Mediaboss Marketing

Love and marriage, love and marriage

They go together like a horse and carriage

This I tell you brother

You can't have one without the other

- - -

WASHINGTON In the turbulent culture wars over sex, love, poverty and the future of the American family, Isabel Sawhill, a blunt, influential and formidable voice, has long come down squarely on the side of marriage.

Though she is a Democrat and a former Clinton administration official, Sawhill's staunch defense of marriage has often put the economist at odds with some thinkers on the left who have dismissed the institution as an oppressive vestige of patriarchy.

Unlike conservatives, who see marriage as sacred and the key to a society based on traditional values, Sawhill based her argument simply on the data, which shows that marriage promotion programs haven't worked and that children born to married parents tend to fare far better in life than do children in other family arrangements.

So it is no small thing that the 77-year-old author and editor of more than 19 books, papers and manuscripts, many of them on matrimony, is now saying that marriage at least for a vast swath of Americans may be dead.

Read more from the original source:
Longtime proponent of marriage wants to rethink the institution

Far Cry 4 Walkthrough Part 27 - Culture Wars (PC 1080p Gameplay)
Subscribe and like if you enjoyed. Dislike the video if you didn #39;t enjoy it and or leave a comment telling me why so I can improve of that. Peace.... ***This...

By: InFamousZoG

Read more here:
Far Cry 4 Walkthrough Part 27 - Culture Wars (PC 1080p Gameplay) - Video

The Washington Post Isabel Sawhill once a staunch defender of marriage has changed her views

Love and marriage, love and marriage

They go together like a horse and carriage

This I tell you brother

You cant have one without the other

In the turbulent culture wars over sex, love, poverty and the future of the American family, Isabel V. Sawhill, a blunt, influential and formidable voice, has long come down squarely on the side of marriage.

Though she is a Democrat and a former Clinton administration official, Sawhills staunch defense of marriage has often put the economist at odds with some thinkers on the left who have dismissed the institution as an oppressive vestige of patriarchy.

Unlike conservatives, who see marriage as sacred and the key to a society based on traditional values, Sawhill based her argument simply on the data, which shows that marriage promotion programs havent worked and that children born to married parents tend to fare far better in life than do children in other family arrangements.

So it is no small thing that the 77-year-old author and editor of more than 19 books, papers and manuscripts, many of them on matrimony, is now saying that marriage at least for a vast swath of Americans may be dead.

In Generation Unbound, a book released this past fall that has opened a new front in the culture wars, Sawhill, who works at the Brookings Institution, argues that it is high time we stopped trying to revive marriage. Instead, she says, we need to figure out what will replace it if we are to stem the rise in single-parenting that has done more in the past few decades to increase child poverty than some of the biggest social programs, such as food stamps, have done to decrease it.

Read more:
Longtime defender of marriage asks if we should try something else

Love and marriage, love and marriage

They go together like a horse and carriage

This I tell you brother

You cant have one without the other

In the turbulent culture wars over sex, love, poverty and the future of the American family, Isabel V. Sawhill, a blunt, influential and formidable voice, has long come down squarely on the side of marriage.

Though she is a Democrat and a former Clinton administration official, Sawhills staunch defense of marriage has often put the economist at odds with some thinkers on the left who have dismissed the institution as an oppressive vestige of patriarchy.

Unlike conservatives, who see marriage as sacred and the key to a society based on traditional values, Sawhill based her argument simply on the data, which shows that marriage promotion programs havent worked and that children born to married parents tend to fare far better in life than do children in other family arrangements.

So it is no small thing that the 77-year-old author and editor of more than 19 books, papers and manuscripts, many of them on matrimony, is now saying that marriage at least for a vast swath of Americans may be dead.

In Generation Unbound, a book released this past fall that has opened a new front in the culture wars, Sawhill, who works at the Brookings Institution, argues that it is high time we stopped trying to revive marriage. Instead, she says, we need to figure out what will replace it if we are to stem the rise in single-parenting that has done more in the past few decades to increase child poverty than some of the biggest social programs, such as food stamps, have done to decrease it.

Maybe some people will be married, or have some kind of commitment to each other, but theyll live in separate places, she speculated in an interview. Or maybe there will be marriages with upfront time limits. Not, We thought we were going to be married forever and decided in the middle to get divorced. But marriages where you say to the other person upfront, How about a five-year contract to be committed to each other, and then reassess?

See original here:
A longtime proponent of marriage wants to reassess the institutions future

Students in a geography lesson at a London secondary school. Photograph: Peter Macdiarmid/Getty Images

Another average week in the education culture wars. Last Wednesday, the Girls Schools Association denounced the Labour party for our policy to have private schools earn their tax rebates. Last Thursday, the Tory right resuscitated plans for a sheeps-and-goats, CSE/O-level exam. Then Tatler magazine published its state school guide, informing parents: Sometimes the right choice isnt the most expensive one. Twitter responded in kind.

As the election looms, I am keener than anyone for education policy to be debated. But I am also desperate for a conversation that leaves behind the incendiary rhetoric of the Blob and class war, and with it the punitive policies of recent years that have served to undermine the best kind of profession-led school improvement.

There are two challenges the debate is missing. The first is the scandal of 1.5m English children not getting a good enough education. Before the Christmas break, the chief inspector of schools, Sir Michael Wilshaw, identified 13 local authorities where results were particularly troubling. But more concerning is the National Audit Office report that slammed the Department for Education over the significant gaps it had in its strategy. Which is bureaucratese for ministers dont have a clue.

The second challenge is the inability of existing schemes to take our schools to the next stage. In short, a realisation that a one-size-fits-all template for getting poorly performing schools into an adequate state doesnt then provide the broader, stretching education we all want to see. So its a dual challenge both to tackle ingrained underattainment, especially in coastal towns and among white, working-class boys, and reform the accountability systems that threaten to constrict school potential.

The Labour partys answer begins with a commitment to give all schools the freedom they need to excel. From Norway to Singapore, successful school policies focus on quality of teaching and strength of leadership. Unfortunately, David Cameron jettisoned all that for relentless structural reform, curriculum instability and an assault on teachers as enemies of promise.

We need to reform Ofsted. Deciding on a school is a big decision for parents and Ofsteds seal of approval is often a first port of call. Quite rightly, schools wear their Good or Outstanding badge with pride. But with too many headteachers now arguing that Ofsted can be a barrier to success, we need to be more radical about the future of inspection.

Ofsted has to move beyond box-ticking and data-dependence. Too much teacher workload is the product of preparing for an inspection. Yes, Ofsted must confront mediocrity, but it must also start to allow heads the space to innovate and develop a richer criterion of school achievement. So its time for greater stability in the inspection framework, more consistency between inspectors and an end to any prescribed system of teaching. And, under a Labour government, Ofsted would inspect on a broad and balanced curriculum, so you cannot be Outstanding if you have stripped out the drama, music and sport from the school day.

We also have to stop the politicisation of our schools inspectorate. It is not Ofsteds place to adjudicate on whether schools have performance-related pay, whether a good school should be converted into an academy or to follow every ministerial fad on British values or otherwise. With 47bn of public money spent on English schools, we need high accountability.

What we cannot afford to discourage is the appetite for radical improvement. The impact of digital technology in the classroom, social media, the latest neuroscience these insights need to be harnessed and shared and scaled up. Under Labour, new schools would be built in areas of need with specific mandates to explore innovative educational approaches.

Read more here:
Schools need freedom to thrive. Labour will offer it