RUTHFULLY YOURS

https://www.frontpagemag.com/the-education-exodus-advances/

In August, it was reported that over the past two school years, children whose public schools were shuttered during the Covid panic were much less likely to return when they reopened. According to the American Enterprise Institute, k-12 enrollment in the 2020-2021 school year had declined by 2.7%, or about 1.2 million students nationwide.

Updated enrollment numbers and chronic absenteeism

But a new survey has revealed that between spring 2021 and spring 2022, there was a 9% drop in families saying their children were enrolled in a government-run school – a plunge of about 4 million students. At the same time, the number of children in charters, private schools, and homeschools shot up. While the dropout numbers aren’t actual data, there is no doubt that a massive education exodus is underway.

Another sign of turbulence is the number of children who are still enrolled in district schools but are “chronically absent,” meaning that they miss more than 10% of school days for any reason. Per the U.S. Department of Education, at least 10.1 million students were chronically absent during the first full year of the Covid-19 pandemic. The data, collected for the 2020-21 school year, is a substantial increase from the approximately 8 million students chronically absent in the prior years. Excessive absences have serious consequences – kids’ learning suffers, and they are more likely to get suspended in middle school, and are at greater risk of dropping out of high school.

The future does not promise a reversal. In fact, chronic absence continued to surge during the 2021-2022 school year. Although no national data have been released yet, several diverse states – Connecticut, Michigan, Ohio, Virginia and California – claim that high absentee rates doubled in the aftermath of the pandemic.

Money flows in; no accountability required

https://www.frontpagemag.com/will-the-supreme-court-finally-get-it-right-on-affirmative-action/

Hard on its landmark victories for judicial and Constitutional integrity last term, the Supreme Court will hear oral arguments this month on two cases challenging admissions policies at Harvard and the University of North Carolina. If decided rightly, both cases should lead to the banning of unconstitutional, discriminatory racial preferences in university admissions.

After years of previous cases in which the Supreme Court tried various work-arounds to avoid stopping discrimination, maybe this year the Justices will get it right.

From its beginning in the 1978 decision Regents of the University of California vs. Bakke, the jurisprudence of subsequent cases have, as Justice Clarence Thomas’ dissent in the 2003 Grutter vs. Bollinger case put it, “refus[ed] to define rigorously the broad state interest” served by “diversity,” and thus demonstrate specifically the “educational benefits that flow from student body diversity,” as Justice Anthony Kennedy in Fisher v. University of Texas (2016) vaguely defined that “compelling state interest” allegedly justifying discrimination on the basis of race.

As we’ve seen for 44 years, this vacuum created by the lack of clarity about what “diversity” is exactly, and how it specifically enhances educational outcomes, has been filled by illiberal ideology and factional politics that serves partisan purposes rather than educational ones. The “diversity,” then, that courts, businesses, educational institutions, and government trade in is so broad and simplistic that it guarantees the concept will be used to pick political and racial winners and losers.

Let’s start with the idea of “diversity” that supposedly justifies violating the Civil Rights Act and the 14th Amendment. Actual diversity is light-years more complex than the old “scientific” racist categories of “black,” “white,” “Asian,” and later “Hispanic,” based on skin color, hair texture, or other superficial characteristics. Relying on these physical criteria ignores the real diversity that appears at the level of ethnicity: socio-economic class, language, dialects, customs, mores, folkways, regional differences, faith, and political preferences. Indeed, so bizarre has this crude “diversity” become that a poor white kid from a region historically impoverished who supposedly enjoys “white privilege” doesn’t add as much “diversity” to the student body as an affluent black student does.

Race-based preferences, then, ignore all those more interesting and meaningful markers of diverse identities––except the last one, politics. Particularly in education, “protected” categories like “race” and “gender” take precedence, and traffic in a “diversity” that camouflages a rigid intellectual and ideological orthodoxy. We used to called it “multiculturalism,” but now it sports the Orwellian moniker “woke.” The grand narrative of the “woke” is the melodrama of permanent white racial oppression of selected victims “of color.” “Diversity” now has been joined to “equity” and “inclusion” in order to define an ideology that is homogeneous, unequal, and excluding––the opposite of real diversity.

https://pjmedia.com/culture/robert-spencer/2022/10/09/maine-university-students-demand-prof-be-fired-for-contradicting-their-fantasy-that-there-are-multiple-genders-n1635693

“A time is coming,” said St. Anthony the Great way back in the fourth century, “when men will go mad, and when they see someone who is not mad, they will attack him, saying, ‘You are mad; you are not like us.’” And here we are. Fox News reported Friday that “students at the University of Southern Maine (USM) are demanding that their professor be replaced for saying that only two sexes exist.”

The students, drunk on the Left’s fantasies and propaganda about there being a multiplicity of genders, actually got up and walked out of professor Christy Hammer’s graduate education class en masse, because she dared to state the simple and obvious truth that cuts against the way they wish the world to be: There are only two biological sexes, male and female.

In response, instead of telling the students that they should stop denying the obvious and try to reconcile themselves to reality, university officials acceded to their demand to hold what the Bangor Daily News called a “facilitated restorative justice meeting.” Adamantine in their delusions, the students demanded that Hammer be fired. USM professors who believe that water is wet and that human beings cannot get along without breathing air are trembling; they could be next.

Oddly enough, in today’s carnival academic environment, USM declined to bring the hammer down on Hammer. However, it did bow to the slavering crazies enough to make an “alternative, identical class” available to the students who remain defiant in their insanity. USM spokesperson Gina Marie Guadagnino explained, “We have developed an alternative plan for this class and will be opening a new section of this course for those students who would like to move.” Sane students, however, will still be able to take Hammer’s class: “The original section taught by professor Hammer will continue for any student who wishes to remain in that class.” It will be interesting to see how many students choose each option.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/a-cold-war-program-gets-hijacked-national-resource-center-security-1950s-critical-race-theory-environmental-justice-k-12-language-11665320013?mod=opinion_lead_pos5

A Cold War-era federal program has wandered far from its national-security mission and into the woke follies that permeate much of American education. For decades, U.S. colleges and universities have received taxpayer dollars through the Education Department’s National Resource Centers, a program intended to bolster U.S. national security at the height of tension with the Soviet Union. But more recently National Resource Centers are promoting unserious academic research or causes irrelevant to national security.

NRC-funded efforts included a training institute last year at the University of Texas, Austin, where teachers of pre-kindergartners through fifth graders were schooled in “(Un)learning patterns of whiteness in literacy teaching.” In May, Stanford University’s Center for Latin American Studies sponsored a webinar about using picture books to initiate “conversations centered on advocacy for LGBT Latina/o(x) youth.” The University of Wisconsin-Madison’s Center for Russia, East Europe, and Central Asia hosted a graduate student who uses critical race theory in her research on Russia and Ukraine.

Many scholars have questioned CRT’s academic rigor, distortions of history, and promotion of racial grievances. In fellowships at Syracuse University and Cornell University, education-school faculty incorporate subjects such as environmental justice into teacher-training programs. New York University’s Center for Latin American and Caribbean Studies held a 10-month program in which teachers use something called “contemporary critical educational theory” to create “culturally relevant” classroom lessons. The propaganda from such NRC-sponsored initiatives becomes more potent when the efforts include outreach for K-12 teachers, who will pass along what they learn to students.

https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2022/10/thirteenjudges_say_no_to_yale_law_grads.html

Toxic school, toxic graduates.

Instead of learning how to behave professionally as lawyers at Yale law school, the storied and prestigious school, possibly the most prestigious in the country, has become a haven for wokester intolerance of the most infantile sort. Speakers are shouted down instead of debated through the ace legal reasoning they’re supposed to teach over there,dissidents are “canceled” and the radical student body in this atmosphere is making a noisy spectacle of itself.

It’s gotten so bad that judges are saying to themselves they want no part of this — and the rot is so deep the entire school is considered hopelessly tainted. Not surprisingly, Yale is now increasingly seeing its grads treated like pariahs by real-world judges. The tally of judges who have stated they will no longer hire Yale graduates as clerks is now 13.

According to legal blog Behind The Black (hat tip: Instapundit):

Following the public announcement by Judge James Ho of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit that he would no longer hire Yale graduates as law clerks because of that school’s enthusiasm for blacklisting and censorship, it appears that a dozen other judges have joined his boycott as well.

“Students should be mindful that they will face diminished opportunities if they go to Yale,” said a prominent circuit court judge, whose clerks have gone on to nab Supreme Court clerkships. “I have no confidence that they’re being taught anything.”

With one exception, the judges made clear this is a policy they are imposing on future—not current—Yale Law School students.

Ho’s public speech was even more harsh.

“Yale presents itself as the best, most elite institution of legal education. Yet it’s the worst when it comes to legal cancellation.” The school “sets the tone for other law schools, and for the legal profession at large. I certainly reserve the right to add other schools in the future. But my sincere hope is that I won’t have to. …”

https://pjmedia.com/news-and-politics/matt-margolis/2022/10/06/heres-what-happened-when-a-concerned-mom-dressed-like-drag-queen-at-a-school-board-meeting-n1635089

““Does this outfit make you turn your head?” Reicks asked. “Does this outfit seem appropriate for anybody here to see? This is what the man dressed like in front of our kids. So if this makes your head spin — if this pisses you off in any way, shape, or form — it should. Because I’m embarrassed to stand here in the outfit that I am in today, but I have a point to prove — that this outfit should not be ever accepted in our schools anywhere.”

For years now, we’ve seen woke schools hiring drag queens to perform for young kids as some sort of exercise about tolerance and diversity. If you spoke out about it, you were a bigot.

Earlier this year, it was reported that New York City schools spent over $200,000 putting drag queen shows on for their students.

This is only part of the trend of inappropriate things happening in schools with the full knowledge and consent of woke school boards. Sexually explicit books are also being carried in school libraries and incorporated into curricula—all in the name of “tolerance.”

https://www.frontpagemag.com/school-choice-winning/

Finally! Now more states will let parents use their tax money to educate their kids at a school they choose.

In Arizona, families can get $6,500 to spend on private school, tutoring or even home schooling.

The education establishment is horrified — especially teachers unions. They don’t want competition.

But competition makes us all better. The Ford Model T was a breakthrough. But it’s lousy compared to what we have today. That’s because carmakers compete to make better cars.

But American education has barely changed since the days of Henry Ford. Kids still sit in a room, watching a teacher at a blackboard.

For my video this week, I debate a union leader.

He’s David Walrod, president of the Fairfax, Virginia, chapter of the American Federation of Teachers. The AFT has been controlled by union boss Randi Weingarten for 14 years. I once provoking her by saying, “Unionized monopolies like yours fail!”

“We are not a unionized monopoly!” she replied. “Folks who want to say this … don’t really care about kids.”

Weingarten won’t talk to me anymore, so I’m glad Walrod would.

“What’s wrong with giving parents a choice?” I ask. After all, competition makes us try harder.

“If I compete directly against you, I have a vested interest in doing better than you,” he said.

Isn’t that good?

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2022/09/30/restoring_free_speech_at_our_universities_148260.html

Now that the autumn semester is well underway, it is worth asking whether students have a chance to participate in free and open debate. The short answer is “No, they don’t.” They don’t have a chance to explore unpopular ideas and controversial opinions. They are “protected” from ideas that might make them uncomfortable. What’s being stifled here is more than speech. It’s their education and, with it, their preparation to live in a tolerant society, where fellow citizens hold different views.

As Hanna Holborn Gray, one of America’s finest university presidents, once observed: “Education should not be intended to make people comfortable, it is meant to make them think. Universities should be expected to provide the conditions within which hard thought, and therefore strong disagreement, independent judgment, and the questioning of stubborn assumptions, can flourish in an environment of the greatest freedom.” She was absolutely right.

Unfortunately, today few universities follow Gray’s advice, and they bear a heavy responsibility for their failure. Promoting free discourse is central to their mission. It’s not only the best way to educate students, it is also the best way to encourage innovative research and to model serious engagement with differing views, a beleaguered value in today’s Western societies.

Students don’t need reminding how intolerant their campuses are. They already know. If they hold unpopular opinions, they keep their heads down. If they hold dominant views, they are all too eager to shame those who differ rather than debate them. Faculty and administrators are among the worst bullies, and they hold real power over students.

Whole departments display this intolerance. That’s especially true in the humanities and social sciences, but the infection has spread to the sciences. Increasingly, departments won’t hire or admit anyone who doesn’t swear allegiance to a specific political agenda. That’s not hypothetical or hyperbolic. Many now require applicants to submit written statements explaining in detail how they contribute to “diversity, equity, and inclusion” (DEI).

https://www.frontpagemag.com/banned-books-bunkum/

Mercifully, Banned Books Week, celebrated Sept. 18-24 this year, is over, and we can take a deep breath for the next 51 or so weeks till it once again rears its ugly, hysterical, manipulative, leftwing head.

Whatever righteousness this week may have once held, it has been taken over by progressive sex obsessives and groomers who are trying to legitimize the field once known quaintly as “obscenity.”

Started in 1982, Banned Books Week is proudly promoted by the American Library Association, whose incoming president, Emily Drabinski, is euphoric at the prospect of leading the organization. In a tweet, she gushed, “I just cannot believe that a Marxist lesbian who believes that collective power is possible to build and can be wielded for a better world is the president-elect of @ALALibrary. I am so excited for what we will do together. Solidarity!”

In a similar pathetic vein, she added on LinkedIn that she’s proud “to have the support of Randi Weingarten of the American Federation of Teachers for our campaign for president of the American Library Association. Solidarity!”

Then there is PEN America, an organization that purports to stand at the “intersection of literature and human rights to protect free expression in the United States and worldwide.” Like ALA, the organization has a far-left agenda, and has no problem with the fact that porn can wind up in the hands of a six-year-old.