Mediaboss Marketing

Summer is upon us, and parents, children and teachers are winding down from what has been an exhausting and fully operational school yearthe first since the devastating pandemic. The long-lasting impact of COVID-19 has affected our students and families well-being and ignited the politics surrounding public schools. All signs point to the coming school year unfolding with the same sound and fury, and if extremist culture warriors have their way, being even more divisive and stressful.

The cause? The far rights assault on public education, which theyre waging by attacking teachers and their students and trying to pit parents against us. Legislators in 45 states have proposed hundreds of laws to ban books in classrooms and school librariesfrom the illustrated adaption of Anne Franks The Diary of a Young Girl to Amanda Gormans poem The Hill We Climb, restrict what can be taught about our countrys history, and promote school vouchers that drain money from public schools. This agenda does nothing to support kids learning. It does nothing to address learning loss, rein in social media and bullying, stop gun violence, or support the record number of children struggling with mental health challenges. In Florida, for example, the latest state budget takes $4 billion in funding away from these efforts and funnels it into a voucher program.

But it turns out, book banning, educational censorship and defunding public schools are wildly unpopular. While extremists say their effort is about parents rights, national polling shows theyve overreached, because voters, including parents, say they do not want to see their kids teachers attacked and their schools politicized. A recent NPR/Ipsos poll found that most Americans (65 percent), including Republicans, oppose book bans; a majority (80 percent) support teaching race as part of our history; and 70 percent approve of their local public school teachers. Another recent poll done by the parents group Moms Rising found even higher support among moms, with 94 percent of mothers supporting teaching honest history and 78 percent opposing book bans.

Most parents want what we all want: for our children to do well in the basics like reading, math and science. They want to ensure all children, regardless of background, develop critical-thinking and practical life skills and are prepared to succeed in the future. And by an 80 percent to 20 percent margin, voters and parents want legislators to focus on improving education in public schools rather than promoting divisive political issues or expanding school choice programs that take resources out of public school classrooms.

Educators want that toobigtime. Its why we are expanding community schools that are built on partnerships to make schools hubs for providing needed services, from academic supports to legal aid to nutrition and health, helping students focus on learning.

And its why were investing in experiential learning, which helps students develop lifelong skills, using their minds and hands to learn everything from welding and auto repair to nursing, graphic design, computer science, culinary skills and plumbing.

Its also why were focusing on literacy and creating joyful, confident readers with the AFTs Reading Opens the World program, which has handed out more than 1.5 million books to students and their families and helps teachers access reading instruction support.

These foundational approaches change lives and, developed in close partnership with parents, will equip our kids with the knowledge, skills and understanding they need for college, career and life. Culture wars do the opposite.

If our extremist opponents think their attacks will slow down Americas educators or disrupt our efforts to organize and improve the lives of workers, theyre mistaken. Good things continue to happen in schools, and parents, workers and communities continue to come together to support our pro-student, pro-family, pro-worker agenda.

For example, United Teachers Los Angeles negotiated an innovative contract that provides an additional $250,000 for each community school and lets educators partner on a virtual learning platform that keeps students connected to their classrooms. The United Federation of Teachers in New York City also broke ground with its new contract, securing retention bonuses to keep teachers in their jobs and expandinga pilot remote learning projectthat allowed small schools to offer virtual coursessuch as Advanced Placement Chemistrythat they otherwise couldnt because of staffing issues. The Florida Education Association has signed up 5,000 new members despite Gov. Ron DeSantis anti-education and anti-union policies. And the Chicago Teachers Union helped elect one of their own, Brandon Johnson, as mayor, despite the money spent by former Education Secretary Betsy DeVos and her cronies to defeat him.

So, the other side can keep waging their political attacks. And we will keep problem-solving. We are bringing communities together and strengthening and improving public education. Our opponents should never underestimate the creativity or commitment of teachers, and all those who work in schools, when it comes to improving the lives of the kids we teach and their families.

Enjoy your summer, and Happy Fathers Day.

View post:
Smears vs. solutions - American Federation of Teachers

UNITED STATES

It is no secret that the United States has grown increasingly partisan over the past few years as the political landscape has become more fraught. Institutions of higher education tend to mirror the broader political landscape in the country. In other words, as states (through local policy) become more categorised into blue versus red, so too do the institutions in those states.

Historically, higher education institutions have navigated more liberal leanings within the complicated campus culture wars, and critics of higher education argue that liberal biases indoctrinate students. The effects of political interference in higher education trickle down to students, impacting their college experiences and even their decisions on where to study.

For the future of our countrys democracy, we must work to break the vicious cycle of partisan influence in higher education and encourage students to engage in healthy political discourse in the classroom and on campus.

The power of perceptions

Generally speaking, Republicans and Democrats differ in their perception of the value of higher education. For example, according to a 2018 Pew Research Center survey, over three quarters (79%) of Republicans, compared to 17% of Democrats, say that a major reason higher education is going in the wrong direction is due to professors bringing their political and social views into the classroom. This is often referred to as the liberal bias in higher education.

Conservative media outlets and politicians argue that higher education is overrun by liberals who force their political agenda onto students.

However, this is not the full picture. College represents a time for students to explore their political ideology and affiliation. Out of the 47% of students who changed their political leanings during college, 17% said they became more conservative.

Therefore, it is important to note that perceptions can differ from reality, but they matter nonetheless, as public opinion influences the way government operates.

Increased polarisation?

The political divide within higher education has implications for students experiences and their considerations in the college admissions process. Regardless of political views, research reveals that, according to students, state politics plays a role in where they decide to go to college. Many worry this impact on the student decision-making process will further the partisan divide and polarisation in the country, which has dangerous implications.

There are ways for institutions to address these challenges by teaching students how to engage with political discourse responsibly. In order to cultivate learning environments that encourage students to openly share their views (regardless of political ideology), faculty must work to foster safety and inclusivity in the classroom.

Unfortunately, this is often not the case.

A recent poll shows 59% of students expressed fear in sharing their political beliefs in class, and 31% of students admitted to having been ridiculed for expressing different political opinions.

Even so, students are not deterred by raising challenging topics, participating in healthy debate and engaging in politics. A survey conducted by the Higher Education Research Institute reported that 71% of students strongly or somewhat agree that dissent is an important part of the political process.

Todays college students are actually some of the most politically active individuals our country has seen in modern history. In fact, according to findings from the National Study of Learning, Voting and Engagement, 66% of college students who were registered to vote cast their ballots in the 2020 election, representing a 14% increase from the 2016 election.

Including students in policy debates

Knowing that todays college students are engaged in politics and willing to have challenging conversations regarding differences in political ideology, why are students often overlooked as stakeholders in higher education policy? Why are students often left out of conversations related to university policies that will ultimately impact their college experiences?

In order to begin to address these issues, higher education faculty and staff should prioritise the students role within shared governance and encourage students to engage in political conversations and debates.

In other words, we must strive to accomplish an environment in higher education institutions in which assumptions are not made regarding students political affiliations and values. Rather, students need to have the agency to decide on their political beliefs and the freedom to learn, grow and potentially change their minds in a safe environment and throughout their college experiences.

There is no denying that students and university leaders are different stakeholders who often have different goals. However, we should strive for an environment in which these two stakeholders are able to come together and discuss policies and sensitive issues.

For example, this could be as simple as inviting student government representatives to board meetings when important decisions are going to be discussed. If the goal of higher education is to foster student development and scholarship, students not only deserve, but are entitled to a seat at the table.

We owe it to our country's future leaders to allow for a world in which disagreement and political discourse are not only allowed, but also encouraged on college campuses. The future of higher education depends on it.

Rachel B Gorosh is a masters student in higher education administration and policy at Northwestern University, USA.

See original here:
Students are entitled to a seat at the governance table - University World News

Some questions for the Los Angeles Dodgers:

What happens next year if a group and out-of-state senator complain that the team is even acknowledging the LGBTQ+ community with a Pride Night? Will they cancel the event altogether?

What happens in two or three years if a group and an out-of-state senator complain that the team acknowledges the pioneering Jackie Robinson and highlights the racism he experienced while playing, alleging that it is "critical race theory"? Will the Dodgers stop recognizing Robinson?

The Dodgers folded like a house of cards in a light breeze this week when conservative politicalCatholic groups and an opportunistic Florida politician complained that the baseball team was honoring the Sisters of Perpetual Indulgence for decades of good deeds. What's to stop the next odious group from getting the organization to abandon its decisions?

The Dodgers have opened the door for anyone to step up, make a minor fuss and get their stance supported, no matter how disgraceful or faulty the reason. They can't now be surprised if a clown car's worth of crying zealots comes rolling through.

Great job. Really.

As part of this year's annual Pride Night on June 16, the Dodgers were set to honor the Los Angeles chapter of the Sisters of Perpetual Indulgence for its years of community service. The Sisters are a 44-year-old satirical group that dresses in nun's habits as they minister to, in the group's own words, "those on the edges" of society. They first appeared in San Francisco in 1979 and began caring for gay men with HIV/AIDS at a time when very few would. Since then, SPI chapters across the country and around the world have continued to work throughout their communities to help those most in need. They are about inclusion and spreading campy joy wherever they go.

The Dodgers are scheduled to hold a Pride Night on June 16 at Dodger Stadium. (Photo by Brian Rothmuller/Icon Sportswire via Getty Images)

Florida Sen. Marco Rubio (R) must have felt like he needed to grab the sectarian spotlight back from others in his partywho have been fighting culture wars against the LGBTQ+ community. Rubio and the group CatholicVote the president of which called the Sisters a "hate group," which is objectively false denounced the Dodgers for honoring the Sisters. In a letter to MLB commissioner Rob Manfred, Rubio said he opposed the group because it "mocks Christians through diabolical parodies of our faith."

The team caved to those howls and is rescinding the Sisters' award, audaciously using the phrase "spirit of unity" and saying "we are removing [the Sisters] from this year's group of honorees" in the same pathetic social media statement.

And now that there is an outcry about the Dodgers' embarrassing capitulation, with multiple LGBTQ+ groups saying they won't attend the team's Pride Night due to its treatment of the Sisters, the Dodgers are scrambling, reportedly trying to find a compromise.

Compromise how? You cannot be tolerant of the intolerant, and the team already failed that test.

The Dodgers can't reinvite the Sisters after this. Well, they could try, but if the Sisters' response were to lift the hems of their habits and show the Dodgers their behinds, no one could really blame them.

Some of us are terrified by the speed at which human rights are being stripped away from Americans who are just trying to live, whether at a drag brunch or as a drag performer, or for pregnant people who do not want to be pregnant for whatever their personal reasons, or for Black or Muslim or Native American people who want their children to be able to read books with characters who look like them and tell the stories of their ancestors.

A big part of the reason these things are happening so quickly is because of organizations like the Dodgers giving in at the slightest sign of complaint or discomfort and prioritizing the objections of the intolerant over standing in support of the oppressed.

What is the point of having a Pride Night if you aren't going to go all-in? Its very essence is supposed to be inclusion, creating a welcoming atmosphere or at least the illusion of one; looking at you, myriad NHL teams for those who far too often have been told they don't belong.

The Dodgers want credit for celebrating Pride, but this week they showed that they aren't committed to the cause of uplifting the LGBTQ+ community, which chooses a rainbow as its symbol for a reason: because members of the community come in many metaphorical colors.

You cannot say you want to celebrate Pride and then pick and choose which LGBTQ+ groups are acceptable.

Or, as the San Francisco Sisters wrote in condemning the Dodgers' decision, "Do not let people who hate us all decide that some parts of our community are more tolerable than others, that some shall be seated at the table while others are locked out."

Here is the original post:
Dodgers lost meaning, purpose of Pride Night in caving to culture war pressure - Yahoo Sports

Ron DeSantis doesnt just want to run for the presidency, the Florida governor seems to already have declared himself president as he tries to wrest clear federal responsibilities away from the U.S. government with a new Florida law that heavily penalizes employment of undocumented immigrants, gives state officials more authority to investigate potential immigration violations and forces hospitals to collect immigration status, among other things.

Almost 150 years ago, in 1875s Chy Lung vs. Freeman, the Supreme Court established that regulating immigration was exclusively the domain of the national government, not states. That hasnt stopped plenty of states from trying it anyway. Thirteen years ago, Arizona set off the modern wave of immigration organizing in enacting the disastrous SB 1070, most of which was eventually struck down by the Supreme Court as a violation of the Supremacy Clause.

Florida Governor Ron DeSantis (Scott Olson/Getty Images)

More recently, Texas Gov. Greg Abbott has taken it upon himself to appear tough on the border, sending National Guardsmen to an ill-fated and ultimately pointless deployment, almost setting off an international incident with Mexico over truck inspections, and of course busing migrants here and elsewhere without any coordination or notice.

Apparently envious of the havoc Abbott was wreaking, DeSantis joined the clown show, using a shadowy former Army counterintelligence agent to trick migrants into boarding planes bound for Marthas Vineyard, paid for by a dedicated state fund that this law has now expanded. DeSantis seems wholly indifferent or apathetic to the fact that the consequences of his culture war are being suffered by his own state.

Since the law was enacted, there have been reports of employees fearful of returning to work in a variety of industries, and even attempting to arrange boycotts. The short-term impacts are still uncertain, but it seems clear that in the long run, Florida will lose out on the contributions of an important population, just as it will face a brain drain from DeSantis heavy-handed crackdown on academia and anti-business war with Disney. The governor doesnt care; his eyes are set northwards, to Washington..

Originally posted here:
Going the Ron way: DeSantis' new immigration law and culture wars will backfire - New York Daily News

Michael Gove

Minister says focus should be on economics and public services a day after Suella Bravermans highly partisan speech

Conservatives need to recognise that elections are won on economics and public services rather than culture wars, Michael Gove has said in what will be seen as a rebuke to Suella Braverman.

Addressing the National Conservatism (NatCon) conference in Westminster, a day after Braverman gave a highly partisan speech to the same event which condemned experts and elites and political correctness, Gove was at pains to make no direct criticism of the home secretary.

But asked in an onstage interview whether Conservatives needed to engage with such issues, Gove highlighted what he said were the virtues of gentleness and stability and discourse.

He said: I think that the overwhelming majority of people in this country prefer civility. This goes to the whole question of the so-called culture war that is raging at the moment.

There are certain principles you should defend, absolutely. And it is absolutely critical that we dont deny biological reality or that we dont feel that we should apologise for aspects of our past, which are genuine sources of pride.

But we should do so with the self-confidence that means we dont need to be strident.

Gove, the communities secretary, said the changing media and social media landscape had helped increase the prominence of culture war issues. The way in which algorithms work tends to drive people towards poles, and the way in which particular sections of the media work means that they tend to become echo chambers, he added

However, he argued, voters were far more likely to judge parties and governments on other areas.

I actually think that economics is still central, Gove said. When it comes to the boring and vulgar task of winning general elections, and the even more boring and even more dispiriting task of government, the most important thing to do is to concentrate on the right economic policies, the right policies for public service delivery and so on.

Goves words are a polite rebuttal of the increasing tendency of some Tories, as highlighted by the NatCon gathering, organised by a rightwing US thinktank, to take more overtly combative approach to subjects like race and sexuality, and to borrow ideas from populists such as Hungarys Viktor Orbn and Giorgia Meloni of Italy.

Braverman devoted much of her speech to railing against what she said was an attempt by the left to devalue Britains heritage, while Tory MP Miriam Cates said cultural Marxism was one reason for the UKs falling birthrate.

Gove, who was at pains to praise Bravermans call for a reduction in legal migration numbers, said such divergent views were a sign that our party and our broader movement is healthy, that you can have debate.

However, he did stress the need for recognising what is distinctive and cherished in Britain and in the United Kingdom, amid a conference which has seen other speakers praise Orbn and Donald Trump, and describe a supposed plot by leftwing groups to eradicate democracy.

In some of the commentary that there has been around national conservatism, I think people are trying to suggest that this is somehow an attempt to import American ideas, American ideology and American conservatism into the UK, Gove said, saying this should not be the case.

He also gently dismissed the idea of another argument by a Tory MP, Andrea Jenkyns, at a grassroots Tory conference on Saturday, that many of her party colleagues would fit better in the Liberal Democrats.

Gove said: The coalition government was five fascinating years, but I cant think of a single Conservative who reminds me of Chris Huhne.

{{topLeft}}

{{bottomLeft}}

{{topRight}}

{{bottomRight}}

{{.}}

See the original post:
Michael Gove says Tories will not win election with culture wars - The Guardian