As valedictorian of his class at Bell County High School, Ben Bowling was invited to speak at the graduation ceremony. He looked for some inspirational quotes to share with his classmates and included this one, “Don’t just get involved. Fight for your seat at the table. Better yet, fight for a seat at the head of the table.’ – Donald J. Trump.” The audience applauded. Then Bowling added, “Just kidding, that was Barack Obama.” The crowd went silent except for a few adult boos. Bowling explained it this way, “I just thought it was a really good quote. Most people wouldn’t like it if I used it, so I thought I’d use Donald Trump’s name. It is Southeastern Kentucky after all.” Bowling was unsurprised by the crowd’s reaction. He will soon be moving to the University of Kentucky for pre-med and medical school. Continue reading WHO CENSORS OR BOOS VALEDICTORIANS?
Category Archives: public education
Legislators should learn from Ed
Would you encourage family members to study to become teachers or other government employees? Unless we can answer “yes”, government is failing as an employer.
Can you hear the voices of elected officials berating and blaming their employees for government performance problems, laziness, and being “thugs”? Employees are tired of it. They want respect and fair treatment. Continue reading Legislators should learn from Ed
THE ECONOMY MUST SERVE PEOPLE
“The economy must serve people, not the other way around.” That is the opening sentence of the US Conference of Catholic Bishops’ statement “The Dignity of Work and the Rights of Workers“. Regardless of your religious beliefs, I encourage readers to look it up on the internet. It’s easy to understand the values being taught but challenging to apply them in our lives, businesses and government. Continue reading THE ECONOMY MUST SERVE PEOPLE
PREVENTING SCHOOL VIOLENCE
Let’s take a deep breath, calm ourselves, and then look at violence in American schools. The facts are likely to surprise most readers. The in-school homicide rate is not rising and our schools are relatively safe places. Continue reading PREVENTING SCHOOL VIOLENCE
A PATH TO EDUCATIONAL EXCELLENCE
In the school district where I live, Asheboro High School has recruited a highly successful mid-career football coach; and fans are already speculating about taking the program from good to great. The coach has an excellent reputation, a consistent winning record, and a state championship to his credit. There are good reasons for high hopes.
Success breeds more success in any endeavor; and it also attracts more participation. When an athletic program succeeds, more students try out for the team and more fans show up for the games. The same is true for community theaters, colleges, hospitals, and charities. People join and support successful organizations.
This made me wonder; what would happen if we treat academics the same way we treat athletics? We hire physical education teachers to provide basic classes for everyone, intending that all students will achieve some level of regular physical activity and competence along with basic understanding of personal health. For those who have the will and ability to excel, something different happens. Student-athletes who want to push themselves to the limits of their abilities are matched with coaches who have the skills and desire to help them achieve their best. We don’t match the basketball coach with the clumsiest kids just because they seem to need the most help. To do that would frustrate both the coach and the students. Instead, we match the student athlete with the coach who can provide the most help. What might happen if we apply that model to academic subjects?
Suppose that for our most highly motivated and talented students, we hired teachers who have the specialized skills and desire to help them achieve their best. Because these students have already achieved the basics and are motivated toward exceptional performance, their teachers would be expected to function like coaches. The goal would be to develop each student to the maximum extent of her or his ability and motivation.
Suppose that students and teachers achieve results comparable to sports programs. A few, like the three sport athlete, will excel at several academic areas. They will be the ones who choose to put in an astonishing amount of work for the thrill of learning, and we won’t know who they are until they have the opportunity. Their intensity is like that of the football player who does more after two-a-day workouts. They need a teacher-coach who can take them to their limits.
The successes of a few students are likely to inspire others. When a high school sports program has a winning tradition, more young children take up the sport. So-called “minor” sports such as swimming grow at schools with traditions of success. The same phenomenon can occur in academics.
Such challenging academic programs are not for everyone, just as varsity sports are not for everyone, but it’s exactly what some students crave after they find the right subject and a coach who inspires excellence. Like dedicated athletes, there are few limits on how hard they will work or how much they can achieve.
Teacher-coaches for these classes will need freedom to adjust subject matter and teaching style to their students and community. Their students have already mastered the basics so they don’t need a standardized curriculum. Instead, they need opportunity and inspiration to follow their own interests as far and as fast as they can go.
Consider the sports analogy again by thinking about the 2017 Mens NCAA basketball tournament. There were 68 teams featuring various styles and coaching philosophies. Everyone worked and played as hard as they could to achieve excellence. In that sense, there was not a loser among them. One reason for their success is the work of high school coaches. What if we encourage teacher-coaches and allow them to prepare our most highly motivated students the same way sports coaches prepare athletes?
Once this change is made, many parents will demand admission of their children to schools that provide such opportunities. The exodus of families with high academic expectations from our public schools will reverse itself and public support (including funding) will blossom. Academic volunteers and boosters will be just as common as they are for varsity sports.
Some (many, I think) of our kids have the will and ability to achieve academic excellence if we rigorously select and encourage teacher-coaches as we do sports coaches. Let’s give our students and their teachers opportunities and encouragement to reach the limits of what they can achieve.
WE CAN CHOOSE HOPE OVER DESPAIR
“There are people whose lives are so hard they break.” Those are the words of Eileen Crimmins, a professor at the University of Southern California. She wasn’t talking about Syrian refugees or undocumented immigrants. She was talking about a large subgroup of white American citizens.
The average life expectancy of white Americans age 25-54 declined between 1999 and 2014 because of a rapid rise in premature deaths from drug overdoses, suicides, and cirrhosis associated with alcohol consumption. The death rate from drug overdoses among 25 -34 year old whites was five times higher in 2014 than in 1999. It tripled among 35 – 44 year olds. By 2014, the overdose death rate among whites was double the rate for blacks or Hispanics. Although whites still live longer, the black-white gap closed considerably because of the premature white deaths.
The rising death rates are heavily concentrated among whites without college degrees. Rural areas and small towns of the Southeast, Southwest, and the Midwestern “rustbelt” have been especially hard hit.
Why are so many white Americans killing themselves with drugs, alcohol and guns? (Almost half of all American suicides are by gun.) The most common hypothesis among researchers is that these are “deaths of despair” among Americans who no longer have hope for a satisfactory future.
Economists, sociologists, psychologists and public health researchers are only beginning to study and understand this troubling trend. It’s clear that the problems of poverty, lack of jobs with good wages, and lack of education have existed at higher rates among black Americans than among whites for all of our history but it’s the white Americans who are killing themselves with drugs, alcohol and guns. Why?
One hypothesis is that this large group of white Americans have been taught to expect that, like their parents, they could support a family and live middle-class lives with a high school education. They counted on factory work, and semi-skilled labor to pay for necessities and a few luxuries. Those expectations have been shattered. They blame corporations, immigrants, government, and public policy (such as trade treaties) for their plight. They also point a finger at themselves and far too many turn to drugs, alcohol, and suicide as avenues of escape.
The white labor class may be suffering so much despair because they are just now experiencing what the black labor class, unprotected by labor unions and discriminated against by employers, have known from childhood. They can’t pay their way into the middle class. In many cases their marriages have failed and their families have shattered under the stress of economic pressures. Many lack the literacy skills, time and money to pursue better opportunities. They see little hope for themselves and their communities.
Our economy will use the least expensive combination of machines, computers, and people to produce goods and services. Then it will sell those goods and services in exchange for more money and repeat the process. In that environment, it is up to each individual to find a way to succeed. Otherwise, the economy will find you to be expendable.
Blame is irrelevant. The important question is, “What future will we choose to create?” The replacement of human work with automation and artificial intelligence has barely begun and no one knows how rapidly it will accelerate. A report by PWC, an international consulting firm, says that 38% of American jobs are at high risk of replacement by automation in the next 15 years.
We shouldn’t even try to stop the trend, but we do need to prepare for it. Public education must be redesigned to prepare every student for life-long learning at the college level. Parents and communities must encourage and support it because jobs with good wages will require continuous learning at that level. Even if manufacturing returns to the US, the old jobs will not accompany it. There will be far more automation and the new jobs will require skills that few of us have today. In addition, minimum wage, healthcare, and other public policies must be sufficient to support viable families.
As we envision our futures, it’s good to remember Jackson Browne’s line, “You can dream but you can never go back the way you came.” We can create a good future, but it won’t be the same as our past. We must not sacrifice another generation of Americans by preparing them for a future that won’t exist. Instead, we should prepare them for hope and success.
References for further reading:
Commonwealth fund brief on white mortality trends
WHY DON’T PEOPLE TRUST GOVERNMENT?
Did you ever play a game with a child who wanted to change the rules after something didn’t go his way? As a child matures, parents and others teach him fair play and we expect him to accept fairness, honesty and basic decency as guiding principles by about the age of 10.
The few who don’t learn those lessons generally become known as whiners, bullies or both. They typically get their next lessons in places lacking adult supervision. The bullies get put in their place by somebody who stands up to them and the whiners are ignored until they figure out how to socialize. Most eventually learn to succeed without getting their own way every time.
A few folks never learn the lesson, and as big people (I’m reluctant to characterize them as adults) they are still bullies or whiners. Their behavior puts the leaders of North Carolina’s Legislature in these categories. (Please excuse the all-male characterizations in this column. I don’t know what else to do when all of the Republican leaders are boys.)
Phil Berger, Tim Moore and his predecessor Thom Tillis, as leaders of the House and Senate, changed the rules to enable Republican Governor Pat McCrory to politicize state employment. Specifically, they passed a law allowing him to hire up to 1500 political appointees into various positions in state government.
When Roy Cooper defeated McCrory for Governor, the bullies decided to change the rules again. The easiest way to do that was to revise state laws before the inauguration so that Cooper could not veto changes. They arranged a sneak attack at the end of a special session for flood relief by announcing plans to adjourn and re-assemble on the same day for another special session. It became obvious that they had been gathering signatures to authorize the session for some time. They allowed about five hours for introduction of legislation. In that brief time, carefully crafted legislation increasing the power of Republican leadership and drastically reducing the Governor’s authority was introduced. The plan was conceived well in advance.
Republicans have the votes to pass these bills. Given their history with HB-2, they may do it before this column is published. They can do it without serious debate and without time for consideration by the public. That’s how they passed HB-2, and North Carolina has paid a heavy price for it.
Here is some of what they want to do.
- Reduce the number of political appointments by the new governor from 1500 to 300. This would also make about 1200 McCrory political appointees into permanent state employees.
- Eliminate the Governor’s two appointment slots to the boards of state universities.
- Remove the state’s Chief Information Officer (responsible for information technology across all state offices) from appointment by the governor and have that position appointed and supervised by the Lieutenant Governor (a Republican).
- Re-organize and merge the State Boards of Elections and Ethics in ways that reduce the Governor’s appointments and guarantee Republican chairmanship during election years.
- Make the Superintendent of Public Instruction (Republican) independent of supervision by the Board of Education
- Require that all of the Governor’s cabinet appointments be confirmed by the Senate.
There is a lot more in these bills and there is no way that anyone can adequately understand their implications without time for consideration and debate. Much like HB-2, there will be unforeseen consequences in addition to the apparent self-serving intent.
There are two ways to prevent this impending train wreck. One is for enough Republican legislators to stand up to the bullies leading their party by refusing to pass the bills in a special session. They can insist on adequate consideration by the public and the legislature. If they fail, Governor McCrory could grow a spine and veto the bills. Taking such firm action might even create the possibility of resurrecting a political future for him.
Are there enough Republican legislators who value fairness, honesty and decency and who have the courage to stand up to bullies? Is Governor McCrory, who no longer needs the support of the bullies, willing to stand up and be counted? If these bills pass, is there any form of cheating that should be off limits to whoever has power?
I’ll close with a quote from one legislator. “This is why people hate us.” He’s right.
For those who are interested, here are links to the as-filed versions of some of the bills submitted for the special session as posted on the website of the North Carolina General Assembly
SB 4 : http://www.ncleg.net/Sessions/2015E4/Bills/Senate/PDF/S4v0.pdf Ethics, elections and court reform bill creates Republican advantage and control of elections Board
HB 17: http://www.ncleg.net/Sessions/2015E4/Bills/House/PDF/H17v0.pdf changes public instruction, UNC and department head appointments and authority of Superintendent of Public Instruction
HB 6: http://www.ncleg.net/gascripts/BillLookUp/BillLookUp.pl?Session=2015E4&BillID=H6 creates independent CIO nominated by Lt Gov
Link to all 21 house bills submitted for the special session: http://www.ncleg.net/gascripts/lastaction/todaysaction.pl?Biennium=2015E4&ActionChamber=H&DateReport=12%2F14%2F2016
Link to all 7 senate bills for special session: http://www.ncleg.net/gascripts/lastaction/todaysaction.pl?Biennium=2015E4&ActionChamber=H&DateReport=12%2F14%2F2016
What to do on the morning after?
The day after the election will be the first day of the rest of our lives. What should we expect of our elected officials? Will we help or undermine each other and elected leaders? If individuals, families and communities listen to each other’s ideas and agree on how to move forward together, we can invigorate the idea of “commonwealth”, a society that is organized to benefit all. Everybody wins. If, on the other hand, winners kick losers while they’re down in order to maintain dominance and if losers do all they can to stop winners from implementing their ideas then the republic will decline. Everybody loses.
It’s happened in great societies throughout history and it’s especially clear in the Bible’s Old Testament. When those in power dominate and abuse the powerless, everybody loses and the society fails. When the principle of commonwealth guides decisions, the society blossoms.
Poverty, income inequality and homelessness are at crisis levels in many places. Rural America has depended on agriculture and manufacturing to provide family incomes and property tax revenue for local governments. Both of those economic sectors now produce more goods with fewer people than ever before. At the same time that rural employment opportunities paying middle class wages have become scarce, the tax revenues of rural communities have stagnated. Budgets for public education, safety, and human services are under severe stress at a time when they are critical to redevelopment of communities. The plight of rural America has much in common with high poverty neighborhoods of urban America. Low incomes and insufficient resources have similar effects in both places.
Will legislatures reconsider how public services are funded and which tax revenues are available at local, state and federal levels? Will high poverty areas have funding for education, high-speed internet, water, sewer, quality of life, health and other priorities at a level that is proportionate to wealthy areas? If not, will their future be inter-generational poverty and emigration of successful residents to more desirable areas? Will legislators work at solving the underlying problems or will they pit urban vs rural and white vs black vs Hispanic for partisan gain?
What about the sanctity of human life? Will we expect our congress, legislatures and executives to behave as if “all lives matter”? Does someone who wants a gun have the right to own an assault rifle designed for mass killing? Does a woman have the right to remove a fetus from her body? In which decisions should government have a role?
Conflicts between personal and constitutional values will not be fully resolved but can we make progress for the common good? Could we agree to reduce the demand for abortion by providing free birth control, better access to pre-natal care, simple and inexpensive adoption procedures, and by solving our income inequality problems? Will we expect legislators to find ways to preserve gun ownership for self-defense and recreation while getting weapons designed for mass killing out of circulation and screening gun purchasers to rule out suspected terrorists and known criminals? Or will we reward leaders for continuing to insult each other?
The Republican controlled Senate has refused to consider President Obama’s nominee to the Supreme Court. They hope to win the Presidential election and get a conservative-leaning nominee. Senators Richard Burr and Ted Cruz have made the radical statement that if Hillary Clinton is elected, they will refuse to confirm nominees and let the court shrink. That abrogation of a senator’s constitutional responsibility would invite similar behavior from Democrats toward a Republican president. Will we insist that senators fulfill their constitutional duties?
Differences of race, wealth, religion and philosophy divide us on a long list of issues: immigration, transpacific partnership, climate change, war, taxes, LBGTQ rights, health care, and more.
We’re not all going to miraculously agree after the election. Continued success for our republic will require two things of us. First, we must look honestly at facts. Second, we must engage each other in ongoing conversation (listening more than arguing) about the principle of commonwealth – making decisions and laws that create opportunity and peace for all of us.
Our legislators are capable of that, but they will do it only if they know that we voters expect it, demand it, and that we’re doing it ourselves.
We can start on November 9.
What is the future of our jobs?
Today I’d like to introduce you to SAM. His full name is Semi Automated Mason. SAM can lay as many bricks as three human masons. He has only one year of experience and will become more skilled and productive as he continues to learn. On the other hand, SAM could become unemployed when on-site 3-D printing of walls becomes feasible. It’s being tested now.
SAM’s story is important because it exemplifies a worldwide trend. We are still in the early days of an economic and social upheaval that will be bigger than the industrial revolution; and we’re not prepared for what’s coming. An Oxford University study identified jobs most and least likely to be replaced by automation. Looking at the list, it becomes apparent that some among us will benefit from less expensive products and services produced through automation while others lose their jobs.
It’s going to happen regardless of what presidential candidates promise about creating jobs or trade treaties. Even in China and undeveloped nations, automation is faster and cheaper than human labor. That is true in the production of both “things” and services. Human operators for elevators and long distance phone calls were displaced a long time ago. Soon automation will replace us in jobs as diverse as loan officer, manicurist, and drivers – not just drivers of taxis but also of trucks and buses.
In economic terms, this revolution means that fewer people can produce more goods and services. The total amount of wealth available will increase. Some of us will benefit from that but those who are replaced probably won’t. If you’re old enough to remember it, think of what happened when mechanized agriculture drove down the cost of eggs, milk, corn, cotton and other products. They became cheaper while previously successful farm families were devastated by agribusiness competition. Today we can see entire communities and families that are no longer self-sufficient because their jobs are gone.
The much-talked-about decline of the middle class is not primarily caused (and won’t be fixed) by tax or trade policies. Instead, it is caused in large part by technologies that are cheaper and more productive than human labor. This inevitable change brings opportunities along with threats.
What then, shall we do to prepare ourselves?
- Know the facts. It’s particularly important for elected officials, educators, economic developers, city planners and business leaders to correctly anticipate the future and plan for it. News media can improve public knowledge by researching and reporting on these subjects.
- Understand the education and skills that will be necessary for success in the future economy. I cringe when I hear someone say that, “not everyone needs to go to college.” The statement is true of course, but it masks a more important truth. Successful people will need to be able to learn at the college level. Change will come at a pace that requires continuous learning of new information and skills. The ability to read and learn at the level expected of a college freshman will be necessary for success in skilled trades, health occupations, and just about any field we can imagine. It is a great disservice to children and parents to lead them to believe that they can succeed with less.
- Prepare community and regional infrastructure for success. For example, gigabit internet service will be more important than highways and railroads. An increasing number of businesses require high-speed and high volume internet service at all of their locations. That’s often true of small startup businesses and may be true for in-home education opportunities. Communities that lack gigabit service may be left behind as badly as those that lacked electricity, roads or railroads a century ago.
- Re-design public education and libraries to support lifelong learning so that all of us can continuously acquire new knowledge and skills as we need them, regardless of our economic status or geographic location. We can discover ways to use the internet to deliver our finest instruction and most complete information to every American.
Issues of this kind should be on the agendas of national, state and local governments. Instead we are arguing about voter IDs and bathroom privileges. I don’t know all the answers, but I’m sure of one thing. The people who find the right answers will be the ones who are asking the right questions.
THE TRANSGENDER CULTURE WAR
The United States Departments of Justice and Education have notified state governments and publicly funded schools across the nation that they will lose billions of dollars in federal funding if they discriminate against transgender students. Amidst the flurry of lawsuits, threats, corporate relocations, event cancellations, and propaganda arising from North Carolina’s infamous HB 2, this is the most meaningful of interventions because it is national in scope and it has big teeth. I’ll attempt to describe the federal intervention and the rationale behind it.
I was stunned by the brevity and clarity of the federal correspondence. It’s only 5 pages long. The law is equally understandable and only 9 pages long. The US Court of Appeals decision that documents federal authority to intervene is long and complex but understandable to non-attorneys. The sample practices raised as many questions as answers, and didn’t seem particularly helpful, but they were distributed only as information not as advice or rules. My suggestion is that people who are truly interested read the documents for themselves. Here, in my opinion, are the key points.
From the letter: “The Departments treat a student’s gender identity as the student’s sex for purposes of Title IX and its implementing regulations. This means that a school must not treat a transgender student differently from the way it treats other students of the same gender identity.” … “As is consistently recognized in civil rights cases, the desire to accommodate others’ discomfort cannot justify a policy that singles out and disadvantages a particular class of students.”
From the law (Title 20): Compliance … may be effected … by the termination of or refusal to grant or to continue assistance … to any recipient (for) a failure to comply …
The US Court of appeals supported the federal policy that “…a school generally must treat transgender students consistent with their gender identity.”
All of the interested parties would be better served by calm and open discussion of the issues. Public policies and laws that protect the rights of transgender people while being sensitive to the modesty, privacy and safety concerns of all parties can best be created when there is mutual respect and trust. Instead we have threats and misinformation. Our national behavior is disappointing but not surprising. It’s consistent with how human rights evolve and social change happens here. Similar events accompanied emancipation of slaves, reconstruction, women’s suffrage, organized labor, school integration, civil rights laws, and marriage equality.
In every case change began in a few local communities and states. Then a conservative backlash brought legislation to embed discriminatory traditions deeply into public policy. Reactionary leaders used fear and traditional prejudices to rally support then used raw power and secrecy to impose their will. In the case of HB 2, a few Republican legislators cooked up the scheme then called an emergency session of the legislature to pass it without public debate. The public, the press, and many of the legislators who voted for it were not even allowed to read the law until the day it was passed.
Similar ideas have emerged in several Republican dominated states. That is the environment into which the federal government has stepped – just as it ultimately stepped into the other human rights issues that I listed. That intervention can create a baseline of fair practices to protect transgender people, but it is far from ideal. Instead of allowing local creativity and cooperation, reactionary intransigence has forced federal intervention and poured gasoline on the always smoldering American culture war. Federal action will, at best, prevent discriminatory practices. It can’t produce ideal local results or tolerance.
The debate is over. Transgender people are entitled to the same protection of laws as people born to that gender. As we learn to collaborate on the best ways to move ahead it is good to remember that during war, safe and nurturing places often become battlefields where innocent bystanders are victims of the conflict. That is true of culture war as well as military warfare. Our best course is to plan and accommodate changes that are constructive and safe for everyone. We can achieve that if we learn together and collaborate toward that goal.