We shouted during OBAMA-ERA that all those privatized WRAP-AROUND services replacing our public school staff K-12 would lose those small businesses as a global corporation took over as GLOBAL CORPORATE SCHOOLS.
Below we see CHEGG doing just that. It is morphing into that AFTER TUTOR-----ONLINE HOMEWORK -------EXTRA CURRICULAR socio-psycho-teambuilding----learning method corporation.
We stated as well that the goal of MOVING FORWARD GLOBAL NEO-LIBERAL CORPORATE SCHOOLS K-CAREER----would be to price out much of our 99% WE THE CHILDREN and soak any parent having disposable income of more and more fees and costs for ordinary education all provided for FREE ------
'90% OFF Chegg Study promo codes & coupons September 2019
Chegg is an online study centre in United States that provides quality education to students by making numerous services readily accessible to them. They had taken online education to the next level by availing hundreds of subjects from the school and college level to their students'.
When FAKE ALT RIGHT ALT LEFT 5% freemason/Greek players pretend there is FREE 4 YEAR COLLEGE in the works---these are the corporations tied to global corporate campuses which will be providing those 4 years of on-the-job-apprenticeship to end our US HIGH SCHOOL and COLLEGE. This vehicle will take more of our US classrooms ----down to being PRE-K.
CHEGG becomes all those outsourced WRAP-AROUND service for schools touted as being small businesses for our city citizens and touted as being local/parent driven.
All this hype about SOCIAL BENEFIT from CLINTON/BUSH/OBAMA about these warm and fuzzy WRAP AROUND services was always tied to global CHEGG HUMAN RESOURCES CORPORATIONS-----the idea being having a CHEGG corporation providing PRE-K----through CAREER apprenticeship INTERNSHIP job training to replace our US PUBLIC K-UNIVERSITY.
'Do community schools and wraparound services boost academics ...
Do community schools and wraparound services boost academics? Here’s what we know. ... When looking at the effect of wraparound services on grades and test scores, those 19 studies come to a mix ..'.
It is indeed REAL CLEAR-----that these CHEGG GLOBAL HUMAN RESOURCES corporations are simply global human capital distribution system working for global corporations and will be the logistics for sending a TRAINED CHILD anywhere in the world to a FOREIGN ECONOMIC ZONE tied to the global corporation that child was ASSIGNED.
'Abel McDaniels is a research assistant for K-12 Education at the Center for American Progress'.
REAL CLEAR EDUCATION .COM is a FAKE NEWS MEDIA OUTLET tied to CLINTON NEO-LIBERAL Center for American Progress
Wraparound Services: the Next Phase of Education Reform
By Abel McDaniels
September 26, 2017
A slice of data released in a survey earlier this month shows surprising support for an underappreciated approach to education reform: providing students with more wraparound school services like therapy and medical care.
More than 85 percent of all Americans believe schools should provide mental health service, according to the latest PDK poll, a survey of the public’s attitudes about the nation’s schools.
What’s more, 79 percent think schools should provide general health services to students who need them, according to the survey. Support for wraparound services was even high across party lines, with 68 percent of Republicans—and 65 percent of “strong conservatives” —agreeing that schools should provide them.
Wraparound services are a critical but often overlooked component of school reform. The past decade of education reform rightly focused on setting standards for what students should know and designing systems to hold teachers, schools and districts accountable for students meeting expectations.
But this traditional policy framework often neglected some of the out-of-school factors that impact student learning. Poverty presents serious challenges for learning and education. Children who grow up in poverty are more likely to have been exposed to lead, for example, which can negatively affect their development. Poor communities also have higher incidents of childhood asthma. And low-income children are more likely to have undiagnosed and untreated eyesight problems and are more likely to eat food that is not nutritious.
These types of out-of-school factors put low-income students at huge disadvantages before they even start school, and studies show that such achievements gaps only grow over time.
Wraparound services, like counseling or food support, help address issues of poverty, and when these services are in place, student achievement often soars.
A comprehensive study of 7,900 students who attended schools that connected families to support services makes this clear. These students started with low grades but had much higher outcomes at the end of fifth grade than students who attended other schools. The achievement gap between English Language Learners and native speakers was also eliminated by third grade. Students who received services attended school more and dropped out of high school at half the rate of students who did not.
But simply providing students with services—like eye screening or health care—is just the floor. Some innovative schools have taken steps to fuse academics with wraparound supports. Known as community schools, these institutions aim to serve as neighborhood hubs that educate students and provide families with whatever additional services they may need.
Geoffrey Canada is well-known for founding the Harlem Children’s Zone. The organization consists of multiple charter schools and a pipeline of programs that provide students and families with support from a child’s cradle to college continuum. Today, the Zone serves 12,000 students and families across ninety-seven city blocks.
The success of the Harlem Children Zone inspired President Obama’s campaign proposal for the Promise Zone initiative, which sought to replicate Mr. Canada’s success in cities across the country. Several planning and implementation grants have been awarded, but the initiative has not enjoyed the necessary funding or political support from Congress.
To be sure, wraparound services are not a substitute for a classroom of well-trained teachers and challenging curriculum in a fairly-funded school. These other components of school reform remain important. Community schools can also be pricey; the Promise Zone grants awarded in 2016 ranged from $2 to $6 million.
But research shows how impactful wraparound services can be, and now we have evidence that the public deeply supports these schools too. Lawmakers should take note by increasing investments in the Student Support and Academic Enrichment Grants, and 21st Century Community Learning Centers in Title IV of the Every Student Succeeds Act.
Put more exactly, the majority of Americans believe that the next phase of education reform must help improve student supports and other forms of wraparound services.
When we educate broadly, we can decades in advance where public policy is going, we look across multiple academic disciplines------this is why we bring ST JEROME into our discussions of early Christian religious public policy.
Erasmus was that revolutionary wanting to kill a DARK AGES CATHOLIC CHURCH allowing only religious study, work training, poverty of oppression. Erasmus fought to change EDUCATION from being only for PRINCES-----AKA ROYALTY----and bring broad humanities to 99% of WE THE PEOPLE. Soon after Erasmus came the JESUITS and those humanist schools. At same time PROTESTANT schools were created to do the same thing. Back then HUMANISM was tied to MORALS AND ETHICS with people believing in GOD----but not believing in DARK AGES CATHOLICISM.
Sadly, LOYOLA today being the product of those HUMANIST Jesuit schools-----have morphed back into being DARK AGES TRANSHUMANIST schools bringing 99% of WE THE STUDENTS back to those DARK AGES CATHOLIC school structures----
'His Times of London article of January 5, 1995, was unabashedly entitled, “It’s the Elites Who Matter.”'
NO HUMANITIES FOR YOU-----SAYS CHEGG GLOBAL HUMAN RESOURCES CORPORATIONS-----AKA OUR CORPORATE SCHOOLS.
REAL LEFT SOCIAL PROGRESSIVES are still those GOD and HUMANITIES -----that ST JEROME of AGE OF ENLIGHTENMENT---but our LOYOLA JESUITS we think have gone to the dark side------NOT RELIGIOUS and ending HUMANITIES STUDIES FOR ALL.
'DARPA, Google, Chemtrails and Silicon Valley Jesuits | TABU ...tabublog.com/2017/06/18/darpa-google-chemtrails...
DARPA, Google, Chemtrails and Silicon Valley Jesuits'.
ERASMUS during the Renaissance did indeed create a FAKE history for JEROME----turning an early Christian scholar into a STEM DOCTOR-----not really who JEROME was.
This is not all of the article---we encourage people to GOOGLE this and read all of it.
GLOBAL CHEGG CORPORATION says-------forget about all that Jesuit/Protestant humanities based education ---we are going back to 1000BC where children worked as young as they could being only trained to do a job.
So, OBAMA and Clinton neo-liberals killed ERASMUS and humanist education for all----returning to educating only PRINCES-----while bringing back ST JEROME this time to promote TRANSHUMANISM as CHRISTIAN----JESUS AND GOD would love that says this new version of ST JEROME.
Definitely not ERASMUS nor early Christian JEROME.
ONLY THOSE GLOBAL 1% PRINCES NEED APPLY FOR ALL THAT BROAD HUMANIST K-UNIVERSITY EDUCATION.
Erasmus of Rotterdam:
The Educator’s Educator
This article is reprinted from the Summer 1995 issue of FIDELIO Magazine.
Fidelio, Vol. IV, No, 2. Summer 1995
Erasmus of Rotterdam,
The Educator’s Educator
by Donald Phau
At the beginning of this year, an influential member of the British ruling class, Lord Rees-Mogg, publicly called for limiting education to the top five percent of the population, the same level of literacy as existed before the Fifteenth-century Renaissance. His Times of London article of January 5, 1995, was unabashedly entitled, “It’s the Elites Who Matter.”
Lord Rees-Mogg’s desire to turn back the clock of history is not an idle threat. In the United States, Conservative Republicans, led by Newt Gingrich, have already proposed to massively slash educational programs. Lord Rees-Mogg and his friends would like to return to the age of feudalism, when rulers had little to fear from their subjects—the remaining ninety-five percent of the population, mainly ignorant peasants, who slaved in the fields from dawn to dusk.
THIS IS 1995 CLINTON ERA ---CLINTON NEO-LIBERALS AND BUSH NEO-CONS RESPONSIBLE FOR INSTALLING FEUDALISM.
The foundations for Lord Rees-Mogg and Gingrich’s so-called “Conservative Revolution” can be found in the writings of the ancient Greek philosopher Aristotle. For example, in the Politics, Aristotle asserted that some men were born to be the masters, with access to education, while others would be their slaves. For the first half of this millennium, the citadel of Aristotelian thought was Venice; and thus it was that Venice, following Aristotle’s teachings, became Europe’s center for trafficking in human slaves.
The Fifteenth-century “Golden Renaissance” in Italy overthrew the hegemony of Aristotle, leading to the creation of France as the first true nation-state, or commonwealth, under the leadership of Louis XI. This “Christian humanist” revolution was led by adherents of Aristotle’s enemy Plato, including such figures as Petrarch, Nicolaus of Cusa, Leonardo da Vinci, and Erasmus of Rotterdam. Beginning in the Fourteenth century, this Platonic Christian outlook was reflected in northern Europe by the work of the Brotherhood of the Common Life, and later by the Oratorian Order. The Brotherhood, founded by Gerhard Groote (1340-84), was dedicated to mass education--including education of the poor—from an early age. Both Nicolaus of Cusa and Erasmus of Rotterdam were educated in schools established by the Brotherhood.
This article will focus on the Christian humanist Erasmus of Rotterdam, who played a critical role in shaping events from the end of the Renaissance to the beginning of the Protestant Reformation. His lifetime, from 1469 to 1536, places him in the center of both events.
There was little of significance that occurred in Europe at the time, which Erasmus did not influence. Most readers have heard, or have used themselves, such phrases as, “He has one foot in the grave,” or “He’s fighting with his own shadow.” Few people today know that these, and many other everyday sayings, were first made popular in The Adages, a book written by Erasmus in 1500. Erasmus wrote at the time that printing was just becoming widespread; Gutenberg had printed the first book, the Bible, just fifty years earlier, and next to the Bible, The Adages was likely the best known book of the time.
The printing and mass circulation of Erasmus’ books led to an unprecedented leap in literacy throughout Europe. In addition, he collaborated with leading intellectuals in England and Spain to begin a revolution in teaching methods, by developing a school curriculum which remains to this day a foundation for education. In the area of statecraft, Erasmus was in personal contact with most of the monarchs of Europe. He dedicated many of his works to them, explicitly calling upon them to emulate Plato’s “philosopher king.” Simultaneously, his works addressed the wider population on the issue of “national sovereignty,” and following Nicolaus of Cusa, who had lived a half-century before him, he foresaw the necessity for an educated population to freely elect its own government. Lastly, he was in the forefront of a movement to reform the institution of the Catholic Church, and end its corruption and toleration of superstition. And when Venice pitted Luther’s Reformation and the Church against one another in their effort to destroy the heritage of the Renaissance, Erasmus, virtually alone, fought for a reconciliation based on a Platonic Christian dialogue.
If the reader looks at a graph of world population (Figure1),
you will see that until the Fifteenth century, population levels remained below 500 million. It has only been in the last approximately 550 years, since the Renaissance, that man has developed the means to enable him to sustain a growth in population to the level of over 5 billion today.
There were two key developments during the Renaissance which made this growth possible. The first was the 1439 Council of Florence, organized by Cardinal Nicolaus of Cusa, at which Cusa succeeded in uniting the Eastern and Western divisions of the Church in an agreement around the doctrine of the Filioque—that the Holy Spirit proceeds equally from the Father and the Son—which expressed and reaffirmed for Christianity the essential idea of man’s creation in the image of God (imago viva Dei), separate and above the beasts. The Council was a recognition of the creative potential unique to man, and paved the way for the breakthroughs in art, literature, science, and music, as represented by such geniuses as Leonardo da Vinci and Raphael, that were followed in the next century by Erasmus.
The second key development was the creation of the first sovereign nation-state, or commonwealth, under France’s Louis XI, who reigned from 1461 to 1483.
Physical economist Lyndon LaRouche, in numerous locations, has emphasized the importance of Louis XI’s France for the development of modern civilization. LaRouche writes that the nation-state, for the first time in history:
FORGET LYNDON LAROUCHE!!!!!!
Fostered and protected the development of the family;
Took responsibility for education of the citizenry, according to the principle that all men are equally created in the image of God; and
Promoted the advancement of science and technology.
Erasmus the Educator
Erasmus was born in 1469, when Louis XI still reigned in France, and when one of the Brotherhood’s most important teachers, Thomas à Kempis, was still alive. During Erasmus’ lifetime, Leonardo da Vinci was creating his great masterpieces and discovering laws of physics which would later lead to such inventions as the airplane and submarine. Also during Erasmus’ life, led by the nation-states of France and England, growing numbers of the population benefitted from higher levels of education and increasing standards of living. And yet, by the time of his death, the Protestant Reformation and the Catholic Counter-Reformation that followed it--both masterminded by the Venetians—had split the Church, emptied the universities, and opened the doors to civil and national wars. The Venetian oligarchy, which had been nearly defeated by the 1508 League of Cambrai, had by the end of the century re-established itself with a new center of political and financial power in its new outpost in the British Isles.
Erasmus was an educator of educators. Throughout his life he encouraged his followers to dedicate themselves to teaching. His students established dozens of schools throughout Europe, and his voluminous writings addressed a wide variety of subjects, from manuals for teaching young children to translations (see box on Erasmus’ Translation Project) of classical Greek writers.
A letter to a young teacher, written in 1516, exemplifies Erasmus’ commitment to lift Europe’s “ninety-five percent” out of ignorance. The teacher, Johann Witz, had written Erasmus, explaining that he was considering quitting teaching and moving instead to a higher paying and more influential position, perhaps at court. Erasmus vehemently objected:
To be a school master is an office second in importance to a King. Do you think it a mean task to take your fellow-citizens in their earliest years, to instill into them from the beginning sound learning and Christ himself, and return them to your country as so many honorable upright men? Fools may think this is a humble office; in reality, it is very splendid. For if even among Gentiles it was always an excellent and noble thing to deserve well of one’s country, I will not mince my words: no one does more for it than the man who shapes its unformed young people, provided he himself is learned and honorable—and you are both, so equally that I do not know in which of them you surpass yourself. ... An upright man who is above all temptation is what that office needed, a man devoted to his duties even if he is paid nothing.
Erasmus had been born in Holland, then part of the Holy Roman Empire, which included Germany, Spain, and part of France. His father was a learned man, a copier of manuscripts, but he never married and became a priest before Erasmus was born. Despite having little money, Erasmus’ parents were determined to see him and his older brother educated. At an early age, perhaps seven or eight, Erasmus was a chorister at the city of Utrecht and, as one historian reports, was trained by a famous organist by the name of Obrecht.
At the age of nine, under their father’s direction, Erasmus’ mother took him and his brother 150 miles from home, to enroll them in the Brotherhood of the Common Life school in Deventer. Deventer was famous for its school, which had been the home of the Brotherhood’s founder, Gerhard Groote, over a hundred years earlier.
Author William Wertz describes the teaching at one of the Brotherhood schools, as designed by Groote: “Imitating Christ themselves, the teachers ... preferred loving warnings to harsh punishments, sought to inculcate a love for individual research by letting pupils delve among the classics rather than confine themselves to text books, and taught the boys the use of their vernacular language. Poor pupils were given money for books, ink, and paper they needed in school. ... It was the practice of the Brotherhood in their educational work, which centered on the Bible, to write down sayings or excerpts from the Bible or from various Fathers of the Church. The collection of such sayings was called a rapiarium. The basic idea is that the way to self-improvement is to think about an appropriate saying which helps one to overcome whatever obstacle to creative thinking arises in one’s mind at the moment it occurs.”
The Brotherhood’s teaching method encouraged their students to study the original writings and discoveries of the ancient Greeks. Rather than using formalisms to be learned by rote, the child was urged to replicate the actual creative thinking of the original authors. Erasmus’ schooling by the Brotherhood would be reflected in his writings throughout his life.
The Brotherhood’s method was known as the “New Devotion,” or “Modern Piety.” It included translating Greek and Hebrew writings into Latin and the vernacular languages, then copying them by hand or, as the technology developed, by printing. From 1460 to 1500, 450 books were printed at Deventer alone. (One of Erasmus’ adult friends, Georgius Agricola, would discover new technologies in metallurgy, allowing for the rapid advancement in printing.)
The Brotherhood schools sought out promising young boys from poor families, such as Erasmus. One of their teaching methods for learning the alphabet was to use a short parable from the Bible beginning with each letter. This manner of learning is reflected in Erasmus’ first major work, The Adages, which when printed in 1500 contained eight hundred sayings and proverbs, many translated from the Bible. By 1521, Erasmus had expanded the work to 3,411 proverbs, and it had had an incredible sixty-two separate printings. Popular sayings in The Adages, in addition to those mentioned earlier, included: “As many men, as many minds; To chomp at the bit; To leave no stone unturned; Where there is smoke there is fire; A necessary evil; Know thyself; Many hands make light work; To mix fire and water.”
Erasmus did not limit his educational concerns only to teachers, but he included parents and children as well. He wrote a short book, On the Civility of Children’s Conduct, actually addressed to children—the first such effort by a major author in the history of literature. Although On Civility contains such admonitions as, “A dripping nose is filthy. To wipe it on a cap or sleeve betokens a peasant, to put it off on the arm or elbow is the mark of a vendor of salt herring. Better to use a handkerchief and turn away the head,” it is not merely a manual of etiquette or discipline. Instead, it is a discussion of how children must learn to live in a world of adults. With great gentleness, Erasmus teaches that although adults may coerce without real understanding, nevertheless discipline is important, because your outward demeanor reflects the inner state of your mind. And, of course, Erasmus engages the children with characteristic irony, as when he tells them not to stare, and then reports how Socrates was thought to be stupid, because he stared all the time. Or when he instructs that, “To laugh at everything is silly. To laugh at nothing is stupid.” (see box on Erasmus and Public Education)
Erasmus’ early writings, such as The Adages, were directed to educating the population in how to use language to communicate higher ideas. Just as Classical composers use simple folk themes as the basis for more complex musical composition, Erasmus took parables and sayings to develop the language. Lyndon LaRouche, in an article on metaphor, has emphasized that creativity can never be communicated by a mere exchange of information.5 Today’s adoration of the computer and the “information superhighway” is totally unfounded, since information alone can never explain how one individual can express a new discovery to another. One must seek through ambiguity to create a crisis in the mind of the reader or listener, such that he is provoked into conceptualizing as a conscious “thought-object” the new idea being conveyed.
For Erasmus, truth was not in the literal meaning of words, but always lay outside the obvious. For example, when one says that “he is chomping at the bit,” an Aristotelian might believe that the person is actually biting on a bit, as horses do. Yet, even a peasant could understand that the expression has nothing to do with actual horses or bits.6
Plato’s use of the Socratic method as a means to provoke such “crises in thinking,” is seen in his use of the dialogue form. In a work which followed soon after The Adages, entitled The Colloquies, Erasmus adopted the method of dialogue, in order to give the reader greater access to the creative process. This was directly opposed to the common Aristotelian method then practiced in the schools, which taught by diatribe and invective, literally hitting the student over the head until he “learned” something.
Erasmus’ writings, printed in the thousands, reached new layers of the population, who, for the first time, discovered how—in the words of the Eighteenth-century poet Percy Shelley—language can convey “profound and impassioned conceptions respecting man and nature.” Erasmus would later come under fire from academic circles, for daring to address his efforts to this new audience. Responding to his friend but oftentime critic, Guillaume Budé, on Oct. 28, 1515, Erasmus wrote:
Again, the risk you display before me, that by publishing so many minor works I shall get myself a bad name, does not move me in the least. Whatever in the way of notoriety rather than glory has been won for me by my publications, I would peacefully and willingly dispense with, if I could. Men’s spheres of interest differ and their strength lies in different fields, nor have all men the same natural bent. For my own part, these superficial subjects are the field in which it suits me to philosophize, and I see in them less frivolity and somewhat more profit than in those themes which the professional philosophers find so pre-eminent. Finally, the man whose sole object is not to advertise himself but to help other people, asks not so much is it grand, my chosen field: As it is useful? ... I write these things not for your Persius or your Laclius but for children and dullards.
Both Erasmus’ parents had died when he was fourteen years of age. His guardians, immediately seeking to rid themselves of the expense and responsibility of raising him, decided that he should become a priest, and withdrew him from the Deventer school. He entered a monastery not at all to his liking. He then moved to a second, Augustinian monastery (although both monasteries were run by the Brotherhood), which he found more congenial. In a letter he wrote: “To a man of learning, what felicity the monastery affords.” Here he discovered manuscripts of St. Augustine, and he became the butt of jokes by his fellow monks when he took a stack of the manuscripts with him to bed every night to read. Many years later, Erasmus would edit the first complete works of St. Augustine.
Erasmus took his vows and was ordained in 1492. Later in life, he requested and received a Papal dispensation releasing him from his monastic obligations, as well as allowing him to wear secular dress. Yet, despite the savage attacks later launched against him from the Venetians within the Church, he never violated his vows. Like Nicolaus of Cusa, he publicly criticized the Church for its corruption, but never abandoned his loyalty to the Church and the Papacy.7
In 1499, Erasmus traveled to England, where he became close friends with a group of humanists around John Colet, a trusted adviser to King Henry VII and a teacher of the soon-to-be famous writer and statesman, Thomas More. Colet inspired Erasmus to begin an intensive study of Plato and other ancient Greeks. In a letter, Erasmus wrote that upon attending a lecture of Colet on St. Paul’s Epistles, he “could hear Plato himself speaking.” With this comment, Eramus acknowledges that Plato’s philosophy laid the foundation for Christianity. (Eramus was known to refer to Plato’s teacher on occasion as “St. Socrates.”)
Colet had earlier traveled to Italy, where he studied the writings of Plato at the Academy of Florence under the sponsorship of the Medici family. When he returned to England, he gathered a circle of friends, including Thomas More and John Fisher, of whom some, such as Thomas Linacre and William Grocyn, had also been to Italy and studied Greek. Linacre, who was the physician to Henry VII, founded the Royal College of Surgeons, translated medical texts, and wrote a text on Greek grammar. More would become one of Erasmus’ closest friends. Eramus dedicated his In Praise of Folly to the English statesman: the word “folly” is a pun on More’s name, which in Greek is “moria.”
The ‘Genius Project’
Erasmus traveled to England numerous times, including for one extended stay of six years. While in England, he joined forces with Colet to develop a methodology of teaching which would revolutionize all future children’s education. Their method would virtually guarantee that any young boy or girl would become a genius. The “experiment” was conducted in a school established at the house of Thomas More, and was later disseminated more widely by Colet’s founding of St. Paul’s School in London.
Erasmus, Colet, and More were joined in England by the Spaniard, Juan Vives. Vives, a student of the great Spanish reformer Cardinal Ximenes, was counselor to Catherine of Aragon, the wife of Henry VIII. Vives was an educator, and an avid anti-Aristotelian. He was one of the first people to call for a public tax to fund education, and for every township to have a school with salaries for teachers paid from the public treasury.
The efforts of this European-wide network focussed, in particular, on the education of women. Up until this time few women—even the daughters of monarchs—were educated in anything more than simple domestic tasks, such as sewing. According to author Pearl Hogrefe in her book entitled The Sir Thomas More Circle,8 More established “the first practical experiment to educate women.” This was not “home schooling”: More sought out and brought into his house the best scholars representing his own worldview. His own daughter Mary, for example, was tutored by Erasmus. Later, she would produce the first English translation of one of Erasmus’ Latin writings.9
This network was welded together by their explicit belief that all human beings, no matter what rank or background, could be successfully educated. As Erasmus wrote in the The Education of A Christian Prince, it is the duty of the prince to see that “all youth, both boys and girls” are educated in either a public or private school.
Erasmus, reflecting the influence of Brotherhood teachings, was against the prevailing use in schools of blame and punishment, e.g., floggings, as a means to educate. We see his insight into child development in the following:
By the nature of man, we mean, as a rule, that which is common to man as such: the characteristic ... of being guided by reason. But we may mean something less broad than this: the characteristic peculiar to each personality, which we call individuality. Thus one child may show a native bent to mathematics, another to divinity, another to rhetoric or poetry, another to war. So strongly disposed are certain types of mind to certain studies that they cannot be won to others; the very attempt ... sets up a positive repulsion ... . The master will be wise to observe such natural inclinations, such individuality in the early stages ... since we learn most easily the things which conform to it.
In Erasmus’ works on education, author Hogrefe says he makes a number of suggestions which would become standard in modern classrooms, such as teaching based on “kindness, praise, judicious recreation, play and games, teaching by stories, fables, jokes and graphic devices of all kinds.” Erasmus’ proposed classroom was full of charts and tables, with quotations in large print on the walls. Proverbs would be on cups and written over the doors and windows. He considered pictures especially helpful. Games were played with older children as judges. He proposed baking biscuits in the form of letters of the alphabet for the younger children, who could only eat them when they knew the letter.
Colet asked Erasmus to write the curriculum for a new school—St. Paul’s—which was granted a license from the King in 1510, and still exists today. Erasmus responded to Colet’s request with De Ratione Studii. In it, Erasmus says that both Latin and Greek must be mastered so that the student can read the authors in the original, rather than a summary or translation.
Colet also asked Erasmus to be the first headmaster of St. Paul’s, but Erasmus declined, and William Lily became headmaster instead. Lily, Colet, and Erasmus then jointly collaborated in writing a grammar text, which continued to be used in English schools through the Eighteenth century. It was used by the school Shakespeare attended as a boy.
Both More and Erasmus were explicit in their rejection of the “drill and grill” method of learning. Erasmus insisted that the student first read and speak the language, and that the grammatical rules were secondary. In his De Ratione Studii, he wrote:
whilst a knowledge of the rules of accidence and syntax is more necessary to every student, still they should be as few, as simple and as carefully framed as possible. I have no patience with the stupidity of the average teacher of grammar who wastes precious time in hammering rules into children’s heads. For it is not by learning rules that we acquire the power of speaking a language, but by daily intercourse with those accustomed to expressing themselves with exactness and refinement, and by copious reading of the best authors.
Three hundred years after Erasmus wrote his curriculum calling for the study of languages, astronomy, mathematics, history, and poetry, similar ideas would form the basis of the Humboldt educational reforms of the Weimar Classical period in Germany, which were the basis for the development of Nineteenth- and Twentieth-century science.
In 1521, Erasmus wrote to his friend Budé, conscious of the tremendous impact his ideas were having:
Although a short time ago, love of literature was considered useless in any practical life or as an ornament, now there is hardly a man who considers his children worthy of his ancestors unless they are trained in the good letters. Even in monarchs themselves a great part of royal splendor is lacking when skill in literature is lacking.
The Aristotelian forces wedded to the feudality in England did not idly accept the education “revolution” occuring in their midst. A letter to Erasmus from Colet in 1512 reveals that the teaching methods at St. Paul had come under fire:
A certain bishop (Fitzjames of London) who is held to be one of the wiser sort, has been blaspheming our school before a large concourse of people, declaring that I have erected a worthless thing, yea, a bad thing—yea (more to give his own works) a temple of idolatry, which, indeed, I fancy he called it because the poets are to be taught there. At this, Erasmus, I am not angry, but laugh heartily.
In another letter during this period, Thomas More writes Colet on the impact of St. Paul’s School:
I am not surprised that your excellent school is arousing envy. For, as the Greeks came forth from the Trojan horse and destroyed barbarous Troy, so scholars are seen to come forth from your school to show up and overthrow the ignorance of others.
It was during Eramus’ first trip to England in 1499 that Colet urged him to learn ancient Greek. By the time Erasmus returned to England in 1509, he had mastered the language so well that he taught Greek at Cambridge. Throughout his later life, Erasmus sought to spread the learning of the classical languages, especially Greek, Latin, and Hebrew, and traveled throughout Europe setting up colleges dedicated to their study.
‘The Militant Christian’
On returning from England, Erasmus wrote his second most popular work, the Enchiridion Militis Christiani (Handbook for the Militant Christian), modelled in part on the Enchiridion of Faith, Hope, and Charity of St. Augustine. This book is his direct intervention into the new “middle class” that was developing in the cities, and was one of the first secular works designed to teach the basics of Christian morality. The initiative for the book came from a friend, a woman, whose weapons-merchant husband had become a profligate womanizer. She asked Erasmus to write something to put her husband back on the straight path. The word “Enchiridion” has a double meaning, meaning both a “manual” but also a short sword, or dagger, symbolizing the book should be used as a weapon to fight off evil.
The Enchiridion established Erasmus as a leading Christian spokesman. It summarized his beliefs, including: (1) his love of Plato and contempt for the works of Aristotle; (2) his belief that faith in God must always be combined with doing good works for your fellow man, and (3) that man, as differentiated from the beasts, was created in the image of God.
In the Enchiridion, Erasmus attacks the heart of the problems in the Church: its adherence to Aristotle and its rejection of Plato. Thus, he writes, regarding the “pagan” philosophers, “a sensible of the pagan poets and philosophers is a good preparation for the Christian life. ... Of all philosophical writings I would recommend the Platonists most highly.” Later, he writes of Aristotle and the problems Aristotle’s writings had caused the Church:
I find that in comparison with the Fathers of the Church, our present-day theologians are a pathetic group. Most of them lack the elegance of language, and the style of the Fathers. Content with Aristotle, they treat the mysteries of revelation in the tangled fashion of the logician. Excluding the Platonists from their commentaries, they strangle the beauty of revelation. Yet no less an authority than St. Augustine prefers to express himself in the flowing style that so enhanced the lovely writings of this Platonist school.
Between 1514 and 1518, eight Latin editions of the Enchiridion were printed. It was translated into English in 1519, German in 1520, Dutch in 1526, and Polish in 1535. The book was especially celebrated in Spain.
Erasmus’ attacks on Aristotle would earn him the deep hatred of the Venetians, who, beginning in 1526, used their influence to have parts of his works banned in Catholic and Protestant countries alike. One of the last holdouts was Rome itself, which, however, placed sections of his works on the Church’s “Index of Prohibited Books” in 1559, after Erasmus’ death.
In the Enchiridion, Erasmus fully expresses his faith in the goodness of his fellow man and, as always, the necessity to teach: “In regard to the soul we are capable of divinity, that is, we may climb in flight above the minds of the very angels themselves and become one with God.” Later, he criticizes the Church:
Charity does not consist in many visits to churches, in many prostrations before the statues of saints, in the lighting of candles, or in the repetition of a number of designated prayers. Of all these things, God has no need. Paul declares charity to be the edification of one’s neighbor, the attempt to integrate all men into one body so that all men may become one in Christ, the loving of one’s neighbor as one’s self. Charity for Paul has many facets; he is charitable who rebukes the erring, who teaches the ignorant, who lifts up the fallen, who consoles the downhearted, who supports the needy. If a man is truly charitable, he will devote, if needs be, all his wealth, all his zeal, all his care to the benefit of others.
Keep all this in mind, my brother in Christ, and accept this advice; Have only contempt for the changeable crowd with its ways. To be holy, ignore demands of your senses. ... Do not fear the crowd to the extent that you dare not defend the truth.
You say that you love your wife simply because she is your spouse. There is no merit in this. Even the pagans do this, and the love can be based on physical pleasure alone. But, on the other hand, if you love her you see the image of Christ, because you perceive in her His reverence, modesty and purity, then you do not love her in herself but in Christ. You love Christ in her. This is what we mean by spiritual love.
In 1509, Erasmus traveled to England for the second time, where he would stay for five years, much of it at the home of his friend Thomas More. Erasmus had been introduced to then-Prince Henry, the future Henry VIII, during his first trip to England. More had brought him, unannounced, to the palace, where he met the King’s whole family and later wrote a poem to the Prince.
When Erasmus finally returned to continental Europe in 1514, he was pressed to become a counselor to the then-sixteen-year-old Prince Charles, the future Holy Roman Emperor Charles V. After a year of hesitation, he accepted the position, which was his only court appointment. His acceptance, however, was on condition that he was neither obliged to travel with the King nor to attend regular court functions. Erasmus feared intimate involvement with court life; instead, his approach was to give the monarch the highest moral example to follow, principally through his writings, and, no doubt, by direct conversation when possible. In doing this, he kept aloof from day-to-day court intrigues, an area in which the Venetians were so adept at manipulation. When his friend, Thomas More, rose to prominence in Henry VIII’s government, Erasmus criticized him for dropping his humanist studies. Erasmus continued this criticism even after More’s death.
It was during that intervening year, that Erasmus wrote On the Education of A Christian Prince, dedicated to Prince Charles.
This work confirms that during his time in England, Erasmus had decided with More to embark on a plan to shape the future of Europe, by both educating its future monarchs as well as the general population.11 Recognizing the limitations of hereditary rule, Erasmus wrote in The Education ... : “[T]he chief hope for a good prince is from his education, which should be especially looked to. In this way, the interest in his education will compensate for the loss of the right of election,” and continued:
Nothing remains so deeply and tenaciously rooted as those things learned in the first years. ... It is fruitless to attempt advice on the theory of government until you have freed the prince’s mind from those most common, and yet most truly false opinions of the common man.
Although he dedicated the book to Prince Charles, Erasmus’ real audience would be the population of Europe. The Education ... was printed and sold throughout Europe. Like Nicolaus of Cusa before him, Erasmus sought to give the population an understanding of their own responsibility for the nation as a whole. This meant that they first must know the requirements of leadership, as a prerequisite of government by popular election. In a future book, Erasmus, like Cusa, would openly state that “succession should be ... by general election by the people.”12
In The Education ... , Erasmus utilizes the prince as a model for the type of individual the reader himself must strive to become. He writes:
The happiest man is not the one who has lived the longest, but the one who has made the most of his life. The span of life should be measured not by years but by our deeds well performed. ... It is the duty of a good prince to consider the welfare of his people, even at the cost of his own life if need be. But that prince does not really lose his life in such a cause.
Erasmus then more fully develops the concept of the “philosopher king,” citing Plato directly and attacking Aristotle (although without naming him:
You cannot be a prince, if you are not a philosopher; you will be a tyrant. ... And so Plato is nowhere more meticulous than in the education of the guardians of his Republic, whom he would have surpass all the rest not in riches and jewels and dress and ancestry and retainers, but in wisdom only, maintaining that no commonwealth can be happy unless either philOsophers are put at the helm, or those to whose lot the rule happens to have fallen embrace philosophy—not that philosophy I mean which argues about elements and primal matter and motion and the infinite, but that which frees the mind from the false opinions of the multitude and from wrong desires and demonstrates the principles of right government by reference to the example set by the eternal powers.
Erasmus had, diabolically, dedicated his book not to the head of a nation-state—such as the King of France—but to the future Emperor Charles V, whose empire extended over vast territories, including peoples with many different languages and customs. Yet, his purpose was to teach Charles and the population the superiority of the nation-state over empire. Erasmus proposes some practical means whereby wars could be prevented and the sovereignty of nations fortified:
One suggestion in this regard would be to have royal families marry within their realms or at least within adjoining territories. This would lessen the problem of royal succession. It should be illegal to sell or alienate territories, as if free cities were up for sale. Kingship does not imply absolute ownership. ... There should be some kind of an agreement that once the borders of an empire have been determined, they must remain inviolate and no alliance can be allowed to alter or destroy them. Once this has been established, each rule shall be extended toward the improvement of the realm, to the end that the ruler’s successors shall find it a richer and better place in which to dwell. In this way each and every territory will prosper.
Erasmus goes further, challenging the reader and the Prince alike to reject the principles of empire, presenting arguments that actually undermine the very Hapsburg empire which Charles would shortly lead. He explains to Charles:
[T]he prince should first know his own Kingdom. This knowledge is best gained from a study of geography and history and from frequent visits through his provinces and cities. Let him first be eager to learn the location of his districts and cities with their beginnings, their nature, institutions, customs, laws, annals, and privileges. ... Next, the prince should love the land over which he rules, just as a farmer loves the fields of his ancestors, or as a good man feels affection toward his household. He should make it his especial interest to hand it over to his successor, whosoever he may be, better than he received it. If he has any children, devotion toward them should urge him on; if he has no family, he should be guided by devotion to his country. ... He should keep constantly in mind the example of those rulers to whom the welfare of their people was dearer than their own lives.
He then elaborates a series of proposals for economic development and infrastructure, as the means whereby the prince could improve his country. He writes that a prince should visit
his cities (civitates) with a mind to improving them. He should strengthen the places that are unsafe; adorn the city (civitas) with public buildings, bridges, colonnades, churches, river walls, and aqueducts. He should purify places filled with deadly pestilence either by changing the buildings or by draining the swamps. Streams that flow in places of no advantage he should change to other courses; he should let in or shut out the sea as the need of his people demands; he should see that abandoned fields are cultivated so that the food supply is increased and that fields which are being cultivated to little advantage are farmed in other ways—for example, by forbidding vineyards where the wine does not warrant the trouble of the farming, but where grain could be grown.
His last proposal, that vineyards should be forbidden “where grain could be grown,” is an undisguised slap in the face to the oligarchs, who prided themselves on growing the grapes for vintage wines. Erasmus, who was himself well known as a connoisseur of good wine, obviously thought that it was more important to grow food for a hungry population than to have a few aristocrats sipping wine at their castle banquets.
Plato vs. Aristotle
To this day, there are perhaps merely a handful of people who have any understanding of what the Sixteenth-century Reformation and Counter-Reformation were all about. The period is usually characterized as “the Catholics versus the Protestants,” as if the study of history were like choosing football teams in the Superbowl. Needless to say, any student of history who accepts this premise will never understand what really happened, because the division of the population along religious lines was a planned Venetian conspiracy. A real division did, indeed, exist—but it was not the religious one. Instead, the real fight was between an evil Venetian oligarchy, on the one hand, and Christian humanists such as Erasmus, who believed all men to be created in the image of God, on the other.
Erasmus was a threat to Venetian power, because he saw that by developing its powers of reason, mankind could rightfully assume responsibility for self-government. The monarch’s right to rule would then be derived solely from the consent of the governed. This same idea had been voiced eighty years earlier by Nicolaus of Cusa.
In The Education ... , Erasmus clearly sketches the two alternatives. Citing from Aristotle’s Politics, he attacks the idea of the master-slave relationship:
[Y]et Aristotle believes that the rule of the King is finest of all, and calls it especially favored of the gods because it seems to possess a certain something which is greater than mortal. But if it is divine to play the part of the King, then nothing more suits the tyrant than to follow the ways of him who is most unlike God. ... But a prince should excel in every kind of wisdom. That is the theory behind good government. It is the part of the master to order, of the servant to obey. The tyrant directs whatever suits his pleasure, the prince only thinks what is best for the state.
Erasmus then states the principle which, 250 years later, would be the basis for our American Declaration of Independence: “Nature created all men equal, and slavery was superimposed on nature, which fact the laws of even the pagans recognized.” He then cites the Gospel of Matthew 23:10: “There is only one Master of Christian men.”
Finally, Erasmus introduces the concept of “free will,” to further demolish Aristotle’s endorsement of the master-slave relationship. Addressing the young Prince Charles directly, he writes:
[W]hoever protects the liberty and standing of your subjects, is the one that helps your sovereign power. God gave the angels and men free will, so that He would not be ruling over bondsmen, and so that they might glorify and add further grandeur to His Kingdom. And who, now, would swell with pride because he rules over men cowed down by fear, like so many cattle?
Unbeknownst to most people, there were actually two “Reformations.” The history books tell us of the Venetian-sponsored “Reformation” led by Martin Luther. This “Reformation,” however, was actually intended to, and did destroy, the real reform movement that was ongoing within the Church. This real “reformation,” was led by Erasmus and a group of collaborators throughout Europe, and in many ways was a continuation of the attempts at reform undertaken by Nicolaus of Cusa at the onset of the Renaissance. In England, there was John Colet and Thomas More, in Spain, Cardinal Ximenes and Juan Vives, in France, the first publisher of the collected works of Nicolaus of Cusa, Lefebvre D’Estaples, and many others.
Erasmus’ works, such as The Colloquies and In Praise of Folly, were aimed at freeing the population from the grip of pagan superstitution which had become rampant throughout the Catholic Church, and especially within various religious orders of the Church.
One of Erasmus’ most popular early works, The Colloquies,14 was written in the form of Socratic dialogues modeled on the writings of Plato. In the dialogue entitled “The Religious Pilgrimage,” for example, he pokes fun at the worship of relics. He writes of the visit of pilgrims to a holy shrine, where each one is given, for a small contribution, a small fragment of wood from the original cross on which Jesus was crucified. The pilgrims, Ogygius (“Og”) and Menedemus (“Me”), at first naively accept the fragment as real, but in further discussion they begin to question their own thinking. Erasmus writes:
Og: And so they tell us of the Cross, which is shew’d up and down both in publick and in private, in so many Reliques, that if all the Fragments were laid together, they would load an East India Ship and yet our Saviour carry’d the whole Cross upon his shoulders.
Me: And is not this a wonderful thing too?
Og: It is extraordinary I must confess; but nothing is wonderful to an Almighty Power; that can increase everything to his own pleasure.
Me: ’Tis well done however to make the best on’t; but I’m afraid we have many a trick out upon us, under the Masque of Piety, and Religion.
Og: I cannot think that God himself would suffer such Mockeries to pass unpunisht.
Me: And yet what’s more common than for the Sacrilegious themselves (such is the Tenderness of God) to scape in this World without so much as the least check for their Impieties ... .
In another dialogue, “The Abbot and The Learned Woman,” the reader is introduced to Magdalia, a woman who has in her library many books in Greek and Latin, which she has taught herself to read. Visiting her is an Abbot, Antronius, who is against the education of women, and, for that matter, is also against the education of the monks under his supervision, for fear that they might learn to counter his orders. Through the dialogue, Erasmus develops for the reader an understanding of why literacy of the population, and especially of women, is necessary. At first the Abbot expresses doubt, but Magdelia turns the tables on him by engaging him in a Platonic dialogue on the question of the pursuit of wisdom.
In 1511, Erasmus wrote the book that would get him into the most trouble with the Aristotelians within the Church. The book, In Praise of Folly, is a devastating attack on every level of the Church hierarchy. No one is spared, from the Pope, to the bishops, to the scholars and monks, down to even the common parishioner. Speaking through the voice of “Folly,” Erasmus saves his most savage criticisms for the scholastic theologians, writing:
They are protected by a wall of scholastic definitions, arguments, corollaries, implicit and explicit propositions; they have so many hideaways that they could not be caught even by the net of Vulcan; for they slip out of their distinctions, by which they also cut through all knots as easily as with a double-bitted axe from Tenedos; and they abound with newly invented terms and prodigious vocables ... they explain ... the most arcane matters, such as by what method the world was founded and set in order, through what conduit original sin has been passed down along the generations, by what means, in what measure, and how long the perfect Christ was in the Virgin’s womb, and how accidents subsist in the Eucharist without their subjects.
And of the monks, Folly says:
For one thing, they reckon it the highest degree of piety to have no contact with literature, and hence they see to it that they do not know how to read ... they do everything by rule, employing ... the methods of mathematics ... . There must be just so many knots for each shoe and the shoe-string must be a certain color; the habit must be decked with just so much trimming ... and one must sleep so many hours. Who does not see that all this equality is very unequal, in view of the great diversity of bodies and temperaments ... .
Of course, Erasmus could use humor as an even more devastating weapon against his targets. In a dialogue, a youth visits a whore, in order to convert her by means of Erasmus’ teachings:
“Erasmus!” says she. “He is half a heretic, I hear.”
“From whom did you hear that?”
“From my clerical customers!”
Before Luther made his appearance, Erasmus’ attacks on the Aristotelians had drawn the ire of men in high positions both within the Church and the universities. His method of dealing with formal, pedantic scholarship, was to hold it up for ridicule and scorn, as his young correspondent and admirer in France, François Rabelais, also did.15
At Louvain University, a stronghold of Venetian influence in Church layers, Erasmus received a warning from the University director Martin Van Dorp in 1514, which foreshadowed the troubles ahead. Wrote Dorp:
Astringent pleasantries, even when there is much truth mingled with them, leave a bitter taste behind. In the old days, everyone admired you, they all read you eagerly, our leading theologians and lawyers longed to have you here in person, and now, lo and behold, this wretched Folly, like Davus, has upset everything. Your style, your fancy, and your wit they like, your mockery they do not like at all, not even those of them who are bred in the humanities. And that is the point, Erasmus my most learned friend: I cannot see what you mean by wishing to please only those who are steeped in humane studies. Is it not better to be approved rather than rejected, even by rustic readers?
In his response, Erasmus displayed his contempt for what he called the “modern” theologians—the Aristotelians:
But the modern kind [of theology] (to say nothing of the portentous filth of its barbarous and artificial style, its ignorance of all sound learning, and its lack of any knowledge of the tongues), is so much adulterated with Aristotle, with trivial human fantasies, and even the laws of the Gentiles, that I doubt whether any trace remains, genuine and unmixed, of Christ. What happens is that it diverts its attention over much to consider the traditions of men, and is less faithful to its pattern. Hence the more intelligent theologians are often obliged to express before the public something different from what they feel in their own hearts or say when among friends. ... What can Christ have in common with Aristotle? What have these quibbling sophistries to do with the mysteries of eternal wisdom?
When Luther first came to Erasmus’ attention, around 1517, Erasmus greeted his calls for reform of the Church warmly. Initially, Erasmus thought that Luther’s efforts at reform were similar to his own. Even as Luther’s attacks on the Church grew more violent, Erasmus continued to seek a dialogue around reform between Catholics and Luther’s followers. It was only in 1524, more than seven years after Luther began to publicly attack the Church, that Erasmus published his first criticism of Lutheranism with his book On the Freedom of the Will. By this time, there was no doubt that Luther was not interested in reforming the institution of the Church, but in destroying it, as Venice had intended from the beginning.
The end result was that the humanists’ reform movement was hopelessly splintered. Erasmus’ future attempts at reform caused him to be branded a “heretic” by the Catholics, and when he sought to have an open discussion within the Church, Protestants accused him of being a “Papist,” defending Papal repression.
When discussing EDUCATION PUBLIC POLICY we always include MEDIA and JOURNALISM in that education field. Today, our US 99% WE THE PEOPLE black, white, and brown citizens------get almost ALL of our ADULT CONTINUOUS LEARNING----from TV, SOCIAL MEDIA, NEWSPAPERS.
REAL LEFT SOCIAL PROGRESSIVES have shouted against global banking 5% freemason/Greek FAKE MEDIA/JOURNALISTS during CLINTON/BUSH/OBAMA because the US university journalism schools went NEO-LIBERALISM-----AKA PRO-GLOBAL CORPORATIONS.
Below we see how even those US universities schools of journalism will be replaced by GLOBAL CHEGG HUMAN RESOURCES AND EDUCATION corporations. Now, a student trained in journalism in these global education structures will never hear about REAL US BEST IN WORLD HISTORY WE THE PEOPLE JOURNALISM.
That would be CITIZENS' OVERSIGHT MARYLAND ----and we are being HIT---MADE PORN------TOLD TO BE SILENT AND STAY INSIDE OUR STANFORD TOTAL PRISON MODEL ----LIVING SPACE.
- The Law of Journalism and Mass Communication 6th edition ...www.chegg.com/textbooks/the-law-of-journalism... COUPON: Rent The Law of Journalism and Mass Communication 6th edition (9781506363226) and save up to 80% on textbook rentals and 90% on used textbooks. Get FREE 7-day instant eTextbook access! Skip Navigation
- Writing and Reporting for the Media 12th edition - Chegg.comwww.chegg.com/textbooks/writing-and-reporting... COUPON: Rent Writing and Reporting for the Media 12th edition (9780190649425) and save up to 80% on textbook rentals and 90% on used textbooks. Get FREE 7-day instant eTextbook access!
- 2019 Journalism Internships | Apply Now | Chegg Internshipswww.internships.com/journalism Find 2019 Journalism Internships New York, NY Washington, DC Chicago, IL Los Angeles, CA San Francisco, CA Atlanta, GA The best way to bridge the gap between finishing school and getting a job in journalism is to have an internship.
- 2019 Journalism Internships in Maryland | Apply Now | Chegg ...www.internships.com/journalism/maryland Journalism summer internships in Maryland are pretty common, but don't expect to be in charge at the end of your internship! Usually, you’ll have to work from the bottom up, but interns are much more likely to get a job offer from the employer they’re interning with.
Of course EVERYONE believes global CHEGG EDUCATION corporations are only looking out for STUDENTS FIRST.
CHEGG HUMAN RESOURCES AND EDUCATION CORPORATIONS
OverviewChegg is the leading student-first interconnected learning platform, which is on-demand, adaptive, personalized, and backed up by a network of human help. It is the Smarter Way to Student and it is transforming the way millions of students learn by reconnecting the link between learning and earning through tools and services that support students throughout their educational journey. Our mission is simply to help students save time, save money, and get smarter in order to improve the overall return on educational investment. Visit www.chegg.com for more information.
Executive NewsEducation in the Era of TechnologyDuring the 10 years I have been at Chegg, we have witnessed a dramatic change in the higher education system. From the cost, curriculum and student demographics, the industry has been forced to evolve to the new realities. Huge change brings even bigger challenges to address the needs and demands of today’s students who are very different than they were even just a few years ago.
At Chegg, we too have evolved to take advantage of new technology and new realities to help solve the biggest pain points that students face and to be their biggest advocate. We have worked hard to realign the education industry by focusing on students first. And we are making a serious impact.