Jill Biden's Almost Great Stump Speech For Teaching

FLOTUS was in Tennessee, of all places, to kick off an "education tour." meant to make hay out of the Biden administration's relief package for schools. At the University of Tennessee, she followed the mayor, Secretary Cardona, and Teacher of the Year Melissa Collins (who is a compelling presence). There's also an emphasis on recruiting and retaining teachers, and she had some good, moving things to say, but I can't let this quote pass without response.

“Teaching isn’t what we do, it’s who we are” - @FLOTUS @WXII pic.twitter.com/hFAuXUuASF

— WXII Maria DeBone (@WXIIMaria) September 12, 2022

This quote's heart is in the right place. It got a big chunk of applause. But here's what's wrong with the sentiment, because it's part of what has gotten the profession in trouble already.

"Teaching is who we are," plays to the myth that people are born teachers, and that myth has several unfortunate, damaging side effects.

First and foremost, it contributes to the notion that teaching is not a profession that people can either choose or not choose. It contributes to the mindset that figures it doesn't matter what we do to teachers and their working conditions because it's not like they could choose to do something else or find another line of work or just choose not to be teachers, because, hey, teaching is who they are. 

If teaching isn't a job folks choose to do, but is simply a calling (which Dr. Biden labeled it at least thrice) or an identity one is born into, then we don't have to talk about how to make the profession more attractive in order to recruit and retain people. 

We can talk about a "teacher shortage" as if we're talking about a shortage of green beans, as if the magic teacher tree for some reason just didn't bear enough fruit this year. And that in turn means we can start talking about "solutions" that address everything except the real issues at hand (like creating cockamamie rules to let any warm body pretend to be a teacher because the teacher tree didn't yield enough fruit). 

If I want to really stretch a point, I can even argue that this quote is a little dehumanizing, erasing the whole "we are people who" choose to do this job. And while it's not at all the most important piece of all this, I'll also point out that if teaching is your whole identity, retirement will be a bitch. 

FLOTUS frames it all as people wanting to teach but being stopped by obstacles--low pay, student loans, class sizes, and safety concerns. If we want to bring bright talented people into the field, she says, "if we want educators to be able to do what they do best, we have to give them the support that they deserve." And then she introduced the Three R's For Teachers-- Recruit, Respect and Retain. And then she pivots to stumping for her husband (opening schools, vaccinating teachers, loan forgiveness, more counselors, encouraging states to raise pay, yay). She just knew he would have to be an education President; she does not offer a connection between this and the years he spent in the public-education-thrashing Obama administration. 

She also refers to teaching as "this profession" and talks about "the work," which strikes me as a better framework. And she really brings it all home toward the end:

Become a teacher. And when you do, and when you do--and I hope all of you do who want to join this profession-- you'll find a vocation that brings you joy and meaning. You'll know that someone out there is a better thinker because of you, that someone is kind of sitting a little bit taller because you gave him the confidence. Someone is working a little harder because you pushed her to try. Someone is braver because you helped him find his courage. And you'll know this, too-- that your President and his administration are working every day so that you have the support, respect and pay you deserve. So join us. Become a teacher. And we will change the world, one student at a time.

Well, she was on a roll for a minute, anyway. 

I'll repeat that Tennessee, with its ardent embrace of Larry "Teachers are the dumbest" Arnn and its long string of amateur-hour grifters as secretary of education, is an odd choice. The gang appear drawn there by a proposed Grow Your Own program, which is currently nothing more than a pretty idea, but as unrealized ideas go, I suppose it's prettier than North Carolina's crappy proposed merit pay program. And it's certainly nicer to have someone from DC saying pretty things about teachers instead of calling them names and suggesting they all stink (like Betsy DeVos under Trump/Pence and Arne Duncan under Obama/Biden). 

But I'm not sure we've fully grasped the range of issues gumming up the teacher pipeline (or at least we have chosen not to express said grasping in words). I like a pep rally for the profession as much as the next person, especially these days, but when it veers toward the ditch, my nerves, long made twitchy by pretty words untethered to any useful, practical policy--well, I get a little pain.

Bottom line. Some swell parts, some terrible parts, some choices clearly made in order to stump for Biden policies (which echoes the "don't tell me what you need, just listen while I tell you what I want to do for you" pitch that teachers know so well from dozens of edu-wares salespersons). This was the kickoff for the tour; maybe things will pick up down the road. 

Study: Broad Academy Grads Help Privatize Public Schools

The Broad Academy has been around since 2002. Founded by Eli Broad, it's a demonstration of how the sheer force of will, when backed by a mountain of money, can cause qualifications to materialize out of nothing. The Broad Foundation ("entrepreneurship for the public good") set the Academy up with none of the features of a legitimate education leadership graduate program, and yet Broad grads kept getting hired to plum positions around the country. And now a new study shows what, exactly, all these faux graduates accomplished.

Give Eli Broad credit-- his personal story is not about being born into privilege. Working class parents. Public school. Working his way through college. Been married to the same woman for sixty years. Borrowed money from his in-laws for his first venture-- building little boxes made of ticky tacky. Read this story about how he used business success and big brass balls to make himself a major player in LA. He was a scrapper; Broad called himself a "sore winner."

Broad believed that education was in trouble, but he did not believe schools had an education problem. He believed they had a management problem--specifically, a management problem caused by not having enough managers who treated schools like businesses. The goal has been to create a pipeline for Broad-minded school leaders to move into and transform school systems from the inside, to more closely fit Broad’s vision of how a school system should work. 

Through a residency program, Broad often sweetens the pot by paying the salary of these managers, making them a free gift to the district. A 2012 memo indicated a desire to create a group of influential leaders who could “accelerate the pace of reform.” And Broad maintained some control over his stable of faux supers. In one notable example, John Covington quit his superintendent position in Kansas abruptly, leaving stunned school leaders. Not until five years later did they learn the truth; Eli Broad had called from Spain and told Covington to take a new job in Detroit.

Broad did not particularly believe that public schools could be reformed, with his vision of privatization becoming ever more explicit (leading to the 2015 plan to simply take over LAUSD schools). The Broad Academy offered an actual manual for how to close schools in order to trim budgets. The process was simple enough, and many folks will recognize it:

1) Starve school by shutting off resources
2) Declare that schools is failing (Try to look shocked/surprised)
3) Close school, shunt students to charterland

Anecdotally, the record for Broad Faux Supers is not great. Robert Bobb had a lackluster showing in Detroit. Jean-Claude Brizard received a 95% no-confidence vote from Rochester teachers, then went on to a disastrous term of office in Chicago. Oakland, CA, has seen a string of Broad superintendents, all with a short and unhappy tenure. Christopher Cerf created a steady drumbeat of controversy in New Jersey. Chris Barbic was put in charge of Tennessee’s Achievement School District, and resigned with all of his goals unfulfilled (and recommended another Broad grad as his replacement). John Deasy’s time at LA schools ended with a hugely expensive technology failure, and he's been bouncing from failure to failure ever since..

But now a trio of researchers takes us beyond the anecdotal record. Thomas Dee (Stanford), Susanna Loeb (Brown) and Ying Shi (Syracuse) have produced "Public Sector Leadership and Philanthropy: The Case of Broad Superintendents." 

The paper starts with some history of Broad Academy, and places it in the framework of venture philanthropy, the sort of philanthropy that doesn't just write a check, but stays engaged and demands to see data-defined results. The we start breaking down information about the Broad supers.

The Academy members themselves. They are way more diverse than the general pool of superintendents, so that's a good thing. Slightly more than half of academy participants and about two-thirds of the Broad-trained superintendents have some teaching experience. This is way lower than actual school superintendents, and probably even lower because I will bet you dollars to donuts that the bulk of that "teaching experience" is a couple of years as a Teach for America tourist passing through a classroom so that they can stamp "teacher" on their CV like an exotic country stamped on a passport. On the other hand, one in five Broadies has experience in the military.

Broadies started at an average age of 48, and their average tenure was a whopping 3.8 years, with more than half moving on to another super job. Fun fact: Broadies tended to be hired by districts that have shorter-than-average superintendent tenures. Over time, the placement of Broadies moved from large public districts to Charter Management Organizations; from 2013 to 2015, one third of the cohort took jobs with CMOs or EMOs. 

But what did these Broadies, with their intensive business management style training, actually accomplish?

The answer is, mostly nothing special. This is not surprising; less-than-four-years is not enough time to move the needle on much of anything in a school district, no matter how awesome your management skills may be. Broadies were found to have little effect on enrollment, spending and student completion. The last is, again, unsurprising--you're there for a small fraction of the students' academic career, so what affect are you going to have, particularly if you're just one more body speeding through the district's revolving door. 

But one effect the study did find-- "they initiated a trend toward increased charter school enrollment." So if the purpose of the Broadies was to nudge schools towards privatization, they apparently did that. 

Near the end of his life, Broad was able to arrange for the Academy to finally get a cloak of legitimacy by having the program housed by Yale (accompanied by a whopping $100 million contribution). The Broad Center is not, of course, anywhere near Yale's education department, but is instead parked in the School Of Management.

The Broad Center at Yale School of Management fosters the ideas, policies, and leadership to help all students – particularly those from underserved communities – to learn and thrive. Our work is bolstered and enriched by the Broad Network, a nationwide community of nearly 900 dedicated and diverse leaders who are alumni of TBC programs.

"Particularly those from underserved communities" makes sense, because wealthy families expect more education from their educational leaders. The Broad Center started its first cohort this year, who will now work for a Yale Masters Degree. 

These thirty education-flavored leaders include about three people with actual public school classroom experience, and a whole lot of Teach for America products who "began their career in teaching" before quickly moving on to leadership roles based on the deep education expertise they acquired from spending two whole years in a classroom. The charter sector is heavily represented (whole lot of KIPPsters in this group). They appear well aligned with the Broad philosophy that the best people to fix public education are those who have little direct knowledge of public education. Eli Broad may be gone, but his vision, now festooned in New Haven ivy, still chugs along.

ICYMI: Welcome My New Granddaughter Edition (9/11)

Yesterday my daughter and son-in-law welcomed their first daughter, my second granddaughter. So all in all, it's a good weekend. In the meantime, I've got a particularly good collection of worthwhile reading for you. And remember--sharing and boosting the stuff that connects with you is important. 

Let Teachers Fix this. They Know How

Cheryl Gibbs Binkley doesn't post at Third Millenium Teacher very often, but when she does, she makes it count. Her point is simple. If you're worried about "learning loss," teachers already know what to do. If ever there was a time to get out of the way and let teachers teach, this is it. 

It's time to stop calling for schools to implement actions that are not going to happen.

While we're on the subject, here's a little quick realism from Larry Ferlazzo

Florida ranked No. 1 for "education freedom" — by right-wing group that wants to privatize it all

Kathryn Joyce reports for Salon on Heritage Foundation's new education freedom report card, and the state that came in first. Great piece. 

It's time to put woke schools myth to bed

In a guest op-ed in The Oklahoman, Dan Vincent argues that the plague of woke schools isn't really a thing. 

Daring to speak about race in a divided school

Thoughtful and even-handed piece in the New York Times by Daniel Bergner, focusing on a small community in Michigan and its wrestling with issues of race. 

With Don't Say Gay Laws and Abortion Bans, Student Surveillance Raises New Risks

The 74 has one of the scarier stories out there. The surveillance state plus restrictive laws equals bad news for students. 

A Texas Eighth Grader Was Pulled From Class And Grilled About His Gender-Identity

Greg Abbott told the state to start treating trans youth cases like cases of child abuse, and they are by God doing it. This is a chilling story of what happened to one 13 year old boy. 

Tennessee school library law's expanded scope puts burden on teachers

All you have to do is just check through every single book in your room for every single thing that some parent might object to. Super easy. Barely an inconvenience. Chalkbeat has the story.

Cyber charters see enrollments rise

Carol Burris guests at Valerie Strauss' Washington Post space, providing more detail and insight on the pandemic explosion in virtual charter biz-- and what that means for educating students and making money.

And To Think I Thought I Had Nothing To Say

Dad Gone Wild, school, funding, and the reformers making a bundle.

As pandemic aid runs out, America is set to return to a broken school funding system

Matt Barnum looks at school funding and the problems set to re-emerge as the pandemic aid runs out. Some god breakdowns of the problems of poverty and schools.

A tiny Christian college in Michigan is infiltrating Florida's schools

Yes, it's Hillsdale. And it turns out they've had even more control of Florida schools than you thought. Mary Harris reports at Slate. 

Hackers infiltrate LAUSD in growing trend

One more damn thing to worry about. The nation's second largest school district had to postpone the first day of school because they were hacked. 

A modest proposal for police reform 

From a few months ago, but I only just encountered this cleveland.com piece from Benjamin Helton. What if we used vouchers for other things? 

High school senior wins Boise school district board position

In fact, he beat an incumbent to do it. Kids these days. An encouraging story from KTVB7.

The Grove City class of 1967 had a request for its 55th reunion: One more class with its 99-year-old science teacher, Homer Christie

Heck of a story, from just up the road. In 1960, high school science teacher Homer Christie started teaching a free, optional Saturday morning extra science class. He retired from teaching in 1986, but he kept teaching the class until four years ago--at age 95. Now he'll be a featured part of a class reunion. 

FL: Endgame In Sight; Heritage Foundation Says Yay

Governor Ron DeSantis just announced his intention for the next step in dismantling public education in Florida; he wants to expand the education savings accounts, the super-vouchers that hand parents a chunk of money on a debit card that they can spend on pretty much anything educational or education-adjacent. 

Not that this is remotely a surprise. Type Florida in the search bar at the top of this blog and look at all the many, many ways Florida's leaders have worked to dismantle public education and sell off the parts, and every step brings them closer to the far right ideal of not just privatizing education, but privatizing it in the setting of an unregulated market, removing government from any involvement in education at all. 

DeSantis made his little speech as part of a victory lap. The Heritage Foundation, a right wing organization with strong ties to every right wing operation you can think of. They've decided to start doing an annual Education Freedom Report Card, organized around the search for a state that has most perfectly realized Milton Friedman's vision of education completely managed by an unregulated free market with government providing zero public education. Friedman also imagined that such a system would be free of discrimination of any sort because, when it came to education and society in general, Friedman was a dope. But his vision has always provided a cover for all sorts of people who want to dismantle public education for all sorts of reasons. "I'm just following the natural laws of economic reality," sounds so much better than, "I don't to pay taxes to fund schools for all those poor kids."

Anyway. The first year of the Heritage Report Card produced a clear winner-- Florida. And the explanation of the report card produces a clear picture of what these folks want in general and what Florida has accomplished in particular. 

We're well into the next phase. Don't call them "reformers" or even "disruptors." Now they're just plain old dismantlers.

The Heritage crew lays out four categories of public ed dismantling.

1) Education choice. This asks how much a centrally accountable public ed system has been replaced with an open market in which parents have to pick and choose an educational program on their own. Arizona, with its universal ESAs, wins the category.

2) Regulatory freedom. How well has the government shredded any kind of accountability measures? No Common Core tests is a winner, but beyond, we're looking for no regulations at all, including the new frontier in unregulated teaching certification. The foundation calls requirements for professional certification "barriers to teaching," much like FDA regulations are barriers to selling whatever kind of cut of whatever kind of meat in whatever kind of state. Accountability is bad.

3) Transparency. This appears to refer to the degree to which anti-education groups like Moms for Liberty and Parents Defending Education have gotten ahold of the levers of power, and how well the state has done at passing various teacher gag laws. 2 and 3 really capture the true spirit of the dismantlers, who argue that private education-flavored options should operate with complete opacity, accountable to nobody, but that the public education system should operate in a fishbowl, the easier to attack it for anything and everything.

4) Return on Investment. This is some top grade bullshit here, literally computing NAEP points per dollar spent, as well as factoring unfunded teacher pension liabilities (because pensions for teachers are bad and show you haven't properly de-powered your unions). 

The Heritage Foundation has embraced the culture war because it's a useful tool for creating distrust in public education. Leading dismantlist Chris Rufo said they would. Jay Greene of the Foundation said they should.  It's a tool; they'll be pro-parent just as long as it's not parents who are pro-public education.

But in the meantime, Florida is the dream. It is approaching the final form of dismantlism.

Defund public education. Undermine it financially, while also sowing distrust and undermining taxpayer support.

End the state's responsibility for providing or overseeing a decent education for every child.

Zero accountability to taxpayers.

Parents just DIY their way through an unregulated marketplace ripe for fraud and failure.

"We gave you a couple thou on a debit card. You're not our problem now. Voucher money ran out? Not our problem. Got bilked by some fraudster? Not our problem. Got left high and dry when some edu-biz closed its doors? Not our problem. Don't have the time or expertise to navigate this mess? We're sure someone has started a business that you can pay to do it for you. Are we certifying that business as qualified and legit? Ha! Now go away."

Two quotes from Kathryn Joyce's most excellent piece about the report card capture things well. First, from Andrew Spar, who has the thankless task of being president of the Florida Education association:

This amounts, Spar continued, to "the Heritage Foundation celebrating the rankings of how well you underfund public schools, how well you dismantle public schools. I don't think we should celebrate the fact that we're shortchanging kids."

And from Carol Burris, head of the Network for Public Education:

"With this report," added Burris, "the Heritage Foundation puts its values front and forward — that schooling should be a free-for-all marketplace where states spend the least possible on educating the future generation of Americans, with no regulations to preserve quality."

Florida and Arizona lead in dismantlism--that's how they ended up at the top of the Public Education Hostility Index last year. It is now easier than ever to imagine a future in which some states have an actual public education system, and others do not. 

The Free Market Is Wrong For Education (Part #1,277,652)

You may have noticed lately that the streaming industry is going through meltdown challenging transition. It's a reminder that, particularly in late stage capitalism, the free market is fundamentally incompatible with public education.

Just as cable disrupted broadcast television, streaming has disrupted cable. The less obvious part of the transition was a transition in what the business was actually about. Broadcast television are in the business of collecting eyeballs and then renting those eyeballs out to advertisers. Streaming services are in the business of selling subscriptions to customers. Except that, in this stage of the game, neither is actually in those businesses primarily--all are in the business of "creating" money for shareholders. Specifically, the business of creating ever-increasing piles of money.

But there's a problem--there is a finite number of customers in the pool, and streaming services have about reached that limit, particularly as they have proliferated. You are now an Old Fart if you can sit and regale the youngs of the days when a subscription to Netflix would let you watch pretty much everything.

The most obvious issue at the moment (other than your steadily increasing subscription costs) is the mess at Warner/HBO Max/Discovery, in which the newly combined streaming services are obliterating a ton of material. Not just canceled as in "don't make any more" but canceled as in "we have removed this material entirely from the servers." There are plenty of reasons behind this move, but this sentence pretty well sums it up:

Discovery is cutting shows from its archives and unfinished movies from HBO Max as it prepares to merge it with its sister streaming service Discovery Plus, having promised its shareholders a $3 billion cut in costs.

Meanwhile, as Washington Post reports,

Faced with a plunging stock price and worrisome subscriber loss, Netflix plans to add an advertising-supported model for a lower price and may crack down on password sharing. Disney Plus, Hulu and ESPN Plus, which can all be subscribed to in a cable-esque bundle, are raising prices after taking a more than $1 billion hit in the fiscal third quarter.

This all makes sense as long as you understand that the business of these services is not what you think it is. It is not to produce and distribute quality viewing experiences, and certainly not to provide for support to the creative people who produce all this content. The business of these businesses is to make money, and if they have to slice off pieces of their supposed primary mission, they'll do that. Sell advertising space? Cut what they pay for content to the bone? Use algorithms and data to determine what is profitable rather than what is quality? They will do all of that because--

1) You've got to keep making not just money, but more money and

2) Once the market is saturated, there's no way to do that except by playing bean counting games, cutting costs, and finding more sources of revenue.

I've repeated my law in the past: the free market does not foster superior quality; the free market fosters superior marketing. But that's probably incomplete, because the free market also, eventually, fosters creative corner cutting, even if the corners cut affect the pursuit of what is supposed to be the business's actual mission. 

We've already heard these kinds of noise from reformsters for years. There's a whole range of initiatives that are all really directed at just one question-- isn't there a way to have a "school" without paying so much for teachers? Maybe super-sardinemasters could teach a few hundred kids at a time. Maybe replace teachers with coaches or facilitators-- even call it something fancy, like microschool. Maybe lower the requirements so that any warm body can do the job and we don't have to pay for qualifications. 

And that's before we get to the lowering of expectations. How often are we hearing the message that a school should just teach students reading and math and maybe a little history, but only enough to make them employable.

The worst tendency for the free market is to look for that sweet spot where you spend the least you can get away with without losing too much of your market share, because your real purpose is to get money to shareholders. Is this what anyone wants for the schools their child attends? Do you want to hear from a building principal at orientation, "Rest assured that we have cut every corner in our attempt to provide your child with the bare minimum required."

The free market can, and has, accomplished some great things. But its values are incompatible with a system that promises to provide a full, rich, rounded education for every single student in the country. 

Moms for Liberty Are Primed For Elections

Moms for Liberty have not been shy about their intentions. Here's co-founder Tiffany Justice on Steve Bannon's show: 

BANNON: Are we going to start taking over the school boards?

JUSTICE: Absolutely. We're going to take over the school boards, but that's not enough. Once we replace the school boards, what we need to do is we need to have search firms, that are conservative search firms, that help us to find new educational leaders, because parents are going to get in there and they're going to want to fire everyone. What else needs to happen? We need good school board training. We need lawyers to stand up in their communities and be advocates for parents and be advocates for school board members who are bucking the system. Right now, parents have no recourse within any public education district.

This is not new. It's worth remembering that there was a third co-founder, Bridget Ziegler, who has since quietly stepped back, perhaps because her husband Christian is an obvious tie to the GOP political machinery. Back in October of 2021, Christian Ziegler told the Washington Post

I have been trying for a dozen years to get 20- and 30-year-old females involved with the Republican Party, and it was a heavy lift to get that demographic. But now Moms for Liberty has done it for me.

So there's no secret here. 

M4L has a different structure from traditional astro-turf groups like Parents Defending Education, which is a group of seasoned professional operatives with no real presence on the ground. M4L is more reminiscent of the Tea Party's early days--a combination of deep pockets and savvy leaders and a web of local groups of aggrieved moms. Traditional astro-turf is some folks in an office somewhere with a little has flame on a desk and the assertion that the flame is burning everywhere. The M4L/Tea Party model is about finding the places where there are sparks smoldering, and getting gasoline to those folks. 

So M4L is unloading some more election time gasoline. For example, on September 24, in Des Plaines, IL, they'll be presenting a Campaign Management Workshop to teach attendees (who will pay a nominal fee of $25) how to develop campaign strategy, research the district, conduct voter outreach, create a campaign organization and (my fave) hire and fire staff and consultants.

The workshop is being run by the Leadership Institute, an organization founded in 1979 by Morton Blackwell, a professional conservative activist.  How conservative? In 1964 he was the youngest Goldwater delegate at the GOP convention. He was a special assistant to Reagan. In 2016, he won the second Phyllis Schlafly Award for Excellence in Leadership. He's held all manner of GOP party office. The Leadership Institute has been recruiting and training conservative activists, politicians, and journalists for over 40 years. They are connected to the State Policy Network. 

M4L is feeling its oats after some victories in Florida's school board elections and they clearly have no intention of stopping there. 

Thay're advocating for their position, which is what advocacy groups do. But let this post serve as a reminder; if these folks are active in your area, they will be active in your school board elections. You may be used to quiet, sleepy school board elections in which candidates spend $50 and do little campaigning. But these are not ordinary times. These kind of conservative drives can be defeated, and have been in many places, but it takes hard work and selling your message. 

If you're looking to elect supporters of public education, be prepared. It will not be easy this time. 

TX: In God We Trust--No! Not Like That!

The problem with dumb rules is that they are hard to enforce and an invitation for people to mess with you.

Every teacher who has spent more than a year in the classroom knows that if you tell a class "I don't want to hear one more peep out of you," the next thing you will hear is "peep." And the next thing that will happen after that is you will find yourself wasting time in an argument about whether saying "meep" or "fleep" or "booger" violates the dumb rule that you just pulled out of your butt. Before you formulate a rule, make sure you've thought it through.

If there is one thing that has been consistent about people who want to get religion back into the classroom, it's that they never, ever think things through. And so we have the current time-wasting silliness in Texas.

Senator Bryan Hughes is an East Texas Republican who came up with Texas's anti-abortion bill with the clever workaround of having the public rather than law enforcement enforce it. Hughes cleverly worked that into his bill attempting to get God back in the classroom, which declared that if somebody donated an "In God We Trust" poster to a school, the school must display it in a conspicuous place. It became law, and Hughes, who had definitely not thought things through, expressed his happiness on the Twitter.

The national motto, In God We Trust, asserts our collective trust in a sovereign God. I’m encouraged to see groups like the Northwest [Austin] Republican Women and many individuals coming forward to donate these framed prints to remind future generations of the national motto.

The Christian cell phone company and election financier Patriot Mobile also chipped in some signs, saying "We are honored to be part of bringing God back into our public schools." The Yellow Rose of Texas Republican Women chipped in, and of course Moms for Liberty did, too. But then things took a turn...

Activist and artist Chaz Stevens sent along some posters with "In God We Trust"--written in Arabic. He set up a GoFundMe (you can still contribute) on which he says of the SB-797, "The law seemingly presumes these signs are written in English. Oopsie."

Others donated "In God We Trust" posters with rainbow colors. Some districts rejected the signs, immediately finding themselves in stupid meep arguments. For example, Carroll ISD rejected the not-what-we-wanted-here posters and argued that "the statute does not contemplate requiring the district to display more than one copy at a time." In this case "does not contemplate" means "does not actually say anything one way or another." Ditto for their argument that the law "does not contemplate" any language other than English.

The Carroll ISD donor, Sravan Krishna, replied, "It doesn’t say you have to stop at one, so that is your decision to stop at one. Why is more God not good? And are you saying you don’t have, like, one square feet of space in our buildings?”

The law does say that the poster must include an American flag and a state flag, and no other images or words. 

The argument that the school only has to display one poster rests on the use of "a" as in the school must display "a durable poster or framed copy." I'm not saying that Carroll ISD School Board President Cam Bryan is grasping at straws, but his argument includes calling "a" the "singular tense." Oddly enough, none of the run-up to all this donating activity included anyone saying, "Remember, we just need one poster per school."

Meanwhile, because it's Texas, someone else is threatening lawsuits against districts that put up the naughty signs, arguing "the legislature passed this law to set a good example for schoolchildren, so we are taking action to ensure schools do just that, and conspicuously display compliant posters that everyone is sure to love, equally.” So Arabic and pride flaggish posters are out because somebody will hate them? 

Even if Texas wins its dumb argument about the singular determiner, that simply opens up another dumb argument about who decides which single poster goes up, and how they decide. Is it first come, first served? Does the spot open up anew every school year? Or will school districts form a committee to select which "In God We Trust" poster is the acceptable one, and what criteria will they use, and will this then put the school in the position of deciding which God is the one allowed to be perched on their walls and does anybody on any side of this dumb argument really want that?

Conservative christianists agitating for "religious freedom" and "putting God back in the schools" always seem to forget that there is more than one faith. You can try to open up schools to access by those faiths, but access will always, by the very nature of schools, be limited, and therefor somebody will have to decide, somehow, which faiths get to have that access. The wall between church and state is meant to protect the church; break it down and you are a few short steps away from a government agency deciding which religion gets to enjoy certain privileges (and which do not). That is not good for anyone. 

We could try to have an honest conversation about that, or folks could pass dumb laws instead. Texas has made its choice. Unfortunately for them, the principle holds--make dumb rules, end up in dumb arguments.