Did You Think Your Kindergartner Would Have to Worry About Malware?

Here is an article from "National Cyber Security" writing how you need to keep your personal data safe as your kindergartner uses his/her iPad in school:

*******************

I was chatting with a friend of mine whose 5-year-old twins start school this year. She was telling me about the list of school supplies they need: pencils, crayons, paper, iPad..

Say again?? Yep, she said iPad. It was a new policy this year for all students at the school to have an iPad. Apparently her twins are not allowed to share, so she will have to purchase two of them.

I sat back and started thinking about this. Besides the obvious price implications of demanding parents buy an expensive device for their young child, what was being done to ensure safe and secure surfing?

1. Sharing iPads

Unlike Mac OS X, there’s no concept of multiple users accounts on an iPad (nor on an iPhone). This means the device might have much more valuable data on it than just things the young students put on there.

So, if a family’s iPad needs to go to school with little Jimmy, his parents’ apps and data could be exposed. Household accounts, banking apps, etc could be opened inadvertently.

Tip: Where possible, make sure you use a strong password for all apps that contain sensitive information.

2. Passcodes

Passcode option" vspace="10" align="right" hspace="10">With kids as young as five being mandated by the schools to have iPads, parents might be tempted to simplify their usage by not password-protecting the device, or giving a very simple passcode like 0000 or 1234.

Tip 2: Always password-protect your device and avoid the most commonly used passcodes.

If your child can handle the complexity, disable the Simple Passcode option and you’ll be able to choose a longer, more complex password which can comprise upper- and lowercase letters, numbers and even special characters.

3. Lost iPads

Kids are not known for looking after their belongings very well. All parents have heard the “I don’t know” response to a query about the location of something. It stands to reason that kids would also lose expensive iPads too. But what happens to the data on the device?

iPad" vspace="10" align="right" hspace="10">Tip: Install Apple’s Find my iPad app that helps you locate your device and provides a map to its whereabouts.

Alternatively, you can remotely set or turn on the passcode lock on an iPad, or send it a message to display on the device – playing a sound for two minutes at full volume (even if the iPad is set to silent).

The free app also has a remote wipe facility, so if you are unable to locate your iPad, or if it has been stolen, you can permanently wipe the device and restore it to factory settings.

There’s an equivalent app for the iPhone as well.

4. Malware and location tracking

Malware is not yet a massive problem on the iPad, thanks to it being very difficult for the everyday user to install anything apart from Apple-approved apps.

iOS malware such as iKee and Duh is so far limited to jailbroken devices.

With malware not a pressing problem, attention turns to the geolocation features present in many apps. Do parents really want their kids’ physical location to be broadcast to the internet?

Tip: Disable location tracking if you do not want your child’s physical location to be shared on the internet.

5. Guarding children against offensive content

The FCC has set out requirements for schools and libraries to follow if they’re offering internet access to minors. Don’t forget – children should not only be protected from the worst that the internet has to offer; they should also be accessing the net via a secure connection to avoid eavesdropping.

Tip: Parents should request written confirmation from the school on what steps have been taken to ensure their kids will be safe when surfing on the school’s WiFi internet connection.

For those who want to go further, iOS includes parental control facilities to let you manage iTunes purchases, web browsing, and access to explicit material.

6. Education

If schools are going to demand that their young students have devices such as iPads, will they also teach lessons about cyber ethics and computer security to ensure that the child knows what behavior is appropriate online? Will little Jimmy know what to do if he encounters online bullies?

The new generation of children is more familiar with technology than any that has gone before it. Our jobs as parents and teachers is to make sure that we safeguard childrens’ use of the internet so they understand what is good and safe, and what is bad and best avoided.

While I am all for using technology in schools, and exposing kids to technology, I am left wondering if this is all as well thought through as it perhaps should be. Will a teacher with 30-40 students be able to provide the right level of diligence?

Full disclosure: My two year old, like many other toddlers, loves to play games on the iPhone and iPad. But I know what he’s doing, and it’s being done on a secure network and always when I can supervise.

Article source: http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/nakedsecurity/~3/iL_9bFZIlmQ/

********************

The above is good advice on keeping data safe and raises questions about the safety and the welfare of the children. But has anyone raised questions about the long-term issues of using iPads in school for such young children?

The Inquisitr reports iPads are being used in Auburn, Maine at a district cost of $200,000 and many parents are not happy about this experiment.

I don't know about you, but the photo posted above (which is from the newspaper article) makes me a bit sad for this child. Kindergarten traditionally has been a time to learn how to play with other children and work on social skills. From Wikipedia's definition of kindergarten:

Children are taught to develop basic skills and knowledge through creative play and social interaction, as well as sometimes formal lessons.

How does using an iPad in kindergarten help a child with creative play and social interaction? Do you remember our posting about the studies done on student's brains and the use of computers?

“The technology is rewiring our brains,” said Nora Volkow, director of the National Institute of Drug Abuse and one of the world’s leading brain scientists. She and other researchers compare the lure of digital stimulation less to that of drugs and alcohol than to food and sex, which are essential but counterproductive in excess.

Mr. Nass at Stanford thinks the ultimate risk of heavy technology use is that it diminishes empathy by limiting how much people engage with one another, even in the same room.

“The way we become more human is by paying attention to each other,” he said. “It shows how much you care.”

That empathy, Mr. Nass said, is essential to the human condition. “We are at an inflection point,” he said. “A significant fraction of people’s experiences are now fragmented.”

If increased technology does diminish empathy and social interaction, the goals for kindergarten might have to be rewritten for Auburn, Maine students. They'll be tech savvy but they might just flunk "Friendship 101".

Parents, Take Note and Repeat: "I'm Just Quitting". What's the Use?

I've discovered a great website by David McElroy from Alabama. He describes himself as a "recovering political prostitute" and here is an introductory paragraph from his blog:

Do you have a love/hate relationship with politics? This is the beginning of a community of people who are looking for ways to say “no” to politics and say “yes” to real life. If you stick around, you’ll read about the futility of the state and you’ll also be subjected to the strange brand of humor that lives in David McElroy’s head, as well as random links and pictures of cute cats (and the occasional drooling dog). If you’re ready to move beyond politics, join our tribe.

.....If you’re still at a point where you believe in politics, I’m not here to talk you out of it. If you have an emotional attachment to the state, only you can decide you’re ready to give it up. If you believe in supporting a political party in order to avoid the “anarchy” you believe is the only alternative, I’m not going to change your mind until you believe there are other alternatives to the chaos you envision.

But if you believe the state is both immoral and incompetent to protect the natural rights of individuals, maybe you’ve found the right place to connect with people who believe the same thing. I’m not interested in debating the state. I’m interested in finding ways to live peacefully without it.

The more I learn the sad truth about the Department of Education and how it:

• handcuffs good teachers and administrators and dooms them to mechanical test givers and beggars of money;

• wields enormous amount of Federal power over states and local districts;

• allows and perpetuates the continuing dumbing down of students;

• is creating the nationalization of standards;

• supports the multi-million dollar "school choice" movement that doesn't offer true choice, but rather a different version of public school education;

• the lack of input and control of parents and taxpayers over the schools they fund;

the more I believe parents have three choices in public education.

The premise is this about public education: the system protects the system. Period. That is how government operates. It doesn't care about PEOPLE. It cares about providing a system. If you don't fit into the system, too bad. Either you are in or you are out. The government is not made of people...it consists of mandates. As McElroy writes: the state is both immoral and incompetent to protect the natural rights of individuals.

Are you unhappy about common core standards? If you live in Missouri, that's unfortunate. The legislators seem more intent on pushing the multi-million dollar school choice lobby reforms which do not promote local control or reduce federal spending than to attempt to stop their implementation.

We are receiving emails and twitters the pro charter movies are being shown in St. Louis again, so let's all take a guess what the educational legislative agenda will be in 2012. Probably the same as 2011 which were focused on trigger options, charter schools, open enrollment and mandated kindergarten programs? Despite requests from constituents, no bill was offered to rescind the State Board's adoption of the common core standards.

So what are parents' three options?

• Homeschool
• Private school education
• Operate within the system but provide the academic education outside of school that your child is not receiving during the day and teach your child the moral and social values of YOUR family unit
  

That's it. Walk away if you can. Schools are becoming more of social service agencies than buildings of education. As McElroy states, look "for ways to say “no” to politics and say “yes” to real life." Stop looking to the government (the schools and your legislators) to provide for your children. It's up to YOU as the parent to provide a decent education for your child. Tell the system you and your child are "just quitting".

Don't stop trying to halt this nationalization of public education and the crony capitalism involved in the charter push; but don't leave your child to suffer in this flawed and politically correct system that cares less for your child than it does for quotas and subset test scores. Parents and taxpayers, keep fighting the fight but get your child off the battlefield.

Read McElroy's article about a business owner who made the decision to leave the system. Sometimes it's just not worth it. It was this man's business: it's your child and his/her future in your hands. As you read it, think about public education today. The mine owner talks about "environmental justice". The Federal government writes about education in terms of "civil rights" and "social justice" and "redistribution of teachers and administrators". The terms are interchangeable but the intent is the same whether you are debating educational, environmental, labor, economic issues, etc:

‘I’m just quitting’: A scene right out of ‘Atlas Shrugged’ in Birmingham

by David McElroy

If it had been a scene in “Atlas Shrugged,” the guy would have disappeared into the secrecy of Colorado with a shadowy figure who we would later learn to be John Galt. In real life, the story will probably be more complex. But I wonder how long it’s going to be before businesspeople really do start walking away and deciding it’s not worth doing business in America today. Or it it already happening and we just don’t know it?

The man you see in the picture at the right is named Ronnie Bryant. He operates coal mines in Alabama. I’d never heard of him until this morning, but after what I saw and heard from him, I’d say he’s a bit like a southern version of Ellis Wyatt from Ayn Rand’s novel. What I saw made an impression on me.

I was at a public hearing in an inner-city Birmingham neighborhood for various government officials to get public input on some local environmental issues. There are several hot topics, but one of the highest-profile disputes is over a proposal for a coal mine near a river that serves as a source of drinking water for parts of the Birmingham metro area. Mine operators and state environmental officials say the mine can be operated without threatening the water supply. Environmentalists claim it will be a threat.

I’m not going to take sides on that environmental issue, because I don’t know enough to stake out an informed opinion. (With most of the people I listened to today, facts didn’t seem to matter as much as emotional implications.) But Ronnie Bryant wasn’t there to talk about that particular mine. As a mine operator in a nearby area, he was attending the meeting to listen to what residents and government officials were saying. He listened to close to two hours of people trashing companies of all types and blaming pollution for random cases of cancer in their families. Several speakers clearly believe that all of the cancer and other deaths they see in their families and communities must be caused by pollution. Why? Who knows? Maybe just because it makes for an emotional story to blame big bad business. It’s hard to say.

After Bryant listened to all of the business-bashing, he finally stood to speak. He sounded a little bit shellshocked, a little bit angry — and a lot frustrated.

My name’s Ronnie Bryant, and I’m a mine operator…. I’ve been issued a [state] permit in the recent past for [waste water] discharge, and after standing in this room today listening to the comments being made by the people…. [pause] Nearly every day without fail — I have a different perspective — men stream to these [mining] operations looking for work in Walker County. They can’t pay their mortgage. They can’t pay their car note. They can’t feed their families. They don’t have health insurance. And as I stand here today, I just … you know … what’s the use? I got a permit to open up an underground coal mine that would employ probably 125 people. They’d be paid wages from $50,000 to $150,000 a year. We would consume probably $50 million to $60 million in consumables a year, putting more men to work. And my only idea today is to go home. What’s the use? I don’t know. I mean, I see these guys — I see them with tears in their eyes — looking for work. And if there’s so much opposition to these guys making a living, I feel like there’s no need in me putting out the effort to provide work for them. So as I stood against the wall here today, basically what I’ve decided is not to open the mine. I’m just quitting. Thank you.

I have no idea what Bryant will actually do. He might have made a quick emotional decision based on anger at feeling blamed for things that are frequently just normal health issues of life. He might reconsider and go ahead with his project.

The only thing I’m sure of is that what I saw today is a broken process and a sham. We all want a decent environment in which to live, but when various people at a public meeting — including federal officials and community members — talk about “environmental justice” and make it clear that their intent is to make it harder for businesses to operate, well, I can see why a businessman would decide to quit. I consider myself an environmentalist — because I want to live in a safe, secure, clean world — but what I saw isn’t reasonable concern for the environment as much as it’s an ideological agenda.

We need reasonable people to talk about how to balance various people’s property rights. (You have the right to use your property as you please, but I have a right not to be injured by it.) Even though we need a discussion, the modern equivalent of a kangaroo court that I observed today isn’t the way to go about it. It was more like a prelude to a lynching of business. If I were a businessperson or investor, I wouldn’t put the money or effort into opening new industry in this country today. I’d take my investment and jobs to somewhere they were wanted.

As Ronnie Bryant asked, “What’s the use?” Maybe Atlas really is starting to shrug.

Editor’s note: Here’s the audio clip of Ronnie Bryant speaking. The audio quality is poor since it was recorded on my iPad without any intention of broadcast or public sharing, but I’m providing it as verification of the story.

Why is Urban Education Failing and Will Busing or Open Enrollment Solve the Problems?

Diversity in schools is one of the main goals in Race to the Top and Common Core standards. It's been a goal for several decades and one experiment to reach diversity was busing. It has been tried since the 1970's with limited success. A new plan, "open enrollment" is being tried in several states and is currently under judicial review in Missouri. Open enrollment, like voluntary transfer or busing, allows inner-city students to attend suburban schools.

Diversity is a goal in Louisville City Schools (Jefferson County). How's that diversity plan working out for the district? According to Education Voodoo, not so well (I've made a couple of editing changes regarding the name of the newspaper as the blogger has a tongue-in-cheek reference to the paper which makes it difficult to ascertain the correct name). Citizens are upset about the lack of success exhibited by bused students and resources being used to perpetuate a broken system. The writer takes on the Citizen-Journal for spinning the arguments against those not in favor of the student assessment plan put forth by the district:

(for a quick background, read the previous entry): « Kelly Thompson, presiding judge of Kentucky Court of Appeals, made sure Jefferson County Public Schools had a really bad hair day yesterday

August 25, 2011 by Education Voodoo

This single excerpt from The C-J’s coverage this morning reveals its totally annoying slant:

a

School district attorney Byron Leet, who defended the value of diverse schools, acknowledged afterward that he got an unusually “good grilling” from the judges. But he warned against predicting a ruling before it was issued, which could take four to six weeks.

a

The case, which may ultimately wind up before the Kentucky Supreme Court, is the latest legal skirmish over the student assignment plan, which has become highly politicized and continues to upset some parents because of long bus rides. Next month, the school board is expected to consider recommendations on ways to improve the plan and reduce ride times.

a

Where’s the slant?

a

1). Leet, “who defended the value of diverse schools.”

a

In reality, Leet less defended the value of diverse schools than he defended the right of the school board to bus children. Time and again, judges in fact pointedly asked Leet to defend the value of busing, and time and again he did so by asserting the right of the board to bus them. On two occasions, he made vague references to “research” that demonstrates the value of busing children, but never produced any hard data in the courts. While Leet clearly defended diverse schools, he really did not defend the VALUE of diverse schools, as the C-J asserts. If anything, he wound up acknowledging that student achievement has declined under forced busing, while refusing to accept that busing is a factor.

a

2). The student assignment plan “has become highly politicized and continues to upset some parents because of long bus rides.”

First The Citizen-Journal marginalizes the opposition to “some parents.” Many who aren’t parents are upset by busing. Many feel community resources are being wasted, and many are upset because they believe busing is churning out a generation of students with inferior educations. As well, this phrasing reduces the complaints about busing to a single issue — length of bus rides. This implies that if you reduce ride time, people will be happy. But that is NOT the sum of the complaint against forced busing, but only a part. Yes, its opponents view it as an incredible waste of time. But they are JUST as upset that it is a waste of resources, and that it has not been demonstrated to improve education.

a

In two paragraphs, the C-J managed to misstate the nature of the JCPS defense, misstate the position of busing opponents, and mischaracterize the makeup of the group opposed to busing.

a

That’s some effective writing! No wonder Op-Ed pages are becoming obsolete!

a

Finally this. The C-J ran a companion photo gallery with this package called “THE LEGACY OF DESEGREGATION.”

Every photo in the collection was from the 1970s. A “legacy” is, by definition, a thing handed down. It is the thing from the past, as it exists now. The C-J’s tribute was a moving tribute to the origins of busing — but not to its legacy. Its legacy is what exists today. And by showing no current pictures, by sharing no current data, the C-J demonstrated that all it has to show as busing’s legacy is a collection of black and white photos and warm stories from the past which are nice, but which do little to address failing schools and students in crisis today.

Even if the C-J wants to advocate for busing, we would all be better served by pictures of the situation as it exists in 2011. That is the true legacy of busing.

Does the "open enrollment" currently supported by many Missouri legislators (students from failing schools will be able to attend suburban schools) create the same type of busing described in this article? Does the desire to create diversity by busing or open enrollment help or hinder the education of low-income students? Why aren't quality schools present in the urban areas? Is it for lack of money or something else? Why do suburban schools surpass the educational benchmarks of urban schools? How will busing "fix" the problems in urban schools? Why should students in failing schools have to be bused for a decent education?

If you believe it helps the students who are bused from their district into suburban districts, what do you do then with the students left behind? Will Common Core standards or some other governmental mandate be the magic bullet for them? Why can't the government save everyone? Isn't that what the DOE has been promising to taxpayers for the last four decades?

Sex Indoctrination for 4 Year Old Swiss Students. Coming Soon to a School Near You?

Will this happen in the United States?

Sex education for kindergartners has already been adopted to a lesser extent in Montana.

Should we expect it to occur in the Common Core standards? Probably. With health clinics operating out of schools and handing out free condoms, nothing seems surprising when it comes to sex and young children. When it does, is there anything you, as a parent can do about it...short of taking your child out of public education?

No. Is there anything that you as a taxpayer can do about eradicating such filth out of your district?

No.

Better wake up, folks. This is the future. We're all about globalization in education. Switzerland the country might as well be the same as Little Switzerland, North Carolina. Just read the documents from the DOE, listen to Arne Duncan, heck, research Jimmy Carter, George HW Bush, Clinton, George Bush and Obama and their views on gloabalization. You don't even need to think this won't be on its way to United States public schools. You KNOW it will be in public school curriculum.

Read this and weep for our children. (Be sure to access the readers' comments. There is more disgusting information) From Pajamas Media:

*****************************************

Brave New World arrives ahead of schedule — sex indoctrination for toddlers

Aldous Huxley’s classic dystopian novel Brave New World envisions a deeply disturbing one-world totalitarian state in which hypersexuality and loveless promiscuity are considered normal — even for children. Twenty-six years after its 1932 publication, Huxley wrote Brave New World Revisited to marvel at how many of his book’s outlandish futurist predictions had already come true — things like in vitro fertilization and psychopharmacology.

But if Huxley were alive today, he’d have to write Brave New World Re-Revisited to account for the new elementary school curriculum in Basel, Switzerland. Because what Huxley predicted would happen by 2540 A.D. has already come true in 2011 — 529 years ahead of schedule.

To prepare yourself for the Basel kindergarten lessons, first read this excerpt from Chapter 3 of Brave New World:

Outside, in the garden, it was playtime. Naked in the warm June sunshine, six or seven hundred little boys and girls were running with shrill yells over the lawns, or playing ball games, or squatting silently in twos and threes among the flowering shrubs.

…

In a little grassy bay between tall clumps of Mediterranean heather, two children, a little boy of about seven and a little girl who might have been a year older, were playing, very gravely and with all the focussed attention of scientists intent on a labour of discovery, a rudimentary sexual game.

“Charming, charming!” the D.H.C. repeated sentimentally.

“Charming,” the boys politely agreed. But their smile was rather patronizing. They had put aside similar childish amusements too recently to be able to watch them now without a touch of contempt. Charming? but it was just a pair of kids fooling about; that was all. Just kids.

“I always think,” the Director was continuing in the same rather maudlin tone, when he was interrupted by a loud boo-hooing.

From a neighbouring shrubbery emerged a nurse, leading by the hand a small boy, who howled as he went. An anxious-looking little girl trotted at her heels.

“What’s the matter?” asked the Director.

The nurse shrugged her shoulders. “Nothing much,” she answered. “It’s just that this little boy seems rather reluctant to join in the ordinary erotic play. I’d noticed it once or twice before. And now again today. He started yelling just now …”

“Honestly,” put in the anxious-looking little girl, “I didn’t mean to hurt him or anything. Honestly.”

“Of course you didn’t, dear,” said the nurse reassuringly. “And so,” she went on, turning back to the Director, “I’m taking him in to see the Assistant Superintendent of Psychology. Just to see if anything’s at all abnormal.”

“Quite right,” said the Director. “Take him in. You stay here, little girl,” he added, as the nurse moved away with her still howling charge. “What’s your name?”

“Polly Trotsky.”

“And a very good name too,” said the Director. “Run away now and see if you can find some other little boy to play with.”

The child scampered off into the bushes and was lost to sight.

“Exquisite little creature!” said the Director, looking after her. Then, turning to his students, “What I’m going to tell you now,” he said, “may sound incredible. But then, when you’re not accustomed to history, most facts about the past do sound incredible.”

He let out the amazing truth. For a very long period before the time of Our Ford, and even for some generations afterwards, erotic play between children had been regarded as abnormal (there was a roar of laughter); and not only abnormal, actually immoral (no!): and had therefore been rigorously suppressed.

A look of astonished incredulity appeared on the faces of his listeners. Poor little kids not allowed to amuse themselves? They could not believe it.

“Even adolescents,” the D.H.C. was saying, “even adolescents like yourselves …”

“Not possible!”

“Barring a little surreptitious auto-erotism and homosexuality—absolutely nothing.”

“Nothing?”

“In most cases, till they were over twenty years old.”

“Twenty years old?” echoed the students in a chorus of loud disbelief.

“Twenty,” the Director repeated. “I told you that you’d find it incredible.”

“But what happened?” they asked. “What were the results?”

“The results were terrible.”

Science fiction you say? Well, maybe it was science fiction in 1932, but in 2011 it’s reality:

‘Sex box’ to get new name as parents revolt

Officials in Basel have agreed to rename the “sex box” after receiving some 3,000 letters of protest from parents angered by the controversial trove of wooden penises and fabric vaginas set to be used in a new sex education programme for playschool and primary school kids.

Christoph Eymann, Basel education minister and member of the liberal democrat party (LDP), responded to parent’s protests in an interview with SonntagsBlick.

“It was no doubt stupid to call it a ’sex box’ – we will change that. But we will stick to our goal: to get across to children that sexuality is something natural. Without forcing anything upon them or taking anything away from their parents,“ he said.

Many parents say they do not understand why sex education needs to be taught to children as young as four.

“There are usually two reasons why sexuality becomes a topic in kindergarten: either the teacher is pregnant or one of the children will soon get a new sister or brother. In such cases, it is correct that the teacher can respond”, Eymann told SonntagsBlick.

Eymann said he understood that one line in the programme, “touching can be enjoyed heartily”, could be misconstrued, but insisted: “It is not about ‘touch me, feel me’. We want to tell the children that there is contact that they may find pleasurable, but some that they should say ’no’ to. Kids can unfortunately can become victims of sexual violence already at playschool age.“

Eymann said he would prefer if sex education was taught to children at home but argued that education officials needed to respond to the realities of today.

“We currently live in an oversexualised society. There is uncontrolled distribution of pornographic material that can reach young children. Some primary school children know the TV schedule until 2am. We would like to offer these children firm support, which is often not available in the family. The box is only an aid. I trust the teachers to approach the material with care.”

Despite this, Eymann said he takes critics’ arguments seriously, and has ordered the contents of the box to be examined after finding the cover of previous teaching material tasteless.

Some parents have called for their children to be exempted from sex education. Eymann says he is strictly against exemptions, although he is aware this will not make him many friends:

“Primary school may be the only big audience that our society has. The shared values that it teaches are very important. I would definitely like to keep this. The explanatory lesson can be portrayed in a way that doesn’t offend“, he said.

Critics of public school sex education have been warning of this for decades: Once you start down the slippery slope of teaching kids about the mechanics of sex, it will invariably (in some school districts at least) eventually lead to advocacy for sex. Combine that with the relentless drive to introduce sex ed at lower and lower grades, and you end up with what’s happening in Switzerland: Telling four-year-olds how pleasurable sex is and leading them in classroom activities that are tantamount to public masturbation:

‘Sex box’ for Swiss kindergarteners has genitalia toys: will teach sexuality is pleasurable

Kindergarten children in Basel, Switzerland will be presented this year with fabric models of human genitalia in a “sex box” to teach them that “contacting body parts can be pleasurable.”

The kit for teachers to give sex-education lessons to primary school children uses models and recommends having children massage each other or to rub themselves with warm sand bags, accompanied by soft music….

I can no longer deny what I’ve long merely suspected: That many “progressive” educators use mandatory public school sex education specifically for the purpose of indoctrinating entire generations of children into being promiscuous as early as possible. Why? To cause the breakdown of the nuclear family, to pave the road for a Brave New World.

Yesterday, it only happened in fiction. Today, it happens in Switzerland. Tomorrow — coming to a school near you.

[Here are some more photos of various Sex Box materials, found on this page:]

UCLA Professor has the courage to question the moral appropriateness of a gift.

Last week the New York Times reported that Lynn A. Stout, a top business law professor at UCLA Law School, wrote a letter to the University Chancellor expressing her concern that a $10 million gift to the school from former UCLA graduate and Vice President of the Milken Family Foundation, Lowell Milken, would compromise her and the school's reputation. The hefty donation created the Lowell Milken Institute for Business Law and Policy. Stout, a specialist in corporate governance and moral behavior, is one of only a very few university staff who have voiced concern about the source of the money.

The problem the University faces is typical. The state has had to make dramatic cuts in education funding so schools must rely more heavily on private and alumni donations in order to continue to operate at their current level. It should be noted that law schools are typically among a state school’s most profitable graduate programs, so there should be less concern about funding than in other state school programs. Still, to turn down such a large donation to their capitol improvement drive would take morals of steel.

Ms. Stout wrote,

“The creation of a Lowell Milken Institute for Business Law and Policy will damage my personal and professional reputation, as I have devoted my career to arguing for investor protection and honest and ethical behavior in business,”

In response, a statement from the MFF said,

“Basic fairness requires that individuals be evaluated solely on the basis of their own conduct... the foundation respect(s) the fact that U.C.L.A. understands that in the United States of America, its citizens are presumed innocent until proven otherwise.”

Within the strict confines of the legal system a person is presumed innocent until proven guilty, but that does not preclude the private citizen or even public administration from scrutinizing future business contracts with people who have, through their past actions, proven themselves less than completely honest. There is a vast difference between what the court can do and what the general public can do. But since the foundation says we should consider a person's conduct, let us look at Lowell Milken.

While it is true that Michael Milken paid the debt to society determine by the legal system for his involvement in the 1980's in illegal activity in the high yield ( junk bond) division of Drexel Burnham Lambert, his brother Lowell, who was Sr. Vice President of DBL at the time, was not tested in court. Charges against him were dropped in a plea bargain by his brother. Lowell was not a trader at that time, so we can reasonably question what role he may have had in the scandal. Some contend that Michael's actions were not illegal at the time, but they do concede that they were in violation of DBL's internal regulations, something his brother should have been aware of or acted upon at the time, given his role within the company. The court of public opinion is still very divided on this issue.

In 2003, Lowell and Michael Milken became the sole owners of Knowledge University, a company they co-founded with Larry Ellison (whom you may recognize as the founder of Oracle whose flagship product was a database produced for the CIA, and is 5th wealthiest person in the world), soon after Michael was released from prison. In the United States, Knowledge Universe is the largest early childhood education company and operates under the KinderCare® Learning Centers, Knowledge Beginnings®, CCLC®, The Grove School®, Champions® and Cambridge Schools™ brand.

What does seem apparent is that Lowell Milken has entered into the latest lucrative field, that of education. He wants to impact children from the moment of birth, by introducing them to KinderCare, to their final job and role in the community through the Law Center which,

"provides expanded studies on business law and policy, clinical experience, additional research opportunities for faculty, along with student fellowships. The knowledge, skills and experience available through the Lowell Milken Institute will help ensure that students are prepared to not only assume leadership roles in the practice of law, but also in the areas of business, government, and philanthropy."

The MFF also stands to make money through government grants that support its TAP program. A 2010 study of the TAP program in Chicago found

"no evidence that the program raised student test scores. Student achievement growth as measured by average math and reading scores on the Illinois Standards Achievement Test (ISAT) did not differ significantly between TAP and comparable non-TAP schools. We also found that TAP did not have a detectable impact on rates of teacher retention in the school or district during the second year it was rolled out in the district. We did not find statistically significant differences between TAP and non-TAP retention rates for teachers overall or for subgroups defined by teaching assignment and years of service in CPS. The findings of no significant impacts on student achievement or teacher retention are robust to the use of different samples and estimation methods."

After working on the program for 12 years, Milken's Foundation still cannot demonstrate significant progress on its stated goal. Perhaps the 13 school districts that applied for and received TIF (Teacher Incentive Fund) grants to expand their TAP programs didn't read the report.

It is a statement from Lowell Milken, on his Lowell Milken Center website, that clearly demonstrates that his ideology is in line with those developing RTTT, CCS and even the Gates Foundation,

“Believing that people make the difference in every endeavor, Lowell has directed the Foundation's efforts to focus on developing the valuable resource, “human capital." Over the past three decades, Lowell's work to inspire and produce exceptional educators — the human capital that produces human capital — has been unwavering in its commitment, unending in its endurance and unbending in its goals.”

Our children are not “capital” that can be accounted for on business ledgers, shoved where they are needed, warehoused when not needed, or whose value is depreciated over time. When we reduce people to commodities we degrade the value of the individual and of life itself.

Lowell may have a lifelong dedication to teaching, good education and philanthropy, but not without an eye to making a profit. He is not precluded from doing so in this country, but those who choose to become entangled with him should do so only with eyes wide open. His TAP program is only one example that he may share more than a last name with his brother. While technically not illegal to pedal a product that is paid for by government money, but produces little if any benefit, it is highly morally questionable. Those out there ringing the warning bells about doing business with him should be applauded for their courage to speak out.

A Conservative Teacher's Experience with the NEA

Not every teacher is a member or fan of the NEA.

Read how a conservative teacher handled the NEA membership drive at school (from the website conservativeteachersofamerica.com) and an immigrant teacher's response to the NEA's tactics:

*****************************************
Close Encounters of the Union Kind

We received this from one of our members, he would prefer to keep his identity and school district confidential, so we are going to post it for him.

Excitement always surrounds new beginnings. For the NEA, new teachers and the beginning of the school year is probably about as exciting as it comes. After all, the beginning of the school year presents fresh meat for the union pack.

I recently started at a fairly large school district in a middle sized city in the Midwest. I was certainly excited for the beginning of the year meetings, but I can’t say I was that excited about my inevitable encounter with the National Education Association. I figured why not turn this into a positive and go in as an undercover reporter, so to speak.

The NEA offered new teachers a breakfast and a lunch all on the same day. I decided that I would attend both of them, the ability to act like a liberal doesn’t present itself very often. Free food and the chance to waste NEA resources, what self-respecting conservative would turn that down?

For breakfast I had the option of some granola bars, juice, water, a fruit, and the ever important NEA membership form! You have to love the NEAs brutal honesty, it’s not about education, it’s about money. From a small flyer attached to the NEA membership form:

Research shows that over a ten-year period, school districts in [my state] with an NEA majority have experienced salary increases more than 30% higher than districts with an [other state teacher organization] majority. The higher the percentage of NEA members in a district, the higher the bargaining power for not only salary increases, but for benefits and working conditions as well.

Can we think about this a second? America is broke, but the NEA wants me to sign up so they can get me some more cash! Thanks for the breakfast (which really wasn’t much of a breakfast), but no thanks. The most irritating part of this form shoved in my face in the morning is they didn’t even tell me the cost of the membership. I guess it’s just assumed you don’t care and are going to join anyway. Hey, they were offering a free t-shirt on top of the promise of a higher salary down the road. What a deal!

I escaped the first meeting with no confrontation and headed off to my morning sessions. Lunch arrived, and it was time to head back into the lion’s den (snake pit?). While waiting in line for my sandwich, chips, and water I was given another folder with more exciting NEA information. It was apparent that time was waning for the NEA, and potential new members were escaping their grasp. Inside of this folder was another membership form and a little bright yellow piece of paper stapled to it.

Special New Member Incentive

Any new member who joins NEA between August 8 and August 12, 2011 will receive a crisp, new (or old, wrinkled) $10 bill!

Well, at least they have a sense of humor as they bribe you with money. It got better though, as I was eating my lunch our district’s NEA president marched in and told us that anybody that joined would be entered in a chance to win $100. At this point I was beginning to wonder if I could join, get the $10, have a shot at the $100, and then dump the membership in a couple days. As tempting as it was, I talked myself out of that. I did finally find out the monthly cost. I finished my lunch and headed on out. I actually had to come back down to the NEA area because there was some confusion on our meeting schedule. As was attempting to leave an NEA representative made some comment about filling out our forms. I can’t specifically remember what he said, but it was arrogant and presumptuous. At this point a somewhat heated discussion began.

Now the guy I was speaking to appeared to be a nice person, he seemed genuine anyway. Overall the conversation was semi-professional. As you would expect any NEA member to do he brought up the topic of Governor Scott Walker. I was a little annoyed with him and decided to tell him that I had a lot of respect for Governor Walker. He decided to share with me that he thought Governor Walker was “a douche bag.” Yeah, not kidding. Of course he attempted to bring up the Koch brothers, the left’s boogie men. I changed the topic quickly.

The thing that floored me as I continued to talk to him was just how little he knew about his own organization. I told him I was frustrated with the NEAs partnership with the AFL-CIO. He told me I had my facts wrong. I guess he ought to check their own website: NEA pledges to work with new AFL-CIO president. He told me that he was upset with WADC’s involvement in education. That’s been the result of decades of NEAs influence on education. He shared with me that he feels the country needs more personal responsibility. I mean, really, the NEA is an organization that supports the political left. I know of no other group in American society that celebrates and rewards personal irresponsibility more than individuals of this political perspective. After an hour I had about enough of Mr. NEA and decided to head on about my day. We shook hands, wished each other the best, and agreed to disagree.

At the end of the day I can honestly say my opinion has not changed of the NEA. I still think they are one of the biggest problems we have in education. This is why I am a member of the Association of American Educators.

Oh, one other beautiful piece of this story. I am working with another new teacher who is originally from Czechoslovakia. We are working in the same building so we were hanging out together. She was with me most of the day and saw the beginning of the discussion with the NEA representative. The next day we were talking and she said, “You know what that reminded me of? Communism.” Unprompted, unscripted, brutal honesty.

Playing Games in Washington DC

Back in June a local group put on a week long Vacation Liberty School to teach kids in 5th-8th grade principles of freedom, both personal and economic. The lessons were taught both in classroom and with relatively simple hands-on games. Several of the economic games were played with dice and used Jolly Ranchers as a surrogate currency. By playing the games the children quickly saw for themselves how a free market produced better individual results, where wealth was only limited by your aversion to risk. While there were those who clearly had been taught the lesson of saving for a rainy day, there were also some aspiring Donald Trumps in the crowd who accepted certain losses because they understood the potential for higher gains in the long run. The children also recognized the role of government and taxes on their personal wealth, and how quickly the principle of "you scratch my back I'll scratch yours" is adopted by those in charge.'

When these kids go back to school this fall, they won't have to take the word of a teacher that capitalism is good, they will have seen it played out for themselves. They will also be able to see the bias in teachers who preach from the blackboard that capitalism is bad.

Last week, Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsak explained that the SNAP [Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program] (i.e. food stamp) program was a stimulus program because the simple act of purchasing food supported jobs throughout the food distribution system,

Mr Vilsak's logic is that of a habitual gambler who only counts his wins. He said,

“Every dollar of SNAP benefits generates $1.84 in the economy in terms of economic activity. If people are able to buy a little more in the grocery store, someone has to stock it, package it, shelve it, process it, ship it. All of those are jobs. It’s the most direct stimulus you can get in the economy during these tough times.”

After reading this, it occurred to me that there is a need to develop a new VLS game for adults. Using similar tools of dice and poker chips, we should be able to develop a game for those in Washington to play that demonstrates the fallacy of Agriculture Secretary's statement. In the game there would be producers who increase the overall quantity of chips, and Recipients (a nicer name than parasites) who must wait for producers to give them chips to spend. Government would be there collecting revenue, from producers only, for both producing and purchasing. As with the SNAP program, Recipient's purchases produce no government revenue nor do they generate government income from producing.

While possibly true, that every SNAP dollar spent generates $1.84 in economic activity, Mr Vilsak conveniently forgot the lost opportunity cost for that dollar going to someone who did not themselves work to contribute anything to the economy. If you or I go to the store, we also generate $1.84 in economic activity but, in addition, we generate economic activity for all our hours at a job.

I realize these economic princples are probably way too advanced for many in Washington and that is why we need a VLS game to break it down for them. In recognition of the enthusiasm in modern education for manipulatives and making learning fun, maybe we can gin up a few game sets and instructions and send them to DC to play.