ID: Lt. Governor Forms Indoctrination Task Force

I am not making this up.

Idaho Lt. Governor Janice McGeachin has announced the formation of a Task Force to Examine Indoctrination in Idaho Education. 

You can go to an honest to God state website page where you can turn in an educator who is doing Naughty Indoctrination Things. 

“One of our primary goals with this task force is to give concerned citizens a voice regarding education in Idaho,” said Lt. Gov. McGeachin. “If you, your child, or someone close to you has information regarding problematic teachings on social justice, critical race theory, socialism, communism, or Marxism, please provide us with as much information as you are comfortable sharing.”

So if a teacher you know, or know of, or have heard about through the grapevine, or on a Facebook group, has been involved in "problematic teachings on social justice, critical race theory, socialism, communism, or Marxism," you can turn that teacher in to the state. And while the form calls for your name, McGeachin is quick to reassure the public that they can turn teachers in anonymously.

Again, I feel it necessary to point out once again that I am not making this up or exaggerating for effect (as I occasionally am wont to do). This is the official headline of the official press release from the official Lt. Governor's official office.

Idaho Lt. Governor Assembling Task Force to Examine Indoctrination in Idaho Education Based on Critical Race Theory, Socialism, Communism, and Marxism

Press Release: Idaho Lt. Governor Assembling Task Force to Examine Indoctrination in Idaho Education Based on Critical Race Theory, Socialism, Communism, and Marxism | Office of the Idaho Lt. Governor

In that release, the Lt. Governor notes “As I have traveled around the state and spoken with constituents and parents, it has become clear to me that this is one of the most significant threats facing our society today. We must find where these insidious theories and philosophies are lurking and excise them from our education system." The press release also recognizes that Idaho has company in this crackdown, with states like Florida, Arkansas, and North Carolina are also cracking down on that evil indoctrination stuff. 

No word yet on whether or not people who turn in indoctrinating teachers will be given cool brown t-shirts to wear as a reward. 

Note that it is still okay to teach about fascism. Hopefully teachers will be allowed to cover just enough communism so that they can talk about how this sort of widespread "cultural revolution" worked out for the Chinese. I'm also hoping that teachers will be free to discuss the relative merits of indoctrination versus an oppressive process of state-sanctioned surveillance and repression. 

None of the materials indicate exactly how the lurkers will be excised--will offending teachers be sent to re-education camps, scolded severely, subjected to mean posts on Facebook, de-certified, fired, or summarily executed? One teacher in Boise has even more questions, and she seems a little angry. Sadly, there also seems plenty of support for rooting out "leftist brainwashing."

McGeachin is so far right that she clashes with the state's conservative governor (who she may try to unseat) and hangs out with three percenters as well. She, of course, also signed on to some post-election court cases in support of the Big Lie.

The ability to do the turning in of teachers anonymously seems particularly troubling. Did Mrs. McTeachalot give us bad grades on that last paper? Let's turn her in to the state. Of course, that feature also means that people could clog the system by turning in Mickey Mouse, Indiana Jones, or Lt. Governor McGeachin. Repeatedly. At this Google form right here.

ICYMI: Car Shopping Edition (4/25)

 Only slightly more fun than a root canal. But I needed a new project. In the meantime, here are some good reads from the week.

State of Siege: What the Free State Project Means for New Hampshire’s Public Schools

Have You Heard welcomes Matthew Honglitz-Hetling, author of A Libertarian Walks Into A Bear, a book I just finished, so I was pretty pumped to have the HYH crew interview him. Oh, New Hampshire, my birth state, home of my families of origin--what the hell has happened to you.

How the federal government's charter school program went wrong

Jeff Bryant takes a look at some of the painful, gritty details behind the fraud and waste that cost taxpayers a billion dollars via the federal charter program.

Buying into the Social Contract is Different from Buying Education with a Public Tuition Voucher in a Privatized School Marketplace

In Ohio, there's a battle between two fundamental ideas about what a school is--a social contract, or a consumer good. Jan Resseger breaks it all down.

Indiana's New Budget Bill--More Privatization

Indiana is one of the states rushing headlong toward bigger, broader school vouchers and a dismantling of public education. The blog Live Long and Prosper has the details.

Dismantling the "Science of Reading" and the Harmful Reading Policies in Its Wake

Paul Thomas has been one of the persistent and well-researched opponents of the SOR wave, and here he presents more explanation of why the new edu-fad is misguided and misguiding.

Why Tax Billionaires Out Of Existence

Thomas Ultican provides a guide to just some of the damage done to public education by America's wealthiest oligarchs.

Too Much Focus on "Learning Loss" Will Be A Historic Mistake

Stephen Merrill at Edutopia explains that yes, learning loss is a thing and no, we shouldn't be making it the centerpiece of education policy.

Who is falling behind what?

John Warner in his substack takes a look why education isn't a race, and if it is, it's not a sprint, and maybe some folks should stop freaking out about the great pandemic pause.

Build Back Better: Avoid the Learning Loss Trap

Yong Zhao offers some insights into the pitfalls to avoid and the opportunities to embrace when dealing with policies addressing the dreaded learning loss

Learning Loss is a misnomer; study shows kids made progress during COVID-19

Look, I'm not generally interested in what big standardized tests have to say about how students are doing, but that's the way some folks like to play, and by the rules of their game, learning loss is not living up to its billing as a world-wrecker. Sarah Schwartz covers a new study for EdWeek.

What's "woke" and what's "whack" about how teachers are being prepared?

Shariff El-Mekki offers some thoughts about how teacher preparation could better prepare teachers for today's diverse classrooms.

A sign of why teachers are discouraged

Maureen Downey at the Atlanta Journal-Constitution looks at a flap in Fulton, where parents are demonstrating against the district's decision to give teachers release time for vaccination. 

How White Americans’ refusal to accept busing has kept schools segregated

Brown v. Board didn't change everything. At the Washington Post, Matthew D. Lassiter looks at the slow steady undoing of desegregation in the US.

The suicide wave that never was

Tom Bartlett at the Atlantic looks at the actual data and discovers that maybe the news about a wave of pandemic school shutdown induced suicides may not have been entirely accurate.

NY recycles state test questions

Just in case there weren't enough reasons to conclude that this year's Big Standardized Test was a waste of time, now it turns out that New York decided to just go ahead and re-use questions from previous tests. And students noticed. Christina Veiga at Chalkbeat has the story.

4 ways George Floyd's murder has changed how we talk about race

Stephen Sawchuck writes for EdWeek, with special appearance by Jose Vilson. 

Alternative Teaching Modalities in Hell

Well, that turned out to be a long list this week. Here's a nice palate cleanser from McSweeney's

VA: Is This The Path To Math Equity

Virginia is working on a new "math path," and conservative news outlets have gone off.

The initiative itself is loaded with the usual bureaucratic argle bargle, like

Through collaboration with other stakeholders across the Commonwealth, the VMPI state task force will make suggestions for institutional changes that will strengthen the alignment between K-12 and higher education mathematics while ensuring that students are better prepared for college and career success.

The goals include math jargonny ones like "Empower students to be active participants in a quantitative world" and ed-speak ones like "Encourage students to see themselves as knowers and doers of math" and also worthwhile ones like "Improve equity in mathematics learning opportunities." 

Fox and Breitbart and the Washington Examiner and a host of other stars in the right wing constellation are upset because, in its current form, the plan eliminates advanced math coursework in the early grades. 

The handwringing is calculated to stir the usual audience members. Out of the five goals and outcomes that the program lists, conservative commentators have focused exclusively on equity, which is guaranteed to agitate a certain sector of their audience. The coverage also soft-peddles the fact that the task force is looking at a timeline that still has to go through "response from stakeholders" and a "revise as needed" steps. So the current version is not necessarily the final word on this program; it's a little early for advanced hand wringing.

That said, the outcome of the current version of Virginia's math path is easy enough to see--wealthy families will send little Pat to Match Camp so that Pat can still get that all-important calculus class in 9th grade. 

There is one other thing here. Tom Loveless, in his new book about the Common Core, makes this observation about math and the Core (p. 152):

Another example of a CCSS dog whistle is organizing a high school math curriculum integrated math courses (typically named Math I, Math II and Math III) instead of the traditional Algebra, Geometry, Algebra II sequence. Integrated math courses have long been a dream of reformers.

Equity is never enhanced by removing programs from public schools, because the wealthy will find a way to buy those programs, and only those who can't afford to fork over the money will actually do without the program. You don't get fairness on ice cream eating by banning ice cream from the cafeteria menu, because the rich will always find a way to get ice cream on their own. You get equity my making the special programs available to everyone, and making sure that everyone is prepared to take advantage of them. 

A Powerful Call To Teach

Sharif El-Mekki is the founder of the Center for Black Educator Development, a group that's doing important work. He blogs at Philly's 7th Ward, and recent post is worth attention. 

I suspect that El-Mekki and I disagree on some education issues, but his view of the teaching profession is inspiring and powerful. Here's a bit from the post "Why We Need Black Men (And Women) To Answer The Call And Teach." El-Mekki is addressing the need for Black men in the classroom, which sits on my list of public education issues in urgent need of being addressed. But in the process, he also tells us about the power of the profession itself.

If more men realized the power of leading a classroom—how it is the most important lever in this fight for social justice and equity, and both challenges and offers uniquely amazing rewards—more highly qualified and gifted Black male educators would sign up to do this nation building. Many who could be Freedom Fighters are searching for how to make an impact, and most are encouraged not to lead in classrooms and schools. This must change.

It is up to all of us to pose the questions: If you want to have the largest, most sustained impact on society, why not teach? Do you believe in lifting as you climb? You view yourself as a follower of the Black radical tradition? Pro-Black? Revolutionary? Anti-Racist? Pro-community? Do you love Black children, community, and a content area?

What a question-- If you want to have the largest, most sustained impact on society, why not teach?

El-Mekki is not a dewy-eyed newbie; he started teaching in 1993 (here's how he got there). He's had more than enough time to settle down into the common head-bowed stance of someone who calls themselves "just a teacher." That clearly has not happened. 

I'm no fan of the myth of the hero teacher or the martyr teacher, but I never would have entered the profession if I hadn't believed in a teacher's power to change a small chunk of the world. It is good to remember that even in the midst of pandemics, bad policy, top-down foolishness, and just general disrespect, a classroom still boils down to a teacher and some students and the fire she can bring to that chunk of time. 

TX: Governor Still Holding On To Education Relief Funds

Texas Democrats have been reduced to tattling to the US Department of Education, as Governor Abbott continues to sit on $17.9 billion-with-a-b in aid that is supposed to be going to public schools.

That huge pile of money that has been allocated by Congress through various packages. Texas school districts are trying to get budgets written for next year. But the money is just sitting there.

Why? Abbott really hasn't explained himself much, but local coverage suggests a couple of issues.

One is a requirement that the state invest a billion dollars in higher education. That would also be the equivalent of the one billion from the first relief package that Texas spent on fixing budget "shortfalls" instead of using it to add to public education funding. Not clear whether state officials object to spending money on higher education, or if they just don't want to spend one billion to get $17.9 billion, which doesn't seem like a really tough math problem.

Abbott's only real comment on this is that the state needs "more guidance" on how the money is supposed to be spent. Which seems--well, 48 other governors have figured it out. Or is the Governor of Texas saying that he can't move without federal direction, which seems kind of un-Texasy.

There is also, apparently, a turf war in Texas about who should final say and control over where all of this money flows-- should it be legislators, or should they just hand the money over to local districts and let them use it as they see best. This seems like a no-brainer (does a legislator in the state capital really know how a local district can best use the funds), but legislators gotta legislate, I guess. 

Meanwhile, even the CEO of a grocery chain has told the governor to fork over the damn money. We'll see if Abbott will budge, or if Texas schools will once again suffer at the hands of their elected leaders.

Chris Evans (And Partners) Create A Useful Civics Tool

So this is how you do it.

Chris Evans has entered the world of celebrity education support, and he's done it up right. There's a companion post to this one over at Forbes that explains in a little more detail what the site does; in this post, I want to explain why I think Evans and his partners are setting an example for how the rich and famous can have a positive impact on education.

First of all, he hasn't done it alone. He has partnered up with actor/producer Mark Kassen, one of those guys who has a long, solid, steady career in the biz without becoming a household name, and Joe Kiani, who--well, Kiani is an Iranian-American tech entrepreneur who started one of those companies that does a medical thing you don't understand, but who also has been hugely active in trying to reform the world of health care. These three started up a civic engagement site called A Starting Point, and then teamed that up with Close Up, a DC-based civics education group, to create ASP Homeroom, a site where you can find short, simple videos in which elected officials (mostly Congresspersons) lay out their position on major issues.

ASP Homeroom is a civic engagement tool that is well-suited to use by classroom teachers. It works for several reasons, not the least of which Evans and Kassen don't imagine themselves as having all the secrets of teaching civics to high schoolers. I spoke to Kassen, who said "We could not be so arrogant as to tell teachers how to do this."  This same quality comes across in Evans' various interviews. Evans seems to know exactly who he is- not a teacher or professional educator, but a guy who can get his phone calls answered and whose name in a press release will draw some attention. They have a platform, and appear to have figured out the trick of using that platform for good without imagining that celebrity has given them special magical powers. For working with education, a field stuffed to the gills with amateurs posing as experts, this is awesome.

Evans and his partners are also not part of that other celebrity education trend--the one where somebody's business manager has explained that they can get a tax break by investing in a charter school or good press by bankrolling an after-school program. Nor does this project attempt justify itself by attaching itself to any silliness like claiming that it will raise test scores. Every indication is that these guys want to promote civic engagement while demystifying the whole sausage-making business.

Nor is anybody making money from this. The resource is free. Kassen told me that they developed their own software. There are not even sponsors trying to piggyback on this to build brand awareness. In early 2019, just as Avengers: Endgame was marking the end of Evans' ten-movie run as Captain America, Evans and Kassen were spending time in DC trying to line up legislators for this as-yet-unlaunched website, which is probably not the best way for a highly-bankable movie star to try to cash in. In other words, not only is the site not profitable, but given the man-hours invested over the past three years, it probably displays negative profitability.

The site is, as I say over at Forbes, devoid of lesson plans, instructional guides, or anything else to try to tell teachers how it is to be used. I call that a plus that goes hand in hand with its other positive feature--it's devoid of any political agenda. Instead, it provides an unfiltered look at what "the people who write policy believe." It offers voices from all sides and links to further resources. And elected officials get to say their piece in short one or two minute bursts, separated from each other. And no comments section or voting videos up or down. The emphasis is on light, not on heat. 

That all makes the resource flexible, useful in a hundred different ways. Invite a slate of elected officials in for current events day. Turn your students into trained fact checkers. Or simply provide students with a basic background about some of the issues of the day. 

There is a charming hopeful optimism to the whole thing; you can see in the video above Evans taking the first halting steps to try to interest politicians back in 2017, pushing that ethic of "if we could just get people to talk a little more and know a little more, maybe things would work a little better..." But I don't think that hopefulness is a bad thing. Nor is breaking down the barriers between elected officials and citizens (Kassen says that hundreds of thousands of people have contacted officials via the site). 

This is a promising resource. If I were still in the classroom, I'd use it as a basis for writing assignments and discussion. Lots of teachers could think of something like this--a website with hundreds of explainer videos from elected officials--but it takes celebrity to open doors, and a smart celebrity to open the door and then step back to let others walk through it.

Check out the site. Share it with a teacher friend. 

To Choice Advocates: Some Questions

I have concerns about school choice programs, and I usually express them as complaints, criticism, general snark. This time, I'd like to come at it a little differently. Let me frame these concerns as questions, because maybe there are answers that I'm just not aware of. As is obvious from a multitude of posts, I am skeptical; these questions show exactly what I'm skeptical of. 

And before I start, I'll agree that some of these concerns are not always well-addressed by public schools. So I'm not looking for answers in the old mode of "Yeah, but public schools do X!" I'm still wondering how a charter or voucher system would do a better job of managing the issues. If you want to take a shot an answering these, the comments are open.

1) A choice system is built on the idea of making parents the primary stewards of their child's education. Contrary to the usual criticism, I believe that the majority of parents are smart and capable and caring. But a non-zero number are not. I've told the stories: the student whose mother tried to run her over with a car; the student who was always tired because dad spent the utility money on beer; the student whose father threw him out of the house for trying to take some of dad's drugs; the student who was thrown out for coming out as gay; etc.  In those sorts of cases, who or what is protecting the educational rights of these students?

2) Education savings accounts (ESA) are a kind of super-voucher that gives families a chunk of money to spend on a variety of educational services. In the event that a family mismanages the money and the money runs out before the student has received a "full" education, what safeguards are in place to insure that the student gets that full education?

3) Should some education service vendors or schools turn out to be incompetent or deliberately fraudulent (or go out of business before the year is over), who or what protects the rights of the student to an education? What mechanism is in place to allow the family to seek redress? 

4) As recent history has vividly demonstrated, society has a collective need to have well-educated citizens. What guardrails should a choice system have in place so that we do not produce a bunch of high school graduates who believe that captive Blacks enjoyed being slaves, that vaccines cause autism, and that Donald Trump won the 2020 election? Are there any educational standards that should be enforced? 

5) What protections are there for marginalized students? We've already seen voucher schools in Florida openly discriminating against LGBTQ students (and teachers), and the standard in voucher laws now seems to be a clause explicitly marking that the state will not interfere in any way with how the voucher recipients do business. But discrimination against students robs them of the very choice that the system is supposed to give them. What protections for those students should be in place?

6) Likewise, there are students who are just too expensive and/or troublesome to be attractive "customers." Do they have any protections under a choice system? Do they get a choice? And what happens if an entire community is considered an undesirable market--what safeguards are there against education deserts?

These are serious questions, not gotcha openings--these are real concerns that a choice system would need to address.

"The market will handle it" is not an answer, though you're welcome to try to explain how the market would do that. I'm unconvinced that the invisible hand can put together an education system that would even attempt to serve all students or the country as a whole. Every free-ish market has to deal with the tension between freedom for customers and freedom for vendors, and that is a tension that is never fully resolved. 

I have other concerns about a choice system, but this is a good list to start with.