Reflections on 9/11
On this day of reflection we're reminded of the importance of educating American students about their great country and the threats to it.
On this day of reflection we're reminded of the importance of educating American students about their great country and the threats to it.
Cecilia Rouse and Lisa BarrowAugust 2008
Barack Obama has long nurtured an interest in education, reports Sam Dillon in Wednesday's New York Times. Much of it grew out of his work with school-reform personalities (including the infamous Bill Ayers) and efforts in the Windy City.
Got the post-convention blues? Miss the fiery speeches, carefully chosen interlude music, and confetti? The Democratic and Republican education platforms are no spit-licked cowlick, sure, but reading them may nonetheless help ease your angst. Or your insomnia.
A cautionary tale emerges from Australia for those who, like many of Gadfly's best friends, favor national standards and curricula. It seems that a former Communist Party member has been appointed to oversee development of a history lesson plan for the entire nation.
Near Dayton on Tuesday, Senator Barack Obama spoke at some length about public schools and his plans to improve them. Amongst his dozen or so proposals for new federal programs and initiatives, he inserted a call to double funding for charter schools. "Charter schools that are successful will get the support they need to grow; charters that aren't will get shut down," he said.
"Indiana girl clocked at 118 m.p.h. held on DUI" She allegedly told cops she was late for school.
"No Child Left Behind Award-Winning Teacher Arrested on Allegations of Student Sex Abuse"
I'm in Scottsdale, Arizona today (projected high: 99 degrees) for an education reform summit hosted by the State Policy Network, the Alliance for School Choice, and the Friedman Foundation.
The Heritage Foundation's Dan Lips writes today, on National Review Online (where "Education Week" continues), more about the Republican eschewal of No Child Left Behind.
Greg Forster thinks (at least I think he thinks) that the difference between rewards and bribes is purely semantic. But semantic distinctions are born to relate and describe real distinctions and degrees, no? Otherwise, we'd have but one word (briwards, maybe) for the concept in question.