Dear Commons Community,

New York Times columnist, Timothy Egan, had a piece yesterday commenting on how our attention spans have been decreasing thanks to our digital life styles.  He comments about a Canadian study last spring commissioned by Microsoft:

“A survey of Canadian media consumption by Microsoft concluded that the average attention span had fallen to eight seconds, down from 12 in the year 2000. We now have a shorter attention span than goldfish, the study found. [Goldfish have an attention span of nine seconds.]

Attention span was defined as “the amount of concentrated time on a task without becoming distracted.” I tried to read the entire 54-page report, but well, you know. Still, a quote from Satya Nadella, the chief executive officer of Microsoft, jumped out at me. “The true scarce commodity” of the near future, he said, will be “human attention.”

Putting aside Microsoft’s self-interest in promoting quick-flash digital ads with what may be junk science, there seems little doubt that our devices have rewired our brains. We think in McNugget time. The trash flows, unfiltered, along with the relevant stuff, in an eternal stream. And the last hit of dopamine only accelerates the need for another one.”

Egan concludes that we should try to engage in activities like gardening and deep reading that require long-term attention.

As someone who has taught online courses at the college level since the 1990s, I have been concerned that the efficiency of an online discussion board, blog, or wiki, encourages both me and my students to write shorter than longer pieces if we want our colleagues to read what is posted.  Once I recognized this, I began to integrate more deep reading assignments not just in my online courses but all my courses.  I am fond of telling students to take a substantive article or book and read word for word and savor and reflect on what the author is saying.  Yes, I have gotten funny looks from them as they text or check their email on their iPhones or other mobile devices but I believe that while our digital life styles have forced us to be quicker in how we share and transact data and information, there are many (and maybe the most important) aspects of our existence that require careful reflection and contemplation.

Tony 

Dear Commons Community,

The National Review‘s special Trump issue, endorsed by twenty-three prominent conservatives, features a blistering editorial opposing his bid for the presidency and calling him a threat to conservatism.  Trump “is not deserving of conservative support in the caucuses and primaries. Trump is a philosophically unmoored political opportunist who would trash the broad conservative ideological consensus within the GOP in favor of a free-floating populism with strong-man overtones,” an article written by the Editors titled “Against Trump,” claims, adding that: “Trump’s political opinions have wobbled all over the lot.”  

The editorial concludes with a stern warning to Republicans:

“Trump nevertheless offers a valuable warning for the Republican party. If responsible men irresponsibly ignore an issue as important as immigration, it will be taken up by the reckless. If they cannot explain their Beltway maneuvers — worse, if their maneuvering is indefensible — they will be rejected by their own voters. If they cannot advance a compelling working-class agenda, the legitimate anxieties and discontents of blue-collar voters will be exploited by demagogues. We sympathize with many of the complaints of Trump supporters about the GOP, but that doesn’t make the mogul any less flawed a vessel for them.

Some conservatives have made it their business to make excuses for Trump and duly get pats on the head from him. Count us out. Donald Trump is a menace to American conservatism who would take the work of generations and trample it underfoot in behalf of a populism as heedless and crude as the Donald himself.”

No doubt about the message in this editorial and sound advice for the Republican Party.

Tony

Dear Commons Community,

The New York Daily News and the New York Times reported yesterday that parents of 13 current and former students of Success Academy filed a complaint with U.S. Education Department on Wednesday, accusing the charter school network of discriminating against students with disabilities by denying them accommodations and in some cases pushing them out.

Success Academy is a network of 34 charter schools in New York City known for  its strict disciplinary policies. Its critics have long asserted that Success pushes out underperforming or difficult students, which the network denies.  As reported in The Daily News:

“The city’s largest charter school chain has been violating the civil rights of students with disabilities for years, a group of parents say in a formal complaint lodged Wednesday with the U.S. Department of Education.

The parents of 13 special needs students claim the Success Charter Network, which is run by former City Councilwoman Eva Moskowitz, “has engaged in ongoing systemic policies that violate” federal laws protecting the disabled. It cites eight Success schools in Manhattan, Brooklyn and the Bronx where the parents’ children were enrolled.

The allegations include:

• refusing to provide special education pupils appropriate services required by law, while often retaining the students to repeat a grade;
• multiple suspensions of students without keeping formal records of all those actions, without the due process required by federal law, and without providing alternative instruction;
• harassing parents to transfer their children back into regular public schools; and even calling 911 to have children as young as 5 transported to emergency rooms when parents don’t pick them up immediately as requested.

“Charter schools like Success Academy should follow the same rules as traditional public schools and protect — not punish — children with disabilities,” Public Advocate Letitia James said.

James joined the complaint, as did City Councilman Daniel Dromm, chair of the council’s Education Committee, and five private non-profit legal advocacy groups. All are calling for federal action.

The charter network did not immediately address the specific allegations.

“We are not in a position to comment on a complaint that we have not seen,” Ann Powell, a spokeswoman for Success Charter Network, said. “We are proud to serve 1,400 students who have special needs.”

This action has been long in coming.  It will be interesting to see how the charter-school friendly U.S. Department of Education pursues this complaint.

Tony

Dear Commons Community,

Harvard University issued a report yesterday calling for major changes in the way college applicants are evaluated for admissions.  Turning the Tide: Inspiring Concern for Others and the Common Good through College Admissions, was endorsed by eighty-two mostly private non-profit colleges.  The report was the work of Making Caring Common, A Project of the Harvard Graduate School of Education.   The Executive Summary states:

“Too often, today’s culture sends young people messages that emphasize personal success rather than concern for others and the common good  And too often the college admissions process—a process that involves admissions offices, guidance counselors, parents and many other stakeholders—contributes to this problem. As a rite of passage for many students and a major focus for many parents, the college admissions process is powerfully positioned to send different messages that help young people become more generous and humane in ways that benefit not only society but students themselves. Yet high school students often perceive colleges as simply valuing their achievements, not their responsibility for others and their communities. While some colleges have diligently sought to convey to applicants the importance of concern for others and the common good, many other colleges have not.

The messages that colleges do send about concern for others are commonly drowned out by the power and frequency of messages from parents and the larger culture emphasizing individual achievement. Further, even when students and parents receive the message that contributions and service to others do count, they often seek to “game” service.

This report advances a new, widely shared vision of college admissions that seeks to respond to this deeply concerning problem. It makes the case that college admissions can send compelling messages that both ethical engagement—especially concern for others and the common good—and intellectual engagement are highly important. Colleges can powerfully collaborate to send different messages to high school students about what colleges value. This report, endorsed by over 80 key stakeholders in college admissions, represents such a collaboration. More specifically, this report takes up three challenges.

First, promoting more meaningful contributions to others, community service and engagement with the public good.

Second, assessing students’ ethical engagement and contributions to others in ways that reflect varying types of family and community contributions across race, culture and class.

Third, redefining achievement in ways that both level the playing field for economically diverse students and reduce excessive achievement pressure…

…Admissions departments’ focus too much on test scores, AP classes, and superficial extra-curricular activities that do not help under-privileged students.  The report makes a strong statement that community involvement — whether that be a service project, or caring for your family — should be emphasized in the application process.

Giving students clear opportunities to report their contributions to their family on their college applications — whether that involves working outside the house, watching over younger siblings, or taking on major household chores — can help under-privileged students, who may not be able to participate in the expensive sports or international trips that so often determine elite college admissions.”

The authors go on to list a number of specific recommendations to admissions processes that would go a long way to correct the concerns highlighted in the report.  It remains to be seen whether these recommendations are implemented particularly in our selective private, non-profit colleges and universities.

Tony
 

Dear Commons Community,

There is a growing struggle at several Catholic colleges and universities where administrators are seeking exemptions to the right of adjunct faculty to unionize.  Manhattan College in New York; Seattle University;  Duquesne University, in Pittsburgh; Saint Xavier University, in Chicago; and Loyola University Chicago have all recently sought religious exemptions from labor law that would end faculty union organizing campaigns.  Two Catholic university groups — the Association of Jesuit Colleges and Universities and the Association of Catholic Colleges and Universities have supported these exemption petitions. However, among other rationales, union organizers are referring to the Catholic Church’s own teachings to support their positions.  As reported in The Huffington Post:

“Since at least the late 1800s, Catholic social teaching has recognized collective bargaining as a tool for social justice. Adjuncts and their allies say the schools are flouting Catholic principles by trying to deny teachers a path to join unions, particularly as Pope Francis rails against income inequality. The schools claim they are merely protecting themselves from government intrusion.

Daniel Kovalik, a lawyer for the United Steelworkers union, which has been organizing adjuncts at Duquesne says:  “If you look at their arguments on those issues, they’re in a box. Going back to Pope Leo XIII, the Catholic Church has encouraged employers to recognize unions. With Pope Francis, it’s even more embarrassing to take a position counter to that.”

In a statement to HuffPost, a Manhattan College spokesperson said its adjuncts play an “indispensable role” at the school, but it must be able to manage its relationship with them “free of [government] oversight.” 

“We believe that it would be irresponsible not to question vigorously the right of the government to insert itself into decisions that directly affect the heart and soul of our institution, not because of opposition to employees or antipathy to the rights of working people,” the college said.

Critics of that stance quickly point to Rerum Novarum, the encyclical on capital and labor issued by Pope Leo XIII. In this 1891 open letter to the Catholic bishops, the pope offered a few prescriptions for alleviating the “misery and wretchedness” he saw among the working classes of the Gilded Age. Near the top of his list was the right to free association with groups that can close the gap between rich and poor. “The most important of all are workingmen’s unions,” the pope wrote.

Just six years ago, in his encyclical Caritas in Veritate, Pope Benedict XVI wrote that his predecessor’s appeal for unionism was even more relevant in an age of globalization. Unions, the pope said, were becoming too weak to effectively advocate for the working class. Calls to promote collective bargaining, Benedict urged, “must therefore be honored today even more than in the past.”

The adjuncts are in the right here not just on religious teaching grounds but also on common decency grounds.  All of us in higher education know that adjunct faculty are among the most exploited class of workers in our profession.

Tony

Dear Common Community,

As if we did not have enough to worry about, Stephen Hawking, one of our generation’s most respected physicists, has suggested that the human race is in danger of being wiped out in the next 100 years.  According to the BBC, the physicist says he believes humanity will face dangerous scenarios of our own making during the next century, including nuclear war, global warming and genetically-engineered viruses.

And he told the Radio Times further progress in science and technology could increase that risk. “We are not going to stop making progress, or reverse it, so we must [recognize] the dangers and control them.”

Hawking has voiced his concerns on this topic before. Last year, he warned that artificial intelligence could wipe out the human race.

These latest comments come just days before Hawking is scheduled to give this year’s BBC Reith Lectures, which will explore research into black holes.

The first part of the lecture will air on BBC Radio 4 Jan. 26, and you can catch part two Feb. 2.

Tony

Dear Commons Community,

Last week, the Los Angeles Unified School Board in a 7-0 vote appointed Michelle King as its new superintendent.  Ms. King is African-American and has served the school district all her life and most recently as Chief Deputy Superintendent.  As reported in the Los Angeles Times:

“For months, a high-profile head-hunting firm searched the nation for a new superintendent of the Los Angeles Unified School District. On Monday evening, the Board of Education gave the job to a candidate who was part of the district all along: Chief Deputy Supt. Michelle King.

Some education experts cheered the decision. Others winced. Few thought that finding a leader for the district was an easy task.

The school board had wanted a unanimous decision to emphasize strong support for a new leader, and members split over several finalists before uniting in a 7-0 vote for King.

Many in the district consider King, whose current district salary is $303,505, a reliable choice because she came up through the system.

“We didn’t know the long and winding road would lead us to our own door when we started,” said school board President Steve Zimmer. “It was the right road and the right door.”

King, 54, began her ascent into district leadership as a respected high school principal, then kept a low profile as a senior administrator. Her views on where she would like to take Los Angeles Unified remained a mystery — as is protocol within the $7-billion bureaucracy, at least for administrators who aren’t in charge.

But board members said they appreciated her knowledge of L.A. Unified, which, they concluded, would allow her to tackle the school system’s problems without delay.

She replaces Ramon C. Cortines, who retired Jan. 2 after serving three times as leader of the nation’s second-largest school system.

Charles Kerchner, a research professor at Claremont Graduate University, hailed the choice as a vote for stability, saying previous outsiders for the top job had not fared well — including former Colorado Gov. Roy Romer, retired Vice Adm. David L. Brewer and educator John Deasy.

“The notion that an outsider could come in and, by dint of personality and power, turn this ship around has been manifestly unsuccessful for the last 15 years,” Kerchner said.

David Plank, a Stanford University professor and the executive director of Policy Analysis for California Education, said the selection of an outsider would have signaled an unrealistic expectation that someone new could solve the district’s problems. “It almost never happens,” Plank said.

David Rattray of the Los Angeles Area Chamber of Commerce said King’s deep experience with L.A. Unified as a student, teacher and administrator would ensure there would be no delay in moving forward. He said he had worked for years with King on such projects as reorganizing high schools into smaller learning communities and found her a “consummate team player” able to build relationships with students and parents, business and labor groups, and community members.”

We wish Ms. King well and great success!

Tony

Dear Commons Community,

The three candidates for the Democratic nomination for president participated in a debate last night, hosted by NBC News. Hillary Clinton, Bernie Sanders, and Martin O’Malley focused on the issues and avoided personal attacks. Income inequality, gun control, the Middle East, an unfair judicial system, big money influence, climate change, and education were all mentioned. Unlike the recent Republican debate, petty attacks were few.  When goaded by the debate moderator, Sanders refused to get into a discussion about Bill Clinton’s infidelities.  Hillary Clinton appears to be tying her campaign to President Obama and stressed that she would build on his legacy.  Sanders appears more ready to take a fresh look at a number of issues plaguing our country.  He does not see incremental change but more extensive redirections.

A good evening for Democrats!

Tony

Dear Commons Community,

Today, we  remember with affection and gratitude, the contribution of Martin Luther King, Jr. to our country.  His messages of peace, racial understanding, and caring for children in poverty are as important today as five decades ago.  

Larry Shore, our colleague at Hunter College, was good enough this morning to make available a digital copy of a speech, Dr. King gave at Hunter College in 1965.  Read it out loud and you will feel his compassion, energy, and wisdom.

Tony

Dear Commons Community,

For the past week, there was been much buzz about Ted Cruz’s disparaging comments about New York values.  Donald Trump rung Cruz’s bell during the Republican Party’s presidential debate on Thursday over these comments.  But I want to thank Cruz for accomplishing something that no one else has been able to – unite New York State Governor Cuomo and New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio.  Since both have been in office, they have worked at cross purposes and with antagonism to each other much to the dismay of most New Yorkers and especially Democrats.  On Friday, the New York Daily News published an article written jointly by the two, responding to Cruz’s attack on New Yorkers and their values.  Here is the article in its entirety.

——————————————————-

Take that, Ted Cruz! Gov. Cuomo, Mayor de Blasio respond with real New York values

BY BILL DE BLASIO, ANDREW M. CUOMO 

NEW YORK DAILY NEWS

Friday, January 15, 2016, 8:27 PM

For the last week, Ted Cruz has settled on a campaign strategy that includes disparaging New York’s values. In a misguided attempt to profit from the politics of division, he has decided to write off and vilify a city of 8.5 million people and a state of 20 million.

For someone who has so much hostility toward our city and state, he spends an awful lot of time begging for money from our residents. According to the FEC, Cruz has raised close to half a million dollars from New York donors this election cycle alone. If he had any class or possessed true presidential timber, Ted Cruz would offer New Yorkers a real apology instead of sarcasm — not because we need it, but to prove he’s not a hypocrite. His rhetoric this week is unfit for anyone who hopes to lead the American people.

Politics must be about harnessing government to better people’s lives and move the country forward. We live in challenging times, and we need thoughtful leadership. Cruz’s latest strategy — disparaging New Yorkers and questioning our values — is anything but thoughtful. Instead, it is political cynicism at its worst.

Hate is never an acceptable political tool. And in New York, we reject those who seek to use it for personal gain. Instead, we welcome people of all backgrounds, and we embrace immigrants with open arms. We have forged one city, one state, and one family. Throughout our nation’s history, New York has been the gateway to opportunity and the driver of the American Dream — both for people born here, and those born on other shores who come here to achieve that magnificent Dream.

New York has also shown the nation what it means to truly come together in times of trouble, to overcome great tragedy, and to emerge even stronger than before. From the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, to the devastation of Hurricane Sandy, New Yorkers have joined hands with people from across the country and around the world to rebuild what had been destroyed, and to comfort those who experienced grave loss.

Emma Lazarus captured New York values best. Her poem, “The New Colossus” is inscribed at the base of the Statue of Liberty — in New York harbor. Ted Cruz has either forgotten or never heard Lazarus’ timeless lines, and we think he should:

“Give me your tired, your poor,

Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free,

The wretched refuse of your teeming shore.

Send these, the homeless, tempest-tost to me,

I lift my lamp beside the golden door!”

Those are New York values. Acceptance. Compassion. Tolerance. Resilience. Equality. The principles that built the greatest nation on the earth, and that continue to help guide it today. New York welcomed people through Ellis Island. Ted Cruz would reject them. New York is strengthening the middle class. Ted Cruz wants to dismantle it. One World Trade Center stands today as a beacon of freedom around the world because of New York values.”

——————————————————–

This is a well-stated response to Cruz. It would be a big plus if Cuomo and de Blasio could use their partnership and co-authorship of this article to unite and collaborate on important New York issues such as housing, education, and health care. Maybe Hillary Clinton or Bernie Sanders, two Democratic candidates with New York ties, could assist in brokering a relationship between the two.

Tony