Remember what our US Constitution and court precedent through modern history has stated:
'Education is the right of all children.
The principle of education for all is based on the philosophical premise
of democracy that every person is valuable in his own right and should be
afforded equal opportunities to develop his full potential'.
Republican usually southern states ignored rights of disabled and misappropriated funds that would have created strong classroom options for our disabled----and they did the same for funds dedicated to creating pathways for disabled to full employment WITH EQUAL PAY in corporations and businesses. Clinton era simply moved all that right wing policy to northern and western public schools eliminating all Americans With Disabilities Act gains.
Today these same global Wall Street pols are bringing that further by allowing Federal disability funds to go only to the EXCEPTIONAL GENIUS----returning to warehousing of broad citizens with disabilities.
If we first recognize the abandonment of rights for disabled---both in the K-university pathway regarding education access and in facilitating disabled into corporate environments----then we can see where the definitions of funding schemed are deliberately skewed.
Slave Wages for the Disabled
A fight over subminimum wages came to a head in Lansing, Michigan last week, when activists battled cops on the steps of the State Capitol.
09.23.15 1:00 AM ETA debate over the sub-minimum wages paid to workers with disabilities erupted into a scuffle between law enforcement and protesters last week at the state capitol grounds in Lansing, Michigan.
Police arrested blind protester Joe Harcz, 62, of Mt. Morris, who was informed by what, he noted, was ironically termed a police “courtesy call” that he will be charged with a felony.
Harcz told The Daily Beast that the Michigan State Police used “police state tactics” when, as he and other protesters tell it, they prevented Harcz and others from entering and challenging (with signs, T-shirts, and chants) a commemoration of the 25th anniversary of the Americans with Disabilities Act.
Michigan State Police did not immediately return a call for comment, but the AP reports that the police said they arrested a Mt. Morris man for “resisting and obstructing a security officer” and shoving two security guards. Harcz denied shoving anyone.
A news report shown on local station WILX in Michigan shows (starting at 0:21) a man with a white can trying to move round a metal barrier blocked by five police officers. Harcz can’t confirm that he is the man in the video, since he can’t see it, but another protester confirmed the video depicts Harcz. In the video, one police officer grabs Harcz’s arm to lead him away. Harcz appears to lose his balance and his cane comes close to hitting another officer in the face, who grabs the cane.
As the nation debates the possibility of raising the federal minimum wage to a living wage, it’s worth pausing to reflect on part of what is angering Harcz and other protestors. It is still perfectly legal in the United States to pay someone as little as $2 or $0.22 or even $.06(!) an hour to toil in a segregated workspace—if the worker is disabled.
The pay of hundreds of thousands of disabled workers, who often work in “sheltered workshops” separate from non-disabled peers, is subject to section 14(c) of the Fair Labor Standards Act. Unlike any other worker in the U.S., workers employed under 14(c) are paid solely according to their productivity, with literally no legal minimum wage.
Like the wider debate about the minimum wage, the use of section 14(c) has on one hand faced fierce criticism over the alleged exploitation of workers who are paid such low wages.
On the other hand, supporters of the law (or of a more graduated phasing out of the law) cite the fact that the number of available jobs would decrease if the minimum wage applied to disabled workers. However, what’s different about argument over the sub-minimum wage is that the debate between supporters and critics is non-partisan. Critics of sub-minimum wages come from both sides of the aisle.
GOP Rep. Gregg Harper of Mississippi recently introduced a bill known as the TIME Act. The bill aims to end legalized sub-minimum wages over the course of three years, and has drawn such ideologically divergent co-sponsors as Republican Markwayne Mullin of Oklahoma and Democrat Donna Edwards of Maryland, who vote similarly on bills only 22 percent of the time.
“Section 14(c) of the FLSA was enacted out of ignorance regarding the true capacity of people with disabilities. Subminimum wage standards currently prevent over four-hundred thousand people with disabilities from gaining access to the work and training environments that have been proven to be more cost effective and to produce more competitive integrated work outcomes,” said Rep. Harper said in a statement. “Segregated, subminimum-wage work is just an expression of low expectations that instills a false sense of incapacity in individuals who could become competitively employed with the proper training and support.”
Jordan See, communications director for Rep. Harper, added that sub-minimum wages are “not a recognition of value of workers with disabilities. It reinforces a life of poverty. It’s a bipartisan issue, going against the Republican ideals of independence and self-determination.”
Those who oppose the abolition of 14(c), then, are also not members of any political party or ideology, but are primarily those who pay workers subminimum wages. These are often non-profit organizations whose employees are usually significantly disabled.
Thus explains the apparent oddity of a group of disability rights activists protesting an event commemorating a landmark of disability rights legislation. The commemoration was partly organized by Peckham Industries, a nonprofit that the protesters argue employs workers with disabilities at subminimum wages. (Peckham did not respond to phone calls and emails requesting comment.)
Several disability rights organizations are coming out in favor of the TIME Act and ending sub-minimum wages.
“Subminimum wages are a form of legal discrimination against people with disabilities. People with intellectual and developmental disabilities [work] in warehouses or workshops for literally pennies an hour,” said Samantha Crane, Director of Public Policy at the Autistic Self-Advocacy Network. “Research shows that most of these people could be earning above minimum wages if they had proper support.”
Chris Danielsen, director of public relations for the National Federation of the Blind, points out that section 14(c) is a now-outdated New Deal program that was created when there were no disabled people in the workforce. “It’s not a start for most people with disabilities, because these are not even jobs that exist in the economy. They are make-work using outdated manufacturing techniques. People are never going to find competitive job sorting rocks by color and shifting one pile to another.”
Danielsen continued, “A lot of business would love to pay solely by productivity, but we have laws that require a minimum wage no matter what. It should apply to everyone.”
Harcz and some other disability activists were headed into the Michigan event when they say they were stopped by police officers in full body armor, carrying Tasers.
Eleanor Canter, another disability rights activist who was protesting the event, said police never explained why they were being blocked from entering the event. Police informed her they were taking away her bullhorn. “What we have is words. We’re not a security threat. Are you scared of a handful of disabled people with words and pasteboard?”
According to Harcz, he and his “ragtag group” tried to protest when they were prevented from entering. “I heard the police. Sometimes they weren’t silent. I went back and forth my cane to try to figure out where things were, where they were, go on grass around them.”
He continued, “I kept hitting barriers. Maybe they were police. I may have touched someone, but I’m not shoving anybody.”
Harcz is a caregiver to his two elderly parents and repeatedly mentioned the stress he was experiencing as a result of these charges. He is flummoxed by what he sees as the disproportion of the police response.
“Screw you guys, I have a right to enter. I can’t tell when the police are in my face. I wasn’t pushing anybody, but what the hell, man? I’m 150 pounds soaking wet. These police were giant fat, white guys. Even a blind guy could tell that.”
This is where parents of children being told they will have access to what are today called public schools but are corporate charters are openly being deceived. They are creating what looks to be broad inclusion with what has a goal of being a 5% at maximum inclusion.
NYC with Wall Street and Mayor Bloomberg's national corporate charter chain stance of course led in this these few decades ----all directed at first making low-income children feel included in these RACE TO THE TOP education reforms and then to make right wing Republican parents think advanced placement students include 30% of students. This is not going to happen in MOVING FORWARD RACE TO THE TOP-----
WE NEED BOTH REPUBLICAN AND DEMOCRATIC CITIZENS TO STOP ALLOWING GLOBAL WALL STREET POLS CONTROLLING BOTH PARTIES TO LIE ABOUT THE DISMANTLING OF OUR PUBLIC SCHOOLS!
Gifted, Talented and Separated
In One School, Students Are Divided by Gifted Label — and Race
By AL BAKERJAN. 12, 2013
DISPARITY A fourth-grade gifted class taught by Angelo Monserrate at Public School 163. Credit Dave Sanders for The New York Times
IT is just a metal door with three windows, the kind meant to keep the clamor of an elementary school hallway from piercing a classroom’s quiet. Other than paint the color of bubble gum, it is unremarkable.
But the pink door on Room 311 at Public School 163 on the Upper West Side represents a barrier belied by its friendly hue. On one side are 21 fourth graders labeled gifted and talented by New York City’s school system. They are coursing through public school careers stamped accelerated.
And they are mostly white.
On the other side, sometimes sitting for reading lessons on the floor of the hallway, are those in the school’s vast majority: They are enrolled in general or special education programs.
They are mostly children of color.
“I know what we look like,” Carolyn M. Weinberg, a 28-year veteran of P.S. 163, said of the racial disparities as she stood one day in the third-floor hallway between Room 318, where she and a colleague teach a fourth-grade general education class, and the one where Angelo Monserrate teaches the gifted class, Room 311.
“I know what you see,” said Ms. Weinberg.
There are 652 students enrolled at P.S. 163 this year, from prekindergarten through fifth grade. Roughly 63 percent of them are black and Hispanic; whites make up 27 percent; and Asians account for 6 percent.
This reflects the flavor of the neighborhood, and roughly matches the New York City school system’s overall demographics.
Yet in P.S. 163’s gifted classes, the racial dynamics of the neighborhood, the school itself and the school system are turned upside down.
Of the 205 children enrolled in the nine gifted classes, 97, or 47 percent, are white; another 31 of the students, or 15 percent, are Asian. And a combined 65 students, or 32 percent, are black and Hispanic.
In the 21 other classes that enroll the school’s remaining 447 students, only 80, or 18 percent, are white.
The disparities are most apparent in the lower grades.
Of the 24 students in Karen Engler’s kindergarten gifted class, one is black and three are Hispanic. Ayelet Cutler’s first-grade gifted class has 21 students, one of them black and two Hispanic. There are two blacks and two Hispanics among the 26 students in Athena Shapiro’s second-grade gifted class.
On a recent morning, a line of Ms. Cutler’s students moved from the classroom to the corridor, ahead of the general education class of Linda Crews. A string of mostly white faces and then a line of mostly black and Hispanic ones walked down the hall of a school named for a New York politician who sought to end inequities in education: Alfred E. Smith.
It was 11:25 a.m., and the classes wound their way to the cafeteria, a cavernous room at the school’s western edge. Once there, the children sat with those in their own class, each one at a separate long white table that, for a moment, froze the divisions.
For critics of New York City’s gifted and talented programs, that image crystallizes what they say is a flawed system that reinforces racial separation in the city’s schools and contributes to disparities in achievement.
They contend that gifted admissions standards favor middle-class children, many of them white or Asian, over black and Hispanic children who might have equal promise, and that the programs create castes within schools, one offered an education that is enriched and accelerated, the other getting a bare-bones version of the material. Because they are often embedded within larger schools, the programs bolster a false vision of diversity, these critics say, while reinforcing the negative stereotypes of class and race.
Despite months of repeated requests, the city’s Education Department would not provide racial breakdowns of gifted and talented programs and the schools that house them. But the programs tend to be in wealthier districts whose populations have fewer black and Hispanic children, and far more children qualify for them in affluent districts than in poorer ones.
In District 3, which stretches for 63 blocks along Manhattan’s Upper West Side and includes P.S. 163, there are five gifted programs for elementary school children, including the Anderson School, one of five citywide programs.
Farther north, for all of Districts 5 and 6, which are poorer and more heavily black and Hispanic, there are just two programs.
And though programs are clustered in affluent neighborhoods around Prospect Park, Brooklyn, and in northeastern Queens, the accelerated classes are absent from broad swaths of central Brooklyn and southeast Queens, where more families are poor and black or Hispanic.
In District 7, in the South Bronx, there is not a single gifted program. The area, dominated by Hispanic and black residents, is among the poorest in the nation, with many people living below the official federal poverty mark.
James H. Borland, a professor of education at Teachers College, said that looking at the gifted landscape in New York City suggests that one of two things must be true: either black and Hispanic children are less likely to be gifted, or there is something wrong with the way the city selects children for those programs.
“It is well known in the education community that standardized tests advantage children from wealthier families and disadvantage children from poorer families,” Dr. Borland said.
And the city’s efforts to fix the system seem to have only made it worse.
Until recently, each of the city’s 32 school districts could establish the classes as it saw fit and determine its own criteria for admission. They varied, but educators often took a holistic approach; they looked at evaluations from teachers and classroom observations, relying on tests only in part, by comparing the results of students from within a district.
That changed in September 2008, when the Bloomberg administration ushered in admission based only on a cutoff score on two high-stakes tests given in one sitting — the Otis-Lennon School Ability Test, or Olsat, and the Bracken School Readiness Assessment.
The overhaul was meant to standardize the admissions process and make it fairer. But the new tests decreased diversity, with children from the poorest districts offered a smaller share of kindergarten gifted slots after those were introduced, while pupils in the wealthiest districts got more.
For the 2012-13 school year, 4,912 children qualified for gifted programs. The more affluent districts — 2 and 3 in Manhattan, 20 and 22 in Brooklyn, and 25 and 28 in Queens — had the most students qualify: 949 in District 2, which takes in Lower Manhattan and the Upper East Side, and 505 in District 3.
Some districts in poor and predominately black and Hispanic districts had too few qualifiers to fill a single class: in District 7, only six children qualified for gifted placements, and none for the most exclusive schools, like the Anderson School, which requires a score at or above the 97 percentile.
The number of classes over all fell sharply.
This year, the department changed the process again, substituting a new test known as the Naglieri Nonverbal Ability Test — Second Edition, or NNAT2, for the Bracken exam. This is what children competing for placements next year started facing this month, in tests that began on Jan. 7.
Shael Polakow-Suransky, the city’s chief academic officer, said data showed that a “more diverse range of kids” excelled on the new test because it was less rooted in test preparation and would allow educators to more accurately identify gifted pupils.
But focusing on the gifted classrooms is missing the point, Mr. Polakow-Suransky said. Though it is worthy to debate whether the “world of G.&T.” is diverse enough, he said, the administration’s “equity agenda” is much broader: It seeks to improve the quality of education and close achievement gaps across the entire school system.
“We are not a system that is purely focused on running a good G.&T. program,” Mr. Polakow-Suransky said. “We are a system that is focused on dramatically shifting educational opportunities for, particularly, kids of color and kids from high-poverty neighborhoods who have historically in this city been deeply neglected.”
But the accelerated classrooms serve as pipelines to the city’s highest-achievement middle schools and high schools, creating a cycle in which students who start out ahead get even further advantages from the city’s schools.
And the numbers of black and Hispanic students who make it into the city’s specialized high schools, long seen as its flagship institutions, have declined significantly over recent decades. Though about 70 percent of city students are black or Hispanic, from 2006 to 2012 the two groups, combined, were offered only about 15 percent of the seats at the specialized high schools, according to the Education Department.
“I don’t think the fact that G.&T. programs are clearly and disproportionately white, and are so lacking, given the size of the population, in black and Latino students is the result of anyone’s bad intentions,” said Ellis Cose, a parent of a child who attends a gifted and talented program at P.S. 163. Mr. Cose is the author of “The End of Anger” (2011), which explores the issues of race and generational change.
“I think it is really the result of people committed to a system that can never work if the objective is diversity,” he said.
“The only way it even conceivably can work is to give young poor kids the same sort of boost up that young affluent kids get, which is to make sure these kids get an excellent preschool education, make sure these kids get tutoring, make sure these parents know at what time in the circuit they are supposed to prepare their kids for what. And that is taking on a much larger task than tinkering with a test.”
THE idea of gifted education has drifted in and out of vogue in American schools. It was elevated in the 1950s, when educators and lawmakers pushed gifted programs in math and science amid fears about communism’s rise. It waned in the 1960s but re-emerged with a White House task force on giftedness and the signing of several federal bills in the 1970s that recognized gifted children’s needs.
Urban districts were seen as using the programs to help prevent white flight from the schools, in essence offering a system within the system that was white-majority and focused on achievement. “There have been claims that gifted education resegregates the public schools,” Dr. Borland said.
“Certainly there was concern with keeping middle-class families involved in public schools, and to the extent that we use tests to select kids for gifted programs, that tends to skew the programs toward children from wealthier, white families,” he added.
At P.S. 163, gifted classrooms date to at least the late 1980s.
Children take different pathways to the school’s classrooms. For general education students, the school is open to those who live in the neighborhood zone, a U-shape area that stretches roughly from West 96th to West 102nd Streets, between Central Park West and just west of Broadway. It captures brownstones and co-ops with park views as well part of the massive Frederick Douglass Houses, a public housing complex whose 20-story towers rise between West 100th and West 104th Streets east of Amsterdam Avenue.
Students from within District 3 whose combined scores on the gifted tests were in the 90th percentile or above can list P.S. 163’s gifted program as one they would prefer to attend. The central office then assigns them to one of their chosen schools. Another choice is the school’s dual-language program, which fosters bilingual learning among students who are split roughly 50-50, according to Spanish or English dominance. Students enter by choice, though priority is given to those in the neighborhood.
In the spring of 2004, P.S. 163’s principal at the time, Virginia M. Pepe, helped create her own assessment of a subgroup of prekindergarten students for placement in the next year’s kindergarten gifted program.
With one eye on the need for diversity and another on the need for objectivity, Dr. Pepe developed some cognitive tasks, like sorting objects, and mixed in an early childhood preliteracy assessment and an assessment of language. Kindergarten gifted teachers also observed the children.
It was a “balancing act” that year, to find the right mix of students for the new kindergarten gifted programs, she said. An aid in diversifying that program, which lasted just one year, was a policy from the central office that allowed families from districts north of the school — Districts 5 and 6, for instance — to send their children to P.S. 163’s gifted program if they chose to and if seats were available.
“Those districts did not have gifted and talented programs at the time,” Dr. Pepe said.
“Families that were Caucasian liked us because we offered more diversity, and multiracial families liked us because they thought their children would have opportunities to be in a more diverse setting, and African-American families from up in District 5 appreciated us because they were closer to home.”
In 2007, though, the Education Department stopped allowing out-of-district children to attend (a policy it has now reversed for the 2013-14 school year); the following year, it went to the testing-only admission policy. And that “slowed things down” in diversifying the gifted-and-talented program, said Nia Mason, an art teacher who began teaching at the school in 1988.
“The diversity changed overnight when they put that test in,” Ms. Mason said.
IF P.S. 163 has little control over admission to the gifted programs or who ultimately gets seated, it does control what happens in its classrooms. According to the current principal, Donny R. Lopez, the school’s leadership does its best to foster mingling between students in the gifted classes and others.
One day, half the students from Keira A. Dillon’s fifth-grade gifted class mixed with half the students from Robyn Lindner’s fifth-grade general education class and headed to the auditorium for a program run by the National Dance Institute.
There, onstage, the pupils from the two classes giggled and moved self-consciously as they followed the directions of Bianca Johnson, a teaching artist and choreographer.
At one point, when Ms. Johnson held up a photo of a man’s face and asked for his name, it was Jamal Brown, a boy from the general education class, who identified him as Jacques d’Amboise, the founder of the National Dance Institute.
Some teachers at P. S. 163 use the word “enriched,” rather than “accelerated,” to describe the academics of the gifted programs.
Ms. Dillon said that even within gifted classes there was a spectrum of ability, and that she commonly arranged pupils into small groups, according to their abilities, for reading, writing, math and the like.
This fall, in studying the branches of the federal government, about a third of her students understood that some concepts of power also extended to the states and that there was an interplay between state and federal powers.
“The general education students might not have all covered this topic,” said Ms. Dillon, whose class is more diverse than most of the gifted and talented rooms, with five black and eight Hispanic children among the 26 students.
Sara K. Bloch’s triplets are all in different programs at the school. Leon is in Ms. Dillon’s gifted class; Jason is in general education; and Felix is in what is known as an integrated co-teaching class, which mixes special education students with general education children like Felix. “To be completely honest, we feel that this class is probably similar to a regular fifth-grade class,” she said on the day she visited Leon in Ms. Dillon’s class. “Math is the same; all three — they have the same book.”
But Leon does seem to be pushed harder, Ms. Bloch said. He is asked to think of things in complex ways, not just to memorize dates of the American Revolution or names like John Adams, for instance, but also to understand relationships between events and people, or to explain possible motives or forces behind certain events, like the Boston Tea Party. She also said that the relationship between the parents and the teachers was more intense at the gifted level, with an expectation of parent involvement and connectedness.
“There is none of that in the other classes,” Ms. Bloch said.
In her experience in teaching those who teach gifted children in New York City’s public schools, Christy T. Folsom, a professor at Lehman College and a former board member of Advocacy for Gifted and Talented Education in New York State, said gifted children got a “much deeper experience and, in some cases, more advanced curriculum.”
“In the gifted classrooms that I’ve been in, the majority of kids are reading at grade level or beyond, and they can write well, and then so much time is not spent on basic skills so they can spend more time on content and on comparing historical eras,” Professor Folsom said. “They are then able to do the more deep thinking work because less time has to be spent on the fundamental skills.”
WHY parents embrace or reject public schools is a complicated equation.
At P.S. 163, several parents and teachers wondered whether white parents would stay if not for the gifted classes.
“You don’t see any white kids in the general education classes,” said one parent of a student in a dual-language class, who requested anonymity for fear of reprisals. “You might see one or two, but I don’t see any white families coming to register their children for general education. They come straight to gifted and talented.”
“I guess it is a question of, ‘How much diversity do you feel comfortable with?’ ” said the parent of one child in the gifted program, who did not want to be identified for fear of animosity from other parents. “Do I want him to be the only white kid in an all-black school? No. Would I like it if the racial mix was more proportionate? Yes, whatever the percentage of the makeup. That’s an honest answer, from my soul. Is it hypocritical for parents to say, ‘We’re sending our kids to public school,’ but they’re sending them to an all-white gifted and talented program? But it’s not our fault. We want the best for our children.”
Carrie C. Reynolds, a co-president of the PTA, said parents seemed to be basing choices not on race but on the academic environment and on socioeconomic factors.
“If you were upper income, well educated, you want your kid to have a more enriched education,” she said. “I think it is more economics than race. They tend to go hand-in-hand in New York City, but I certainly know families that have made a different choice, that are here at this school, that are white and are not in gifted and talented.”
But one afternoon at the school, Ms. Lindner, the fifth-grade teacher, said she was “always surprised” when she saw more than two or three white children in her general education classes.
As a parent herself, and a resident of Manhattan’s Upper East Side, she said, “there’s no way I’d put my kid in a general-education class here, no way, because it’s right next to the project and all the kids in general education come from the projects.”
She said her experience was that many of the children in her general education classes were at grade level or below and did not get the same support from their parents that the children in the gifted classes got. “They’re tougher kids,” she said of the general education students in the school. “They’re very street-savvy. They don’t have the background; their parents are hard on them but don’t know what to do with them.”
Andi Velasquez, who as the school’s parent coordinator has helped lead tours of the school for prospective parents over the last two years, said she had occasionally heard very “vocal” parents expressing surprise in seeing even a few black and Hispanic children in a gifted class.
“They say, ‘It has too many minorities to be a G&T class; that can’t be a G&T class,’ ” said Ms. Velasquez, 48, who is white and is married to a Hispanic man from Colombia, and whose two children attended the dual-language program at P.S. 87.
“And I say, ‘We’re proud of that,’ ” she said. “And those are the parents that haven’t come in the past.”
SANDRA M. ECHOLS, 46, a single mother who is black, has sent all three of her children to the gifted classes at P.S. 163, beginning with her oldest son who, in 1998, when he was entering fourth grade, gained admission to the program.
“It is an elitist program,” Ms. Echols said. “They don’t advertise it the way it should be advertised, but I’m glad I was savvy enough to navigate the system and give my children what they need.”
She remembers taking her oldest son to his middle-school gifted program and being mistaken for “the nanny.”
Her daughter got into the P.S. 163 program for kindergarten and was one of only two black girls in the class until second grade, when the other girl moved away, leaving her as the sole black child.
Now, Ms. Echols’s youngest son, Kenyan, 10, is in the fifth-grade gifted and talented class taught by Ms. Dillon.
Ms. Echols recounted her story while standing in Kenyan’s class one morning in the fall, when Ms. Dillon had invited parents to a “publishing party” to celebrate essays the children had written and edited.
“This class is the most diverse gifted and talented class I’ve seen,” said Ms. Echols, as other parents and children swirled around her.
She said that now her son was “best buds” with Lucas Pulsifer, who is white, and Nicholas Urena, who is Hispanic, and that they often arranged weekend play dates. “They represent what New York City is all about: a truly diverse melting pot.”
Minutes later, the party over, the parents began trickling out. Ms. Echols walked out with Lucas’s mother, Anna.
“We’re going to get coffee now,” she said, her arm hooked around the white woman’s elbow.
Correction: January 20, 2013
Because of an editing error, an article last Sunday about racial separation in gifted and talented classes in New York City’s public school system misstated the admissions procedure for Hunter College Elementary School and its residency requirements for applicants. The school uses a separate test for placement and is open only to children living in Manhattan. It does not require a score in the 97th percentile on the tests used by the department of education, and children from District 7 in the Bronx are not eligible to attend.
The focus on educating only EXCEPTIONAL/GIFTED students with the broad democratic education Americans have had for centuries is bad all around but as well as for our gifted citizens. We have embraced our gifted students and found mainstreaming students identified with high IQ actually works better for them in socializing----in allowing time to mature ----in creating choice in career paths-----and know what? Gifted students are found not to need extra enrichment----they are usually motivated to seek their own course of instruction.
So, what is all this attention to identifying-----tracking into controlled STEM-oriented education pathways all about? Of course it is only about which global corporation will capture that gifted child and they will see only a STEM career as valuable because that is where today's profit industries lie.
As 99% of US students are pushed to vocational tracked apprenticeship lower-tiered corporate campus education -----these 5% will receive all Federal funding that would have gone to special needs, low-income, equal protection programs-----
AND NONE OF IT IS NEEDED FOR THE GOOD OF THE GIFTED CHILD---IT IS ALL TIED TO WHICH GLOBAL CORPORATE CAMPUS CAN RECRUIT THE MOST GIFTED STUDENTS GLOBALLY.
Why geniuses don’t need gifted education
By Jay Mathews Columnist December 1, 2013
The father of one of my high school friends was part of Stanford psychologist Lewis Terman’s famous Genetic Studies of Genius project. This dad had been one of 1,528 California children with very high IQs who were followed for decades to see if they were as successful in life as they were smart on tests.
He was a nice man. He did well at his job. But he made no great discoveries as far as I know. There were more successful people with bigger salaries despite lower IQs in our town. Most of Terman’s other geniuses were much the same. After decades of data gathering, Terman concluded that “intellect and achievement are far from perfectly correlated.”
If high IQ scores are not reliable indicators of genius, what are? Advocates of gifted children hope schools can be designed to turn intellectual promise into world-changing creativity. Many of those experts admit that a lot of our gifted programs at the moment don’t add much. What those children get in an occasional pullout class is likely to be less interesting to them than their own research in their parents’ bookcases, kitchens, the local library and the Internet.
Talking to the experts leads me to think we should not be putting our faith in public schools to meet this need. Our schools have more than they can handle in helping other students become fully functioning adults. There may be something to the view that socially awkward geniuses need a safe place to be weird, but the better approach is to focus on stopping bullying of all kids. Public schools are mostly successful at finding people who know how to teach English, math, history and science, but we don’t know how to encourage creativity very well and might find it better to let the gifted do their own exploring.
Like any journalist, I have interviewed many bona fide geniuses, because they tend to make news. Their life stories suggest that such people are best left alone to educate themselves, as long as we make sure that they can get to all the riches of our culture and science and that we don’t require them to take grade-level courses that hold them back. Most geniuses, such as megabillionaire Warren Buffett (Wilson High School in the District) or Beach Boy Brian Wilson (Hawthorne High School in California), appear to have gone to fairly ordinary schools like the rest of us.
There are exceptions. In her 1977 book, “Turning On Bright Minds: A Parent Looks at Gifted Education in Texas,” Julie Ray profiled a Houston sixth-grader she called Tim. He was in an ambitious public school’s gifted-education program that would later be called Vanguard. Tim was reading dozens of books and had several science projects underway. He was surveying classmates in order to rate all the school’s teachers. He loved the school’s small group discussions, where he was free to share his wildest ideas. I read about Ray and her subject, Tim, in Brad Stone’s new book, “The Everything Store.” Tim’s real name was Jeffrey P. Bezos.
The future founder of Amazon.com and owner of this newspaper later graduated from a typical big American high school, Miami Palmetto. He found lots to do there without the help of a gifted program. That suggests that potential geniuses are getting as much useful stimulation in, say, regular high schools in Fairfax County as they are getting in Fairfax’s famous magnet, the Thomas Jefferson High School for Science and Technology.
I pray for a 21st-century Terman to do another genius study on kids like that. Take a sample of very bright Fairfax teens at Jefferson and similarly smart students at other Fairfax schools, then follow both groups for a few decades. Will they turn out differently? I don’t think so. Geniuses are made mostly by themselves. All schools can do is give them what they ask for and get out of the way.
I was reading a similar article written by VANDERBILT UNIVERSITY----all global IVY LEAGUES are building that pathway in our US cities deemed Foreign Economic Zones that place a high emphasis on that campus identifying the most gifted globally and bringing that child----and we guess parents---to these US campuses. The university is injected into these students lives from the start----their testing and evaluation in pre-school will lead to global executive boards deciding how, where, when, what career path that child will follow. That very gifted child----who will have all the ability to decide things for themselves in most cases----our Asperger students may need that parent----will be forced into a career path and global corporations want that path to be STEM-----FOR THEIR PROFITEERING.
Now, the 99% of citizens need LEADERS----our gifted often creatively are those folks often embracing the goals of the 99%----not so much the global 1%. Remember our SUPERMAN series where that gifted professor talented in STEM was always under threat of KIDNAP BY maniacal despots? Well, this is it mainstreamed in America.
IVY LEAGUE Johns Hopkins is of course doing the same in our public education system REFORM-----
Remember, in Asian Foreign Economic Zones global neo-liberal education corporations have created this hyper-competitive environment for all students ---and parents fight to get their children into these programs because they are the only pathway out of what are global factory----sweatshop employment. This is an example of STANFORD'S EDUCATION BUSINESS IN THIS ONE AREA. This is to where most of our Federal hundreds of billions of dollars in public K-12 funding will go.
What is GiftedandTalented.com?
Guided by ongoing research at Stanford University, GiftedandTalented.com provides innovative personalized programs that help students become advanced learners in Mathematics, English, and Science, including Computer Programming and Physics. Students work independently or with the support of a Tutor.
Who Can Benefit?
Kindergarten through 12th-grade students of all backgrounds can benefit from enrolling in our personalized courses. Whether supplementing school, preparing for tests or homeschooling, we accelerate learning.
Math & English Combined
Grades K to 7
This dual enrollment allows students to become advanced learners in two courses simultaneously: Redbird Mathematics: Advanced Edition and Language Arts & Writing, all at a discounted rate - the equivalent of 50% off the second course. Perfect for after school learning, summer learning, and homeschooling.
Grades K to 7
Math games, digital projects, and cool videos, oh my! A variety of instructional methods ensures student fun and learning. For students in grades Kindergarten through 7.
Language Arts & Writing
Grades 2 to 7
Students utilize innovative language technology to develop advanced reading and writing skills. Unlike any other program, this course provides students with error-specific writing feedback on sentences and paragraphs. For students in grades 2 through 7.
Grades 8 to 9
Students cover concepts including the real number system, solving equations and inequalities, and more in this foundational algebra course. For students in grades 8 and 9.
Thank you, and keep the comprehensive, innovative, and educational solutions coming.
Andie K, parent of a 4th grader
I absolutely LOVE this program.
It changes with the child's level of learning and comprehension.
And, I get GREAT reports.
Erin R, parent of 1st grader
The best online learning
program for talented kids!!!
Synthia H, parent of 2nd grader
Accelerate Learning with a Tutor
Students who use our Tutors finish 2+ grades ahead! Our courses offer tutoring services from dedicated experts who specialize in helping students become advanced learners. Our tutors provide unlimited support to students on each family's schedule!
What was sold as DEMOCRATIZING education several years ago by global Wall Street Clinton/Obama neo-liberals was the next step in completely deregulating our US K-12 public education with Obama through RACE TO THE TOP spending his entire career building that global technology for what will become the only access to education those 99% of global citizens will have. This will occur on global corporate campuses ------where a child will be tracked will be determined in the pre-K testing-----then that campus school will simply channel global education lessons like these KHAN ACADEMY to students.
With vocational apprenticeship tracking a child may be average or below and attend school until a 6th grade after which they will be sent to child labor apprenticeship in global factory settings----or they will continue to grade 8 after which they will do the same---a white collar sweat shop professional employment ----THAT $20-30 A DAY JOB.
All of these left progressive posing policies like citizen representation on school boards----like school choice---wrap-around-services-----all low-income students getting laptops----all fake -----far-right global Wall Street pols kill 99% of people----and their strong public education.
EDUCATION FOR THE 99%-----HOW MANY STUDENTS CAN BE TIED TO AN ONLINE COMPUTER LESSON PACKAGE? LOTS AND ITS ALL VERY CHEAP-----THAT'S CORPORATE SUSTAINABILITY.
The One World Schoolhouse: Education Reimagined
Paperback – Bargain Price, July 30, 2013
by Salman Khan (Author)
A free, world-class education for anyone, anywhere: this is the goal of the Khan Academy, a passion project that grew from an ex-engineer and hedge funder's online tutoring sessions with his niece, who was struggling with algebra, into a worldwide phenomenon. Today millions of students, parents, and teachers use the Khan Academy's free videos and software, which have expanded to encompass nearly every conceivable subject; and Academy techniques are being employed with exciting results in a growing number of classrooms around the globe.
Like many innovators, Khan rethinks existing assumptions and imagines what education could be if freed from them. And his core idea-liberating teachers from lecturing and state-mandated calendars and opening up class time for truly human interaction-has become his life's passion. Schools seek his advice about connecting to students in a digital age, and people of all ages and backgrounds flock to the site to utilize this fresh approach to learning.
In THE ONE WORLD SCHOOLHOUSE, Khan presents his radical vision for the future of education, as well as his own remarkable story, for the first time. In these pages, you will discover, among other things:
- How both students and teachers are being bound by a broken top-down model invented in Prussia two centuries ago
- Why technology will make classrooms more human and teachers more important
- How and why we can afford to pay educators the same as other professionals
- How we can bring creativity and true human interactivity back to learning
- Why we should be very optimistic about the future of learning.
More than just a solution, THE ONE WORLD SCHOOLHOUSE serves as a call for free, universal, global education, and an explanation of how Khan's simple yet revolutionary thinking can help achieve this inspiring goal.
CLUE-----HEDGE FUND MANAGER-------HARVARD MBA------this was one of the earlier TED TALKS-----that is the ONE WORLD global media outlet that only allows that 1% and their 2%----with guest 5% bring canned talking points forward to global 99%
'Thanks for joining us. I'm Diane Rehm. Harvard MBA and former hedge fund manager, Salman Khan has become an Internet sensation'.
IT'S ALL SO DEMOCRATIZING----ONLY WE ARE DISMANTLING THE MOST DEMOCRATIZING EDUCATION SYSTEM IN WORLD HISTORY TO CONTROL ALL INFORMATION PEOPLE GET IN ALL EDUCATION VENUES.
Wednesday, Oct 03 2012 • 11 a.m. (ET)
Salman Khan: “The One World Schoolhouse: Education Reimagined”
Salman Khan, founder of Khan Academy. Image used under Creative Commons from Flickr user ACEducation
Salman Khan is the founder of Khan Academy – a nonprofit that offers free online educational videos. In 2004, Khan was working at a hedge fund in Boston when he began tutoring his cousin Nadia in math. When other relatives and friends sought his help, he started recording videos and putting them on YouTube. Soon his growing popularity prompted him to quit his job and dedicate his time to the Academy. Today, the website offers more than 3,000 videos and practice exercises on everything from algebra to physics. Khan believes this technology can help empower teachers and allow students to learn at their own pace. Diane talks with Salman Khan on the current state of education and the power of online learning.
- Salman Khan founder of The Khan Academy.
Salman Khan talks at TED 2011:
I like this guy-----he is likely a Republican citizen not tied to the same education values of a left social Democrat like me----but we agree as to where this is going-----why it is so bad-----and how its goal is to make 99% of global citizens----COMMON. Nothing EXCEPTIONAL here folks------the cheapest vehicle to educate globally for the same vocations-----it takes every avenue to individualism----cultural uniqueness------spontaneity and creativeness-----exposure to broad experiences----and creates A HUMAN CAPITAL COG.
We see a parent with passion in this video-----I don't agree with some points-----when we here citizens saying they are going to strike out on their own----create their own schools----educate their own children at home or within a separate school system-----
GLOBAL WALL STREET WILL NOT ALLOW THIS----THIS STRUCTURE IS NOT AN OPT-OUT CHOICE----ALL CITIZENS WILL BE FORCED INTO THIS SYSTEM AS PART OF GLOBAL LABOR POOL TRAINING.
This is a long video in great depth---but done by a parent who really cares about public education----
Clint Richardson - Common Core, Agenda 21, And Global Privatization
Published on Dec 22, 2013The greater global picture of Common Core...
Common Core Standards are not only in schools, but are now standard in the military, FBI, CIA, and most other government agencies.
This Power Point lecture was given in November, 2013 at the Utah County Fairgrounds by Clint Richardson. Special thanks to Linda Oberhansley for organizing the event.
Other research on Common Core by Clint:
Please utilize the following links for total CORE immersion.
1- Read the Annual Financial Report for "CORE Education and Technologies" corporation:
***Previous years reports will have other valuable information
2- Explore the "CORE Education and Consulting Services" main International website based in India:
3- Learn who CORE's international corporate and government Shareholders are:
4- CORE learning tools for Autistic and other special needs children -- the workforce of the future: Computers and keyboards for autistic kids are learning on.
5- Dr. Rima Liabou video "Don't Delta Me, Dude!":
6- "CSCOPE" is CORE in Texas. This is a watchdog site:
7- CORE is essentially Agenda 21. Here is the Texas "School Transformation" website:
8- This comes from the "Public Education Visioning Institute", which is all Texas school superintendents literally proof of their conspiring to "Transform" public education into for profit private enterprise by implementing CSCOPE as part of "Common Core" model standards and best practices. They also admit the failure of their own education system. (Very Important):
9- Link to the Report issued by Public Education Visioning Institute called "Creating a New Vision for Public Education in Texas"... "Respectfully Offered by Superintendent Participants in the Public Education Visioning Institute":
For those who know IT and computer code, CORE's main function is data collection and management. This search page searches Texas CSCOPE and CORE programming:
Propagandist for special needs children:
Clint's Documentaries include:
Lethal Injection: The Story of Vaccines - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UioC6A...
We want to look at one global manufacturing corporation since Johns Hopkins is only just expanding into manufacturing as far as we know. UnderArmour took a patent and grew a global corporation a few decades ago. It has operated overseas in several Foreign Economic Zones in some of the worst of global slave labor nations. It has been tied to and expanded the Clinton global human capital distribution system with Johns Hopkins to include factories and distribution centers for its own corporations. UnderArmour may have on its GLOBAL CORPORATE CAMPUS-----a headquarters----a global garment factory----a global dye factory-----a global product plastics factory----a global sports equipment factory-----a global distribution center. Each one of these campus entities is filled with workers trained to do specific jobs. ONE WORLD ONE GOVERNANCE GLOBAL LABOR POOL EDUCATION will have lessons designed to meet each of these job categories specified to UnderArmour. Now, in Foreign Economic Zones around the globe cities and their citizens are identified for these jobs. A US city deemed Foreign Economic Zone like Baltimore will do the same. So, our Baltimore citizens tested in pre-K will have that global executive board decide that JOEY fits a profile for an UnderArmour salesperson-----BILLY fits that UnderArmour global dye factory worker-----and SUZY fits that global garment factory worker. Each of these Baltimore citizens will be tied to that UnderArmour campus school with the canned online lessons bringing them to the ability to do that job. Then UnderArmour at any time will decide to send JOEY----BILLY----SUZY to any one of its global corporate campuses around the world to be installed into that position. Then they can be distributed to any other UnderArmour campus around the world----throughout their lives. At each stage they will return to a corporate campus classroom for updates in training......AND THAT WILL BE THEIR EDUCATION. Citizens living in Malaysia---China---South Korea----Peru---Brazil where UnderArmour has campuses as well will be sitting in front of the same canned lessons at the same ages moved through the same positions and human capital distribution.THIS IS RACE TO THE TOP FOR THE 99%----cheapest method to train human capital for jobs.
Anyone thinking that today's US standards of labeling our students will apply to this mess-----like ADVANCED PLACEMENT STUDENT-----needs to WAKE UP--------there is NO LIPSTICK FOR THIS PIG.
UNDER ARMOUR GLOBAL OFFICE LOCATIONS
Under Armour’s Global Headquarters campus has been based in Baltimore, MD, since 1998. The impact of the Brand is visible throughout the entire city, including the new and evolving Harbor East neighborhood where UA’s first-ever Brand House store is located.
In addition to its Global Headquarters, UA also has thriving corporate office locations in Austin, TX, Denver, CO, Houston, TX, New York, NY, Portland, OR, and Toronto, Canada.
Additionally, the Brand has three distribution centers that operate out of the U.S. in Nashville, TN, Rialto, CA, and its first-ever “Distribution House” in Swan Creek, MD, less than 15 miles from its Global Headquarters. These operations are responsible for shipping and receiving UA’s product innovations with a Universal Guarantee of Performance.
Under Armour’s presence in Latin America continues to expand. It is the home of the Brand’s International Headquarters located in Panama City, Panama, with offices in Sao Paulo, Brazil, Santiago, Chile and Mexico City, Mexico.
Under Armour is rapidly building its Brand across Latin America through its partnerships with Chilean football club Colo-Colo, Brazilian fashion model Gisele Bündchen, Mexico football club Cruz Azul and Mexican boxer Canelo Alvarez.
Amsterdam, the capital city of the Netherlands, is home to Under Armour’s European Headquarters. The UA office is actually located in Amsterdam Olympic Stadium, host of the historic 1928 Summer Olympics. This regional team is focused on building the Brand across all of Europe, with additional offices in France, Germany, and the United Kingdom.
Since arriving in Europe, UA has developed world-class partnerships with the English football club Tottenham Hotspur and Scottish tennis world champion Andy Murray.
Under Armour’s offices in Asia represent the epicenter of its Footwear and Accessories business, focusing heavily on product development, sourcing, production and delivery, with locations in Guangzhou, Hong Kong and Indonesia, and Vietnam.
The Under Armour office in Shanghai is the regional headquarters for our rapidly growing Brand presence across Greater China, and was the launch site of UA’s first retail theater specialty store. This revolutionary retail environment places storytelling at the forefront through a multi-dimensional short film that immerses visitors in the brand’s world of making athletes better through passion and innovation.
Under Armour is also building its Brand “Down Under” with an office in Sydney, Australia.
The Brand has retail stores across the entire globe, featuring men’s, women’s and youth apparel, footwear and equipment. Under Armour’s retail locations include Brand House and Factory House locations that offer a full line of Under Armour products that make athletes look, feel and perform their best.