What to Expect from the 1st Public Hearing on the Jan. 6 Insurrection – Scheduled for this Thursday Night!

Jan. 6 committee may hold prime-time hearings

 

Dear Commons Community,

The House committee investigating the Jan. 6 attack on the U.S. Capitol will go public with its findings starting this week as lawmakers hope to show the American public how democracy came to the brink of disaster.

A series of hearings that will take place over the next several weeks begin with a prime-time session this Thursday night (June 9th)  in which the nine-member panel plans to give an overview of its 11-month investigation. More than 1,000 people have been interviewed by the panel, and only snippets of that testimony have been revealed to the public, mostly through court filings.

What you need to know ahead of the hearing:

WHEN WILL THE HEARING TAKE PLACE?

The first of six hearings is set to go live at 8 p.m. EDT on Thursday. It will take place in a large House office building in the U.S. Capitol complex. Lawmakers plan to have witnesses testify and to display a series of never-before-seen images and exhibits relating to the lead-up to the insurrection and the attack itself.

HOW TO WATCH THE HEARING

Several major networks and cable news programs are expected to carry the first hearing live in its prime-time slot. The committee is also expected to live-stream it on C-SPAN and on  its YouTube page.

WHO IS EXPECTED TO TESTIFY?

The select committee has yet to release details about who is expected to testify Thursday. But the public hearing, unlike other committee hearings, will be a mixture of traditional testimony as well as a multimedia presentation.

WHAT WILL THE HEARING ENTAIL?

The first hearing is expected to be a table-setter for the rest of the subsequent hearings. The committee, comprised of seven Democrats and two Republicans, plans to lay out several areas of information it has gathered throughout its investigation.

The panel’s probe has so far been divided into a series of focus areas, including the efforts by former President Trump and his allies to cast doubt on the election and halt the certification of President Joe Biden’s victory; the financing and organizing of rallies in Washington that took place before the attack; security failures by Capitol Police and federal agencies; and the actions of the rioters themselves.

WILL THERE BE NEW DETAILS ABOUT THE INSURRECTION?

Several members of the committee have promised new and explosive information to arise from the public hearings, but it remains unclear what that will entail.

The hearings are expected to be exhaustive but not the final word from the committee. It plans to release subsequent reports on its findings, including recommendations on legislative reforms, ahead of the midterm elections.

It is my sense that there will be a substantial audience for this hearing.

Tony

Emmeline Ortiz:  Policy Paper on English Language Learning!

Dear Commons Community,

One of my doctoral students, Emmeline Ortiz, recently wrote an excellent policy paper on English language learning entitled, Commissioner’s Regulations Part-154: Language Policies in New York State for Multilingual Learner Programs and Services.  Below is a brief description and my comments.

This paper covers the history, controversies, and present state of English language learning as an incredibly important aspect of education policy especially in schools with large numbers of bilingual students such as here in New York City.   As background for instance, the fate of Bilingual Education was severely scrutinized in the 1990s.  See url:  https://www.nytimes.com/2000/10/22/nyregion/answers-english-question-instead-ending-program-new-york-may-offer-choice.html  Read especially the comments made by former  Schools Chancellor Ramon Cortines.  Emmeline also cites the work of Kate Menken and Christian Solorza, both of whom worked closely with Ofelia Garcia at the CUNY Graduate Center in the Urban Education program. Among other examples, Emmeline comments about Hostos Community College which was a grand initiative on the part of CUNY.  There is a dissertation or two waiting to be written about it. 

If you are at all interested in education policy related to English language learning, you will find Emmeline’s paper fine reading!  I highly recommend it!

Below is her statement of purpose for writing this paper.

Tony


Purpose

            New York has always been a state of immigrants and continues to represent a diverse population of individuals. This diversity is reflected in our public education system, as millions of culturally and linguistically diverse students attend our schools on a daily basis. To properly serve the multilingual learner (ML) population, the New York State Education Department (NYSED) has created and continues to amend the Commissioner’s Regulations Part 154 (CR-154). This policy is rooted in a long history of language activism and is a result of federal policy, court case decisions, and state laws and regulations passed by the Board of Regents. It is necessary to understand the historical context and language of this policy to work towards an equitable education system for MLs, a population that is growing and often underachieving (Olsen, 2014).

References

Olsen, L. (2014). Meeting the unique needs of long term english language learners. National Education Association, 1-42.

 

Republican Tom Rice:  “Trump is a narcissist… driven by attention … and … revenge”

Office of the Clerk, U.S. House of Representatives - Tom Rice

 Tom Rice

Dear Commons Community,

South Carolina’s Tom Rice was one of 10 House Republicans who voted to impeach former President Donald Trump for inciting the Jan. 6 attack on the U.S. Capitol.

Now, as Rice fights an uphill battle for his political life in the heart of Trump country, he is standing by that choice — calling it “the conservative vote” in an interview with ABC News Chief Washington Correspondent Jonathan Karl that aired yesterday on “This Week.”

“I did it then. And I would do it again tomorrow,” Rice said.

Rice said Trump deserved to be impeached for potentially endangering former Vice President Mike Pence and his family at the Capitol and not acting more quickly to stop the deadly riot as it unfolded last year.

“When he watched the Capitol, the ‘People’s House,’ being sacked, when he watched the Capitol Police officers being beaten for three or four hours and lifted not one thing or to stop it — I was livid then and I’m livid today about it,” Rice recalled. “And it was very clear to me I took an oath to protect the Constitution.”

Trump has vowed vengeance against Rice, endorsing one of his six primary opponents and holding a rally in his district in March.

“Right here, in the 7th district, Tom Rice, a disaster,” Trump said to boos. “He’s respected by no one, he’s laughed at in Washington.”

A mild-mannered accountant and tax attorney who helped craft the 2017 Republican tax law Trump signed into law, Rice says he voted overwhelmingly in favor of Trump’s agenda in Congress.

“If I am a ‘disaster,’ and a ‘total fool’ and I voted with him 169 times out of 184, what does that make him?” he said to Karl. “I was following his lead.”

“He’s a narcissist, and he’s driven by attention, and he’s driven by revenge,” Rice said of Trump.

He also warned his party against rallying around the former president if Trump seeks the Oval Office again, as Trump has often hinted.

“I think it will hurt us,” Rice said. “We’ll get painted more in the corner of extremism, they’ll try to label us as extremist. And he’ll feed that.”

Rice criticized Republicans, including GOP Leader Kevin McCarthy, of California, for quickly embracing Trump in the weeks after the Capitol attack.

He declined to say whether McCarthy should be speaker if Republicans win back the House in November.

“I’m not gonna answer that one right now,” he told ABC’s Karl. “We’ll see what happens.”

Rice praised Rep. Liz Cheney, R-Wyo., who also voted to impeach Trump and now serves as the vice chair of the Jan. 6 committee, calling her a “real Republican.” Like Rice, Cheney drew Trump’s wrath for criticizing him and is contending with her own primary challenge.

“She’d be a great speaker,” Rice said. “She is very conservative and I think she’s a fearless leader.”

But before November, Rice needs to defend his seat in Congress on June 14, when he’ll face off against six other candidates — including Trump-endorsed state Rep. Russell Fry — for the Republican nomination.

The crowded field makes it unlikely that any of the candidates will win more than 50% of the vote and avoid a runoff later this month between the top two finishers, Jerry Rovner, the Republican party chairman in Rice’s district, told ABC News.

Rovner, who is officially neutral in the primary but critical of Rice’s position on impeachment, said Rice’s vote could be a “major problem with a lot of constituents” given Trump’s popularity in the area.

“He could vote 800 times the way they [want him to] vote, but the one thing he voted on that got the press, they were very upset about,” Rovner said of Rice. “And that’s really what it comes down to.”

Rice’s balancing act was on full display at a recent forum in Myrtle Beach, South Carolina, where some voters who had previously supported him walked out when he defended his impeachment vote.

“He’s a traitor, and I just don’t trust him,” Lyne Vail told ABC News. “If you can’t back your party, he’s not going to back you or me.”

Billy Zevgolis, a Myrtle Beach businessman and undecided voter, said he also disagreed with Rice’s impeachment vote.

“Right now, Trump is our guy,” he told ABC News. “I don’t like his personality, but his politics are right on the money. His values are aligned with mine.”

Rice hopes he can convince enough voters to overlook his stance on Trump’s impeachment even if they don’t agree with it. He could also benefit from the state’s open primaries, which allow Democrats and independents to vote in the GOP race.

Even if he loses, Rice has “absolutely” no regrets, he said.

“You know that, like your obituary, the first sentence is going to be ‘Tom Rice, who was a Republican member of Congress, voted to impeach Donald Trump,’” Karl told him.

“So be it,” he said. “I’ll wear it like a badge. So be it.”

Wear it proudly Congressman Rice!

Tony

 

GAO  Says Congress Should Scrutinize Higher Ed’s Use of Predictive Analytics for Admissions!

BaumanGAO.jpg

Illustration by The Chronicle of Higher Education

Dear Commons Community,

A new report from the US Government Accountability Office is urging Congress to probe how higher education uses consumer scores, algorithms, and other big-data products to determine recruitment, admissions and financial aid decisions.

The GAO also encouraged Congress to consider bolstering disclosure requirements and other consumer protections relevant to predictive analytics used for these decisions.

“Among the issues that should be considered are the rights of consumers to view and correct data used in the creation of scores and to be informed of scores’ uses and potential effects,” the office recommended.  As reported by The Chronicle of Higher Education.

Predictive analytics have been heralded as a means to improve many facets of higher education, like bolstering retention and more equitably apportioning institutional aid, but they are not without their detractors. Concerns for student privacy abound. And critics worry poorly designed or understood models can embed and automate discriminatory behavior across an institution’s operations.

“Colleges were often not aware of the data and methods used to create scores used in marketing, recruiting, and sometimes determining financial-aid amounts for students,” the GAO wrote in its report, summarizing an exchange the agency had with one industry expert, and describing higher ed’s uses of predictive analytics that most concerned the office.

The sheer complexity of certain algorithms presented another challenge. After reviewing one scoring product, used to identify and flag students at risk of dropping out or transferring to another college, GAO researchers observed the breadth of variables — “potentially hundreds” — evidently relevant to the underlying model’s assessment of risk.

Of most concern to the GAO? The weight assigned by certain models to an individual student’s points of origin — including the neighborhood where they live and the high school they attend.

“Although this methodology may be innocuous when used for certain purposes, we found examples of its use that could have a negative effect if scores were incorrect,“ the agency wrote. Put more bluntly: In a country where race, wealth, and geography are inextricably linked, models and algorithms can rationalize and endorse biases against minority and low-income students,

As an example, GAO refers to an unnamed scoring product used by admissions offices to identify students who “will be attracted to their college and match their schools’ enrollment goals” — in essence, a lead-generation service. A prospective student’s neighborhood and high school dictates which lists their contact information will appear on. Each list is in turn assigned its own respective set of scores — measures of each cohort’s shared socioeconomic, demographic, and “educationally relevant” characteristics. Using these scored lists, admissions professionals can deploy recruitment strategies tailored to their respective institution’s admissions goals.

But what about high-achieving students enrolled at poor-performing or underfunded high schools? How can a college target those students for recruitment if where they live and learn precludes them from being included in colleges’ enrollment efforts? To the Government Accountability Office, it’s a recipe for disparate treatment.

“Some students may not fit the predominant characteristics of their neighborhood or high school and may miss out on recruiting efforts others receive,” the GAO warns.

To guard against pitfalls like these, colleges and universities should consult with diversity, equity, and inclusion professionals, Jenay Robert, a researcher at Educause, a nonprofit association focused on the intersection of technology and higher education, said in a statement. If analytics staff don’t work with diversity experts with their institution’s specific needs in mind, “big-data analytics can do more harm than good,” she said.

Higher education also lacks broadly accepted policies on this topic, she said: “We’ve yet to establish a widely used ethical framework that puts forth best practices for engaging in big-data analytics.“

In the absence of federal regulations on the use of algorithms, colleges and universities have been left to reconcile how their institutional interests comport with the interests of individual students — and to what extent this usage serves the broader public good. And in theory, there should be no distinction. For instance, when an institution uses predictive analytics to allocate scholarship aid to those who might have forgone college without it, the public good is served.

But reality is often more complicated. Big-data products and models afford colleges and universities capabilities for fine-grained analysis that may not have been previously available to most admissions offices. In testimony to the GAO, one industry expert posited a scenario in which a college might draw certain conclusions from a prospective student’s repeated campus or website visits — conclusions ultimately resulting in less scholarship money awarded to this prospective student relative to similarly situated peers.

For a college, the calculus is simple: Why offer significant scholarship aid to a student who is likely to attend your institution regardless? For the country, though, a different dilemma emerges: Even if there is more scholarship money to go around, is the public good really best served when a student is penalized for making use of campus visits and online research prior to embarking on one of the most significant investments in American life?

The GAO report raises interesting issues that colleges and universities should consider!

Below are summaries of why the GAO did this report and what it recommends.

Tony


Why GAO Did This Study

The growing use of consumer scores to make decisions affecting consumers has raised questions among some in Congress and others about their usage and potential risks. Scores are generated using various pieces of information about consumers, which can include public data. Some may derive from complex methodologies using technologies such as artificial intelligence. GAO was asked to review how predictive consumer scores are used and regulated. This report examines:

(1) how such scores are used,

(2) the potential risks to consumers, and

(3) federal consumer protections for scores.

The review is focused on selected types of scores, some of which may fall outside of the Fair Credit Reporting Act. GAO analyzed publicly available information from the websites of a nongeneralizable sample of 49 consumer scores, selected based on literature reviews and stakeholder interviews; reviewed studies by academics and consumer advocates; interviewed score creators, industry organizations, consumer advocates, and federal officials; and reviewed applicable laws and regulations.


What GAO Recommends

Congress should consider implementing appropriate consumer protections for consumer scores beyond those currently afforded under existing federal laws. Among the issues that should be considered are the rights of consumers to view and correct data used in the creation of
scores and to be informed of scores’ uses and potential effects

 

Teachers after Texas attack: ‘None of us are built for this’

National Day of Action Against Gun Violence in Schools - April 20, 2018

 

Dear Commons Community,

John Raby wrote the following yesterday for the Associated Press describing the pressures being put on teachers in our schools especially given the violence that we see in places like Uvalde, Texas.

Sad commentary!

Tony

——————————————————-

“Teacher Jessica Salfia was putting up graduation balloons last month at her West Virginia high school when two of them popped, setting off panic in a crowded hallway between classes.

One student dropped to the floor. Two others lunged into open classrooms. Salfia quickly shouted, “It’s balloons! Balloons!” and apologized as the teenagers realized the noise didn’t come from gunshots.

The moment of terror at Spring Mills High School in Martinsburg, about 80 miles (124 kilometers) northwest of Washington happened May 23, the day before a gunman fatally shot 19 children and two teachers in a classroom in Uvalde, Texas. The reaction reflects the fear that pervades the nation’s schools and taxes its teachers — even those who have never experienced such violence — and it comes on top of the strain imposed by the coronavirus pandemic.

Salfia has a more direct connection to gun threats than most. Her mother, also a West Virginia teacher, found herself staring down a student with a gun in her classroom seven years ago. After talking to him for some two hours, she was hailed for her role in helping bring the incident to a peaceful end.

For any teacher standing in front of a classroom in 21st century America, the job seems to ask the impossible. Already expected to be guidance counselors, social workers, surrogate parents and more to their students, teachers are sometimes called on to be protectors, too.

The U.S. public school landscape has changed markedly since the Columbine school shooting in Colorado in 1999, and Salfia said teachers think about the risks every day.

“What would happen if we go into a lockdown? What would happen if I hear gunshots?” she said. “What would happen if one of my students came to school armed that day? This is a constant thread of thought.”

George Theoharis was a teacher and principal for a decade and has spent the past 18 years training teachers and school administrators at Syracuse University. He said teachers are stretched more now than ever — even more than last year, “when the pandemic was newer.”

“We’re sort of left in this moment where we do expect teachers and schools to solve all our problems and do it quickly,” he said.

Schools nationwide have been dealing with widespread episodes of misbehavior since the return to in-person learning, which has been accompanied by soaring student mental health needs. In growing numbers, teens have been turning to gun violence to resolve spur-of-the-moment conflicts, researchers say.

In Nashville, Tennessee, three Inglewood Elementary School staffers sprang into action last month to restrain a man who had hopped a fence. After children on the playground were directed inside, the man followed them, but he was tackled by kindergarten teacher Rachel Davis.

At one point, secretary Katrina “Nikki” Thomas held him in a headlock. They and school bookkeeper Shay Patton cornered the man, who didn’t have a gun, inside the school until authorities arrived. All three employees were hurt.

“For me, it was just like, these kids are innocent,” Patton said. “I just knew that they couldn’t protect themselves, so it was on us to do it. And I didn’t think twice.”

The three employees watched in horror less than two weeks later as news of the Uvalde shooting unfolded.

“In my head, immediately I thought, ‘That could have been me and my kids,’” Davis said. “That could have been us out there on that playground with this … guy if he had had a gun on him.”

Adding to frustration for some educators was the scapegoating of a teacher initially blamed for propping open the door a gunman used to enter the Uvalde, Texas elementary school. Days later, officials said the teacher had closed the door, but it didn’t lock.

Kindergarten teacher Ana Hernandez said Texas educators are anxious after a rough patch that has lasted years and shows no sign of ending. She and a group of colleagues from Dilley drove an hour to Uvalde to do all they could, delivering donated stuffed animals and cases of water. She said more is needed.

“Changes have to be done for us to feel secure in a classroom as a teacher (and) for students also to feel secure and safe in a classroom,” she said.

“It interferes with their ability to function, and it also interferes with students’ ability to learn,” Jennings said. “So when things like this happen, the school shootings, it shuts everybody down. It’s very hard to learn when you’re afraid for your life.”

Salfia says the load teachers carry is daunting.

“You’re a first responder. You’re a first reporter. If there’s an issue in the home, you are sometimes the only chance a kid has at love, at getting food that day, at maybe getting a warm and safe place to be that day. The scope of the job is huge right now.”

The pandemic added the challenge of remote learning, classroom sanitizing and finding enough substitute teachers to keep schools running.

There’s also a sense that tragedies continue to happen, and politicians rarely do anything about it.

“It is so hard to know that, at any moment, that reality could also be your reality, or the reality of your children,” said Salfia, a mother of three students. “My youngest is the same age as the kids who were killed in Texas. It sharpens everything, I think, especially when you’re in a classroom.”

In August 2015, the new school year had barely started for Salfia’s mother, teacher Twila Smith, when a freshman entered Smith’s world studies class at Philip Barbour High School and drew a gun he had taken from his home.

For about 45 minutes, Smith said, no one outside the room knew the class was being held hostage. She diverted his attention from other students and tried to keep him talking while she walked around the room with him.

Eventually, police persuaded the boy to let everyone go. After at least another hour and a half, his pastor helped convince the boy to surrender. A few months later, he was sentenced to a juvenile facility until he turns 21.

Smith, who has a background in dealing with students with behavior problems, was among those hailed as heroes, a label she deflected.

“I think my training just came into play,” Smith said. “And then I had 29 freshmen sitting there looking at me, and I would have to say that they were the heroes. Because they did everything I told them to do, and they did everything he told them to do. And they stayed fairly calm.”

Smith saw those freshmen through to graduation in 2019. Then she retired.

Back at Spring Mills High, one of Salfia’s former students now works in her department as a first-year English teacher. When asked what she tells others hoping to go into her field, Salfia repeated the ex-pupil’s description of what today’s teachers go through: “None of us are built for this.” But their commitment to the profession is such that they “are only built for it,” and could scarcely consider any other career.

“This is the only job I can imagine doing,” Salfia said. “But it is also the hardest job I can imagine doing.”

After the balloons popped, “kids were visibly rattled,” she recalled. “Some people were a little bit angry at me, I think, in reaction to that fear that everyone had experienced momentarily.”

She knows that’s the world she and her students live in now.

“We are all, at any moment, prepared to run from that sound.”

 

Sen. Ben Sasse calls out weirdos dividing country – “This is a government of the weirdos, by the weirdos and for the weirdos”

A Time for Choosing with Senator Ben Sasse - YouTube

Dear Commons Community,

Senator Ben Sass ( R-Neb.) lit into the “weirdos” that he said are tearing the United States apart, in a speech at the Reagan Foundation that connected the hyperbolic political debates of the last few years with the global threats facing the nation.

The Nebraska Republican ripped into “performance artists” on the far left and far right who have dominated politics for close to a decade, saying they’re more focused on getting likes and retweets for themselves on social media than on preserving the United States’ standing as a global superpower amid new threats from adversaries like China.  As reported by Yahoo News.

“This is a government of the weirdos, by the weirdos and for the weirdos,” Sasse said Thursday night in California. “Politicians who spend their days shouting in Congress so they can spend their nights shouting on cable, are peddling crack — mostly to the already addicted, but also with glittery hopes of finding a new angry octogenarian out there.”

Sasse, a former university president who was often chided through the Trump administration for failing to pick a clear side in the many battles surrounding the former president, said that while “jackwagon” politicians and “isolationists” increase the intensity of their stunts, the U.S. is falling behind as a global superpower.

“The last 75 years, with the U.S. as the globe’s unrivaled superpower, we have seen shocking peace and shocking prosperity, by every historical measure,” Sasse said. “Every generation has a choice, to get off the couch and build — or to resign as the rich kid who lets the family business fall apart. Because, make no mistake, the loss of confidence we’re experiencing has disastrous real-world effects.”

Sasse spoke at the Reagan Foundation’s “A Time for Choosing” speaker series, which has featured a wide array of Republicans eyeing runs for the White House in 2024, from former Vice President Mike Pence to South Dakota Gov. Kristi Noem — but, notably, not including former President Donald Trump.

Politicos and reporters are still divining the shape and direction of the Republican Party almost 18 months since Trump left office. A series of recent primaries have sometimes shown Trump with an iron grip on the extremes of the GOP, but also unable to command that base of voters in the way that he did when he was in the White House.

Georgia Republican voters’ rejection of Trump’s picks for governor and secretary of state last week appears to have opened a door in the party for more “traditional” Republicans on the Reagan model.

Thursday’s speech was a “definitional” statement for Sasse, pulling together his previous arguments about the direction of the country and the GOP into a clear thesis about what should come next, a Sasse aide told Yahoo News on Friday morning.

Sasse wrote the speech over several days, working off ideas written on note cards that he shuffled and arranged at his home as he pulled the speech together, the aide said.

Sasse argued throughout that Twitter and cable news had hijacked the national debate, representing the voices of only “2%” of the country, while alienating the majority of voters trying to live their lives, get their kids to school and meet their mortgage payments.

“Political algorithms run on rage,” Sasse said. “Nobody goes viral for being honest that 280 characters probably won’t allow the space to have an honest debate. It’s dumb to talk about a particular piece of federal legislation as either the arrival of heaven on earth or the harbinger of hell by Tuesday.”

There’s some evidence that Sasse’s approach may resonate — most polling has found that voters across the board are more concerned about inflation, gas prices and pocketbook issues than about Trump’s 2020 election lie and culture war battles, issues that have dominated the party’s far-right elements.

Republican operatives, however, remain deeply skeptical that anyone can dislodge Trump’s hold on the party. He is still the most popular candidate in hypothetical 2024 matchups. Meanwhile, benchmark issues of his time in office, specifically immigration and its white supremacist offshoot, the “great replacement theory,” continue to resonate with Republican voters.

Sasse is calling it as it is!

Tony

OLC Blended Learning Symposium on June 21st!

Dear Colleagues,

Some of you might be interested in a Blended Learning Symposium that is being sponsored by the Online Learning Consortium on June 21st.  It is a free event and will include a number of speakers who have done significant work over the years on blended learning. You can register at: https://bit.ly/3PYZKQ3.

Below is a description of the symposium.

Tony


OLC Blended Learning Symposium

Come join instructors, designers, and leaders to discuss perspectives on the past, present, and future of blended learning research, what have we learned, what are we doing, and how will we see blended learning impacting our future. This free virtual webinar will be a dynamic session with featured speakers and interaction opportunities. Plan to leave with takeaways to prepare you for the virtual and onsite symposium aligned with OLC Accelerate 2022.

Jun 21, 2022 12:00 PM in Eastern Time (US and Canada)

Former House Speaker Paul Ryan: A ‘Lot’ Of Republicans Wanted To Impeach Trump But ‘Didn’t Have The Guts’

Why The GOP Chose This Man To Respond To Obama : NPR

Dear Commons Community,

Former Republican House Speaker Paul Ryan said at a South Carolina political appearance that “a lot” of Republicans wanted to impeach President Donald Trump but that they “didn’t have the guts.”

The former Wisconsin congressman made the remarks at a gathering Wednesday in Florence, where he praised Rep. Tom Rice (R-S.C.), whom he has endorsed, for having the courage to vote for impeachment after the Jan. 6, 2021, insurrection. Rice and nine other Republicans joined with Democrats to vote for impeachment, making Trump the first president in U.S. history to be impeached twice, although the Senate did not convict him either time.

Rice is now locked in a heated battle for reelection for a sixth term against state Rep. Russell Fry, who is backed by Trump. The former president is determined to punish any Republican who failed to show loyalty to him.  As reported by The Sun News and the Huffington Post.

“There were a lot of people who wanted to vote like Tom but who just didn’t have the guts to do it,” said Ryan, The Myrtle Beach Sun News reported.

“There are a lot of people who say they’re going to vote their conscious, they’re going to vote for the Constitution, they’re going to vote for their convictions, but when it gets hard to do that, they don’t do it,” he said.

“Tom Rice is a man of conviction,” Ryan added.

Rice has argued that Republicans ought to stick with Trump’s policy ideas but abandon the man. He called his House reelection bid a battle between “nerds” like himself and Ryan, who aim to enact conservative policy, and “flamethrowers” who put allegiance to Trump over all else, The Sun reported.

Ryan last week on CNBC criticized “entertainer” lawmakers — from both parties — who strive to develop a noticeable “brand” rather than work with colleagues to pass legislation.

“If you are going to entertain, if you are going to try to show that you’re better than everyone else within your own ecosystem,” it makes it more difficult to compromise and forge policy, Ryan said. It “divides us,” he added.

Ryan, who was speaker of the House from 2015 to 2019, removed himself from the political scrum after 20 years in office and opted not to run for reelection in 2018, following uncomfortable confrontations with then-President Trump.

Ryan initially endorsed Trump in the 2016 presidential campaign but then withdrew his support a month before the election after the “Access Hollywood” tape emerged in which Trump was heard boasting about how he could “grab” women “by the pussy.” Trump then blasted Ryan as disloyal and accused him of deliberately undermining his campaign.

Ryan said in an interview last year that it was “really clear” Trump lost the 2020 election and that it had not been rigged, as Trump and many of his loyalists continue to claim.

We needed more Republicans to come out against the lying Trump then and we still need them to do so now.

Tony

 

 

A New State by State Study Examines Where Students Go to College!

Click on to Enlarge

Dear Commons Community,

A new study co-authored by Craig Wills, the computer-science department chair at Worcester Polytechnic Institute, and Chayanne Sandoval-Williams, a student at WPI, tries to provide insights into where students decide to go to college. This is a subject of importance to higher education policy makers and administrators. College choices are based on a range of factors — cost, location, program offerings, facilities, and more — moving the decision in different directions for individual students.  Here is a summary written by Isha Trivedi of The Chronicle of Higher Education.

Using Ipeds data from 2012, 2018, and 2020, Wills and Sandoval-Williams characterized the college “market” in each state, indicating where students are more likely to stay in state for college and where they’re more likely to migrate elsewhere. The researchers focused on four-year institutions.

On average, 54 percent of all college-bound students attend an in-state public college, while 15 percent attend an in-state private college.

Students in Michigan, Louisiana, and Texas are more likely to attend college in their home states. The researchers described those states as “self-contained markets.”

In Texas, for instance, 91 percent of first-year students are from the state. Among all public colleges, Texas A&M University enrolls the largest number of in-state students, with Pennsylvania State University a close second.

Meanwhile, a larger share of students from New Jersey and Alaska are attending college out of state, compared to the average across all states. Despite that outward migration, institutions in those states are still enrolling a higher than average percentage of in-state students. The trend suggests a need for those states to increase their capacity for in-state students, the study said.

On the other hand, the “relatively fewer” in-state college-bound students and out-of-state first-year students in New Jersey and Alaska could also indicate that colleges in these states are “less attractive” than similar institutions in different states, researchers wrote.

North Dakota, West Virginia, and Utah, however, may have more on-campus capacity than they need for in-state students. While a relatively large share of students from those states decide to stay in state for college, the institutions enroll smaller-than-average shares of in-state students in their first-year classes. Those figures could also indicate that colleges in those states are “more attractive” than peer institutions elsewhere.

The study found that just 6 percent of college-bound students from Utah and West Virginia attend college beyond the immediate region, which the study defines as in state or in an adjoining state.

In contrast, high-school seniors from states including Hawaii and Oregon attend college farthest from their home state. Among specific institutions, the University of Colorado at Boulder and the University of Alabama at Tuscaloosa enroll the lowest percentage of students from the immediate area.

“I was mildly surprised in some cases,” Wills said. For example, he was struck by the broad geographic range that Tulane University draws students from. The reach of some public universities surprised him, too. “I was familiar with institutions like University of Michigan that had maybe a pretty broad reach, even though they are public institutions, but certainly other ones that I was less aware of popped up there,” he said.

Through Ipeds data, the study also examined how college-migration patterns might have been affected by the pandemic.

Wills and Sandoval-Williams found that, during the pandemic, from 2018 to 2020, the share of students studying fully online increased by 27 percentage points, and the percentage of international students at four-year U.S. colleges decreased by nearly 1 percentage point.

Over all, students traveled farther away from home for college during the fall-2020 semester. But a contributing factor might have been the increase in students studying online. They might have been taking classes at a faraway institution without physically migrating to the state.

The percentage of students specifically attending major state universities — “flagship, land-grant, and a half-dozen other major state institutions” — increased during the pandemic, and the distance those students migrated to get to their respective colleges decreased accordingly.

“The major state and national public institutions tended to attract more students because of the pandemic, but the students tended to reside closer to the institution,” the study states.

The study also noted that “national liberal-arts colleges saw a decline both in the number and migration distance of first-year students.”

Historically Black colleges and universities, though, saw an increase in the average number of first-year students, and an increase in how far students were traveling to attend.

Wills said the study could be useful for college administrators or state leaders to determine whether public universities are able to sufficiently address the enrollment needs of in-state students.

Interesting data!  Below is the abstract from the study itself.

Tony

———————————

Migration of American College Students
Craig E. Wills and Chayanne Sandoval-Williams
Computer Science Department
Worcester Polytechnic Institute
WPI-CS-TR-21-07
May 2022

Abstract

This work studies the migration of college-bound students to attend American colleges and universities in the Fall 2020 timeframe. It makes use of the rich IPEDS data source augmented with additional data to determine both the migration patterns and migration distance for each 4-year institution in the U.S. These results are also used to characterize the movement of college students on a per-state basis.

Using the percentages of college-bound students enrolling in-state as well as first-year students enrolled in colleges of the state, we are able to characterize the college “market” of each state. It shows that Texas, Louisiana and Michigan are the most self-contained markets with both a higher than average percentage of college-bound students remaining in state and a higher than average percentage of first-year college students from in-state. The District of Columbia, Vermont and New Hampshire are freer markets with relatively more student movement in and out of the state. The results suggest that more in-state college capacity is needed for college-bound students in New Jersey and Alaska. Colleges in these markets may also be less attractive as these states both enroll relatively fewer in-state college-bound students as well as out-of-state first-year college students. In contrast, the results suggest that North Dakota, West Virginia and Utah may have more college capacity than is needed. Colleges in these markets may also be more attractive as these states both enroll relatively more in-state college-bound students as well as out-of-state first-year college students.

The migration patterns for major state institutions show Texas A&M and the University of Texas have the highest percentage of first year students from their state while the University of Vermont has the lowest. The University of the District of Columbia and the University of Nevada enroll the highest percentage of in-state or adjoining state students while the University of Michigan, University of Colorado and University of Alabama enroll the smallest percentage in their immediate region. First-year students at the University of Hawaii, University of Oregon, Montana State and the University of Colorado have the highest migration distance to attend these institutions.

Similar migration patterns and migration distance are reported for national public universities, national private universities, national liberal arts colleges, historically black colleges and universities, and primarily online institutions. Focusing on migration distance shows that MIT and Stanford, followed by Cal Tech and Dartmouth, have the greatest reach for national privates. Reed College and Thomas Aquinas College, followed by Pomona College and Wellesley College, have the largest migration distance for the liberal arts colleges with Howard University and Clark Atlanta University having the greatest reach for HBCUs.

The results for primarily online institutions show that Southern New Hampshire University enrolls the highest number of first-year students in this group followed by Grand Canyon University and Liberty University. The results show that the University of Phoenix-Arizona, American InterContinental University and Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University-Worldwide have the greatest reach relative to the location of these institutions.

Finally we examine the initial effects of the Covid-19 pandemic by comparing the Fall 2020 data with previous years. Not surprisingly, these initial pandemic results show a significant increase in the number of fully-online students and a drop in first-year international students. There is more variation among institutional groups. On average, institutions in the HBCU and primarily online groups showed an increase both in the average number of first-year students and the migration distance for these students between 2018 and 2020. In contrast, national liberal arts colleges saw a decline both in the number and migration distance of first-year students. The major state and national public institutions tended to attract more students because of the pandemic, but the students tended to reside closer to the institution.

New York Poised to Raise Age to Purchase Semiautomatic Rifles to 21 – It Should be 90!

Increasing The Age To Buy An Assault Rifle In New York Is Stupid

 

Dear Commons Community,

The New York State legislature is poised to ban people under age 21 from buying or possessing a semi-automatic rifle, a major change to state firearm laws pushed through less than three weeks after authorities say an 18-year-old used one of the guns to kill 10 people at a supermarket in Buffalo.

Formal debate on the measure was expected to begin in the state Assembly and Senate yesterday, the last scheduled day of the legislative session.

The bill raising the age limit is the most significant part of a package of gun control bills announced earlier this week by Democratic legislative leaders and Gov. Kathy Hochul.  As reported by various news media.

New York already requires people to be 21 to possess a handgun. Younger people would still be allowed to have other types of rifles and shotguns, but the change in the law would restrict ownership of the type of fast-firing rifles used by the 18-year-old gunmen in the mass shootings in Buffalo and at a Texas elementary school.

Besides raising the legal purchase age to 21, the bill would also require anyone buying a semiautomatic rifle to get a license — something now only required for handguns.

The change would largely impact areas outside of New York City, which already requires permits to possess, carry and purchase any type of firearm and prohibits most applicants under 21.

Elsewhere in New York, people as young as 16 can possess long guns like rifles and shotguns without a license.

New York would join a handful of states — including Florida, Hawaii, Illinois, Vermont and Washington – that require buyers to be at least 21 instead of 18 to purchase some types of long guns. Similar legislation has been proposed in Utah.

California’s attempt to raise the legal buying age for a semiautomatic weapons has been challenged in court.

On May 11, a U.S. Appeals court panel ruled 2-1 that the state’s ban on the sale of semiautomatic weapons to adults under 21 is unconstitutional. The two judges who ruled in the majority were part of Republican President Donald Trump’s wave of conservative-approved nominees that reshaped the famously liberal court.

The National Rifle Association is also challenging Florida’s ban on the sale of rifles to adults under age 21, which was passed in the wake of a 2018 shooting that killed 17 students and staff at a high school in Parkland.

Semiautomatic rifles automatically load each bullet after firing, although firing requires pulling the trigger for each round. That makes it possible for mass murderers to kill more people in a short amount of time.

Another bill set to pass in New York would require new guns to be equipped with microstamping technology, which would allow law enforcement investigators to more easily link weapons to fired bullets.

The state is also expected to pass legislation that would restrict the purchase of body armor and expand the list of people who can apply for an extreme risk protection order, a court order that can temporarily prohibit someone from purchasing or possessing a firearm if they are believed to be a danger to themselves or others.

I recommend that the age limit to purchase semi-automatic weapons be raised to 90!

Tony