Archives for category: Bigotry
« Older Entries

Police Remove 3-year-old from Soccer Game Because He is Too Good

By dianeravitch
October 26, 2026 //
5

This is a remarkable story. The parents of a 3-year-old in Winter Park, Florida, signed him up for a league of mostly 5-year-olds. The little guy dominated the game. No one could get the ball away from him, and he easily scored against the older boys.

Someone called the police and complained about the 3-year-old.

It’s not a hoax. Watch the little guy playing soccer, and you can see a future great in soccer.

One journal called The Baller Alert reported:

A 3 year old soccer standout named Nevada was kicked out of his youth league in Winter Park, Florida, and police escorted his family off the field after parents on the opposing team complained that none of their kids could get the ball from him.

Another one, Blacksportsonline, reported the story.

A family says police escorted them and their 3-year-old son off an i9 Sports youth soccer field in Winter Park after the league issued a trespass, following complaints from opposing parents that the boy held the ball too much and was “trying to put on a show.”

The incident, captured in video the family posted to TikTok under the handle @nevadaney10 and later shared widely, shows the child — identified by his parents as Nevada — playing in a league with kids roughly two years older. According to the family’s accounts in the video and related posts, he dominated possession, was substituted multiple times in a roughly 30-minute game, and still scored multiple goals (the family cited 10 in one game). Opposing parents are heard complaining that the play was unfair.

Nevada is black. Most of the other players are not. Could that be the reason he was ejected from the game?

Tags
Categories Bigotry, Competition, Ethics, Florida

The Sordid Voucher Scam Cheats Everyone But Billionaires

By dianeravitch
October 15, 2026 //
2

I have written about the devastating consequences of vouchers for years and the fact that they are promoted by billionaires and rejected whenever they are put to a statewide vote. So it is very satisfying that The New York Times, the newspaper of record, published this sharp opinion piece by Jessica Grose, a regular contributor. No both sides here; vouchers are a scam that billionaires love and that most public school parents loathe.

Jessica Grose wrote:

“I’ve been voting Republican my whole life. I’m superconservative,” the Pine Tree superintendent, Steve Clugston, tells the camera in an Instagram reel. “I’m going to tell you what: When Greg Abbott sold us out to the billionaires and sold out our schools, I’m done with his leadership.” In the Texas governor’s race, Clugston is voting for Abbott’s Democratic opponent, State Representative Gina Hinojosa.

The Pine Tree public school district is in the bright red small city of Longview in East Texas, between the big cities of Dallas and Shreveport, La. A majority of its 4,400 students are economically disadvantaged. When I caught up with Clugston on Friday, hours before the Pine Tree football team trounced its opponents under the lights, he was at his farm. “My wife’s a teacher. My daughter’s a teacher. My son-in-law’s a teacher. Both my sisters are teachers. My brother-in-law’s a retired superintendent. So I’d say education’s kind of in our blood,” he told me over the phone.

Clugston told me he’s sick of his fellow Texas conservatives straying from their principles of fiscal common sense and straight talk; he even attempted a run for the Texas State Senate as an independent conservative. He is particularly appalled by Texas’ voucher program, known as Texas Education Freedom Accounts, which went into effect this year. This program puts state money in accounts for Texas families to use outside the public school system: up to nearly $10,500 for children enrolling in private school, up to $30,000 for children with disabilities and up to $2,000 for those who are home-schooled.

The State of Texas has no say over the curriculum taught at the institutions that accept vouchers, and participating schools can discriminate against applicants for any number of reasons, including religion and disability status. Texas’ vouchers are universal, which means anyone can apply for them, regardless of financial means, though poorer students have been prioritized.

Around 70 percent of this year’s voucher recipients already were enrolled in private schools or were home-schooled. Vouchers are costing the state about a billion dollars this year alone and could ultimately cost $4.4 billion annually. While funding for vouchers comes from a budget that is separate from the public school pot, the state’s funding for public schools has not kept up with inflation.

Texas public schools are projected to lose $227 million just this year as they shed head count, according to The Houston Chronicle. More public schools may close as a result of vouchers siphoning that money away from them. In Clugston’s opinion, vouchers are “abillion-dollar giveaway program for the rich, and we’re going to have no accountability in it. Zero.”

Hinojosa has made saving public education central to her campaign for governor, and it is what got her started in politics. Her child’s school was on the brink of closure, and she describes her political trajectory as concerned parent to local school board member to Texas House member. If elected, Hinojosa has vowed to “end the voucher scam.”

I have long been frustrated at the way both parties barely talk about K-12 public education, despite plunging test scores and post-Covid woes. But the reason politicians don’t talk more about education is that votersdon’t care about it. What makes Hinojosa’s message on schools effective beyond irate public school parents and educators is that she ties the passage of vouchers to larger themes plaguing Republicans in the age of President Trump: corruption and the outsize power of billionaires.

Vouchers failed in the Texas Legislature multiple times, with rural Republicans tending to side with Democrats to block the measures. In rural areas “school choice,” even with vouchers, tends to be a mirage. There are few private schools, and public schools are often the biggest local employers and the heart of small-town life; nearly every Texan I spoke to for this newsletter said the reverence for “Friday Night Lights” is real.

When Abbott couldn’t get vouchers passed the honorable way, he decided to primary Republican state legislators who opposed the policy. He took $12 million from Jeff Yass, a pro-voucher Pennsylvania billionaire, got most of his preferred candidates into office and got vouchers passed in 2025, as The Washington Post noted.

The outcomes for students participating in voucher programs in other states have been decidedly mixed, but Yass doesn’t give a rip. “If the mother or the parent wants the kid to go from one school to another, who the hell is anyone to tell them not to?” he told The Post. “I don’t care what the studies say.”

Yass isn’t the only billionaire who meddled in vouchers in the Lone Star State. The religious Texas billionaires Tim Dunn and Farris and Dan Wilks have also poured money into pro-voucher candidates over the years. As The Texas Tribune explains, “Dunn is also the founder of Midland Classical Academy, a private school that offers its approximately 600 K-12 students a ‘classical education from a biblical worldview,’ according to its website.” (It’s worth noting that many of the elite, popular and highly ranked private schools in Texas refused to accept vouchers this year.)

Some voucher proponents claim that Texas offers more choice to underprivileged children in underperforming schools. But the data we have on other states with universal voucher programs, like Arizona, suggest that they are redistributing money to the highest income and most educated ZIP codes in cities and suburbs. An Arizona ABC station found that parents were spending their voucher money on everything from trampoline parks to ski tickets.

In Iowa, which has a universal voucher program for private schools that’s similar to Texas’, the Democratic candidate for governor and the current auditor, Rob Sand, has made a similar connection among vouchers, special interests and corruption. “The current school voucher program is an open invitation to waste, fraud and abuse of taxpayer dollars,” he explains on his campaign website.

Sand lists his voucher stance under the headline Accountability for All, where he also talks about protections for whistle-blowers and banning stock trading by politicians. By doing so, he is saying that you don’t have to care about what’s going on in the classroom to be outraged that a New York-based company called Odyssey, which manages his state’s voucher program, allegedly got a sweetheart deal for the work. As auditor, Sand found that the company “more than doubled its rate less than a month after signing their no-bid contract, costing taxpayers an additional $2.7 million.” (Odyssey, which has ties to Yass, also administers the voucher system in Texas.)

Whatever you think about public schools, it is difficult not to seethe at the fundamental unfairness of voucher programs that give money to schools that don’t have to educate all students. The Texas Observer found that of 291 private schools approved for voucher funds from the state, over 90 percent were religious or faith-based schools, “more than 100 of those schools require or prioritize for admission students of the same faith and more than 60 have a written policy that discriminates against L.G.B.T.Q.+ students, the schools’ own data shows.”

Though the Texas vouchers prioritize students with disabilities, The Observer also noted that most of the private Texas schools they analyzed lack special education services. A Dallas Morning News analysis found that thousands of students with disabilities returned state money, in part because private schools rejected them or didn’t even respond to their applications.

Some educators I spoke to in Texas and Iowa told me that they’d already seen students ricocheting back to public schools because their private or home-school experience wasn’t all it was chalked up to be. Another outrageous part of this legislation is that Texas public schools are still required to do the disability testing for families that choose vouchers, and it’s straining their limited resources.

When put to a public vote, school vouchers have been unpopular; they’re perennial losers on the ballot. It’s maddening that ideologically motivated billionaires, who probably never sent their own children to public schools, have been able to push this policy through.

According to the latest New York Times/Siena University polling, Hinojosa was up by four points, and Sand was up by 11. Texas is obviously the tougher battle, but after spending the week talking to parents there, I’m cautiously optimistic. Rebekah Baus, who described herself as a conservative Christian and lives in the Dallas-Fort Worth area with her husband and two kids, told me she is so upset about the state of public school policy that she doesn’t know which way she is voting.

The State of Texas, Baus said, is trying to pretend “our public school system is failing, but in the reality, we’re failing our public school system by not funding them properly.”

Categories Accountability, Bigotry, Billionaires, Budget Cuts, Closing schools, Corruption, Disruption, Education Industry, Funding, Iowa, Privatization, School Choice, Support for public schools, Texas, Vouchers

John Thompson: Why Are Oklahoma Republicans Bullying Their Muslim Neighbors?

By dianeravitch
October 14, 2026 //
1

John Thompson, historian and retired teachers in Oklahoma, questions the outbreak of bigotry towards Muslims, starting at the tip.

He writes:

Gov. Kevin Stitt recently ordered the Oklahoma Department of Public Safety and the Oklahoma Office of Homeland Security to determine whether the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) or any of their members, or the Muslim Brotherhood are a terrorism or public-safety threat. His order also directed state public safety leaders to advocate for federal action to designate the Muslim Brotherhood and CAIR as Foreign Terrorist Organizations under federal law.

The Tulsa World reported that CAIR responded by saying it and the Muslim Brotherhood do not share any organizational ties. And, CAIR is an “American civil rights and advocacy organization unaffiliated with any ‘offshoot, chapter, or agent of any foreign movement, organization, political party or government.’”

And, the Oklahoma Voice reported that Pauline Jones, a political science professor at University of Michigan added, “There’s a paper trail of trying to undermine CAIR,” but no evidence tying CAIR to terrorists. Such anti-Muslim efforts create “fear that’s nonsensical.” 

Moreover, Oklahoma State University’s Stephen Nemeth, an expert on international relations and terrorism, “said while ordering an investigation ‘sounds menacing,’ it’s more of a ‘convenient bogeyman.’” And, “It’s probably just a way to kind of gin up maybe some activism or voter interest.” 

CAIR’s Oklahoma Executive Director Veronica Laizure-Henry told NPR:

Throughout CAIR’s long history in Oklahoma, our civil rights organization has worked to protect the Constitution’s guarantees of free speech, religious freedom and equality under the law. We have also pursued justice for all people, including Oklahoma Muslims impacted by hate. … Our successful civil rights work in Oklahoma is exactly why Gov. Stitt is targeting our organization with debunked conspiracy theories. We look forward to continuing our civil rights work in Oklahoma and proving once again that the Constitution is stronger than any politician’s bigotry.

Moreover, the Oklahoman responded to Stitt’s call for “both the Oklahoma Legislature and the federal government to declare CAIR a terrorist organization” by reminding him of the “Oklahoma Standard,’” that calls for “kindness and inclusion.”

Yes, what we are seeing is a battle between the best and the worst of our state.

The Oklahoman also explained how the Interfaith Alliance of Oklahoma weighed in:

“The Interfaith Alliance of Oklahoma is deeply concerned about Governor Stitt’s executive order regarding Muslim organizations,” the organization said in a statement. “The executive order was issued without any evidence of what is being accused, and such unfounded claims are harmful to our Muslim neighbors.”

And it recalled how Gov. Kevin Stitt “showed commendable leadership when, in 2021, he welcomed nearly 2,000 refugees from Afghanistan after the city of Kabul was taken over by the Taliban.”

As the Oklahoman also reported, when “Imad Enchassi, senior imam of the Islamic Society of Greater Oklahoma City” learned of Stitt’s order, he said, “I could feel a chill going from the tip of my head to the bottom of my toes,” and “Our governor has a good relationship with us — he knows us and we know him. It was a slap in the face.”

In 2019, Stitt’s visited with Muslims during CAIR-OK-sponsored Muslim Day at the Capitol.  In 2023, Stitt pulled out of CAIR-OK sponsored Ramadan Iftar “due to wildfires raging in multiple areas of the state,” but a “CAIR-OK leader read Stitt’s planned remarks that the governor’s office sent to be shared with Oklahoma Muslims and others who attended the event at the Oklahoma History Center.”

And, the Oklahoman has reported about the ways that anti-Muslim bigotry has a long history, and how it’s exploding.  

Former state Sen. Mike Mazzei [R] who is running for governor,  had previously run against so-called “Sharia Law” and so-called Muslim terrorists. And he has been endorsed by Donald Trump. On the day when Mazzei and Trump spoke in Durant, Mazzei doubled down on his promise to prosecute CAIR.

Granted, such racism predates  today’s Trumpists, but there is a long history of many Oklahomans standing by their neighbors, while others commit to cruelty.

For instance, my former neighbor Mauree Turner was the nation’s first Black, non-binary, Muslim to be elected to a state legislature. But, as National Public Radio explained, Rep. Turner:

Was censured and removed from legislative committees. There had been a demonstration in the capitol against anti-trans measures with some scuffling between protesters and police. Afterwards, a protester went to Turner’s office to rest. Republican legislators accused them of “harboring a fugitive.”

 In 2017, I wrote about Ramadan Iftar with Our Elected Officials which “was a wonderful antidote to the worries that go along with life in our Red state. As usual, the diverse audience shared laughter and an opportunity to discuss where we go from here. In attendance were a dozen current or former state legislators, two school board members, a city councilman, and two candidates for governor.” 

As always in these interfaith gatherings, “the most humorous exchanges occurred when Iman Imad S. Enchassi and reform and conservative rabbies shared the stage and engaged in delightful banter.” This time, however, a Christian pastor was equally hilarious “when riffing off a classic CAIR/OK punch line.” When Executive Director Adam Soltani is told to “go back to where you come from,” he responds No!, he is not going back to Kansas.”

During its “2017 Legislative Wrap-Up,” CAIR led a discussion, which addressed the “surrealistic behavior” of so many members of the party that controls two branches of the Oklahoma government, and led to the conclusion, “We have to laugh together to protect our sanity – as we work together to save our public institutions.”

But, then, CAIR recognized the session’s “first disgrace,” a bill which passed out of a House committee which would “require a woman to get the written consent of the fetus’s father before obtaining an abortion.” The second was the effort to shrink the budget deficit by turning students who are identified as English Language Learners over to ICE for possible deportation.

Then, its public affairs coordinator said:

During the interim session, we will be planning community meetings on issue areas and helping you stay connected with your elected officials, even when they are not at the Capitol. We will continue to support and promote policies that maximize religious freedoms, Constitutional protections, and work towards eliminating inequality in Oklahoma. We look forward to your help making a more equal Oklahoma for all.

So, why are Gov. Stitt and Sen. Mazzei attacking an organization which they must know is an exemplar of the Oklahoma Standard? And, why are so many Republicans still making vicious attacks on their neighbors?

We know that a diverse range of Oklahomans will defend CAIR. But, will we be able to defeat the fear mongering of the state’s super majority of legislators?

Categories Oklahoma, Religion, Ethics, Bigotry

Network for Public Education Urges States Not to Opt in to Federal Voucher Program!

By dianeravitch
October 5, 2026 //
6

The Network for Public Education is dedicated to the preservation and improvement of public schools. Public schools are a foundation stone of our democracy. Nearly 90% of American students are enrolled in public schools.

We urge concerned citizens to write to their Governor and tell them NOT to participate in the federal voucher program!

Every community needs high-quality public schools but diverting public money to private alternatives weakens public schools.

Public money should be spent in public schools.

The Trump administration does not like public schools. It encourages public funding for religious schools, vouchers, charter schools, for-profit schools, and home schools. Research and experience teach that these alternatives choose their students and they discriminate. And they get worse academic results than public schools.

Voucher schools are free to reject students with disabilities. Unlike public schools, students in special education have no rights.

Do not fall for the machinations of the Trump regime against public schools. Their intentions are not good. They loathe public schools, the schools that educated 90% of all Americans and created the greatest nation in the world.

From NPE executive director Carol Burris:

October 2, 2026

The Network for Public Education Urges Governors Not to Opt-in to the Federal Voucher Program

On October 1, the U.S. Treasury Department released regulations for the federal tax creditvoucher program that was slipped into the One Big Beautiful Bill Act and pushed through reconciliation.

The rules confirm that this program will advantage sending public dollars to private and religious schools, including schools that freely discriminate. Governors must decide whether to opt-in by January 1.

We make our recommendation that states not opt-in based on the following:

Opting in allows federal tax dollars to fund discrimination against children.

When a state opts in, federal tax dollars can flow to private and religious schools and other providers that discriminate against students based on disability, academic challenges, LGBTQ status, or religion. States are expressly forbidden from adding protections of their own.

Opting in pushes cash-strapped public schools toward “pay to play.”

The regulations allow scholarships for public school students to cover services such as tutoring or extra special education services. However, nothing in the regulations stops public schools from turning programs they now fund into paid services that would require families to scramble to cover with scholarships.

A struggling district could convert elementary band, middle school art, or high school SAT prep into programs paid for with these vouchers. Here is the catch: to do that, the district must first charge parents. Some students will get a voucher. Others will not. Children whose parents cannot pay will be shut out.

This moves us one step closer to libertarian Milton Friedman’s vision, in which parents pay to educate their children and public education disappears. Make no mistake. This has been the far right’s goal for decades.

Opting in now creates a blind commitment to a program designed by those who actively undermine public schools.

At this point, the regulations are not final nor has Treasury released its Guidance regarding what expenses will be eligible under the program. That Guidance is expected “by the end of the year,”according to Kevin Salinger at Treasury. Without the Department’s Guidance for what qualifies as an eligible expense, a governor may opt-in, only to find out that virtually any spending that makes its way to public schools or districts has been disallowed. And then they’re stuck, because it’s clear that once in, states cannot back out until the following year.

Opting in fuels the growth of schools without rules.

As privatization has expanded, NPE has documented the fraud, abuse, and chaos that charter and voucher programs have produced. Dangling more tax dollars with few restrictions will draw more bad actors into education, opening low-cost, experimental schools that mislead parents and shortchange children.

States cannot block money from flowing to schools with poor fiscal or academic records. They cannot require public reporting on how funds are used or which students are served. They cannot add safeguards against waste and fraud.

Opting in adds to an unsustainable federal deficit.

Treasury projects that by 2030 the program could cost $26 billion a year in lost federal revenue.

That is more than Title I or IDEA, the largest federal programs supporting public schools.

Opting in will drain donations from charities American families depend on.

Large, respected charities like St. Jude Children’s Research Hospital, and smaller ones that fund suicide prevention centers and domestic violence shelters, will now compete with a program that offers a dollar-for-dollar tax credit instead of a deduction. In an affordability crisis, donors will be drawn to giving that returns their entire contribution.

We encourage friends of public education to act today. Write your governor with a simple message: Do not opt our state into the federal voucher program. Then urge your members of Congress to repeal it. Join the millions of Americans who treasure public education and recognize this voucher program for what it is—a stealth attempt to destroy our beloved public schools.

Categories Bigotry, Charter Schools, Democracy, Disruption, Education Industry, Equity, For-Profit, Funding, Home Schooling, Network for Public Education, Privatization, Research, Resistance, School Choice, Separation of church and state, Support for public schools, Virtual Charter Schools, Vouchers

Come to Hear a Brilliant Analysis of Trump’s War on DEI!

By dianeravitch
October 1, 2026 //
5

Come to Wellesley College to hear Dr. Yohuru Williams dissect and eviscerate the Trump administration’s attack on “diversity, equity, and inclusion.”

Such policies are meant to broaden opportunity. They take us closer to our professed goals of liberty and justice for all. Yet the Trump administration wants to abolish them. Civil rights protections have already been reversed, so that any effort to help students of color is treated as a violation of this administration’s hostility to DEI.

Yohuru Williams is a leading scholar and public intellectual who has often appeared on public television to expound on African American history. He is Distinguished University Chair and Professor of History and Founding Director of the Racial Justice Initiative at the University of St. Thomas in St. Paul, Minnesota. He is a wonderful speaker.

Join me on October 6 at Wellesley College.

Open to all. Free.

Yohuru Williams is speaking as part of the annual lecture series that I established several years ago.

The event will be live-streamed and available later online.

Categories Education Reform, Accountability, Democracy, Trump, Ethics, Academic Freedom, Bigotry, Racism, Censorship, Extremism, Freedom to Read, Freedom to Learn

Peter Greene: The Ghost of Milton Friedman Haunts Us

By dianeravitch
September 25, 2026 //
16

Peter Greene, our brilliant champion of good sense and reason, writes about the specter that energizes the privatization movement. Milton Friedman, leader of unfettered capitalism, encouraged his followers to abandon public schools. We are living with the consequences of this disastrous ideology, funding failing charter schools, funding semi-literate home schools, funding intolerant religious schools, funding grifters and phonies whose only interest is profit.

Greene wrote:

We’ve discussed, many times (e.g. here and here) Milton Friendman’s ideas for education, pretty simply described as “burn down public schools and replace them with a private free market for education.” Nancy McLean summed it up like this in 2021:

He and his libertarian allies saw vouchers as a temporary first step on the path to school privatization. He didn’t intend for governments to subsidize private education forever. Rather, once the public schools were gone, Friedman envisioned parents eventually shouldering the full cost of private schooling without support from taxpayers. Only in some “charity” cases might governments still provide funding for tuition.

Friedman first articulated this outlook in his 1955 manifesto, but he clung to it for half a century, explaining in 2004, “In my ideal world, government would not be responsible for providing education any more than it is for providing food and clothing.” Four months before his death in 2006, when he spoke to a meeting of the conservative American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC), he was especially frank. Addressing how to give parents control of their children’s education, Friedman said, “The ideal way would be to abolish the public school system and eliminate all the taxes that pay for it.”

Friedman liked the idea of vouchers, but mostly as a way to get the free market mainlined into the nation’s education system. And to really understand what that means, we need to understand how Friedman saw the free market.

Many public school supporters (including me) have argued that Friedman’s free market love is misplaced because of course a free market would choose winners and losers in a system with multiple tiers. Don’t you get it, we have brayed lustily– A free market education system would result in all sorts in inequality for students in school and society at large.

The ghost of Milton Friedman replies, “Don’t threaten me with a good time.”

For Friedman, the free market was not a magical engine for equality and uplifting one and all. Instead, it was a system that perfectly suits a world that is– and ideally ought to be– filled with inequality between people.

Society is filed with winners and losers, and the free market is an excellent way to sort them out. Society is inevitably, and correctly, hierarchal and unequal. Friedman wrote in Free to Choose, “Life is not fair. It is tempting to believe that government can rectify what nature has spawned,” without any sense that government might have had a hand in creating that unfairness. Nor could Friedman ever really grasp the notion that power imbalances were self-perpetuating by the system and not some sort of natural and just occurrences (Friedman never, ever came up with a convincing free market answer for racist elements of business and society).

That’s only the beginning. Please open the link and read it all. It’s an excellent description of the ideology that is undermining our public schools. Not to make society better, but to make it worse.

Categories Accountability, Bigotry, Charter Schools, Civil Rights, Corruption, Democracy, Education Industry, Evil, Extremism, Failure, Privatization, Vouchers

Is It 1950 Again? Provost at University of Texas-Austin Removes Majors in All Ethnic, Racial, and Gender Studies.

By dianeravitch
September 24, 2026 //
5

Julian Vasquez Heilig is a professor of educational leadership at Western Michigan University. As a writer and scholar in Texas, California, Kentucky, and now Michigan, he has concentrated on issues of equity, inclusion, and diversity.

He writes here about the current drive to turn back the clock on civil rights in Texas. To put it mildly, he eviscerates the decision by the Provost at the University of Texas in Austin to close down

He writes:

Is the provost at UT-Austin a right wing political operative?

The University of Texas at Austin is eliminating majors in African and African Diaspora Studies, Mexican American and Latina/o Studies, Women’s and Gender Studies, and Race, Indigeneity, and Migration. These are not abstract academic labels. They represent the histories, intellectual traditions, and lived experiences of communities that built Texas and continue to shape the nation.

The manner in which this happened is almost as disturbing as the decision itself. Faculty members reportedly were asked to design proposals to preserve the existing majors inside the provost-initiatives consolidated Department of Social and Cultural Analysis, but the Daily Texan reported that Office of the Provost rejected that proposal. According to Professor Danielle Pilar Clealand, interim chair, faculty then discovered that the majors had already been removed from the admissions application while they were still working to redesign and save them.

That is not shared governance. It is administrative maneuvering designed to make consultation meaningless.

Vasquez Heilig explains that Provost William Inboden was imported in 2025, along with several professors from the University of Florida’s Alexander Hamilton School for Classical and Civic Education, which was part of a rightwing effort to increase the conservative movement in higher education. Inboden was director of the Institute.

Vasquez Heilig points out:

I have not seen evidence of a formal numerical quota for conservative professors. But when public resources build institutions expressly promoted as ideological counterweights, while programs studying marginalized communities are dismantled, the result resembles an ideological preference whether administrators call it an official quota or not. Political favoritism that overwhelms qualifications does not become academic freedom simply because its supporters describe themselves as restoring balance

He has faced the pressure from the right at his own university and paid the price personally:

I have discussed before that when I served as provost at Western Michigan University, I faced pressure to close Gender and Women’s Studies. The Faculty Senate recommended against closure, and I agreed with the faculty despite intense internal pressure to do otherwise. I paid a political price, and I would make the same decision again.

I also advocated for Black student success and community-centered initiatives while several deans complained about and opposed those efforts. Those complaints had consequences for me, but leadership without risk is merely management. If leaders support marginalized communities only when nobody powerful objects, they do not truly support those communities.

As provost, I said no to closing Gender and Women’s Studies because the university did not belong to me or to the loudest administrators around the cabinet table. It belonged to the students, faculty, staff, alumni, and communities whose labor, knowledge, and trust gave the institution meaning.

We must be of the people because the people are the institution. Buildings, endowments, rankings, and administrative titles are empty without them.

Please open the link and learn how pressure from wealthy alumni is reshaping higher education in states like Texas.

Categories Bigotry, Censorship, Curriculum, Equity, Ethics, Evil, Extremism, Freedom to Learn, Freedom to Read, Texas

Why You Should Attend the NPE Conference This Weekend!

By dianeravitch
September 22, 2026 //
4

Carol Burris, executive director of the Network for Public Education, explains why this NPE conference will be stellar.

She writes:

A community governs its public schools. Neighbors elect a board, set a budget, and decide what their children learn. That is exactly what privatization threatens, and it is what NPE’s national conference is built to defend. Over two days, September 26–27, at the Hyatt Regency Conroe near Houston, more than 40 sessions take on the fight from every angle. Here’s a taste of what’s on the schedule.

Vouchers and charters. In “Beating Vouchers in Court,” Derek Black, Jessica Levin, Fred Jones Jr., and Sharon Krengel will walk through recent wins in Montana, Utah, and Ohio, where voucher programs were declared unconstitutional. They will also review the live challenges in Tennessee, Wyoming, Florida, and Missouri. In “A View from the Trenches,” two Florida school board members and an Arizona teacher offer a candid account of what universal ESA vouchers have already done to how public education is funded and governed. And a session on the federal tax-credit voucher scheme, set to launch in January 2027, lays out what advocates in opt-in and opt-out states can do right now. 

In “Taxation Without Representation — Using a Conservative Argument to Combat Charter Schools,” Gregory Walace, Alison Chaplar, Betsy Flanagan, Daniel Marcano Jr., and Jennifer Simões will show how that framing sparked a grassroots movement, moved public opinion, and helped drive proposed legislation. “What’s Next for Charter Schools? A Review of Charter Strategies Across State Lines,” Patti Everitt, Gregory Walace, Carol Burris, and Dave DeMatthews lead an interactive look at how charters keep expanding in key states with few guardrails and little public engagement, which national initiatives fund that growth, and the research and messaging advocates can share across state lines to push back.

Takeovers are where democracy gets stolen outright. Houston high schoolers will describe how they organized against the HISD takeover. Parents from Houston (CVPE) and Fort Worth (FORT) share how they are fighting to win their voice back. An Indianapolis panel will dissect the sharpest trick of all — an elected board left in place, but stripped of control over buildings, transportation, and property taxes. “The Struggle to Govern Ourselves” will confront the research showing takeovers overwhelmingly target majority-Black districts, while organizers from New Orleans share hard-won lessons from years on the front lines. And in “The People’s Board,” presenters will take on Student Outcomes Focused Governance, the corporate model quietly sidelining elected members in board after board.

Follow the money. Maurice Cunningham, Mercedes Schneider, Mike DeGuire and David Armiak teach their best techniques for tracing dark-money networks back to the billionaires and foundations bankrolling privatization in two sessions. Other sessions map the private firms profiteering off vouchers and spotlight Wisconsin’s campaign to get voucher and charter costs printed right on taxpayers’ bills. 

The money grabs keep getting more creative. Texas advocates expose SB 1882 “partnership” charters as a fast-track privatization grift. Another panel takes on corporate tax breaks — energy-hungry data centers now the worst offenders — draining billions from schools. And with 17 states cutting or capping property taxes in 2024–25, national and state experts lay out how to defend the local revenue public schools depend on.

Faith, nationalism, and the classroom. Sessions on building school–congregation partnerships and mobilizing faith leaders in hostile states sit alongside a hard look at Christian Nationalism and its playbook for defunding and reshaping public education.

The newest battlegrounds. Randi Weingarten joins experts to debate AI’s role in classrooms — cognition, privacy, mental health, and the environment. A separate panel takes on ed-tech overreach and the lawsuits challenging how it commercializes student data. And student organizers from SEAT share how they’ve carried the fight to school boards, the legislature, Congress, and the Supreme Court.

The skill builder sessions are the reason you will leave with more than notes. Charles Siler, a former Goldwater Institute lobbyist who helped build the privatization playbook before turning on it, joins Manny Garcia to teach what messaging actually moves people. Rachel Coyle and Susan Spicka show how to win over hostile legislators. Others cover new-media strategy, gathering community input at scale, and getting real press traction beyond the press release. 

The keynotes anchor it all: Diane Ravitch and Texas AFT’s Zeph Capo open Saturday; Southern Education Foundation CEO Raymond Pierce speaks at lunch; investigative journalist Katherine Stewart headlines Sunday brunch; and Howard University’s Dean Emerita Leslie Fenwick closes us out.

You’ll meet the students, parents, teachers, clergy, researchers, and organizers who are actually winning in courtrooms, at statehouses, and on ballots. Privatizers have the money. We have the people, the passion and the plan. Register now here, book your room here in the hotel block, and join us in Conroe, Texas, right outside Houston.

I can’t promise that hotel rooms are still open but Carol will help you if you made a terrible mistake and forgot to sign up.

Categories Accountability, Bigotry, Budget Cuts, Censorship, Charter Schools, Childhood, Closing schools, Corruption, Democracy, Education Industry, Equity, Ethics, Failure, Freedom to Learn, Freedom to Read, Funding, Parent Groups, Privatization, Religion, School Choice

Don’t Miss This Brilliant Blast at Trump’s War on DEI!

By dianeravitch
September 21, 2026 //
2

Come to hear Yohuru Williams dissect and eviscerate the Trump administration’s absurd attack on “diversity, equity, and inclusion.”

Such policies are meant to broaden opportunity. They take us closer to our professed goals of liberty and justice for all.

Yohuru Williams is a leading scholar and public intellectual who has often appeared on public television to expound on African American history. He is Distinguished University Chair and Professor of History and Founding Director of the Racial Justice Initiative at the University of St. Thomas in St. Paul, Minnesota.

Join me on October 6 at Wellesley College.

The event will not be livestresmed but will be available later online.

Categories Academic Freedom, Accountability, Bigotry, Censorship, Democracy, Education Reform, Ethics, Extremism, Freedom to Learn, Freedom to Read, History, Trump

A Young Man Wanted to Be an American. He Was Killed by the Racism of Donald Trump and Stephen Miller and Their MAGA Followers.

By dianeravitch
September 9, 2026 //
4

“The photograph of his leg, posted on Instagram, documents his sense of shame at having to wear the device, at being branded somehow a criminal. His short life had followed the same arc as hundreds of millions of Americans, immigrants or descendants of immigrants, who came here seeking hope, opportunity and a chance for dignity. He wanted to grow and prosper and be free of tyranny — in this case, the tyranny of crime and instability.”

Philip Kennicott of The Washington Post wrote about the death of Pierre Damas Bel.

Kennicott says we all share responsibility for his death. I disagree. Pierre’s death belongs to Stephen Miller, who wants to expel as many dark-skinned immigrants as possible. His death belongs to Donald Trump, who knew that racism and hatred was a good political issue for him, who told Republicans in the Senate not to pass a bipartisan immigration bill in 2024 because he wanted to run in the issue. His death belongs to the Republican elected officials who bowed to Trump’s wishes and have failed to rein in the heartlessness of ICE. His death belongs to all those who turn a blind eye to the reign of brutality and violence imposed on anyone who is swept up in the un-American crusade against immigrants, especially those who are black and brown.

Kennicott wrote:

The most haunting photo of the past week shows not a whole human, just part of one. Sometime in the past few weeks, a 20-year-old college kid named Pierre Damas Bel took a photograph of the lower part of one of his legs. He’s wearing black pants and gleaming, thick-soled, black-and-white brogues, the toe so polished it reflects the light. Around his ankle is a heavy plastic GPS tracking device, with a red, LED status light glaring like a demonic eye

Bel was one of about 350,000 Haitian immigrants who lost temporary protected status after a Supreme Court ruling in June. He fled Haiti, a country racked by gang violence and crime, in 2024, and he apparently despaired at the thought of having to return. On Monday morning, he stepped in front of a tractor-trailer on Interstate 70 in Springfield, Ohio, and now he is dead. His family believes he died by suicide, but that doesn’t seem quite the right word. He was desperate and depressed, but that misery was forced on him. No matter how he died, his life was taken from him.

Bel, who is seen in an earlier image in a blue tuxedo jacket beaming as he receives his high school diploma, entered the country legally to rejoin his family and request asylum. He graduated from high school, matriculated at university, joined the ROTC program, and he had a pending asylum hearing. But just after 8 a.m. Monday, he called his father and said, “I’m not feeling okay.” Less than an hour later he was dead.

The photograph of his leg, posted on Instagram, documents his sense of shame at having to wear the device, at being branded somehow a criminal. His short life had followed the same arc as hundreds of millions of Americans, immigrants or descendants of immigrants, who came here seeking hope, opportunity and a chance for dignity. He wanted to grow and prosper and be free of tyranny — in this case, the tyranny of crime and instability.

“I came to this country to pursue my education. I didn’t come here to commit a crime or hurt anyone,” he wrote on Instagram in late July. “Yet now I’m walking through the streets of the United States with a GPS monitor on my leg, carrying a feeling of shame and humiliation that I never imagined I would experience.”

Likely, the GPS device made his leg feel foreign to him, just as this young asylum seeker, perhaps an aspiring American, had suddenly been branded foreign to the country he hoped to serve. The weight of the device made it impossible for him to play soccer, a sport he loved; according to his father, it also made him an object of ridicule to his classmates, who mimicked on an interpersonal level what has become the basic tool of this country’s domestic politics and foreign policy: bullying.

No administration in my lifetime has used imagery and narrative more effectively than the Trump administration. A White House webpage called “Aliens” uses “X-Files” music and text to suggest that we have been secretly invaded, and that President Donald Trump alone can repel the enemy living among us.

“Millions arrived under the cover of darkness and embedded themselves directly into our society,” reads the scrolling text, with a spooky electronic, sci-fi soundtrack suggesting the invaders are extraterrestrials. “They’ve shopped in the same stores, attended the same classes as our children, and lived seemingly normal human existences,” the site also says. “With one exception — they do not belong here.”

From emphasizing the supposed criminality of immigrants, the administration moves on to stressing their normality. The very things that are, for so many Americans, definitive markers of being American — living peacefully, shopping, learning — become markers of suspicion. And so we are invited to look at ourselves as Bel looked at his leg, the normal as abnormal. Even people who abhor this cruelty face what is essentially an existential question: If I am American, and America does this, what am I? To remain within this ugliness is insufferable; to flee would only make it worse.

“I do not know how long it will still physically be possible to breathe this European air,” wrote critic Walter Benjamin in 1938, as the Nazi’s made life unlivable for Jews. He killed himself in 1940, in a small border town in Spain, where he was denied entry after fleeing France. That, too, was an act of desperation.

The loss of temporary protected status for Haitians means that the U.S. will have to find tens of thousands of new health care workers to staff an already overburdened system. A recent study by the Yale Budget Lab found that even if immigration returned to normal after the Trump administration, by the 2030s there will be thousands fewer new businesses than would be expected, and the economy will be smaller than it could be, with effects lasting as far as 2075.

And thus, another metaphor travels through the body, upward and outward, from the death of a young man on a highway in Ohio to include all of us. Bel was desperate, and his death is a kind of murder, but what the U.S. is doing to itself is simply suicide.

Categories Bigotry, Citizenship, Extremism, Immigration, Trump
« Older Entries