DeVos Doesn’t Want Educated Citizenry

Before I begin I will make one thing clear; it is my belief that corruption and politics go together like senators and sex scandals. Further, I do not think that monetary (or other) influence(s) is unique to one party or the other. If political sell outs were baby names nearly every elected official could be called “Aiden”, “Kayden” or “Brayden”.

            Which brings me to the elected official that this piece will highlight; Betsy DeVos.

by AntarcticSpring on DeviantArt

               No wait a second...

 That's better, or at least more accurate.

            The Secretary of Education has over thirty years of teaching experience and has been known throughout her career as a champion of the disenfranchised. She has built her altruistic legacy through her work with non-profit education foundations. In addition, she has given most of her meager earnings to those within our country that are most in need.

            No wait scratch all that, our current Sec of Ed has a Bachelor’s Degree in Business Administration and Political Science (Emery, 2017). Her own children never attended public schools (Emery, 2017). DeVos is also a bona fide billionaire. However, rest assured she does contribute philanthropically, and although it is hard to pin down, it seems she and her husband Dick are particularly fond of supporting Christian education (Emery, 2017). Finally, she is a proponent of what DeVos herself labels as “school choice” – going as far as saying that the federal government has a monopoly-like grip on education (Weller, 2018). She also has taken steps to eliminate student loan forgiveness. Not coincidentally, she holds an interest in a debt collection agency that focuses on repayment of past due student loans.

            There are of course, concerns with all of these things. Although, what bothers folks (but doesn’t surprise them) is what she’s done since being in office.

            DeVos, someone with little experience in public education, but seemingly at least some business experience continues to support an educational for-profit business model that yields little in the way of results. Many sources have shown that the charter schools that DeVos is so fond of fall behind statistically when it comes to their main goal, educating the nation’s youth. In fact, some studies have indicated that some of these charter schools have amassed a sad graduation rate of only 48% (Hefling, 2017). Further, many of these schools have been labeled as a contemporary form of segregation, reporting that 70% of African-American students attend schools that are nearly all minority students (Weller, 2018).

            These results are part of what makes DeVos’s unwavering support of charter schools all the more mystifying. Typically, those in business look at the benefits of what their product produces- what make the product worthwhile to consumers. In a competitive market (a market with the choices DeVos often touts) this matters because the opposition will be quick to deliver on that which is lacking in order to gain an advantage in the marketplace.

            With education, everything is different. There isn’t truly any competition, there are contracts. There isn’t really value of the DeVos brand over another, instead there are vouchers.  

            DeVos’ maiming of the country’s educational system doesn’t just stop at curling her boney fingers around another crumpled dollar at the expense of an entire generation. She has also repealed no less than 72 federal statutes that serve students with various types of disabilities (Hammerschlag, 2018).  This action is as transparent as it is repulsive. Clearly, accommodating students with disabilities is cancer to the bottom line, DeVos’ bottom line.  

            Beyond the almighty dollar, is there anything else that motivates DeVos? That becomes harder to say. As mentioned earlier she seems to support the idea of religion in schools, and this writer would state that there’s nothing wrong with that, she only needs to make sure those same religious morals accompany her own decision making.

            When it comes to DeVos we have 2 things we can use with which to form opinions on her intent; her history and her actions in office. Each of these has thus far demonstrated her intent is not to educate, but merely profit off of the idea of education.

           

References

Emery, D. (2017, February 7). Meet Betsy DeVos, Trump’s Secretary of Education Nominee.     Retrieved May 6, 2018, from Snopes: https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/betsy-devos-education-   secretary/

Hammerschlag, A. (2018, May 5). Betsy DeVos gets standing ovation from Florida graduates after   religious speech. Retrieved May 6, 2018, from Arizona Republic:   https://www.azcentral.com/story/news/nation-now/2018/05/05/betsy-devos-religious-   commencement-speech-earns-standing-ovation-fla-college/583868002/

Hefling, K. (2017, October 8). DeVos champions online charter schools, but the results are poor.   Retrieved May 6, 2018, from Politico: https://www.politico.com/story/2017/10/08/education-betsy-   devos-online-charter-schools-poor-results-243556

Weller, C. (2018, February 7). New education secretary Betsy DeVos champions vouchers and   charter  schools — here's what that means. Retrieved May 6, 2018, from Business Insider:   http://www.businessinsider.com/what-are-charter-schools-2017-2

#hithole

                First off, I’d like to start this post with a disclaimer:

                I typically do not get much into politics, which you could argue runs against my ideals as a social worker. However, before you judge, hear me out. Contemporary politics are more about party and profiteering, less about people, and certainly not about progress. This has been the case for years.

                Thus, my position as an American citizen is that if you are waiting for a politician (Republican, Democrat, whatever) or government entity to help you, then you are going to be sorely disappointed.  In the same vein, the social worker in me says that the best positioned person to help you is, well you. The tools of resiliency and empowerment go a long way towards bettering yourself.

                Sincerely,

                David I WriteStuff

                We now return you to your not-so-regularly scheduled rant…

*             *             *

                There has been a great deal of media attention given to President Trump and his [alleged] use of vulgarity and racially charged comments. As such, I felt obliged to weigh in on the current kerfuffle involving these [alleged] comments regarding certain lesser-developed countries during a meeting about DACA. Particularly, the President is stated to have remarked that certain countries, Haiti among them, were nothing but “shithole” countries. He [allegedly] went on to even question the very notion of why we would even consider letting in immigrants from these countries to the United States.

                There are three points I’d like to address about this:

                1) I have no doubt that Trump uttered these words       

                To begin, I have no doubt that President Trump would refer to any number of lesser-developed nations by the term “shithole”. He has demonstrated that his character and vocabulary are oafish and limited. Further, I can only hypothesis that he is the latest in a long line of government officials- perhaps even presidents- that have uttered similar sentiments in service to this country. To take things even a step further, I would argue that the majority of the American public likely holds these countries in the same dim view.

                That doesn’t make remarks like this okay, nor does it give Trump a pass. That makes these thoughts a bias inherent to a majority of Americans. This also means through education, and oh gee, I don’t know maybe meeting someone from Haiti, these myths can be dispelled.

                2) Circle of Trust

                Building on what I’ve said above, I believe that most everyone has said something in the heat of the moment that was perhaps off-color or inappropriate. Usually, the smart ones among us do so in a circle of close friends, family, or business acquaintances that we trust.

                What I mean is usually, when these things slip out, we apologize, and/or those around us know our character well enough to know that one statement does not, nor could not define us.

                Unfortunately, for the President he made the mistake of spewing whatever comments he made in front of those with which he had no rapport (It was in fact, a bi-partisan DACA meeting). That coupled with the fact that Trump has already had a questionable history when it comes to shall we say, “less-than-acceptable” (or accurate) statements. These things together create an environment where several around him are poised to react defensively.

                This leads us to a point where you now have Democrats and Republicans who attended the meeting bickering over what was said versus not said. This is equally as shameful as uttering the words themselves.

                3) Deny, deny, deny

                What disappoints me the most is the fact that as President, Trump seems incapable of admitting fault. This marks only the latest scenario in which he denies what he said, and tries to rewrite history, in spite of other people clearly being present.

                I learned early on in my business career that if you make a mistake, own up to it. It is only then that you can begin to correct the mistake. Not to mention, these two things are essential in improving your integrity, and reputation.

                Some detractors may ask, “But David, how do you know he said these horrible things? And if he didn’t why should he fess up to something he didn’t even do?”

                Elementary my dear readers; Trump denies (or attempts to outmaneuver) anything that flies back into his face as overly controversial in order to save face. In fact, he has a heaping track record of doing so, well before he took office. In fact, if it weren’t for denials, backpedaling and distraction that Twitter account of his would be nearly dormant.

               

                To close, I feel that President Trump would be truly amazed at how fast this “news story” would go away if he would just admit any wrongdoing and actually attempt to do so some follow-up in the name of self-improvement.  However, I won’t be holding my breath while waiting for him to do so.

               

MISinformation

There’s are many things I dislike, among them; when men wear v-neck t-shirts, humidity, being said I “look like” any and every bald, white male celebrity.

Similarly, but limited to things that truly irk me, are occurrences I would place in the category of hate. At the top of these, is when I see people being bilked into believing that something is true, when it simply isn’t.

Truth be told, there’s been a lot of commotion about fake news lately. You all know where that came from, and so I will not spend time or precious words delving into that again.*

What I will say is I feel bad for anyone that gets convinced into believing outright falsehoods or half truths, just because the read a compelling post in their Facebook news feed.

I say this not as a Republican, not as a Democrat either. The only agenda I have is to help people do more to think for themselves. Therefore, I can freely say EVERYTHING in media has a slant to it. Every news agency, radio station, website, television network, blog (uh oh) has an angle. If that angle isn’t politically motivated, you can bet it’s motivated by something else; sales, donations, clicks, emotional response, or some other form of attention.  

I was moved to write about this today when I saw, more than one Facebook contact post the below. Essentially, it’s a post trying to fuel the flames of anti-refugee rhetoric via social media. As you might’ve guessed by now it’s not true, Snopes did a piece on this very thing back in 2015 (with an update in 2016), you can read it here. Note, that Snopes hasn’t called out this particular use of this post (at least as of my writing), but you’ll notice the pictures are recycled from the stories labeled as false on their previous reports.

Which brings me to my next point, think critically - what might the poster or originator of these types of items get out of you “liking”, or otherwise circulating their post? If you can answer that question without any skepticism, good for you. If not, I would suggest following some of the steps used to evaluate peer reviewed literature. Cornell University (which I have never attended) has a great guide available here, that can be applied to just about any item or source.

I’d also like to state that what bothers me most about these types of posts are the unfounded prejudices they perpetuate, and the dividing lines they are clearly attempting to draw. Let me also remind you that  ALL of us are in this together.

To conclude, if you are so inclined, you can choose to be republican, you can choose to be democrat, but please don’t choose to be ignorant.