Public school

Latest news on public school

NBC's Todd falsely claimed 9th Circuit "wants to get rid of the Pledge" of Allegiance

On the October 2 edition of MSNBC's Hardball, NBC political director Chuck Todd falsely claimed that the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit "wants to get rid of the Pledge" of Allegiance. In fact, in the case that Todd was referring to, Newdow v. U.S. Congress, a three-judge 9th Circuit panel did not decide that the entire Pledge of Allegiance was unconstitutional, but rather "h[e]ld that ... the 1954 Act adding the words 'under God' to the Pledge ... violate[s] the Establishment Clause" of the First Amendment. As the 9th Circuit noted, before the 1954 act, the Pledge of Allegiance was: "I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the Republic for which it stands, one Nation indivisible, with liberty and justice for all." The court did not find anything unconstitutional about the remaining language of the pledge. (The Supreme Court subsequently vacated the 9th Circuit's decision, on the grounds that the plaintiff, Michael Newdow, did not have standing to bring the case.) Todd made his comment while discussing Gov. Sarah Palin's response to this question from CBS Evening News anchor Katie Couric: "What other Supreme Court decisions do you disagree with?" In addition, during the discussion, host Chris Matthews falsely suggested that the Supreme Court has "outlaw[ed] prayer in public school." Palin, Matthews said, has "never heard of the Brown case, she's never heard of 'separate but equal' being outlawed by the Supreme Court, never heard outlawing prayer in public school, never heard of any of the Supreme Court decisions like Dred Scott." In fact, as Media Matters for America has noted, the Supreme Court's 1962 Engel v. Vitale decision and successive cases in the field did not prohibit all prayer in public school; rather, Engel barred state-sponsored prayer. As the Supreme Court stated in its 2000 decision in Santa Fe Independent School District v. Doe, "[N]othing in the Constitution as interpreted by this Court prohibits any public school student from voluntarily praying at any time before, during, or after the schoolday. But the religious liberty protected by the Constitution is abridged when the State affirmatively sponsors the particular religious practice of prayer." From the October 2 edition of MSNBC's Hardball with Chris Matthews: MATTHEWS: Let's take a look at Sarah Palin the other night -- last night on CBS with Katie Couric. She was asked about the Supreme Court and showed very little knowledge of that topic. Let's take a look. [begin video clip] COURIC: What other Supreme Court decisions do you disagree with? PALIN: Well, let's see. There's -- of course, in the great history of America, there have been rulings that there's never going to be absolute consensus by every American. And there are those issues, again, like Roe v. Wade, where I believe are best held on a state level and addressed there. So, you know, going through the history of America, there would be others, but -- COURIC: Can you think of any? PALIN: Well, I would think of any, again, that could be best be dealt with on a more local level, maybe I would take issue with. But, you know, as a mayor and then as a governor and even as a vice president, if I'm so privileged to serve, wouldn't be in a position of changing those things, but in supporting the law of the land as it reads today. [end video clip] MATTHEWS: I'm dying. I'm dying, Chuck. I mean, it reminds me of the president's press secretary that didn't -- never heard of the Cuban missile crisis. She's never heard of the Brown case, she's never heard of "separate but equal" being outlawed by the Supreme Court, never heard outlawing prayer in public school, never heard of any of the Supreme Court decisions like Dred Scott. None of them came to mind. TODD: And you know what's going to frustrate some social conservatives? She comes from a state that is a part of the most liberal circuit court in the country, the 9th Circuit, the circuit that makes conservatives crazy, the circuit that wants to get rid of the pledge, the circuit that wants to -- MATTHEWS: San Francisco. TODD: Exactly. Alaska's part of that circuit. In fact, they wish they weren't, and they have judges that live in Fairbanks. And had she pivoted the answer, had she said, "You know what? I'm not going to sit here and tell you how many Supreme Court cases I can recite. I can tell you what -- how frustrating it is to deal with the liberal 9th Circuit." Can I just tell you, conservatives would have loved it, the conservative elites would have loved it, because it would have shown some, some knowledge on that point.

Support schools directly with DonorsChoose!

BB is pleased to participate in this year's DonorsChoose blogger challenge to support high-need public schools in the US. DonorsChoose is a bottom-up platform to link donors with classrooms that need very specific things, from books and furniture to computers and musical instruments. Former teacher Charles Best came up with the brilliantly simple idea: individual teachers ask for the things they need, and individual donors choose what they want to help make happen! Charles helped Boing Boing pick ten classroom projects that we're hoping you'll join us in supporting. For example, a high poverty middle school is seeking help to print the Spring issue of their school newspaper. One "post-Katrina" school is hoping for a new digital piano for music classes. A 7/8 grade charter school with limited funds could really use a video camera for a Digital Arts program. I hope you'll check out this list of projects and consider helping out, even with just a few bucks! And if there are other projects on DonorsChoose that you prefer to support, please mention them in the comments and they'll get added to the BB page on the site! Thanks so much! DonorsChoose: Boing Boing Challenge...

Review: God's Choice: The Total World of a Fundamentalist Christian School

God's Choice: The Total World of a Fundamentalist Christian School, reviewed by Michael Lorenzen. (This review is from 2002. It used to reside on a now defunct website. I am republishing it here as I believe it may be of interest to some on the Web.)Alan Peshkin wrote God's Choice: The Total World of a Fundamentalist Christian School in the 80s. Nonetheless, the forces that shaped the forming and operation of the anonymous "Bethany Baptist Academy" are still very much an issue today. While new possibilities such as charter schools give parents more control over the education of their children, only private endeavors can possibly offer a parent from a Christian Fundamentalist background the type of schooling that Peshkin described today. And the appeal for some goes beyond the escape from the secular world. The school that Peshkin described has all the elements of a successful school: institutional unity of purpose, a dedicated faculty, strong discipline, rigorous homework, and committed parents. As Bethany Baptist Academy is probably not alone in its success, it is useful to ponder the implications of the success of the fundamentalist private school.Bethany Baptist Academy has no confusion as to the mission that drives it. The goal is to prepare students to be successful in a world that they intend to be apart from. "Separate from the world-in it but not of it" is the driving principle. Students should come to be "saved", lead wholesome lives, witness their faith to non-believers, and at the same time maintain their distance from the secular world. And, the student has to be taught to do this while they also learn to interact and live in a secular world that will daily challenge their lifestyles. Both the faculty and parents of Bethany strongly believe in this purpose and the message in constantly reinforced in all aspects of the curriculum and at home.This type of schooling is bound to bother some educators. Students are not taught to value viewpoints that differ from the biblical interpretations of their teachers. Critical thinking skills are only sharpened to question in biblically and politically correct tones. Cultural diversity is not valued when most religious perspectives (and all but one sexual one) are taught to be incorrect. Further, state regulations for schools are ignored. This is problematic to those who believe in teacher certification and state assessment of scholastic achievement of students. The success and proliferation of schools such as Bethany is a direct challenge to many educators.Although there are some limits, most laws ultimately uphold the right of the parent to decide what is best for their own children. This exercise in parental involvement has lead many to home school children, send their kids to private schools, and more recently lead to the development of charter schools. It is no surprise that Fundamentalist Christians are exercising their parental rights to educate their children in ways that fit their cultural views. The public schools are not supportive of the fundamentalist way of life. In many ways, public education is open and willing to embrace every form of diversity in the world with the exception of western religion. Further, it teaches many things such as situational ethics and evolution, which the fundamentalists view as being diametrically opposed to their beliefs. Attempts to get public schools to address their concerns are usually unsuccessful and often result in the petitioning party being portrayed as a right wing zealot or nut by the teachers and local media. It is no wonder that fundamentalists consider the curriculum of schools to be a religion in and of itself called "secular humanism" and their withdraw from public education seems to be a rational response to this hostile religion.Much to the surprise of many educators, the fundamentalist approach to schooling in Peshkin's book works. In addition to "schooling" the child in religious issues, Bethany is successful in teaching academic subject matter. Bethany students were supposedly doing well on assessment tests. Doubtlessly, the students were able to read and had a good grasp on many scholarly subjects. From reading Peshkin's book, every indication was given that the school was doing a good job educating in academic subject matter. If this is the case, why shouldn't parents consider this type of schooling if it appeals to them and they can afford it? If the fundamentalist school can give a superior spiritual education and at least a good academic education, it is very logical that fundamentalist parents will choose these schools when they can.Some concern for this type of schooling is in order even from a fundamentalist perspective. If students are not exposed to competing ideas, they will not get the kind of education needed to deal with many issues. If the student never goes to movies, has limited TV exposure, and has a heavily censored curriculum at school, how will the student deal with people who have been exposed to other ideologies and believe them? Without a wider exposure, the student will be at a disadvantage when engaging in debate with non-believers. This could cause some to ultimately question their faith in the face of a charismatic "debate" opponent or hamper their ability to make conversions. From a secular view, this type of "sheltered" education is even more problematic. Someday these children will grow up, vote, and take part in the decisions that they are not truly fully educated about. All issues will be one-dimensional to these students and compromise will be difficult for them to engage in causing even more problem in this diverse society.The library at Bethany Baptist Academy is a good example of this. The "librarian" engaged heavily in censorship. (Although it is worth noting this individual may have lacked the credentials to be called a librarian.) When she discovered a chart showing the evolution of man, she glued the pages together so those students could not see it. What was she thinking? Every one of her students will at some point be exposed to similar charts or illustrations of evolution. How can the student effectively argue against evolution if they do not understand the concept they are arguing against?Public schools need to seriously consider the success of schools such as Bethany. Parents can and will pull their children out of traditional public schools and put them in charters, private schools, or educate them at home. The public schools must look attractive to families from strong religious backgrounds. This in many cases will prove impossible when dealing with the most extreme members of these groups. However, more moderate or lukewarm families may stay in the public schools if their religion is acknowledged in a positive manner. If controversial subjects such as birth control and situational ethics are eliminated or covered in a less objectionable way, the public schools may not lose as many students. Finally, the public schools must realize that groups such as Christian Fundamentalists themselves add to diversity. A diverse curriculum includes them as well.Peshkin has written one of the best education books this writer has ever read. It was a pleasure to read about Bethany Baptist Academy even if I was bothered by some of what I learned. Regardless of what one may believe, this type of schooling works. Peshkin was very successful in translating his experiences into writing. Rather than fear this kind of school, educators can learn much by studying them. I have no doubt that traditional public education will continue to shrink in the face of charters, home schooling, and tuition tax credits. More schools like Bethany will appear. Educators need to take them seriously from a scholarly and non-hostile viewpoint.