Betsy DeVos for Secretary of Education

William Haskins

poet
Kind Benefactor
Absolute Sage
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Feb 12, 2005
Messages
29,114
Reaction score
8,867
Age
58
Website
www.poisonpen.net
devos is a disgusting example of the type of cronyism and influence peddling that systematically erodes personal freedom and, at the foundational level of education, has the capacity to indoctrinate children into ignorance of the crimes being committed against critical thought and action.

she is a blight on democracy:

"[M]y family is the largest single contributor of soft money to the national Republican party…. I have decided, however, to stop taking offense at the suggestion that we are buying influence. Now, I simply concede the point. We expect to foster a conservative governing philosophy consisting of limited government and respect for traditional American virtues. We expect a return on our investment; we expect a good and honest government. Furthermore, we expect the Republican party to use the money to promote these policies, and yes, to win elections."'

http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Betsy_DeVos

all legal measures should be taken to keep this elitist theocrat from taking the helm of the department of ed.
 

Silva

saucy
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Sep 24, 2015
Messages
1,764
Reaction score
260
Website
twitter.com
But in many poorer communities the church is a very important part of people's lives - and churches do much of the charity work in the neighborhood. What do we do if a poor parent feels that a religious school is best for their child's education but they cannot afford the expense?

Often, parents choose to homeschool in this situation, using a religious curriculum.

Unfortunately, homeschooling regulations are extremely lax in several states and religious curriculum ranges from biased to utterly absurd, and highschool-aged homeschoolers lack the necessary support to efficiently transition to college in many cases.

And in the typical evangelical religious scenario, girls will receive less education than boys because the religious homeschooling lifestyle idolizes one-income families (thereby perpetuating poverty, in some cases) in which the boy is expected to support his family and the girl will simply be a wife and homeschooling mom.

I support responsible homeschooling, but we don't have the laws in place to ensure that is happening and often homeschooling families oppose those laws, thanks to HSLDA.
 

Roxxsmom

Beastly Fido
Kind Benefactor
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Oct 24, 2011
Messages
23,124
Reaction score
10,887
Location
Where faults collide
Website
doggedlywriting.blogspot.com
The bear was cute - but at an appropriate distance. I thought he/she might try to climb through our window. I came across another one outside about 20 feet away from me - we were both startled.
Charter schools don't necessarily do better than public schooling, but if they fail they go away. Charter or private schools don't have to be religious. My kids went to a non-religious private school because our local, suburban public school was terrible. Interesting that the private school had a much more diverse student body than the public school.
I don't have answers - but I know the problems are complicated and go beyond the quality and dedication of the teachers, especially in poorer neighborhoods.

I agree. And to be clear, I'm not against charter schools. There are some very good ones, and they can cater to students who have specific needs or interests. However, there are also some very good neighborhood schools of the traditional public persuasion. I'm against the idea that charter schools (or a move to supply vouchers to private schools) are a panacea for all that ails public education. And as an educator (though at the college level) who has some teachers in my family, I know that teachers, and teacher's unions, aren't the primary problem either. One problem I have with some of our local charter schools is that they are non union, and this means teachers are always looking over their shoulders, worried about test scores year to year, and actually afraid to experiment to see what works for them and their classes. And collegiality goes out the window when teachers see themselves as being in competition with their colleagues. Also, no one has their back if they're treated poorly by administrators.

Sadly, the US has a couple of issues that many other western democracies don't share to the same extent, so trying to lift an educational model from a country with excellent public school outcomes won't necessarily work either.

1. We are a very economically stratified society with a larger gap between the wealthiest and the poorest citizens. As a rule, the richest of the rich kids are sent to private schools, but upper middle class people tend to live in wealthier neighborhoods with high property values, so their local schools tend to be better funded, to attract more experienced teachers, and to be populated by kids with educated parents.

2. As a whole, Americans don't value education. Oh, we say we do, but that's always followed with "so kids can learn job skills and we have a better, more nimble work force." We don't think education, knowledge and learning are valuable for their own sake, or are needed to be better citizens. At best, we think they're luxuries for those of the upper middle class to indulge in or that science is "too hard" for most people to understand, so why bother. At worst, we're overtly anti intellectual and regard science and other areas of basic knowledge with suspicion.

Note that some groups in the US have done very well and have outperformed other groups in terms of educational attainment, because they do value education and intellectualism to a greater extent.

I've been frustrated by how poor the reading comprehension skills of many of my students are and at their ability to apply basic algebra (or even grade-school level math, such as the calculation of percentages) to their coursework. Seriously, I encounter students who don't even know how to convert a decimal to a percentage. This is in spite of them being products of "outcome focused" education and standardized testing that was supposed to focus exclusively on reading comprehension and basic math skills. I suspect it's because the teaching of these skills without integration into other subject areas fosters memorization, not application of knowledge. Also, many of them grow up in families where no one reads for fun and where they don't learn how to use math in their daily lives (they just memorize a bunch of formulas and are taught to use them in narrow, specific ways for testing). There was less time (and money) available to teach kids about History and science and the arts in school too.

I don't blame teachers for this, though. They were overwhelmingly against "No Child" and other such programs and warned that this would happen.

I'm not looking forward to what four years of what will clearly be an anti-intellectual and anti-taxation and anti-public education administration will do to us.
 

Silva

saucy
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Sep 24, 2015
Messages
1,764
Reaction score
260
Website
twitter.com
(Edit: in response to Gregg)

Nevertheless, if that single mom is so devoutly religious that secular schools are not an option, and she cannot afford religious private schools in any way, that is the only option left.

And there will be a number of other homeschool moms who will tell her not to worry, that homeschooling takes less time than public school, that once the child can read he can self-direct his learning, etc., and that even no education is better that being morally ruined by the secular school system.

And there is precious little legislation to stop that from happening.
 
Last edited:

ElaineA

All about that action, boss.
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Jan 17, 2013
Messages
8,582
Reaction score
8,522
Location
The Seattle suburbs
Website
www.reneedominick.com
Well, they came back and told us we weren't getting white boards or smart boards. Instead, the administration had decided that what we teachers really needed was iPads attached to projectors that we could use in class instead, with screens to project on. Sure, they weren't going to include any training in this technology. Sure, no one could explain why the iPads were better than smart boards other than it was cooler and made the school look more high tech. And sure, we would no longer be able to have students write easily on the board.

Apple has been very proactive in recent years in placing its products in schools to fight Microsoft's cornering of the school market. Macs and iPads for all.

But in many poorer communities the church is a very important part of people's lives - and churches do much of the charity work in the neighborhood. What do we do if a poor parent feels that a religious school is best for their child's education but they cannot afford the expense?

If they were interested in charity and run a school, perhaps they should educate the poor child for free. I know it's not a sustainable model, but...it's an answer to your question.

On the larger issue, it seems to be in the interests of the politicians of the current era to have a populace that lacks in critical thinking. All I can say is anyone who has children or who has the ability to positively influence a child, teach them critical thinking above all else. Then math.
 

Xelebes

Delerium ex Ennui
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Aug 8, 2009
Messages
14,205
Reaction score
884
Location
Edmonton, Canada
At best, we think they're luxuries for those of the upper middle class to indulge in or that science is "too hard" for most people to understand, so why bother.

When I look at college campuses as presented by Hollywood, that is most certainly what is portrayed. Education is most certainly for the upper middle class.

When I look at testimonials of college experience in places like here (AW) from the United States, I do get the sense that colleges and universities are for the upper middle class.

I made this comment elsewhere but I think a lot of the anti-education sentiments from the communities is separation anxiety. College is notoriously bad because there is a big assumption that the kid will travel somewhere have to else to go to college and then they don't come back as the same.

I know my dad had that problem. When he grew up, he lived on a farm. College was always somewhere 2 1/2 hours away from home. If somebody else went to college instead of staying on the farm, that meant them staying away from the farm. And when they did return, they weren't the same. They came back as the doctor, or the lawyer or the accountant. Or they didn't return at all. Kids from the cities have it better. You can commute to school if you choose. But even as my dad moved into the city, those views never went away until he saw his kids fail to find stable jobs.

This does not touch issues of religion, belief or faith though.
 

kaitie

With great power comes
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Sep 10, 2009
Messages
11,052
Reaction score
2,642
Do you guys think he could really eliminate the department of ed? It concerns me because I've heard quite a few republicans talk about it in the past and I think many would be supportive of it. What would it take to make it happen?

I'm in a state that right now has some of the worst budget crises going on in schools because of several years of utter mismanagement by the state. No, that's not quite right. They intentionally were de-valuing education and cutting budgets. Our local schools have had to cut two weeks from the school year to afford to open this year. They've started hiring non-licensed teachers because they have had such a huge decrease in qualified staff because of the lack of funding/job security.

When I was in grad school not all that long ago, we actually had some of the highest standards in the states. The requirements for a teaching certificate here were more stringent than many other states, our schools were performing well, and honestly our schools were something we were proud of. And in less than six years it's become a shambles because of a single governor undoing everything good that had been done.

I am seriously nervous about what could happen nationwide if the Department of Education is cut and states are expected to fully fund education. I don't think most states could do it.
 

cornflake

practical experience, FTW
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Jul 11, 2012
Messages
16,171
Reaction score
3,734
Hang on--I'm missing about the vouchers. From what my Google-fu tells me, vouchers are a way for parents to use public school funding to send their kids to private school, instead of footing the bill entirely for tuition? Is that correct? I'm struggling to see this as a bad thing. What's the catch here? I mean, I assume there has to be, but I'm not seeing it.

The bear was cute - but at an appropriate distance. I thought he/she might try to climb through our window. I came across another one outside about 20 feet away from me - we were both startled.
Charter schools don't necessarily do better than public schooling, but if they fail they go away. Charter or private schools don't have to be religious. My kids went to a non-religious private school because our local, suburban public school was terrible. Interesting that the private school had a much more diverse student body than the public school.
I don't have answers - but I know the problems are complicated and go beyond the quality and dedication of the teachers, especially in poorer neighborhoods.
But in many poorer communities the church is a very important part of people's lives - and churches do much of the charity work in the neighborhood. What do we do if a poor parent feels that a religious school is best for their child's education but they cannot afford the expense?

We do nothing. Anyone is free to pay for a private or religiously-based education. The state shall not.

If someone can't afford it, that's too bad. Lots of people feel that a $50,000/yr private school is best for their child's education.

If those people can't afford to pay, they can explore getting a loan or a scholarship. If they can't, well, too bad?

The First Amendment is important.
 

Cyia

Rewriting My Destiny
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Nov 15, 2008
Messages
18,644
Reaction score
4,097
Location
Brillig in the slithy toves...
We do nothing. Anyone is free to pay for a private or religiously-based education. The state shall not.

If someone can't afford it, that's too bad. Lots of people feel that a $50,000/yr private school is best for their child's education.

If those people can't afford to pay, they can explore getting a loan or a scholarship. If they can't, well, too bad?

The First Amendment is important.

Actually, keeping state funds out of religion-based schools is better for those schools, too. If the state administers funds, then they get a say in how the school is run. Most religion-based institutions don't like that trade-off; it changes the way they have to teach.

I don't know exactly how the coupon systems work, but I would think the state would expect to get something in return for their tuition payment to prove that a given school meets minimum requirements at the very least.
 

rugcat

Lost in the Fog
Kind Benefactor
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Sep 27, 2005
Messages
16,339
Reaction score
4,110
Location
East O' The Sun & West O' The Moon
Website
www.jlevitt.com
Actually, keeping state funds out of religion-based schools is better for those schools, too. If the state administers funds, then they get a say in how the school is run. Most religion-based institutions don't like that trade-off; it changes the way they have to teach.

I don't know exactly how the coupon systems work, but I would think the state would expect to get something in return for their tuition payment to prove that a given school meets minimum requirements at the very least.
Depends on the state, I would think. Some states are already trying to give equal time for creationism; Texas was eager to get rid of teaching "critical thinking.

If a state can't get public schools to teach a religiously based curriculum, I'd guess the next best thing is to provide public funds for charter schools who will teach in a fashion more to their liking.
 

MaeZe

Kind Benefactor
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Jun 6, 2016
Messages
12,823
Reaction score
6,578
Location
Ralph's side of the island.
The bear was cute - but at an appropriate distance. I thought he/she might try to climb through our window. I came across another one outside about 20 feet away from me - we were both startled.
Charter schools don't necessarily do better than public schooling, but if they fail they go away. Charter or private schools don't have to be religious. My kids went to a non-religious private school because our local, suburban public school was terrible. Interesting that the private school had a much more diverse student body than the public school.
I don't have answers - but I know the problems are complicated and go beyond the quality and dedication of the teachers, especially in poorer neighborhoods.
But in many poorer communities the church is a very important part of people's lives - and churches do much of the charity work in the neighborhood. What do we do if a poor parent feels that a religious school is best for their child's education but they cannot afford the expense?
My son went to an excellent public school.

For every successful charter school there are also excellent public schools. The schools are not all good or all bad in either case. Do you have evidence bad charter schools go away and don't harm the public system in the meantime?

Religious schools can offer scholarships for children whose families cannot afford the tuition.

People who pay property taxes and don't have children make similar arguments questioning why should their money go to educating other children. But well educated children benefit the community, not just the parents or the children. Charter schools sound good, it sounds like a solution. But they failed to live up to the promise and despite the continued belief said schools are better, the evidence supports the conclusion they do more harm than good to the education system as a whole.

Present the evidence of the overall effect of charter schools, evidence they improve the options, evidence bad ones sort themselves out.
 

Roxxsmom

Beastly Fido
Kind Benefactor
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Oct 24, 2011
Messages
23,124
Reaction score
10,887
Location
Where faults collide
Website
doggedlywriting.blogspot.com
One problem with offering religious schools as an alternative to public schools: not everyone is religious or has access to a school of a compatible religion. Plus there's that whole separation of church and state thing. How can the government subsidize a parochial school without appearing to endorse or favor that religion? Would they have to treat every religious school equally? And what about schools that only admit members of their own religious faith or who seek to indoctrinate/convert non-believing students to that faith? Does the government get to tell a religious school what can and can't be in their curriculum in return for providing the vouchers? Would that be interfering with religious freedom?

And one of the reasons that some private schools (parochial or not) have better outcomes than many public schools is because they can be very selective about the students they admit to begin with. Essentially, they're starting with a pre-selected group of students. And of course they tend to have smaller class sizes.

A voucher system (assuming the vouchers were large enough to allow the poorest students to afford the tuition) might also create a situation where schools might be pressured to take more students, or where not all students would be able to find a private school with room for them (or interest in taking them). Maybe running private schools would become more profitable, so educational entrepreneurs would open more "open access" private schools to get the government vouchers, but would they be sufficient to accommodate all students of all abilities, and how would we determine whether or not they were offering appropriate curriculum and instruction? If private K-12 schools become profit driven, would they maybe start cutting corners and doing things like increasing class sizes etc. to become more profitable?

How would we prevent them from having the same issues that many public schools have already--too many students overall and too many students who aren't getting what they need outside of school to succeed academically?

I made this comment elsewhere but I think a lot of the anti-education sentiments from the communities is separation anxiety. College is notoriously bad because there is a big assumption that the kid will travel somewhere have to else to go to college and then they don't come back as the same.

I'd argue that that's one of the points of education. If it doesn't change you in significant ways, why bother?

I grew up in an area where there were a goodly number of local colleges and universities I could have attended while living with my parents, including the university where my dad taught as a professor. But my folks didn't want me to do that, and I didn't want to either. I was eager to go away to school and immerse myself in a new and different environment (and yes, to be away from parental control and finally function on my own). Of course not everyone is lucky enough to have the money to go away to school, and it's especially difficult for people in rural areas, where there's often no affordable four-year college or university within many hours drive.

But the fear that your kid may be changed by education, or that they might leave home an end up living in another city or state because of it? Isn't that the expected thing for people to do in the US when they grow up?
 
Last edited:

cornflake

practical experience, FTW
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Jul 11, 2012
Messages
16,171
Reaction score
3,734
The thing about selection is so true - people look at outcomes without thinking about that the only kids in the religious or private schools were academically superiour to begin with (testing-wise, and dependent on the school, of course).

Catholic schools in my area have a great reputation, in general. You also have to test into them at most levels, and the better the school, the more selective they are about taking only the top off the testing pool. A bunch that are very expensive do offer full-ride scholarships, but that is a separate testing process, and it's hella rigorous.

There are some public high schools here consistently ranked at the top, nationwide, with endless kids going on to Ivys and top-of-the-top tier science schools. They're completely free to students, filled with state-of-the-art equipment, staffed by Ph.d-holding teachers. They're test-in and incredibly selective. They don't consider anything else - no grades submitted, no essays, recommendations, nothing.

Thus, they have a pool of kids already at the tops of their games who only improve the outcome of the schools and on they roll.

A charter school that takes any comers from a poverty-stricken area with very poor-performing schools can have great teachers and dedication, but they're not going to suddenly make top scholars out of every kid who's not had access to good schooling to that point, or who is not innately gifted.
 

Xelebes

Delerium ex Ennui
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Aug 8, 2009
Messages
14,205
Reaction score
884
Location
Edmonton, Canada
I'd argue that that's one of the points of education. If it doesn't change you in significant ways, why bother?

I think it would be honest to admit that it is a problem. If the education of the child results in only the child learning, then it might as well be indoctrination. If the education of the child allows the parents and other community members to learn alongside, then it's contributing to the community.

I grew up in an area where there were a goodly number of local colleges and universities I could have attended while living with my parents, including the university where my dad taught as a professor. But my folks didn't want me to do that, and I didn't want to either. I was eager to go away to school and immerse myself in a new and different environment (and yes, to be away from parental control and finally function on my own). Of course not everyone is lucky enough to have the money to go away to school, and it's especially difficult for people in rural areas, where there's often no affordable four-year college or university within many hours drive.

But the fear that your kid may be changed by education, or that they might leave home an end up living in another city or state because of it? Isn't that the expected thing for people to do in the US when they grow up?

Maybe for many but it is not for all. For some, family and community is very important. And you can have a lot of social pressure to have this teased apart but in the end, you are putting a lot of stress on these individuals and that can make them act very squirrelly.
 

Cramp

Pain in the writing wrist
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Sep 5, 2012
Messages
688
Reaction score
72
Location
UK
It's strange that there are some fields of human endeavour - like education, but also including things like justice systems and punishment, where policy seems so allergic to evidence-based practice. People are much more prepared to accept that their vague impressions and nostalgic memories should govern policy rather than looking at evidence and actual outcomes. Education is a field of study and there are experts who might have something to say about how things could be better.
 

Romantic Heretic

uncoerced
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Jan 15, 2009
Messages
2,624
Reaction score
354
Website
www.romantic-heretic.com
Have you guys heard the Bannon interview where he essentially said that what needed to happen was everything needed to be destroyed so the system could be rebuild the "right" way? It's disturbing as heck to think that someone who wants to burn everything down could be having any influence in decisions like this.

This is why I've been calling the people who have hijacked the label 'conservative' revolutionaries for years. After all, what do they want to conserve?

They think they're revolutionaries like the Founding Fathers but they're much closer to the Jacobins or Bolsheviks.
 

Romantic Heretic

uncoerced
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Jan 15, 2009
Messages
2,624
Reaction score
354
Website
www.romantic-heretic.com
What's the solution to failing schools? According to the nation's Report Card only 40% of high school seniors are ready for college or a career.

"But what do NAEP scores mean? On the 12th-grade test in particular, Ho says, research shows that NAEP maps well with estimates of college and career readiness from Common Core-aligned tests, the SAT and the ACT.
According to research by Ho and others, just under 40 percent of students score at college and career ready levels on NAEP.
"College and career ready" means these scores strongly predict that students will be able to succeed doing college-level academics, or with on-the-job training in a position requiring only a high school diploma."

http://www.npr.org/sections/ed/2016...lege-or-career-ready-says-nations-report-card

Any solution is going to cost money. That means higher taxes.

It is also widely believed that government can only be incompetent at best and is more often evil. Conversely it is widely believed that business is incapable of doing wrong and will always provide the optimum solution to any problem.

On top of that many people with power want trained individuals suitable for being human resources, not educated individuals suitable for citizenship.

This means there will never be any fix for these problems. The ideological resistance is too strong.
 

rugcat

Lost in the Fog
Kind Benefactor
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Sep 27, 2005
Messages
16,339
Reaction score
4,110
Location
East O' The Sun & West O' The Moon
Website
www.jlevitt.com
I came across a little bit of odd information I did not know. DeVos is the sister of Eric Prince, the founder and former head of Blackwater, the mercenary army of Iraq fame.
 

Sheryl Nantus

Holding out for a Superhero...
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Feb 12, 2005
Messages
7,196
Reaction score
1,634
Age
59
Location
Brownsville, Pennsylvania. Or New Babbage, Second
Website
www.sherylnantus.com
Remember what Trump said - "We love the uneducated."

The stupider your minions are, the more likely they'll keep voting you back into office. And letting you get away with anything as long as you're dumb enough to buy what he's selling.

Sounds like Trump is setting up to settle in for the long-term before he hands it over to his sons and grandsons.