ICYMI: Star Wars Edition (5/4)

If you don't know, I don't think I can explain it to you.

If you are of a Certain Age, you have a story. In the summer of 1977 we didn't have a movie theater in my county, so I trekked down to Butler, 45 minutes or so away. The within a week, I went back again. It was part of the new phenomenon of Star Wars-- Jaws had invented the summer blockbuster just two years earlier, the movie that everybody had to see, but Star Wars was the movie you had to see more than once, just to see everything and hear everything. I was a broke college student but I still went three times (the third in Hampton Beach while on a summer trip with friends) and it still didn't seem like enough.

There are things you just can't understand second-hand, and most of them, unfortunately, are things that suck. But some are moments of uplift and excitement that stick with you for a long time. One more amazing part of being human in the world.

Here are your bits of reading from the week.

Drawing a Line

Jennifer Berkshire looks at how communities are stepping up to protect immigrant members.

Will the U.S. Supreme Court Approve Oklahoma’s Proposed Religious Charter School?

Jan Resseger looks at the big decision coming down the road. I sure wish it was a harder decision to predict.

The Rise of the Unqualified: Inside the Kakistocracy Running American Education

Julian Vasquez Heilig has been writing up a storm lately. Here he explains why, exactly, kakistocracy sucks.

The New Teacher of the Year Shares Her Secrets for an Engaging English Class

She's from Pennsylvania, and she has some non-silly ideas. Sarah Sparks reports at Education Week.

Tina Descovich must leave Ethics Commission after Senate again fails to take up nomination

A Moms for Liberty co-founder doesn't make it onto a state ethics commission? What a surprise. Okay, in Florida, land of infinite grifter tolerance, it is kind of a surprise.

K12 Education, Meet Trump 2.0 Chaos.

The indispensable Mercedes Schneider tries to assemble a timeline of Trumpian education shenanigans.

San Diego's Edtech Lollapalooza

Thomas Ultican takes a look at ASU+GSV and its varied AI grifting.

Court says no rights violated when Michigan school told girl to remove hat with image of a gun

Dad sends third grade daughter to school with a hat bearing an image of a AR-15ish gun and "come and take it" in all caps. School told her to take it off. Dad sued. He seems like a swell guy.

Are Women the Cause of Reluctance to Read?

Well, no. But Nancy Flanagan explains herself a bit more thoroughly than that.

How would the Trump Administration budget impact American education?

Steve Nuzum looks at the Trump wishlist for the budget and what it would mean to education (spoiler alert: nothing good). 

Separation of Church and State: Critical for Public Schools and America!

Not sure it can be said too many times, but separation of church and state is a good thing. Here comes Nancy Bailey to make sure it's said again.

Exceeding Student Expectations of Teachers: A Way to Achieve “Good” Teaching

Larry Cuban looks at the importance of expectations for academics and behavior.

Battle lines being drawn

Benjamin Riley is taking names of those organizations that have decided that technofascism is super cool and totally fine with them.

As Predicted: Florida’s Voucher Expansion is Gutting Public Education

Sue Kingery Woltanski reports on the progress of Florida's program to end public education. 

And now, Happy May the Fourth

Join my newsletter. It's free and easy.

"Religious Liberty" is the new "State's Rights"

Last week Adam Laats reminded us of why conservatives are so worked up about Harvard's tax-exempt status. It goes back to a 1980s case that tells us a lot about the moment we're living in, and why "religious liberty" is the new "state's rights."

Bob Jones University was founded as part of the culture panic wave of a century ago, a wave of right-wing anguish centered around evolution and the Scopes Trial. Bob Jones University would be a bulwark against modern naughty culture. As Laats quotes Bob Jones himself, “Fathers and mothers who place their sons and daughters in our institution can go to sleep at night with no haunting fear that some skeptical teachers will steal the faith of their precious children.”

Resisting modern evils meant, when the fifties rolled around, resisting desegregation. Bob Jones University remained stubbornly committed to keeping Black folks out, well into the 1970s refusing to bend and staying proudly unaccredited (note that college accreditation is yet another Trump/Project 2025 target) by refusing to bend and accept Black folks on its campus. 

It tried some tricks (let a Black employee register for one class) and then even accepted a few Black men as students (as long as they were married and therefor less of a threat to the purity of white co-eds). Then the Carter administration got aggressive, threatening to remove the university's tax-exempt status, as well as those of other segregated universities.

The 1980 GOP platform and candidate Reagan promised to stop this use of the IRS to attack the schools. Not that he could publicly argue in 1980 that keeping Black folks off a campus was a perfectly okay goal. Instead, using BJU's fictitious desegregation as a fig leaf, he instead declared that this was all about religious freedom.

So when Donald Trump declared the launch of a Religious Liberty Commission, he was following a well-established right wing playbook. 

What religious liberty is being protected? The freedom to discriminate.

The Supreme Court has ploughed the road for this for over a decade. From Hobby Lobby on through Masterpiece Cake Shop and up to the trinity of cases being invoked in the St. Isidore Catholic charter case, SCOTUS has been insisting that the Free Exercise clause beats the Establishment clause. And not only is Free Exercise the part that matters, but no Christian can freely exercise their religion unless they are free to A) discriminate against people they disapprove of and B) get supported by tax dollars to do it. 

There's a case from Maine working its way to decide just that-- the schools that won Carson and the right to collect voucher money for religious education now want to be free to collect that money while discriminating against LGBTQ students , a right that many other voucher states already recognize. Free Exercise for folks operating certain religious schools means the freedom to reject and degrade students of whom they disapprove.

So Trump's Anti-Christian Bias Task Force is set to root out any policies that get in the way of that Free Exercise. Martha McHardy reported on the first meeting for Newsweek:

Attorney Michael Farris, speaking on behalf of a Virginia church, said the IRS had investigated it for alleged violations of the Johnson Amendment, which requires churches to refrain from participating in political campaigns if they want to keep their tax-exempt status. Representatives from Liberty University and Grand Canyon University also claimed their institutions were unfairly fined because of their Christian worldview.

Additional allegations included the denial of religious exemptions to COVID-19 vaccine mandates for military personnel, biased treatment of Christian Foreign Service Officers, and efforts to suppress Christian expression in federal schools and agencies. Critics further accused the Biden administration of marginalizing Christian holidays while giving prominence to non-Christian observances, and of sidelining faith-based foster care providers.

Speakers also alleged that Christian federal employees were retaliated against for opposing DEI and LGBT-related policies that conflicted with their religious beliefs.

"Faith-based foster care providers" turn up in these complaints because of a Biden era policy that put protections in place for LGBTQ minors. But the religious freedom argument is that folks should be free to foster kids even if they believe certain types of kids are terrible sinners who need to be Straightened Out.

The claim that some folks are discriminated against for religious positions on "DEI and LGBTQ-related policies" is another way to say those folks aren't allowed to discriminate against persons on the basis of race or gender identity or sexual orientation. It's the same claim as the people who don't want to do their job issuing marriage licenses if gay marriage is involved, or who don't want to provide health care to naughty women who have sought an abortion. 

The Religious Liberty Commission edict follows a similar pattern. What's the complaint here?

Recent Federal and State policies have undermined this right by targeting conscience protections, preventing parents from sending their children to religious schools, threatening funding and non-profit status for faith-based entities, and excluding religious groups from government programs.

"Conscience protections" is another favored construction, as in "my conscience tells me that I shouldn't treat Those People like people and how dare you infringe on my right to do that."

The modern rejoinder to someone claiming that the Civil War was not about slavery, but about state's rights is to ask, "The state's right to do what?" The answer, of course, is "The state's right to perpetuate a system of enslavement." 

When someone on the far right starts talking about religious liberty, the question is "The liberty to do what?" The answer is, "The liberty to enjoy a position of high privilege from which we can decide which people we think are worthy of civil rights." Or more simply, "The liberty to discriminate against others without consequence." 

It all makes me sad because it is the worst testimony ever for the Christian faith. It's the kind of thing that makes my non-believing friends and relatives point and say, "See? Religious people are just as awful as anyone." There are actual Christians in the world, and they deserve better than this. There are people who daily wrestle with how to live out their faith in the world in challenging situations, and they deserve better than this. If your assertion is that you can't really, truly follow Christ unless you are freely enabled to treat certain people like shit, then you are talking about some Jesus that I don't remotely recognize. You are not talking about religious liberty; you're talking about toxic politics with some sort of faux Jesus fig leaf.

TX: Furry Panic Is Back

It has been three years and change since the Great Furry Panic first swept school policy circles. 

Patient Zero for this fake story seems to be Michigan's Midland Public Schools board meeting in December of 2021, at which a mother spoke claiming she was informed that litter boxes had been added in bathrooms for students who "identify as cats", calling it a "nationwide" issue and pointing to an "agenda that is being pushed" (a "nefarious" one). The co-chair of the Michigan GOP promoted the stories ("Parent heroes will TAKE BACK our schools), and before you could say crazy-pants disinformation campaign, the story was being covered by Buzzfeed, USA Today, and the New York Times.

There's also a theory that the post-Columbine practice of keeping an emergency bucket in the classroom  in case students are trapped there by another gunman. Some schools include kitty litter in their emergency bucket.

At any rate, the story spread through the far right dope-o-sphere. Folks started noting the spread of furry panic back at the beginning of 2022. There are schools, the story goes, that allow students to self-identify as animals, wear their furry costumes, eat sitting on the floor, do their business in litter boxes. So far there has not been a single factual foundation for any of these stories. Nor, for that matter, do the stories get it right when it comes to Furry culture and behavior (furries do not, for instance, wear their outfits to work and insist on acting as animals or pooping by their desks). But it didn't matter. 

2022 was a banner year for furry panic.

In Colorado, the GOP candidate for governor has tripled down on the claim that students are self-identifying as animals throughout the Denver with the support of their school districts, despite repeated debunking and denials. 

Minnesota also has a GOP gubernatorial candidate who repeated the litter box claim, despite debunking.

In Tennessee, school leaders had to take time to respond to a litter box claim by a state senator. 

South Carolina districts felt the need to respond to litter box stories. In Wyoming, parents told a board they were worried that furries were covered in equality policies. And Rhode Island. And Pennsylvania. And New York. And Illinois. And Oregon. Oh, and Marjorie Taylor Greene, too.

In Nebraska, in a rare apology, a state senator had to admit that the furry rumor he had repeated was baloney in March. In Texas, a GOP house candidate went with the relatively milder "lowered tables" story in January. A South Dakota school district had to explain to a parent in July that no, they would not be putting in litter boxes for furry students. Maine was battling back the litter box rumors in May. In April, a Wisconsin school district had to explain that they have no "furry protocol."

The whole hoax even has its own Wikipedia page. 

There has never been a single confirmed incident, ever.

And yet.

Texas has HB 54, "Relating to the display of and allowance for non-human behaviors in Texas schools." Also known as the "Forbidding Unlawful Representation of Roleplaying in Education (F.U.R.R.I.E.S.) Act." The bill has five legislators signed on as authors, and a whopping 51 co-authors. Governor Greg Abbott backs the bill. There are 22 pages of public comments compiled, and some of them are just as silly as you expect.

[W]e are tired of DEI, distractions, and affirmation of FURRY behavior in schools. Children should be learning how to read and excel in math, not playing make-believe at school. Please specifically write into the Code of Conduct that this behavior is not acceptable in schools or in society. In all K-12 schools.
Keatha Brown

Moms for Liberty, Montgomery TX

Children attend school are there to learn reading, writing, math, science, etc. I do respect each person has their own individual style when they dress but what I don't approve of is children attending school dressed like an animal and pretending, acting and portraying that they are indeed an animal. Its a distraction to other children attending classes at school and teachers and staff already have enough challenges in schools and they don't need these additional types of behaviors to deal with. Children shouldn't be acting like animals, making sounds like animals, wanting to eat like or dressing like animals. If they truly feel like they are an animal, they should be referred to a mental health professional. This would also go along the lines of a child wanting to be an alien
Jennifer White

Moms For Liberty Williamson County Round Rock, TX

Please support HB 54. I have been in education over 45 years. Non- human behaviors should not be accepted or catered to in public schools. What cat learns to read?
Susan Perez
Citizens for Education Reform
Lubbock, TX

And more in the same vein. The vast majority of the comments are opposed to the bill, hitting it with terms like "silly," "ridiculous," "stupid," and "waste of time." The Libertarian Party of Texas opposes it. Many accused the legislature of trying to solve a non-existent problem. Many tell stories of small children who like to play in ways that sometimes include animal noises. The parent of an autistic child explains how fur-like materials soothe the child. 

The bill itself is remarkably specific in defining "non-human behavior" with nine or so items on the list of "behaviors of accessories" not typically "displayed by a member of the homo sapiens species."  No animal noise, tails, ears, or licking yourself for "purposes of grooming or maintenance." There are exceptions for Halloween and school mascots or plays. 

But it's worth noting that the bill goes way beyond the standard furry litter box panic to target any sort of animal-ish behavior-- ears on headbands, tails, animal noises (like children don't make inhuman noises on a regular basis). 

The bill comes from Rep. Stan Gerdes. Gerdes was endorsed last year by Greg Abbott when he was up against Tom Glass, who was endorsed by AG Ken Paxton. Gerdes did vote for vouchers, but he also voted for the impeachment of Paxton. He previously worked under Rick Perry both when Perry was Texas governor and as US Secretary of Energy. He won his first election to the House in 2022, then again last year. Both campaigns were pricey-- $600K in 2022 and almost a million in 2024 (just for the primary). 

At Tuesday night's hearing, he claimed that the bill was in response to stories about furries that have been denied by the district superintendent. Asked if he could cite a single confirmed instance of a school making furry accommodations, Gerdes said he could not, even though he originally came out swinging, as reported by Benjamin Wermund at the Houston Chronicle:

When Gerdes introduced the legislation last month, he said he fully expected members of the subculture he was targeting to show up at the Capitol "in full furry vengeance" when the bill was heard.

"Just to be clear - they won't be getting any litter boxes in the Texas Capitol," the Smithville Republican said in a press release announcing the bill.

But there were no so-called furries or litter boxes at the late-night hearing Tuesday. Instead, the four people who showed up to testify against the measure included a public school teacher and a Texan who worried the measure could affect students with disabilities.

Rep. James Talarico labeled the bill as one more attempt by Abbott and his crew to discredit public schools:

That's because if you want to defund neighborhood schools across the state, you have to get Texans to turn against their public schools. So you call librarians groomers, you accuse teachers of indoctrination, and now you say that schools are providing litter boxes to students. That's how all of this is tied together.

 It's a bill designed to create furor over a non-existent problem. Currently the bill is sitting in committee, and if there is a lick of sense left in some corners of Texas, it will never emerge from there. 

Do Teachers Need To Be Liked?

A recent Robert Pondiscio post took me right back to many, many teacher lounge debates. "Do students need to like their teachers to learn?" was the question both in his post and in my lounge, and it seemed to come up again every time a student teacher passed through our halls.

The frequency with which this came up for newbies led me to think that maybe being liked is one of the answers that young teachers land on as they search for an answer to "How do I know whether I'm succeeding here?" This is one of the challenges that come with teaching being a solitary profession-- teachers have no place to get feedback except from students. But if you are looking for affirmation of your professional conduct from a child--well, that is not a great way to do adulting.

Teaching also comes with the challenge of being a profession in which relationships are very important, but they also mostly have to be created out of whole cloth by the adult in the room, and there isn't much in life that prepares us for that. 

So out of all that young teachers may land on, "Well, if I can get the kids to like me..." It doesn't help that so many fictional teacher models center on a beloved hero teacher who we get to see being beloved but not so much actually teaching.

But trying to get young humans to like you just leads to all sorts of problems. Heck, it leads to all sorts of problems among the young humans. The key to social success in high school is confidence, and "Please like me" energy projects the opposite. In a teacher, it projects both a lack of confidence and weakness, and while younger students may take pity on you, older students will not. And if they figure out you can be played by threats that are simply coded versions of "If you don't give us our way, we won't like you," you are done.

Teachers will sometimes land on other unproductive approaches to creating the relationship. For instance, "rule through fear" crowd. But mostly what you teach through that approach is some combination of sneakiness and resentment. Your students may comply when they are in front of you, but you'd better be careful about when you turn your back. Can they learn this way? Maybe, but I wouldn't bet on it. 

So what is the answer? Respect and competence.

Treat the students with respect. Know what you're doing. I would add "be kind," but that term is too open to misinterpretation, so let's leave it for now.

The experts say that one sign that a marriage is doomed is when contempt sneaks in. Same is true for the classroom; when you show contempt for your students, it's game over. The opposite of contempt is respect-- you treat them like they are functional, capable human beings deserving of decent treatment. And here's a hugely important fact lost to many in our current political climate-- you don't have to like someone to treat them with respect. You don't have to agree with someone to treat them with respect. You just have to recognize that they are human, and as such, deserve a certain base level of respect. 

Respect for students goes hand in hand with providing them with competent teaching and high-but-realistic expectations. Throw in Not Wasting Student Time as well. 

As a teacher, you've stepped up to take on a particular role, and students will sooner or later judge you based on how well you fulfill that role. "He's a nice guy, but a lousy teacher" is not the dream. The dream is to teach the students, to help them increase their understanding of themselves and the world. 

Pondiscio says that students like teachers they learn from (not vice versa), and I guess that's sort of true. But every kind of person in the world is going to pass through your classroom, and some of them are not going to like you, ever. Trying to win them over is a waste of time, but modeling how to respectfully get the work done even when you don't necessarily like the person you're working with-- that's a lesson they (and the other students watching how things play out) can carry into the world. 

On Your Own

There are so many ways in which the education debates have simply been a warm up for broader attacks on government as a whole.

Take the latest from nepo baby RFK Jr. talking to TV grifter Dr. Phil, as reported by the New York Times:

“I would say that we live in a democracy, and part of the responsibility of being a parent is to do your own research,” the health secretary said, in response to a question from a woman in the audience who asked how he would advise a new parent about vaccine safety. “You research the baby stroller, you research the foods that they’re getting, and you need to research the medicines that they’re taking as well.”

"Do your own research" is supposed to ring with independence and a refusal to blindly follow the sheeple, combined with an implicit claim that your google search is probably just as good as what those so-called experts tell you. 

But what I really hear in this exchange is a rejection of collective responsibility. "Can you help me make a safe choice for my child?" the young mother asks. "Not going to do it," replied the damned Secretary of Health and Human Services of the richest nation in the history of the world. "Your kid is not my problem. Your kid is not anyone else's problem. Go figure it out yourself."

This has always been the message of the school voucher movement since those long-ago days when Milton Friedman dreamed of a country where education was just one more commodity in a government-free marketplace. "Go get an education for your kid yourself. It's nobody else's problem, nobody else's concern, nobody else's responsibility. Here's a little voucher; now shut up and go away."

This is the Big Theme of MAGA/Trump/DOGE/Etc-- "We are tired of being told we have to care about other people." That's it. That's the whole thing. "I don't want to have to spend a cent of my money on anyone who isn't me." From the DOGE non-saving inefficient roll-back of anything the government does that involves looking out for other people (including collecting information that could help them make decisions) all the way to J D Vance's bizarre claim that Jesus says the further away from you someone is, the less Jesus wants you to love them. 

In fact, not only would they like to not have their money taken to spend on other people, but maybe they can get some of other people's money to spend on themselves. 

They can always draw a crowd of people who believe in the legitimate concerns-- government is too often inefficient and wasteful, being free to make choices is good, public schools have too often failed some students-- but those folks rarely get to drive the bus because they never think it would go So Far and going So Far is what the actual drivers intended from the start.

"Do your own research" because nobody else is going to do it, and if you don't have the resources, well, don't worry about it because I'm sure whatever you do will be just as good as any scientist or expert or teacher would come up with. The important part is that you do the science, health, and education research yourself. And if this bold new do-it-yourself approach means that society is sorted into different tiers and classes based on who has the most resources to take care of themselves, well, that's how God meant it to be. The social safety net and government-supported programs have just been a means to lift up people (with my damn money) when those folks should be staying in their proper places, cranking out babies to serve as future meat widgets for our wealthy leaders (who are wealthy and leaders because of their demonstrated merit). 

For MAGA, the DeVos's, the Kochtopus, and the rest of that crowd, public schools are just one more way that dollars are stolen to try to lift the lessers out of their proper place in society. It's the businesses, the corporations, that deserve the support and assistance of the government. For individual persons? Do your own research, do your own science, do your own educating-- because the regime is tired of helping take care of you, and they are trying to convince us that disregard is freedom. 

A Day In The Post-Mahmoud Classroom

It looks like the Supreme Court, guided once again by A) a profoundly impaired understanding of how schools work and B) a belief that it's unconstitutional to interfere with a religious conservative's desire to organize the world to suit their beliefs-- will decide in favor of Maryland parents (carefully selected so that this won't look like just a white christianist thing) who want to be able to opt their children out of any lessons that suggest that LGBTQ persons exist in the world. 

To be clear, the idea of alternative assignments doesn't bother me-- I've offered them in my own class for works that push the envelope. But this case takes us into whole new territory. 

So let's take a look at the classrooms of the future should this ruling come through. 

----------------------------------------------------------------------------

"Okay, class. Today we're reading 'Pride Puppy,' the story of a puppy who gets lost at a Pride parade. That means that Pat, Sam, Eddie, and Xavier-- go down to the Special Room till I send someone to bring you back--"

"You mean the room that used to be the gym?"

"Yes, that's it. See you in a bit."

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"Mrs. Smith, I have a question about the Puppy story. Why did they--"

"Hold on a second, Ethel. Pat, Sam, Eddie, and Xavier-- head down to the room. This should only take a second."

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"Yes, this is Principal Shmershwerks. What can I do for you, Mrs. Smith. You're upset because Mr. Smith doesn't have any family pictures on his desk, and you figure that since only the gay teachers aren't allowed to put out family pictures, he must be one of the gay ones, and you would like him to...? Oh, either be less gay or you want Pat out of that class."

------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"Okay. today we are going to-- what is it, Pat?"

"My mom says that the people on Page 16 look kind of gay to her, and she thinks I shouldn't have to read this book with the class."

"What do you mean, they look kind of -- never mind. Go to the room."

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"Okay, class. I see some of you were a bit confused by this early scene in The Sun Also Rises so let's look at the clues. When Jake first sees Brett in the novel, she's entering a cafe with some men described as having white hands and wavy hair. One makes a comment about seeing an--"

"Actual harlot!" 

"Right. And one calls another 'dear,' and Jake comments that 'I know they are supposed to be amusing, and one should be tolerant..."

Light bulbs go on around the room. "Ooooohh! It's a bunch of gay guys."

Six hands go up around the room. They hadn't figured out the LGBTQ content on their own.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"Wait. Why are you being opted out of the entire unit on Marie Curie? She wasn't gay."

"But my folks say she is an unhealthy model because she didn't stay home and act as a proper helpmate for her husband. That's not the right way for a woman to--"

"Go."

------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"The following students will be going to the room for the next two weeks while we complete our unit on Walt Whitman--"

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"Why are you students back already. I told you we'd be discussing Kate Chopin's The Awakening all week. Remember? Story of a woman unhappy to be a wife and mother, written by a lady author who wore pants?"

"Yes, we know. Sorry. But biology classes are doing evolution this week and the room is already full."

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"I don't understand. Why are you opting out of this lesson?"

"This poem definitely refers to the world as a globe, but in my family, we believe that the earth is flat."

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"Yes, Pat?"

"Mrs. Smith, my family has a religious objection to eating meat, and this character clearly has a hamburger for lunch. Expect to hear from my father's lawyer over the lack of advanced warning."

----------------------------------------------------------------------------

"So, Mrs. Jones, you want Pat opted out of lessons because of the pronouns?  Not just 'those gay pronouns,' but you have objections to all pronouns?"

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

"Yes, this is Principal Shmershwerks. Yes, hello Mrs. Wiggins. You want Sam moved out of Mrs. Smith's classroom because why?...Oh, because you saw Mrs. Smith's new haircut and it looks kind of butch."

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

"Okay, class. According to the posting on today's opt out request list, Pat's family objects to the portrayal of geocentric orbit, Sam's family objects to the suggestion that God loves short people, Quinn's family objects to the portrayal of talking fish on religious grounds, three other families object to the use of caricatures on moral grounds, and Patsy's mother has moral objections to any use of the word 'oral'. All of these objections have been referred to the District Office of Moral and Religious Issues, which will consult with the State Office of Religious Concerns, and we'll let you know whether your religious issues are officially recognized by the state or not."

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

OK: More Edu-spats

While awaiting SCOTUS's take on the Big Oklahoma story-- the attempt to create the illusion that a religious charter school-- do not miss the other ongoing crazypants fussing going on over various other issues.

Oklahoma is wrestling with some new history standards, subject to Edu-dudebro-in-chief Ryan Walters intense desire to jam his version of Christianity into schools while simultaneously making google eyes at Dear Leader in DC.

Here's the thing-- the standards were rather christianism-infused to begin with. But then as the new year rolled around, a bump or three appeared in the road.

There's fallout from ongoing feuding among Oklahoma's big name GOP politicians. Walters tried to get State Attorney General Gentner Drummond to make some noise about Trump's anti-diversity edicts to support Walters own response, but Drummond, who has often clashed with Walters, called it "manufactured political drama" intended to get Walters more attention. Drummond is running for governor, Kevin Stitt wants to keep being governor, and Walters sure looks like he's running for something (especially now that Dear Leader didn't call him to DC).

Then Walters decided to require all schools to send him a list of every undocumented immigrant child, and even Stitt thought that was too much ("picking on kids" he called it) and fired three members of the Board of Education. Walters put two of them on a new made-up thing called the "Trump Advisory Committee" because his old BFF Stitt is now part of the "liberal DC swamp." But Walters now has to deal with three new members of the board who don't appear to be either impressed by or afraid of Walters, and the history standards have emerged as the first topic of dispute. 

The standards were tossed in front of the board, complete with three new members, in February, accompanied by a demand that these needed to get okayed super quick. Only it turns out that the final version of the standards had some changes that had been quietly slipped in there, most notably a requirement that Oklahoma students "identify discrepancies in the 2020 election results." Those changes were not discussed, and the newly appointed board members somehow didn't know about them.

Walters has handled this challenge to his authority with aplomb and diplomacy. Ha, just kidding. He has called the new board members liars and accused them of creating a "fake controversy." "I can't make you do the reading," he said, referring to the standards with changes that nobody was told about. 

"I'm not a speed reader," said new member Ryan Deatherage, reminding Walters that he had asked for more time at the February meeting.

"I did my homework," said (more or less) new member Michael Tinney, pointing out that he downloaded the standards to read, but that what he read was the pre-sneaky-changes standards.

Sasha Ndisabiye and Bennett Brinkman have been all over this for NonDoc. They report:

Asked after the meeting why Walters did not at least notify board members of what changed between the initial version of the standards and the final version, Walters declined to give a reason besides saying he made it clear to board members that the version of the standards given to them less than 24 hours before the meeting was the updated and final version.

“I don’t control when Gov. (Kevin) Stitt put these board members on here. That’s what he chose to do,” Walters said. “It was at the very end of the process.”

I think we could safely call this a passive-aggressive hissy fit. And to add to the cheery atmosphere, the GOP chair of the Senate Education Committee, Rep. Adam Pugh, filed a resolution shortly after the board fireworks saying the Senate doesn't like the standards and will send them back to the board for a do-over. 

Walters continues to demonstrate what it looks like to put politics and personal brand building over educating actual young humans. In the meantime, Oklahomans can consider the value of adding The Big Lie to the curriculum when there are so many smaller lies near to hand. 

ICYMI: Spamalot Edition (4/27)

I'm playing in another pit orchestra, this time for a local community theater production of Spamalot, a show that makes me really want to get out my copy of Monty Python and the Holy Grail, but I don't have time to because I'm playing in a pit orchestra.

But I still have time for the weekly roundup of read-worthy pieces. Here we go.

Donald Trump’s war on children

Someone at the Washington Post messed up and let Catherine Rampall post this big-picture look at all the ways Dear Leader has been trying to make life worse for the next generation.

How Trump Is Using Strategic Chaos to Reengineer Public Education

Julian Vasquez Heilig posts about the tactics of Dear Leader and what it means for education policy (watch that Overton window).

Harvard Stands Up

The Academic Freedom newsletter takes a look at Harvard's tussle with the regime. 

Harvard Takes the Gloves Off

This view is from David Pepper. Dang, but who knew that we would be cheering for Harvard some day.

Florida’s Proposed School Grading Change Isn’t About Accountability—It’s About Undermining Public Education

Sue Kingery Woltanski looks at the latest Big Bad Idea in Florida as part of its never-ending quest to kneecap public schools.

Et Tu, Urban Institute?

Stephen Dyer looks at a new study that cuts all sorts of corners on its way to saying that school vouchers are swell!

Draft executive order outlines plan to integrate AI into K-12 schools

From the Washington Post again, but all you need is the headline. And if you've not been grasping the kind of authoritarian threat that AI poses, let this be your big clue.

Executive Disorder

Audrey Watters responds to that edict for AI, in case you need an explanation of just how bad it is. 

The Silent Professor

This is an oldie, but I only just ran across it. What would you do if you lost your voice, but you still had to teach? Joseph Finckel tells his story.

Bringing Critical Thinking to the Classroom: Introducing the “InfluenceWatch Educational Guide”

Kali Fontanilla has developed some teaching materials based on the InfluenceWatch media guide to bias. If I were still in the classroom, I would be considering this.

Student Outcome Focused Governance is Impuissant

Not sure what SOFG actually is? Thomas Ultican has dug up answers to what it is, and why you should be wary. 

RIP, Libraries and Museums

Nancy Flanagan considers yet another institution that Dear Leader wants to trash.

Congress Should Defy the Trump Administration and Save Head Start

Dear Leader's budget proposal includes the cutting of Head Start. Jan Resseger explains why Congress should put the kibosh on the plan.

In search of solace

Benjamin Riley is grappling with the role of tech in the erosion of democracy, and he turns to musing with people of faith to get a handle on it.

This week at Forbes.com I looked at some of the arguments being brought up this coming week for the religious charter school case, and I looked at the court order holding off Dear Leader's anti-DEI measures for schools. 

Join me on my newsletter, and I can haunt your email inbox without you having to do a thing. It's free and always will be.

God Loves A Sucker

Lifewise is in a state of alarm over candy.

We need to have a long talk about Lifewise some time, a company that is making hay out of an Ohio law that says schools must let students out to attend church lessons-- a sort of Skip School For Jesus. It's a chance for conservative christianists to recruit children right out of school, and make a ton of money while doing it. Lifewise sets up a site for church school, and buses students to it and back during the school day (and if that sounds like a terrible idea, it is, but we'll talk about that another day). 

It's one more way to try to work around the wall between church and state, but it turns out that Lifewise needs the use of a particular tool, and they grump when they can't have it.

Candy.

Well, candy and toys. Turns out that students who skip out for church time come back to school with "candy, stickers, or tchotchkes." and Lifewise attorney Jeremy Dys says that some schools are forbidding this. You know-- in the same way that schools don't allow candy and toys during the day because it's disruptive and troublesome. All over the country you'll find schools where students can't even bring in cupcakes for their birthday because of health policies. 

But attorney Dys says forbidding students to bring back the trinkets from their Lifewise session-- well, "that’s restricting free speech and denying students their religious liberty." And he feels strongly enough about it to threaten "some very serious litigation that is not going to be fun for anybody."

Dys is an attorney at First Liberty, yet another of those right wing legal shops dedicated to imposing christinist political beliefs on everyone. 

The point here, of course, is that promising the students treats if they attend the Lifewise program is an important part of the recruitment process. Maybe the argument is that God really loves a sucker and Jesus has commanded His people to hand out lots of stickers, but I can't say I've ever seen either idea crop up in the scripture, and I'd personally rather not see my church resorting to the same recruitment techniques as creepy guys in vans. 

If Lifewise has a message that is just as powerful and uplifting and life-improving as they claim, surely they don't need to add candy and treats to sell it. 

OH: Is A District Firing A Teacher Because He's Gay?

Tiny South Central School District in Greenwich, Ohio, is stirring controversy by canning its choir director, and it doesn't appear to have anything to do with his job performance. I will warn you ahead of time-- yes, this is a thing that is happening in 2025. 

Decades ago, a district in my neighborhood fired a gym teacher for being gay. They didn't hide it behind any kind of vague language; they just said they wanted to fire her because she was gay. So they did. And she sued their asses off and won. 

Since those days, uber-conservative districts have learned a lesson. Unfortunately, the lesson was not "Don't discriminate against people because of sexual orientation," but was instead "Don't say out loud that you are firing people because they are gay."

The crowd turns out for the March meeting.
  Terry Burton/Norwalk Reflector   

Greenwich, Ohio is a tiny place; fewer than 1,500 citizens located smack in the middle of Central Ohio's Big Flat Nothing. The district is the result of Greenwich's consolidation with North Fairfield schools back in 1960. The high school has around 200 students in grades 9-12. 

The district hired Alex Kuhn last year to handle the choir, and by accounts, he did a good job with his chorus getting high scores in district contests and advancing to states. But apparently word got out soon that is gay and in a committed relationship with a partner (it's not clear from what I've read whether or not they are married). And that has become a point of controversy. 

By mid-March, the region was worked up over the issue. The culture panic crowd was agitating for Kuhn's contract to be non-renewed for next year. The school board meeting drew a crowd that would be large for a school board meeting in a town with more than 1500 people. The board responded by refusing to expand public comment time (15 minutes with 3 minutes per speaker) and refusing to let anyone who hadn't signed up ahead of time to speak. Also, they announced that anyone who tried to make a public complaint against a board member or employee would be shut off. 

One 2019 graduate spoke in favor of diversity and tolerance, and also pointed out the hypocrisy that heterosexual staff can speak openly about their families and personal lives, but Kuhn is (allegedly) denied the same freedom. 

But another community member rose to express his "disappointment" over the hiring practices, and his hope that an unnamed staff member would not be rehired.

Another audience member expressed a concern that Kuhn's "values are inconsistent with the values of the community and district. The district "can't allow this to take root and snowball" and that "God will not honor this path unless we choose to alter the path." He asked four questions:

1. Was the board aware of Mr. Kuhn's lifestyle?
2. Can his contract be rescinded?
3. Can the district buy out his contract?
4. What can the board and administration do to insure this will never happen again?

 The board appears to have been split, with two members unwilling to go on record one way or the other. As a result, the vote to renew Kuhn's contract failed. 

Those opposed were remarkably coy about the actual issue. The one newspaper that covered the meeting (Terry Burton for the Tandem Network) couldn't get anyone to comment on exactly what policy the board was reviewing, nor was anyone apparently explicit about the "this" in the "this will never happen again." Disappointed? About what.

But Kuhn's defenders seem to have no doubt about what they're defending him from. A petition at change.org supporting Kuhn has 1,294 signatures and numerous comments praising the teacher and condemning the attempt to end his employment over homophobia on the board and in the community. 

What's the fear? Students will learn that LGBTQ persons exist in the world, leading perfectly ordinary lives? Is this that same old notion that nobody is born LGBTQ and therefor every LGBTQ person is probably a recruiter? Are people just freaking out about LGBTQ persons for no particular reason beyond vague moral panic? I suppose one is entitled to disapprove of LGBRQ persons (though it strikes me like disapproving of blondes), but why should that disapproval require stripping a young man of his job?

I wish I could provide more detail, but there's very little real media coverage of rural Ohio, so this is pulled from the one press account about the March 17 meeting and a plethora of online comments that center on the April meeting, which appears to be the one at which the board failed to hire Kuhn for next year. One commenter noted that the board opened the meeting with a prayer. Several others suggest he may have cause for a lawsuit, and that certainly seems possible, though what young teacher would want to go through that. This is an ugly chapter for the district, but time will tell if there is more of this story ahead. 

How Schools Can Push Back Against Christian Nationalism

Christian Nationalism is neither Christian nor nationalism, but it is currently inescapable in this country. It presents a challenge for schools and educators-- how do you educate students in a climate of culture panic that demands adherence to a list of ever-shifting beliefs?

Katherine Stewart is an exceptional chronicler of christian nationalism, and is particularly good at framing what's really happening. A hugely valuable insight from her most recent work, Money, Lies and God, is that christian nationalism can be understood not as a particular set of policy goals, but as a particular mindset, a view of the world described by four beliefs.

First is the belief that the country is going straight to hell. Think Trump's many dark descriptions of the many ways that America is no longer great. Education has been captured by Marxist radical leftists who have installed groomers and pedophiles in every room. Any minute now they're going to lure your sons into the guidance office to get their penis chopped off during study hall. 

Second is the persecution complex. One survey shows that christian nationalists believe discrimination against white folks is at least as big a problem as discrimination against minorities. Trump's creation of the anti-christian bias task force is an expression of this view. Stewart points out that surveys show fear about the loss of status is a driver of Trump support. 

Third is the insistence that christian nationalists have a "unique and privileged connection to this land." Stewart has elsewhere made the point that for these folks, government derives legitimacy not from the "consent of the governed," but from alignment with proper christian values. Here that extends to individuals-- people who are aligned to the correct christian values created this country (hence our favored "exceptional" status), and such people are also entitled to privilege and position that others are not. (When those Others are given that undeserved privilege that should belong to the Right People--well, see the second item on the list).

Fourth, is the mindset that "Jesus may have great plans for us, but the reality is that this is a cruel place in which only the cruel survive." Yes, cruelty is the point of many christian nationalist policies and actions, but the point they want to make is that this is what the world is like--cruel and hard and a constant battle that you can only win by being hard and cruel and allied with Jesus, and if that sounds like a bizarre contradiction, well, there's a reason I don't capitalize the "christian" in "christian nationalism."

This mindset is also wrapped in a layer of anti-curiosity about other views. As one gifted student at my school years ago said when offered a unit about comparative religions, "Why would I study those other religions? They're all wrong." People with different views are evil or stupid or both; we can see this in action with the Trump regime, which never ever admits that reasonable people might have a view different from theirs. 

So what can schools and classroom teachers do in response?

The short answer is to develop a school culture that reflects and demonstrates a different view of the world.

The notion that the country is going to hell? Ironically, this MAGA linchpin is profoundly unpatriotic, and the counterpoint is actual patriotism. That's patriotism rooted in an honest story of our successes and failings, and the steps we have taken to live up to our principles in a long arc that speaks to the rising and advancing of the nation.

The persecution complex? Run a school in which dignity, respect, and quality instruction are not zero-sum qualities that are only available to a few students. Challenge every attempt to give some students less respect and dignity and education. 

The privileged position? Okay, this is honestly the hard one, because some students being deprived of their "rightful" position as the Most Special Boys and Girls are going to kick hard. But other students will see how you react to that. Students know whether rules and privileges are fairly handled or not. Students know whether some people in your school are valued more than other.

A cruel world? The school and classroom can provide a strong, living argument against this mindset, and all they have to do is value something other than cruelty. Schools and classroom management can be based on trust and support rather than threats and punishment. If your school's message is "Life sucks and you'd better toughen up," you are underscoring the christian nationalist message and all that's left is working out how to be the most cruel. 

And finally, recognize that ideas can be debated, discussed, and dissected, but to simply impose ideas on others through blunt power and rough cruelty is no way to grow in mind and character. Teachers especially have to remember this. 

None of this means a school culture of fluffy bunnies and warm fuzzy unicorns, and it certainly doesn't require the suppression of honest conflict or the erasure of consequences for bad choices. Nor does it require actual active dialog with christian nationalists.

All it requires is schools and classrooms based on grace and generosity, respect and recognized human worth for all students. It requires a school that recognizes and celebrates the rich beautiful diversity of human ways to be in the world, not some tiny cramped meager vision of a world of grey scarcity where some humans are worth more than others from the moment they walk in the door. This is how we do the best job of delivering a quality education to all students, and if that also shows them that there is a way to see the world other than in dark grasping angry paranoia--well, that would be a benefit to society as well.

It's worthwhile for US citizens, especially those of us who think of ourselves as Christians, to check ourselves for markers if these christian nationalist mindset characteristics. It's easy enough to fall into the idea that the country is going to hell, that some people matter more than others, that life is a bitch and the only way to win is to be the biggest bitch on the block. But if you agree with MAGA and your only beef is about which people are the most valuable, you've already handed them the win. There is no profit in replacing one dark vision of humanity with another just as dark.

Education is about helping young humans uncover and grow to be fully themselves, to grasp what it means to be fully human in the world. The christian nationalists of MAGA world have little interest in any part of that; that's why, though they wash up on our spiritual and intellectual shores time after time, they always fade back into their own dark depths. No reason that schools cannot be part of the resistance. 

UT: Court Strikes Down Voucher Program

Utah privateers were pretty excited about getting a taxpayer-funded school voucher program through the legislature. HB 215 pulled off that trick in part by bundling teacher salary boosts with an education savings account program. But now they're back to square one, because Judge Laura Scott of the Third Judicial District Couty in Salt Lake has found the whole thing unconstitutional.

In 2023, the legislature (swiftly) created Utah Fits All (curious name, suggesting one size does fit all, I guess). It was supposed to be universal (maybe that's the "all" part), with wealthy families who had never set foot in public schools eligible. That's standard these days-- taxpayer funded vouchers have pretty much left behind the old "for poor children trapped in failing schools" rhetoric. 

The bill was passed with a GOP super-majority, avoiding a repeat of 2007, when lawmakers passed a voucher bill, voters forced a referendum, and vouchers were then repealed by 62% of Utah voters. The legislature in 2023 appropriated $42.5 million from the Income Tax Fund to finance the vouchers (with a slice, of course, for ClassWallet, the voucher management company). Then in 2024 they threw in another $40 million.

Utah Fits All has most of the usual features, like voucher money being spent on any education-flavored expense of the family's choice, and some unusual ones, like mandating that nobody but the family can see inside the student "portfolio"-- in other words, nobody is allowed to know how the money was actually spent. And critically, as always, the schools receiving taxpayer-funded vouchers are not state actors and may discriminate on many bases, including LGBTQ status, disability, or religion. 

Utah's teacher union challenged the new law, thus beginning the trek to this month's decision.

As happened in South Carolina and Kentucky, the voucher fans found themselves facing a court that can read the plain language of the state constitution. The decision cites key parts of the Utah constitution, like this one:

The Legislature shall provide for the establishment and maintenance of the state's education systems including: (a) a public education which shall be open to all children of the state' and (b) a higher education system. Both systems shall be free from sectarian control.

The court also cites the part of the constitution that delineate the state's responsibility to establish and manage the education system. Does the state, asked the court, have the authority to "create an education program that is not part of the public education system." 

In what may seem like a tasty twist for court watchers, the Utah court notes that while there's an argument that some of the language of the constitution may be ambiguous or subject to interpretation of modern legislative intent, the US Supreme Court has been big on the "original public meaning: and tradition argument for reading constitutions. 

The court decision finds a couple of problems with the taxpayer-funded voucher program. 

First, the state tried to lean on a 1986 Proposition claiming that it gives the state the authority to designate schools that aren't onside the public system and are sectarian. The court agrees that there's no way that voters of 1986 would have understood the amendment to empower the legislature "to create a constitution-free zone where publicly funded education programs could operate in violation of constitutional requirements." So, the state doesn't have the authority. 

There's a similar argument with a 2020 action known as Amendment G, meant to alter the constitutional rules for using tax revenue. The discussion of the bill (by which the court judges intent) never mentions school choice, nor did the publicity surrounding it. Once again, the court determines that a taxpayer-funded voucher was not part of the intent of the bill at all.

In addition, the court finds that the proposed system is not open to all children of the state. Public schools must take the students that land on their doorstep; voucher schools don't.

Judge Scott's ruling is just short of 60 pages, much of it highly detailed and dizzying legal argument, but the bottom line is clear-- Utah privateers have to go back to the drawing board or to a higher court. She deliberately avoided a debate about the merits of choice, but instead focused on the constitutional violations-- most especially the state's argument that some taxpayer-funded schools should still get to discriminate as they see fit. 

Does this have any far-reaching implications. Unlikely. As Chris Lubienski, ed policy professor at Indiana University, told Education Week, the rulings tend to come down to “variation in how the state constitutions are written,” rather than to a verdict on private school choice as a concept. These battles will be fought state by state. And I expect we haven't heard the last from Utah.

Moms For Liberty University

Moms For Liberty has a university! Sort of. If you use a really broad definition of "university." Like even broader than the definition used by Prager University.

M4LU wants to "inform-equip-empower." They call themselves "an academic approach to educating, equipping, and empowering parents to fight for their children."

Moms for Liberty, through M4LU seeks to be the go-to resource for parents to learn more about the issues and ideologies facing their children in the classroom, and to gain practical tools to navigate those issues.

Punctuation errors in the original.

The program director is Melissa Karwowski. She is touted as having "a diverse background in marketing, operations, data analytics, and tech consulting." Her sister-in-law started the M4L chapter in Washington County, PA (southwest of Pittsburgh) where Karwowski lives. 

She appears to be the same Melissa Karwowski whose LIinkedIn profile shows her working the tech side of multiple industries, most recently working as Director of Operations for IndeVets, an outfit that appears to provide floating employment for veterinarians. It appears that she was also a Mary Kay lady at one point. She's a military spouse (there's a nice piece in the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette about her welcoming her husband home in 2018). They have three children. She has a couple of degrees from Robert Morris University--one in business administration, and one in data analytics, both from 2021.

While this very much appears to be the same woman who is program director, her LinkedIn does not mention the M4LU job at all.

So the program director seems a bit more qualified to manage digital resources than an actual university, which seems about right. But she also doesn't appear to have been the first person in the job. January and February lecture videos are hosted by Robin Steenman, who introduces herself as M4LU director. Steenman may be familiar as the M4L leader in Tennessee who led the book banning charge there. 

The "university" launched in January. As Jennifer Vilcarino noted at Ed Week, M4LU is not actually accredited. Karwowski describes the goal a little more specifically:

Radical ideologies that have been building for decades are being daily inculcated in our children’s minds. What are the seeds being sown in our children today in America? If we as parents are to combat these efforts, we must understand the ideology. We must become experts ourselves. That is the goal of M4LU.

The website lists two "semesters" for 2025, but the format seems much more like a "topic of the month" structure. January-- Social Emotional Learning. February-- Critical Race Theory. March-- Restorative Justice. April-- Gender Ideology. May-- Comprehensive Sex Ed. In the fall, things get a bit more esoteric. August-- Generative Curriculum. September-- Graphic Content in Libraries. October-- Ethnic Studies. November-- Marxism.

For each topic, there's a group of resources. There's a "smart book" that provides a history and background of the topic from the far right perspective. This includes talking points arranges according to the points to which one is responding. The resources include presentation slides, and a set of videos. There is also a set of "white papers" and some books for recommended reading, plus a whole laundry list of related links (CRT gives links to videos that Williamson County M4L created when they were trying to ban the Wit and Wisdom books series, including a Riby Bridges bio-- that was three years ago).

The "experts" cites are the usual crew. James Lindsay, Chris Rufo, Parents Defending Education, the American Enterprise Institute, and plenty of Heritage Foundation stuff. There are also "watch parties for films every month or so.

As mentioned, there's a live lecture with each month, apparently filmed at a studio in Nashville (for $25 you can be part of the studio audience)

I could get into the specifics, but-- okay, just one. To respond to the argument that restorative justice is a good idea because children who commit offenses do so because of social factors beyond their control and punishing them just makes matters worse, the resources suggests you say that "Bad social circumstances caused by government policy make it more likely that members of certain groups will commit crimes."

The newly made materials for this endeavor are slick and professional looking, the website also slick and easily navigated. However, you can't squint hard enough in a million years to make this look like a university. What it is is a deep resource library being rolled out a month at a time. It is a library of all the usual complaints and grievances of the culture panic crowd, presented in an academic-looking form that should be welcome by the "I'm not trying to stir up trouble, I just want to answer some questions" crowd.

M4LU told EdWeek that it includes counter perspectives, and that's true, though it's also clear that those perspectives are there in a Know Your Enemy function and not to be engaged as ideas that reasonable people might hold. M4LU frequently credits itself with an "academic" approach, but I'm not sure that they know what that means. Granted, it's a vague sort of term, but I've never understood it to mean "we have already decided the conclusion and we will now just build a scaffold to support it and discredit all others." I think maybe they think "academic" means "not screaming," and M4LU does seem to clear that floor-level bar. 

M4L remains far more interested in using culture panic to stir up political activism than it is interested in actual education or, for that matter, liberty. M4LU is one more aspect of that mission to outrage and agitate MAGA ladies. If you want to get a picture of what the current talking points and arguments are, this website is just the thing. But a university it is not. 

ICYMI: Easter 2025 Edition (4/20)

It's a beloved holiday here at the institute, so if you celebrate Easter, a happy day to you. And if you do not, also a happy day to you, because we can all use some happy days. It's been kind of a scrambly week here, so here's your scrambly reading list.

Yet another expensive high-tech school opening in NYC - now with the promise of AI learning

The Prices have brought their Two Hour Learning model to the Big Apple as a private school with Big Tuition (just two hours of computerized learning a day gets you a full education). Leonie Haimson is here to remind you of the many failures of the education-via-screens model in the past.

It Ain't Over in Texas

Greg Abbott finally threw enough money at vouchers to drag them through the legislature. Jennifer Berkshire says he hasn't even begun to pay the cost for that victory.

Children Are the Future: Authoritarianism, Culture War, and Making Model Citizens

Alan Elrod at Liberal Currents looks at the MAGA goal of remaking a new generation in their own image.

The Seamy Side of CTE

Nancy Bailey looks at some of the problematic applications of CTE.

The controversial anti-poverty solution coming to public schools

The oft-debunked "success sequence" is popular again, and some right wing folks would like to make every teen learn it. Rachel Cohen at Vox.

Piercing the Propaganda

John Warner talks to Mary Anne Franks about how to get past bad faith propaganda in arguments about higher ed and academic freedom.

Opting Out

Adrian Neibauer offers a nuanced and honest look at the issue of opting out of the Big Standardized Test when you are a parent and a teacher.

Teachers, parents give West Ada school board an earful over classroom sign

The Idaho Statesman and Rose Evans continue to follow the story of West Ada, the district where a teacher got in trouble for a "Everyone is welcome here" poster. The story is both encouraging and depressing-- some folks are quite direct about supporting a message of diversity and inclusion and some... aren't.

Military Brats Slap Pete Hegseth With a Lawsuit Over Book Removals

From the Daily Beast, so it lacks a little balance, but here's an account of the students fighting back against the order to banish books from DOD schools.

The Biggest Threat to Public Education Is Coming From an Unexpected Place

Politico looks at two upcoming SCOTUS cases that threaten to blast public education as we know it.

Schools Are Already Seeing Higher Prices Due to Trump’s Tariffs

At EdWeek, Mark Lieberman and Caitlynn Peetz note one side effect of the Trump tariffs-- higher prices for school supplies.

Who’s In and Who’s Out at the Naval Academy’s Library?

The list of books purged from the Naval Academy was alarming enough, but someone at the New York Times had John Ismay compare that list to the list of books still in the library, and yikes! I Know Why The Caged Bird Sings is out, and Mein Kampf is in. 

How to Control the Electorate 101

Dan Rather and his crew take a look at Greg Abbott's steamrolling of Texas on vouchers.

Failing Charter School Will Continue To Operate

Carl Petersen with a case study of a Los Angeles charter that should have been closed-- and wasn't. Petersen has the receipts.

The South's Long War on Black Literacy

You should have picked up a copy of Derek Black's Dangerous Learning by now, but if you need more convincing, here's a look by Thomas Ultican.

A Veteran Teacher’s Thoughts about ADHD

Nancy Flanagan was a band director, and that for a different set of interactions with ADHD students.

Lawsuit to Deny Federal Funding to Maine Public Schools in Transgender Athlete Case Tests President Trump’s Definition of Civil Rights

Maine's lady governor hurt Trump's tender feelings, so of course he sicced the Attorney General on the state. Now we'll see how well his upside-down version of civil rights plays out. Jan Resseger explains.

Cold As Ice: Update #3, The Posse

Gregory Sampson continues to look at the details of Florida's ICE-friendly student-unfriendly initiatives.

What to Know About Head Start, the Early Childhood Education Program the Trump Administration Is Proposing to Eliminate

Yes, Trump's proposed budget apparently axes Head Start. Here is some information about Head Start from Chad de Guzman at Time-- you can use it when you call your Congressperson to say, "What the hell!?"

Two-Sigma Tutoring: Separating Science Fiction from Science Fact

I covered this article in a post this week, but I want to make sure you don't miss it, because it contains most of what you need to enter a conversation about Two Sigma tutoring and why claims that AI can provide it are bunk. Paul T. von Hippel at Education Next.

The AI vicious cycle

Scott McLeod illustrates the AI circle for education. Short but bittersweet.

As ‘Bot’ Students Continue to Flood In, Community Colleges Struggle to Respond

In a fun new scam, community colleges are being swarmed with AI bots masquerading as students just long enough to score some student aid dollars. It's creative. Jakob McWhinney reports for the Voice of San Diego.

A Scanning Error Created a Fake Science Term—Now AI Won’t Let It Die

And here's one of the deep questions of the AI age-- once something that's just wrong gets folded into the sludge of AI product, can anyone get it out?

Have some Eleanor Powell and Fred Astaire

This week at Forbes.com I ran a piece about a new survey of attitudes about civics education.

Join me on my newsletter, where you get all my stuff. It's free.