public school,” Ms. Friedman said. “We believe that we need to stand with all public schools in demanding the financial support, during and after this crisis, to meet the staffing and facilities needs to give all of the state’s children the safe and high-quality education they deserve.”

Bad news for the College Board, which owns the SAT. Yale University is going test-optional for the class entering in fall 2021.

Today Yale became the fifth Ivy League school to adopt a test-optional policy for the class of undergraduates who will be applying for admission in the fall of 2021. It joins Cornell, Columbia, Dartmouth and the University of Pennsylvania who have also announced they would not require either the SAT or ACT for their Class of 2025 undergraduate applicants.

According to a statement on Yale’s website, students who can’t take exams or who decide not to report scores “will not be disadvantaged in the selection process.”

After infection risk from the coronavirus forced the College Board, the nonprofit that administers the SAT, to cancel multiple test dates this spring, schools started announcing test-optional admissions policies. One hundred eighty have done so since the pandemic hit, according to Bob Schaeffer of FairTest, a nonprofit that opposes the use of standardized tests in admissions. That brings the total number of test-optional schools to 1,244. (FairTest keeps a database of test-optional schools.)

It’s not clear whether these policies will survive the pandemic. But who knows?

John Thompson is a retired teacher and historian in Oklahoma. He writes here about the resumption of Trump’s big political rallies, beginning in Tulsa. The attendees will have to sign a waiver releasing the campaign of any liability if they fall sick with COVID.

Will Trump promote the disease amongst his enthusiastic base? He won’t wear a mask. To show their macho, his followers will copy him, in defiance of CDC guidelines. Why would Trump want to sicken and/or kill his own base? Will he tell them that the coronavirus is a hoax? Or will he spend his hour ridiculing Biden, Romney, Democrats, and his other enemies?

The headline which should have drawn Oklahomans’ attention was “OMRF: Virus Likely to Remain in Circulation for Decades.” The Oklahoma Medical Research Foundation President Stephen Prescott expressed skepticism that a COVID-19 vaccine will “wipe out the virus,” because many Americans “don’t vaccinate because they don’t believe in it or don’t trust a new vaccine.” The news article cited a recent survey of Oklahomans which found that only 55% of those polled would get a coronavirus vaccine. It then cited Washington Post which “found that only 7 in 10 Americans were interested in getting vaccinated.”

The top headlines, however, were about President Donald Trump’s Tulsa rally, originally scheduled on Juneteenth, and how he wants large crowds of people not wearing masks. Not only was he denigrating the historic celebration of the day when slaves in the Southwest learned of their emancipation, but he was doing so on the 99th anniversary of the Tulsa Massacre, where about 300 African-Americans were murdered. And it’s only been four years since Terence Crutcher, an unarmed black man, was fatally shot by a white Tulsa police officer, who escaped a criminal conviction, and was later hired as a deputy sheriff in a neighboring county.

These and the other awful headlines of the week are due to decades-old mindsets, featuring anti-intellectualism, paranoia, and racism. They are also legacies of years of rightwing lobbying. For instance, the Oklahoma Conservative Political Action Committee (OCPAC) compared Republican Senator Ervin Yen, a physician who sought to limit vaccination exemptions, to Hitler, Mao and Mussolini.

And their destructive propaganda crossed the tipping point during the Trump administration.

We’ve long heard anti-vaccination spin. But Oklahoma now has an anti-vaxxer, a Trump acolyte, as governor. When the Daily Beast quoted Gov. Kevin Stitt’s own words, he tried to back off from his message to the OCPAC. However, Oklahoma Watch reporting served as a reminder of the anti-vaccination, “pro-choice” mindset’s enduring power. His kids attended a private school where 24% received exemptions.

The Trumpers’ destructive ideologies are especially frightening due to the way they pressured local leaders, forcing an abandonment of the science-based policies that were working against the virus. Stitt first posted a photo with his kids eating at a crowded restaurant, and tried to maintain “business as usual,” which meant that Oklahoma was one of the last two states in the nation to do so.

The OCPAC and the Stitt administration pushed policies that could require workers to choose between their health and their income. They also used the pandemic as an opportunity to try to restrict abortion rights, stop Medicaid expansion, and expand vouchers, as well as ridicule medical “experts” who supported Black Lives Matter while urging social distancing.

Even after an Oklahoma City McDonald’s customer shot two employees after being asked to leave because she wouldn’t wear a mask, Stitt signed an anti-Red Flag law to prevent municipalities from passing ordinances that “could restrict gun access to an individual deemed to be an imminent danger.”

In other words, it is no surprise that Trump’s rally is scheduled for a place where the groundwork has long been laid for his hate speech and cruelty. But, in March and April, it looked like enlightened, bipartisan leadership was flattening the COVID-19 curve, especially in Oklahoma City, Tulsa, and Norman; in fact, Oklahoma City’s infection rate remained flat until the forced reopening was implemented, and Norman’s progress is continuing.

Moreover, during the Oklahoma City marches for George Floyd, even after Stitt inappropriately sent in the National Guard, Black Lives Matter and municipal leaders continued to communicate, preventing serious violence.

My sense is that Tulsa Mayor G.T. Bynum is like Oklahoma City Mayor David Holt (and our former Police Chief Bill Citty) in trying to reform our reactionary law enforcement cultures. But they are facing intractable problems and a determined rightwing assault. Bynum recently blamed the murder of Terence Crutcher on the “insidious nature of drug utilization” rather than racism. I suspect we saw his true beliefs when Bynum subsequently apologized.

Also, its my understanding that there would be legal complexities, as well as political threats, that make an Oklahoma mayor’s authority complicated. But, how could any mayor not publicly resist the dangerous Trump rally? Couldn’t he at least join the Tulsa Health Department’s Dr. Bruce Dart in calling for a postponement until after the city’s current surge in infections is under control?

The systemic problem was exemplified by Tulsa Police Maj. Travis Yates who “denied systemic racism exists in the Tulsa Police Department, adding, ‘By the way, all the research on this says … we’re shooting African Americans about 24% less than we probably ought to base on the crimes being committed.’”

Worse, the OCPAC’s “Government Unions Kill George Floyd” illustrates the way that Trump supporters are doubling down on their agenda. It explained:

A government union isn’t the only thing that attacked Floyd. News reports note that due to government shutdowns associated with COVID-19, Floyd was hurled into unemployment with millions of Americans who became unemployed because of government’s overreach and government’s shutdowns of nonessential businesses.

Who knows how big of a symbolic victory it was when Trump’s rally date was moved to June 20? Just a few months ago, I was repeatedly, thrilled that municipal leaders quickly ordered shelter-at-home. I was even more pleasantly surprised when the public supported those policies. Similarly, when attending a major Black Lives Rally, I was stunned by the size of the crowds walking such large distances after finally finding parking spots. Even though concerns about social distancing have reduced the size of subsequent crowds, these multi-racial, cross-generational protests persist.

Yes, the ideologues’ agenda have exposed us to even more danger, driving a new COVID-19 surge. But we’re finally tackling structural injustices, as well as Trump’s antics.

For many years, the Walton family has owned the state of Arkansas. Their collective wealth exceeds $150 billion, yet Arkansas is one of the poorest states in the nation. All that money, and very little has trickled down. Perhaps you have seen the ads on national television about how much Walmart cares about its neighbors. The people of Little Rock know better.

Veteran journalist Cathy Frye reports on a dramatic series of events that occurred yesterday. Peaceful protestors closed down four Walmart stores in Little Rock.

Frye writes:

But why? Why close Walmarts?

To these anguished pleas, I offer this by way of explanation.

Because the Waltons need to understand that it’s time to relinquish their iron-clad grip on the state of Arkansas, on its economy, and on its public schools.

I worked for three years for a Walton-funded “nonprofit” organization called the Arkansas “Public” School Resource Center. If you scroll down this blog, you will find numerous posts about how APSRC operates. Its mission is to destabilize, deconstruct and resegregate public schools. It also is working with other Walton nonprofits to create a private-school voucher system in Arkansas.

The Waltons have put themselves, their politics, and their wealth above what is good for all Arkansans.

So here we are, in the midst of a pandemic and the Waltons are using this public-health crisis and the resulting school closures to retain and even strengthen their control over the Little Rock School District…Protesters shut down Walmarts because those stores symbolize everything that is wrong in Arkansas for those who are marginalized and oppressed.

You can’t put lipstick on a pig. The Waltons are the avaricious family that destroys communities and Main Street across America. Good on Little Rock for calling them out.

Twitter is alive with tweets about Trump’s health, pointing to a video showing him walking very slowly and unsteadily down a ramp after he addressed graduates at West Point, accompanied by an officer. Another clip from his speech showed him taking a drink of water during his speech and using both hands to steady his grip. These clips produced the hashtag #TrumpIsNotWell, and many clips of Obama bounding up and down steps, even one of Obama drinking water from a glass with one hand.

Trump responded with a defensive tweet that brought additional attention to the mishaps.

The Washington Post reported:

BRIDGEWATER, N.J. — President Trump late Saturday tried to explain his slow and unsteady walk down a ramp at the U.S. Military Academy at West Point, which had generated concern and mockery on social media, by claiming the walkway was “very slippery” and that he was worried about falling.

The walk in question came at the conclusion of Saturday’s commencement exercises at West Point, where Trump was the guest speaker. As he exited the raised platform by descending a ramp alongside Lt. Gen. Darryl A. Williams, the academy’s superintendent, Trump was visibly tentative and took short, careful steps.

Video of the moment was widely shared on social media, with critics of the president — including Republican operatives working on the Lincoln Project, an anti-Trump group whose ads have provoked the president’s ire — using the hashtag #TrumpIsNotWell in their tweets.

The chatter seemed to get the attention of Trump, who is spending the weekend at his golf club in Bedminster, N.J. At 10:57 p.m. Saturday, the president wrote on Twitter: “The ramp that I descended after my West Point Commencement speech was very long & steep, had no handrail and, most importantly, was very slippery. The last thing I was going to do is ‘fall’ for the Fake News to have fun with. Final ten feet I ran down to level ground. Momentum!”

Elements of Trump’s explanation strained credulity. Trump’s claim that the ramp had been “very slippery” was inconsistent with the weather, which on Saturday in West Point, N.Y., was sunny and clear-skied. The grass plain on which the commencement took place was dry.

In addition, Trump wrote that he “ran down” the final stretch of the ramp. Video footage of the episode shows the president picking up his pace slightly for the final two steps, but that would hardly be considered a run or a jog by any standard definition.

Once on flat ground, Trump appeared to walk normally as he surveyed the field and mingled with officers on his walk to board Marine One, which was parked roughly 100 yards or so from the platform stage.

The ramp video was not the only clip from Trump’s speech to generate considerable attention on social media. Another was when he briefly took a sip of water while standing behind the presidential lectern. As Trump raised a small glass of water toward his mouth with his right hand, he used his left hand to steady the bottom of the glass so he could take a sip.

Some defenders of Trump say that its unfair to criticize Trump for any physical disability, but bear in mind that this is a man who ridiculed a reporter with disabilities, raided questions about Hillary Clinton’s fitness, raises questions about Biden’s health, and never acknowledges any infirmity. It matters very much to the public to know whether the president’s physical and mental health is diminished.

Christine Baranski, the gifted actress who has appeared in many films (including “Mama Mia”), reads a very, very funny short story by Thomas Mehran before a live audience In New York City B.P. (BeforePandemic). I almost cried with laughter. Enjoy!

Thomas Mehan’s utterly hilarious short story “Yma Dream” is one of our perennial favorites to listen to–especially in the hands of the incredible Christine Baranski. Tune in to join this absurd dinner party of Mehan’s imagination and try to keep up with Baranski’s masterful delivery.

Frank Splitt is a retired electrical engineer with a distinguished resume and wide-ranging interests, including education. A friend gave him the hostile review of SLAYING GOLIATH that appeared in The New York Times. He decided to read the book and reach his own judgment. He wrote the following review for Amazon:

An Educational Whodunit with a Happy Ending

For anyone still wondering about what happened to the highly touted education reform programs, such as Common Core, Race to the Top, and Value Added Measures, wonder no more. Diane Ravitch puts on her education historian hat once again—telling a page-turning story.

It’s a whodunit that begins by naming the villains (Goliaths), the millionaires and billionaires who targeted America’s public schools—labeling these schools as poorly managed havens for bad teachers who are protected by their powerful unions.

The villains aimed to replace public schools with charter schools and/or voucher programs while ferreting out so-called bad teachers on the basis of student test scores. For some, public schools presented a rich marketing opportunity ripe for the taking. And take they did with the cooperation of federal, state, and local governments. At the federal level, the U.S. Department of Education under the administrations of President’s George W. Bush, Barack H. Obama, and Donald J. Trump have all been deeply complicit to varying degrees.

The heroes (Davids) in the story are the teachers, students, administrators, and parents who formed the ill-funded, passionate resistance to the privatization and corporatization of America’s public school system. It was this passionate resistance that slayed Goliath.

I would also count Diane Ravitch among these heroes. She sees public education as a basic public responsibility—warning Americans not to be persuaded by a false crisis narrative to privatize it while urging parents, educators, and other concerned citizens to join together to strengthen our public schools and preserve them for future generations.

In this book, Ravitch has exposed the rampant corruption involved with the villain’s takeovers, the baseless notion of evaluating teacher via student test scores, as well as the damage done to communities, schools, students and teachers that will take years to heal, especially so while dealing with the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic.

Although this is not another book about education reform per se, one is left to wonder where American public education would be today if the Goliaths respected the sound principle of giving to meet needs instead of giving to impose their ideas and take control of K-12 education in America.
.
My thanks go to primary teachers Holly Rothstein Balk, Katianne Rothstein Olson, Chelsea Gabzdyl, and Margaret Zamzow Wenzelman, as well as high school teachers Margaret Mangan, (the late) Joseph Hafenscher and to retired Illinois State Board of Education staff member Michael Mangan, for their insights into the Common Core State Standards, Value Added Measures, and the impact of the standards and related over-the-top testing regimes on school administrators, teachers, and their students.

This is a must read book for parents, teachers, government officials, and other concerned citizens as well.

Sam Wineburg, an education professor at Stanford, and Nadav Ziv, his student, delved into the .org domain and explain here why it is deceptive.

Readers assume that .org implies a trustworthy site. It does not.

They write:

Dot-org symbolizes neither quality nor trustworthiness. It’s a marketing tool that relies on a widespread but false association with credibility….The dot-org domain is controlled by the Public Interest Registry, which was sold last month to Ethos Capital, a private equity firm. The three letters are marketed as “a powerful signal that your site serves a greater good — rather than just a bottom line.” It’s a claim that leads people to make errors about whom and what to trust.

Unlike dot-gov or dot-edu, which are closed to the general public, dot-org is an “open” domain. Anyone can register a dot-org without passing a character test. Even commercial sites can be dot-orgs. Craigslist — among the world’s largest ad sites — is craigslist.org. There are over 10 million dot-orgs, each of which pays roughly $10 per year to register. All you have to do to get one is fill out an online form and provide payment.

Registration fees generated $92 million in revenue for the Public Interest Registry in 2018 alone. In theory these revenues could grow much larger soon — in June, the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers, the supervisory body that regulates the internet’s domain name system, agreed to lift price caps on dot-orgs. Still, Andy Shea, a spokesperson for the Public Interest Registry, says it plans to keep the pricing for dot-orgs low, with increases of no more than 10 percent on average a year.

In the Public Interest Registry’s latest marketing blitz, they unveiled a logo painted in “deep royal blue,” a shade they say evokes “feelings of trust, security and reliability.” They tell new customers to expect an increase in “donations, and trust for donors” when they become part of the “domain of trust.”

Noteworthy nonprofits, civic organizations and religious groups have embraced the domain — and so have a host of bad actors. All reaped the benefits of dot-org’s association with credibility.

Educational institutions unwittingly shape misperceptions around dot-orgs. Many colleges and universities, including Harvard and Northwestern, steer students in the wrong direction. They equate dot-orgs with nonprofit groups and issue no warning of the dangers lurking beneath the domain’s positive aura.

Dot-org is the favored designation of “astroturf” sites, groups that masquerade as grass roots efforts but are backed by corporate and political interests. One of these is the Employment Policies Institute, which claims to sponsor “nonpartisan research.” It was actually founded and run by the head of a public relations firm that represents the restaurant industry. Another dot-org, Americans for Prosperity Foundation, says it addresses major social problems through “broad-based grass roots outreach.” In reality, it was founded by the billionaire Koch brothers and many of its “grass roots” activists are paid.

There’s an even bigger risk to equating dot-org sites with do-gooders. Dozens of neo-Nazi, anti-L.G.B.T., anti-Muslim, and anti-immigrant groups bear the dot-org seal. A random sample of a hundred organizations designated as hate groups by the Southern Poverty Law Center found that 49 percent carry the dot-org domain.

Reader, beware!

Mercedes Schneider, a veteran high school teacher in Louisiana with a Ph.D. in research and statistics, was stunned to learn that Teach for America teachers—recent college Gradiates—will begin teaching with no actual teaching experience.

In this time of school closures and social distancing, teacher temp agency, Teach for America (TFA), has decided to “train” its 2020 corps members online.

As former TFAer-gone-career teacher, Gary Rubinstein, writes, pre-COVID, TFA trainees actually teach on average one hour per day over the course of four weeks during the summer, in classrooms which they share with four other TFA trainees.

As such, TFA trainees have no experience teaching even one entire school day in a classroom in which the trainee is responsible for all instruction.

And now, with the social restrictions and classroom complexities introduced by the coronavirus, TFA’s 2020 trainees will have no experience being in charge of a classroom– not even an entire classroom online.