"I know no safe depository of the ultimate powers of the society but the people themselves; and if we think them not enlightened enough to exercise their control with a wholesome discretion, the remedy is not to take it from them, but to inform their discretion by education. This is the true corrective of abuses of constitutional power." - Thomas Jefferson 1820

"There is a growing technology of testing that permits us now to do in nanoseconds things that we shouldn't be doing at all." - Dr. Gerald Bracey author of Rotten Apples in Education

Search This Blog

Showing posts with label Sebelius. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Sebelius. Show all posts

Tuesday, August 7, 2012

And More On Bullying

The Department of Education, at its annual anti-bullying summit, unveiled an ad campaign, co-sponsored by the Ad Council and the Free to Be Foundation, advising kids to speak up if they see bullying at school. To stay silent is to be complicit in the bullying.

Actually, the ads don't say that last part, but since this is an annual summit it can be assumed that it will continue to be held for many years. And since it is organized by the DoEd, who looks for continual improvement, or value added, it is not a leap to think that in a few years that's how they will interpret a child's failure to get involved in a bullying situation. Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius did say, “We are all responsible for our children’s safety, and no one can afford to be a bystander.”

Rather than deal with conjecture, however, lets take a look at the people involved in this summit. It included lawmakers, educators and government officials. Government officials included and Secretary Sebelius and Education Secretary Arne Duncan. Their goal is to develop a national strategy that "ensures a safe and healthy learning environment for students."

Sebelius told the summit, “Bullying is not just a harmless rite of passage, or an inevitable part of growing up. It’s a systematic situation that threatens the health and well-being of our young people. It’s destructive to our communities and devastating to our future.”

Ok, raise your hands if you were never subject or witness to bullying as a child. I don't see many hands there. The fact is, bullying has been a part of growing up since man decided to live in groups. It is found in every single culture on the planet though it is almost never seen as desirable behavior.

Apparently Ms. Sebelius has not done much reading on the adolescent brain. If she had, she would know that not only is adolescence a time of increased hormonal activity which can affect decision making and impact impulsive behavior, but it is also a time when society begins to demand more from children.  They are given doses of freedom and responsibility that can be very unnerving if the child hasn't matured enough to handle either of those things. The natural immature instinct to cover for that fear is to try to make someone else appear weaker or further behind in development. Bullying is fear masked as a power struggle. It can be done so easily because the immature brain actually cares more about what others think than the adult brain does.  Bullying tactics just work better on the young brain.

A Temple University study  used functional magnetic resonance imaging scans on teenagers and adults to determine "if there are differences in brain activity when adolescents are alone versus with their friends." The findings suggest that teenage peer pressure has a distinct effect on brain signals involving risk and reward, helping to explain why young people are more likely to misbehave and take risks when their friends are watching. It also explains why children are likely to bully kids if they know others are watching. There is the perceived reward of elevated status.

Having children intervene or speak up about a bullying incident would only work if a significant majority of kids present did so. But you have to factor in the social fear that is endemic to young children which will keep them from being one of the first ones to speak up.  That is a very high hurdle to overcome.  It would be great if they would unite against the bullies, but I'm not holding my breath.

But if bullying is so prevalent and has been around so long, why the intense focus on it now? DoED says they feel the need to act because of a recent string of high profile suicides by students who were later revealed to have been bullied.  Potential 24 hour connectivity through technology has also increased opportunities for bullying. They are also highly concerned about bullying directed against students perceived to be gay or lesbian.

By this reasoning, bullying because of red hair or thick corrective lenses is not as bad as bullying because of sexual orientation. Come on people, either bullying is inherently wrong or it isn't.

Given the long history of bullying, the question they should be asking isn't, "How do we get kids to stop bullying" but rather, "Why do some children see suicide as the only way out of bullying?" What has broken down in society or the school system that makes children feel powerless?

The Washington Post covered this summit. Nowhere in the article is the idea of the victims standing up to the bullies themselves mentioned.  Could this be one of the reasons children feel powerless? Children are still told to bring in an adult to solve the problem. Those adults are bound by school policy which is sometimes woefully misguided, punishing the victim as well as the bully.  Could this be a reason children see suicide as the only way out? The list of things that are offensive is growing daily and is not posted on the school walls. Does this lack of clear, non-moving boundaries make children feel unstable enough to consider suicide?  To get the right answer, you must ask the right question.

A note about one of the co-sponsors of this ad campaign. The Free to Be Foundation has been around since 1973 which develops and markets education material that challenge stereotypes. The group includes high profile entertainers like Marlo Thomas, Alan Alda and Mel Brooks. Their foundation
seeks to ensure children’s wholeness as human beings: their right to nuturing (sic) care from women and men; their right to schools, homes and a society that are free from descrimination (sic) based on sex, race, culture, class or any condition of birth; their right to nonsexist, multiracial education; and their right to grow up in a positive, diverse, supportive setting that encourages independence.
This bit of pablum could receive its own post.  It is generously sprinkled with nice words (even if they are misspelled) that entertainers like to get behind.

They seem tremendously enamored with the idea of Rights. I'm not sure if they understand rights must be protected or that the denial of rights can be punished.

They would like to make it a right to receive care from men and women. So when the daycare only has women employed, can we file a discrimination case for denying my child the right to a male provider?  Can I refuse to let my child be in the classroom if there is only a male teacher? If I am unfortunate enough to be born into a wealthy family who is able to provide generously for me, will you punish those who call me spoiled rich kid, or who demand that I pay more than everyone else, when the circumstance of my birth is nothing I could help?  Can they even explain what a nonsexist multiracial education is?  You have a right to grow up in a positive, diverse, supportive setting???

As Inigo Montoya would say, "You keep using that word. I don't think it means what you think it means."

The ads will start in October.

Saturday, May 12, 2012

More Unnecessary Duplication and Expansion at DOEd

The proliferation of federal employees is like a rodent infestation problem.  You can attack one nest to eradicate them, but if you don't plug the holes where they are coming into your house, more are bound to appear and multiply.

The President embarked on a campaign to reduce waste in the federal government by eliminating duplication in federal agencies. Good news/bad news there. Less spending yes. Creation of a behemuth agency with no potential for redress also a possibility.  We've already seen how that works out over at EPA.

Education was an area found with many opportunities for cutting waste. For instance, the GAO found:
  • Thirteen agencies fund 209 different science, technology, engineering and math (STEM) education programs - and 173 of those programs overlap with at least one other program.
  • At least 15 major financial literacy programs - including three new ones established by the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act. 
The Administration has tried to enact efficiencies.  Last year they, along with Congress, addressed four of the GAO's 81 problem areas, and worked on 60 more, but duplication still exists.

And while they are busy getting rid of these overlapping programs, Arne Duncan is over at the DOEd coming up with new ones.  This week he and Kathleen Sebelius met with the Healthy Schools Campaign, a nonprofit group based in Chicago, and Trust for America’s Health to consider "a few small changes they believe could improve students’ academic and physical well-being and work to close achievement gaps." (Ed Week)

Among those changes are:
  • The Education Department should expand the work of the office of safe and healthy students and appoint a deputy assistant secretary to the office so it is better equipped to handle emergency situations, such as an outbreak of the H1N1 flu, and provide guidance to states, school districts, and universities.
  • The department should appoint a school nurse consultant who can share information with state school nurse consultants and promote school health services and school nursing.
Duncan is looking to expand the DOEd into the area of health, completely ignoring the fact that we have a Center For Disease control who already has plans for infectious disease outbreaks that are implemented through the already existing public health service.  A clear case of unnecessary duplicative federal programs and an equally unnecessary expansion of the role of the department of education.

Funding a consultant at the federal level to promote school nursing and school health services is an ironic twist since many schools are having to cut their nurses or share them because there isn't the funding available for them. How is it our federal government has money for stuff like this in education when our local schools do not?

Further down the list of recommendations is this beauty:
  • The department should identify best practices for training teachers about standards related to health and separate standards for integrating health into data tracking and school accountability. Health and wellness also should become part of the criteria for competitive-grant programs for teacher and principal training, parent-engagement strategies, and state longitudinal data systems.
Here is another pathway for getting your private health information into the SLDS. The fact that the government will already have access to your health information through the mandatory electronic medical record system implemented a couple years ago should make this bullet point unnecessary. Are they perhaps going after the health data that doesn't make it into that system because people aren't going to the doctor for it. The fact that it says the school will now be accountable for student health is extremely worrying. DOEd will hold out the carrot of competitive grants to get schools to stand in line to create this system. Will the teacher training include training to spot unreported health issues so they can be entered into the SLDS?  Doesn't that make your teacher also your health spy?

Additional recommendations include changing the rules to allow schools to receive Medicaid funding for all health services they provide (necessary for the expansion of the Community Schools Program).  HHS has already written, but not implemented, that rule. Then there's the National Prevention Council, led by members of President Obama’s Cabinet, who want to explore the potential roles that schools can play in supporting children’s health and wellness. Keep in mind it's just a short skip and a hop from "supporting" to "overseeing" which would make parents and their pediatrician secondary players in children's health.

The financial watchdogs need to be on capitol hill asking the question "Doesn't DOEd need to follow the administration's mission to avoid duplication of federal programs?  Where do they expect to get the money for these new positions and programs?  How do they justify an expansion of their role beyond education like this?"

All these recommendations seem to fly directly in the face of Mr. Obama's mission to reduce government duplication of effort. Someone needs to show the administration they have a hole over at the DOEd that needs to be plugged.  Perhaps Mr. Duncan and Ms. Sebelius didn't get the memo about not recreating existing programs.  Or maybe they did get the memo, just a different one.  Perhaps their memo said that they would be the foundation of the new behemuth agency for Human Development that will be responsible for all aspects of human growth, from birth to death. Somehow that doesn't make me feel any better.
Site Meter