Page 187 of 397
1 185 186 187 188 189 397

Disposability in the Age of Disasters: From Dreamers and Puerto Rico to Violence in Las Vegas

By: Henry A. Giroux

Under the reign of Donald Trump, politics has become an extension of war and death has become a permanent attribute of everyday life. Witness the US’s plunge into a dystopian world that bears the menacing markings of what presents itself as an endless series of isolated catastrophes. All of these are inevitably treated as unrelated incidents; victims subject to the toxic blows of fate. Mass misery and mass violence that result from the refusal of a government to address such pervasive and permanent crises are now reinforced by the popular neoliberal assumption that people are completely on their own, solely responsible for the ill fortune they experience. This ideological assumption is reinforced by undermining any critical attention to the conditions produced by stepped-up systemic state violence, or the harsh consequences of a capricious and cruel head of state.

«Progress» and dystopia have become synonymous, just as state-endorsed social provisions and government responsibility are exiled by the neoliberal authorization of freedom as the unbridled promotion of self-interest: a narrow celebration of limitless «choice,» and an emphasis on individual responsibility that ignores broader systemic structures and socially produced problems. Existential security no longer rests on collective foundations, but on privatized solutions and facile appeals to moral character.

Under Trump, a politics of disposability has merged with an ascendant authoritarianism in the United States in which the government’s response to such disparate issues as the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) crisis, the devastation of Puerto Rico by Hurricane Maria and the mass shooting in Las Vegas are met uniformly with state-sanctioned and state-promoted violence.

In an age when market values render democratic values moot, a war culture drives disposability politics. Indeed, the politics of disposability has a long legacy in the United States, and extends from the genocide of Native Americans and slavery, to the increasing criminalization of everyday behaviors and the creation of a mass incarceration state.

In the 1970s, the politics of disposability, guided by the growing financialization of a neoliberal economy, manifested itself primarily in the form of legislation that undermined the welfare state, social provisions and public goods, while expanding the carceral state. This was part of the soft war waged against democracy — mostly hidden and wrapped in the discourse of austerity, «law and order» and market-based freedoms.

At the beginning of the 21st century, we have seen the emergence of a new kind of politics of death, the effects of which extend from the racist response to Hurricane Katrina to the lead poisoning of thousands of children in Flint, Michigan, and dozens of other cities. This is a politics in which entire populations are considered disposable, an unnecessary burden on state coffers, and consigned to fend for themselves. This is a politics that now merges with aggressive and violent efforts to silence dissent, analysis and the very conditions of critical thought. People who are Black, Brown, poor, disabled or otherwise marginalized are now excluded from the rights and guarantees accorded to fully fledged citizens of the republic, removed from the syntax of suffering, and left to fend for themselves in the face of natural or human-made disasters. And their efforts to mobilize have been met with murderous police crackdowns and deportations.

With the election of Trump, the politics of disposability and the war against democracy have taken on a much harder and crueler edge, with the president urging the police to «take the gloves off» and the attorney general calling for a regressive «law and order» campaign steeped in racism.

Under 21st century neoliberal capitalism, and especially under the Trump regime, there has been an acceleration of the mechanisms by which vulnerable populations are rendered unknowable, undesirable, unthinkable, considered an excess cost and stripped of their humanity. Relegated to zones of social abandonment and political exclusion, targeted populations become incomprehensible, civil rights disappear, hardship and suffering are normalized, and human lives are targeted and negated by diverse machineries of violence as dangerous, pathological and redundant. For those populations rendered disposable, ethical questions go unasked as the mechanisms of dispossession, forced homelessness and forms of social death feed corrupt political systems and forms of corporate power removed from any sense of civic and social responsibility. In many ways, the Trump administration is the new face of a politics of disposability that thrives on the energies of the vulnerable and powerless. Under such conditions, power is defined by the degree to which it is abstracted from any sense of responsibility or critical analysis.

This type of disposability is especially visible under Trump, not only because of his discourse of humiliation, bigotry and objectification, but also in his policies, which are blatantly designed to punish those populations who are the most vulnerable. These include the victims in Puerto Rico of Hurricane Maria, immigrant children no longer protected by DACA, and a push to expand the armed forces and the para-militarization of local police forces throughout the country as part of a race-based «law and order» policy. Trump is the endpoint of a new dystopian model of disposability, and has become a window on the growing embrace of violence and white supremacy at the highest levels of power, as both a practice and ideological legitimation for increasing a culture of fear. Fear, in this context, is framed mostly within a discourse of threats to personal safety, serving to increase the criminalization of a wide range of everyday behaviors while buttressing the current administration’s racist call for «law and order.» This culture of fear threatens to make more and more individuals and groups inconsequential and expendable.

Under such circumstances, the US’s dystopian impulses not only produce harsh and dire political changes, but also a failure to address a continuous series of economic, ecological and social crises. At the same time, the machinery of disposability and death rolls on, conferring upon entire populations the status of the living dead. The death-dealing logic of disposability has been updated and now parades in the name of freedom, choice, efficiency, security, progress and, ironically, democracy. Disposability has become so normalized that it is difficult to recognize it as a distinctive if not overriding organizing principle of the new American authoritarianism.

While the politics of disposability has a long legacy in the United States, Trump has given it a new and powerful impetus. This era differs from the recent past both in terms of its unapologetic embrace of the ideology of white supremacy and its willingness to expand state-sanctioned violence and death as part of a wider project of the US’s descent into authoritarianism.

Running through these events is a governmental response that has abandoned a social contract designed, however tepidly, to prevent hardship, suffering and death. Large groups of people have been catapulted out of the range of human beings for whom the government has limited, if any, responsibility. Such populations, inclusive of such disparate groups as the residents of Puerto Rico and the Dreamers, are left to fend for themselves in the face of disasters. They are treated as collateral damage in the construction of a neoliberal order in which those marginalized by race and class become the objects of a violent form of social engineering relegating its victims to what Richard Sennett has termed a «specter of uselessness,» whose outcomes are both tragic and devastating.

A politics of disposability provides a theoretical and political narrative that connects the crisis produced in Puerto Rico after the devastating effects of Hurricane Maria to the crisis surrounding Trump’s revoking of the DACA program. Trump’s support of state-sanctioned violence normalizes a culture and spectacle of violence, one not unrelated to the mass shooting that took place in Las Vegas.

First, let’s examine the crisis in Puerto Rico as a systemic example of both state violence and a politics of disposability and social abandonment.

Puerto Rico as a Zone of Abandonment

On September 20, 2017, Hurricane Maria, a Category 5 storm, slammed into and devastated the island of Puerto Rico. In the aftermath of a slow government response to the massive destruction, conditions in Puerto Rico have reached unprecedented and unacceptable levels of misery, hardship and suffering. As of October 19, over 1 million people were without drinking water, 80 percent of the island lacked electricity, and ongoing reports by medical staff and other respondents indicate that more and more people were dying. Thousands of people are living in shelters, lack phone service, and have to bear the burden of a health care system in shambles.

Such social immiseration is complicated by the fact that the island is home to 21 hazardous superfund sites, which pose deadly risks to human health and the environment. Lois Marie Gibbs ominously reports that waterborne illnesses are spreading, just as hospitals are running low on medicines. Caitlin Dickerson observed that the «the Environmental Protection Agency cited reports of residents trying to obtain drinking water from wells at hazardous Superfund sites.» These are wells that were once sealed to avoid exposure to deadly toxins. The governor of Puerto Rico, Ricardo Rossello, warned that a number of people have died from Leptospirosis, a bacterial disease spread by animal urine.

The Trump administration’s response has been unforgivably slow, with conditions worsening. Given the accelerating crisis, the mayor of San Juan, Carmen Yulín Cruz, made a direct appeal to President Trump for aid, stating with an acute sense of urgency, «We are dying.» Trump responded by lashing out at her personally by telling her to stop complaining. Cruz became emotional when referring to elderly and ill victims of Maria that she could not reach and who were «still at great risk in places where relief supplies and medical help had yet to arrive.» Cruz said the situation for many of these people was «like a slow death.» Stories began to emerge in the press that validated Cruz’s concerns. Many seriously ill dialysis patients either had their much-needed treatments reduced or could not get access to health care facilities. Because of the lack of electricity, Harry Figueroa, a teacher, «went a week without the oxygen that helped him breathe» and eventually died at 58. «His body went unrefrigerated for so long that the funeral director could not embalm his badly decomposed corpse.»

Scholar Lauren Berlant has used the term «slow death» in her own work to refer «to the physical wearing out of a population and the deterioration of people in that population that is very nearly a defining condition of their experience and historical existence.» Slow death captures the colonial backdrop of global regimes of ideological and structural oppression deeply etched in Puerto Rico’s history. The scale of suffering and devastation was so great that Robert P. Kadlec, the assistant secretary of Health and Human Services for preparedness and response stated that «The devastation I saw, I thought was equivalent to a nuclear detonation.»

Puerto Rico’s tragic and ruinous problems brought on by Hurricane Maria are amplified both by its $74 billion debt burden, an ongoing economic crisis, and the legacy of its colonial status and lack of political power in fighting for its sovereign and economic rights in Washington. With no federal representation and lacking the power to vote in presidential elections, it is difficult for Puerto Ricans to get their voices heard, secure the same rights as US citizens and put pressure on the Trump administration to address many of its longstanding problems. The latter include a poverty rate of 46 percent, a household median income of $19,350 [compared to the US median of $55,775], and a crippling debt. In fact, the debt burden is so overwhelming that «pre-Maria Puerto Rico was spending more on debt service than on education, health, or security. Results included the shuttering of 150 schools, the gutting of health care, increased taxes, splitting of families between the island and the mainland, and increased food insecurity.» Amy Davidson Sorkin was right in arguing that «Indeed, the crisis in Puerto Rico is a case study of what happens when people with little political capital need the help of their government.»

Not only did Trump allow three weeks to lapse before asking Congress to provide financial aid to the island, but his request reeked of heartless indifference to Puerto Rico’s economic hardships. Instead of asking for grants, he asked for loans. Throughout the crisis, Trump released a series of tweets in which he suggested that the plight of the Puerto Rican people was their own fault, lambasted local officials for supposedly not doing enough, and threatened to cut off aid from government services. Adding insult to injury, he also said that they were «throwing the government’s budget out of whack because we’ve spent a lot of money on Puerto Rico.»

Trump also suggested that the crisis in Puerto Rico was not a real crisis when compared to Hurricane Katrina. Trump’s view of Puerto Ricans as second-class citizens was exposed repeatedly in an ongoing string of tweets and comments that extended from the insulting notion that «they want everything to be done for them» to the visual image of Trump throwing paper towel rolls into a crowd as if he were on a public relations tour. Throughout the crisis, Trump has repeatedly congratulated himself on the government response to Puerto Rico, falsely stating that everybody thinks we are doing «an amazing job.» A month after the crisis, Trump insisted, without irony or a shred of self-reflection, that he would give himself a «perfect ten.»

These responses suggest more than a callous expression of self-delusion and indifference to the suffering of others. Trump’s callous misrecognition of the magnitude of the crisis in Puerto Rico and extent of the island’s misery and suffering, coupled with his insults and demeaning tweets, demonstrate the perpetuation of race and class oppressions through his governance. There is more at work here than a disconnection from the poor; there is also a white supremacist ideology that registers race as a central part of both Trump’s politics and a wider politics of disposability. It is difficult to miss the racist logic of reckless disregard for the safety and lives of Puerto Rican citizens, bordering on criminal negligence, which simmers just beneath the surface of Trump’s rhetoric and actions. Hurricane Maria exposed a long history of racism that confirms the structural abandonment of those who are poor, sick, elderly — and Black or Brown.

Trump embodies the commitments of a neoliberal authoritarian government that not only fails to protect its citizens, but reveals without apology the full spectrum of mechanisms to expand poverty, racism and hierarchies of class, making some lives disposable, redundant and excessive while others appear privileged and secure. Trump’s utterly failed response to the disaster in Puerto Rico reinforces Ta-Nehisi Coates’s claim that the spectacle of bigotry that shapes Trump’s presidency has «moved racism from the euphemistic and plausibly deniable to the overt and freely claimed.» What has happened in Puerto Rico also reveals the frightening marker of a politics of disposability in which any appeal to democracy loses its claim and becomes hard to imagine, let alone enact without the threat of violent retaliation.

Revoking DACA and the Killing of the Dream

Trump’s penchant for cruelty in the face of great hardship and human suffering is also strikingly visible in the racial bigotry that has shaped his cancellation of the DACA program, instituted in 2012 by President Obama. Under the program, over 800,000 undocumented immigrants brought to the country as children or teens before 2007 were allowed to live, study and work in the United States without fear of deportation. The program permitted these young people, known as Dreamers, to have access to Social Security cards, drivers’ licenses, and to advance their education, start small businesses and to be fully integrated into the fabric of American society. Seventy-six percent of Americans believe that Dreamers should be granted resident status or citizenship. In revoking the program, Trump has made clear his willingness to deport individuals who came to the US as children and who know the United States as their only home.

Attorney General Jeff Sessions was called upon to be the front man in announcing the cancellation of DACA. In barely concealed racist tones, Sessions argued that DACA had to end because «The effect of this unilateral executive amnesty, among other things, contributed to a surge of unaccompanied minors on the southern border that yielded terrible humanitarian consequences … denied jobs to hundreds of thousands of Americans by allowing those same jobs to go to illegal aliens» and had to be rescinded because «failure to enforce the laws in the past has put our nation at risk of crime, violence and even terrorism.» None of these charges is true.

Rather than taking jobs from American workers, Dreamers add an enormous benefit to the economy and «it is estimated that the loss of the Dreamers’ output will reduce the GDP by several hundred billion dollars over a decade.» Sessions’s claim that DACA contributed to a surge of unaccompanied minors at the border is an outright lie, given that the surge began in 2008, four years before DACA was announced, and it was largely due, as Mark Joseph Stern points out, «to escalating gang violence in Central America, as well as drug cartels’ willingness to target and recruit children in Mexico … [A] study published in International Migration … found that DACA was not one of these factors.»

Trump’s rescinding of DACA is politically indefensible and heartless. Only 12 percent of Americans want the Dreamers deported and this support is drawn mostly from Trump’s base of ideological extremists, religious conservatives and far-right nationalists. This would include former White House chief strategist Steve Bannon, who left the White House and now heads, once again, Breitbart, the right-wing news outlet. Bannon is a leading figure of the right-wing extremists influencing Trump and is largely responsible for bringing white supremacist and ultranationalist ideology from the fringes of society to the center of power. On a recent segment of the TV series «60 Minutes,» Bannon told Charlie Rose that the DACA program shouldn’t be codified, adding «As the work permits run out, they self deport…. There’s no path to citizenship, no path to a green card and no amnesty. Amnesty is non-negotiable.» Bannon’s comments are cruel but predictable given his support for the uniformly bigoted policies Trump has pushed before and after his election.

The call to end DACA is part of a broader racist anti-immigration agenda aimed at making America white again. The current backlash against people of color, immigrant youth and those others marked by the registers of race and class are not only heartless and cruel, they also invoke a throwback to the days of state-sponsored lynching and the imposed terror of the Ku Klux Klan. Additionally, they offer up an eerie resonance to the violent and repressive racist policies of the totalitarian governments that emerged in Germany in the 1930s and Latin America in the 1970s.

Las Vegas and the Politics of Violence

On October 1, 2017, Stephen Paddock, ensconced on the 32nd floor of the Mandalay Bay Resort and Casino Hotel in Las Vegas, Nevada, opened fire on a crowd of country and western concertgoers below, killing 58 and wounding over 500. While the venues for such shootings differ, the results are always predictable. People die or are wounded, and the corporate media and politicians weigh in on the cause of the violence. If the assailant is a person of color or a Muslim, they are labeled a «terrorist,» but if they are white, they are often labeled as «mentally disturbed.» Paddock was immediately branded by President Trump as a «sick» and «deranged man» who had committed an act of «radical evil.»

Trump’s characterizing of the shooting as an act of radical evil is more mystifying than assuring, and it did little to explain how such an egregious act of brutality fits into a broader pattern of civic decline, cultural decay, political corruption and systemic violence. It also erases the role of state-sanctioned violence in perpetuating individual acts of brutality. Corporate media trade in isolated spectacles, and generally fail to connect these dots. Rarely is there a connection made in the mainstream media, for instance, between the fact that the US is the largest arms manufacturer with the biggest military budget in the world and the almost unimaginable fact that there are more than 300 million people who own guns in the United States, which amounts to «112 guns per 100 people.» While the Trump administration is not directly responsible for the bloodbath in Las Vegas, it does feed a culture of violence in the United States.

Many Republicans, including Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, reinforced the lack of civic and ethical courage that emerged in the aftermath of the Las Vegas massacre by arguing that it was «particularly inappropriate» to talk about gun reform or politics in general after a mass shooting. By eliminating the issue of politics from the discussion, figures like McConnell erased some basic realities, such as the power of gun manufacturers to flood the country with guns, and the power of lobbyists to ensure that gun-safety measures do not become part of a wider national conversation. This depoliticizing logic also enabled any discussion about Paddock to be centered on his actions as an aberration, as opposed to a manifestation of forces in the larger culture.

The corporate press, with few exceptions, was unwilling to address how and why mass shootings have become routine in the United States and how everyday violence benefits a broader industry of death that gets rich through profits made by the defense industry, the arms manufacturers and corrupt gun lobbyists. There was no reference to how young children are groomed for violence by educational programs sponsored by the gun industries, how video games and other aspects of a militarized culture are used to teach youth to be insensitive to the horrors of real-life violence, how the military-industrial complex «makes a living from killing through defense contracts, weapons manufacturing and endless wars.» Nor did much of the media address how war propaganda provided by the Pentagon influences not only pro-sports events and Hollywood blockbuster movies, but also reality TV shows, such as «American Idol» and «The X-Factor.»

In the aftermath of mass shootings, the hidden structures of violence disappear in the discourses of personal sorrow, the call for prayers and the insipid argument that such events should not be subject to political analysis. Trump’s dismissive comments on the Vegas shooting as an act of radical evil misses the fact that what is evil is the pervasive presence of violence throughout American history and the current emergence of extreme violence and mass shootings on college campuses, in elementary schools, at concerts and in diverse workplaces. Mass shootings may have become routine in the US, but the larger issue to be addressed is that violence is central to how the American experience is lived daily.

Militant Neoliberalism in an Armed USA

Militarized responses have become the primary medium for addressing all social problems, rendering critical thought less and less probable, less and less relevant. The lethal mix of anti-intellectualism, ideological fundamentalism and retreat from the ethical imagination that has grown stronger under Trump provides the perfect storm for what can be labeled a war culture, one that trades democratic values for a machinery of social abandonment, misery and death.

War as an extension of politics fuels a spectacle of violence that has overtaken popular culture while normalizing concrete acts of gun violence that kill 93 Americans every day. Traumatic events such as the termination of DACA or the refusal on the part of the government to quickly and effectively respond to the hardships experienced by the people of Puerto Rico no longer appear to represent an ethical dilemma to those in power. Instead, they represent the natural consequences of rendering whole populations disposable.

What is distinctive about the politics of disposability — especially when coupled with the transformation of governance into a wholesale legitimation of violence and cruelty under Trump — is that it has both expanded a culture of extreme violence and has become a defining feature of American life. The state increasingly chooses violence as a primary mode of engagement. Such choices imprison people rather than educate them, and legitimate the militarizing of every major public institutions from schools to airports. The carceral state now provides the template for interacting with others in a society governed by persistent rituals of violence.

Democracy is becoming all the more irrelevant in the United States under the Trump administration, especially in light of what Robert Weissman, the president of the watchdog group Public Citizen, calls «a total corporate takeover of the US government on a scale we have never seen in American history.» Corporate governance and economic sovereignty have reached new heights, just as illiberal democracy has become a populist flashpoint in reconfiguring much of Europe and normalizing the rise of populist bigotry and state-sanctioned violence aimed at immigrants and refugees fleeing from war and poverty. Democratic values and civic culture are under attack by a class of political extremists who embrace without reservation the cynical instrumental reason of the market, while producing on a global level widespread mayhem, suffering and violence. How else to explain the fact that over 70 percent of Trump’s picks for top administration jobs have corporate ties or work for major corporations? Almost all of these people represent interests diametrically opposed to the agencies for whom they now lead and are against almost any notion of the public good.

Hence, under the Trump regime, we have witnessed a slew of rollbacks and deregulations that will result in an increase in pollution, endangering children, the elderly and others who might be exposed to hazardous toxins. The New York Times has reported that one EPA appointee, Nancy Beck, a former executive at the American Chemistry Council, has initiated changes to make it more difficult to track and regulate the chemical perflourooctanoic acid, which has been linked to «kidney cancer, birth defects, immune system disorders and other serious health problems.»

The sense of collective belonging that underpins the civic vigor of a democracy is being replaced by a lethal survival-of-the-fittest ethos, and a desperate need to promote the narrow interests of capital and racist exclusion, regardless of the cost. At the heart of this collective ethos is a war culture stoked by fear and anxiety, one that feeds on dehumanization, condemns the so-called «losers,» and revels in violence as a source of pleasure and retribution. The link between violence and authoritarianism increasingly finds expression not only in endless government and populist assaults on vulnerable groups, but also in a popular culture that turns representations of extreme violence into entertainment.

The US has become a society organized both for the production of violence and the creation of a culture brimming with fear, paranoia and a social atomization. Under such circumstances, the murderous aggression associated with authoritarian states becomes more common in the United States and is mirrored in the everyday actions of citizens. If the government’s responses to crises that enveloped DACA and Puerto Rico point to a culture of state-sanctioned violence and cruelty, the mass shooting in Las Vegas represents the endpoint of a culture newly aligned with the rise of authoritarianism. The shooting in Las Vegas does more than point to a record-setting death toll for vigilante violence; it also provides a signpost about a terrifying new political and cultural horizon in the relationship between violence and everyday life. All of these incidents must be understood as a surface manifestation of a much larger set of issues endemic to the rise of authoritarianism in the United States.

These three indices of violence offer pointed and alarming examples of how inequality, systemic exclusion and a culture of cruelty define American society, even, and especially, as they destroy it. Each offers a snapshot of how war culture and violence merge. As part of a broader category indicting the rise of authoritarianism in the United States, they make visible the pervasiveness of violence as an organizing principle of American life. While it is easy to condemn the violence at work in each of these specific examples, it is crucial to address the larger economic, political and structural forces that create these conditions.

There is an urgent need for a broader awareness of the scope, range and effects of violence in the US, as well as the relationship between politics and disposability. Only then will the US be able to address the need for a radical restructuring of its politics, economics and institutions. Violence in the US has to be understood as part of a crisis of a politics and culture defined by meaninglessness, helplessness, neglect and disposability. Resistance to such violence, then, should produce widespread thoughtful, informed and collective action over the fate of democracy itself. This suggests the need for a shared vision of economic, racial and gender justice — one that offers the promise of a new understanding of politics and the need for creating a powerful coalition among existing social movements, youth groups, workers, intellectuals, teachers and other progressives. This is especially true under the Trump administration, since politics and democracy are now defined by a threshold of dysfunction that points not only to their demise, but to the ascendancy of American-style authoritarianism.

Source:

http://www.truth-out.org/news/item/42450-disposability-in-the-age-of-disasters-from-dreamers-and-puerto-rico-to-violence-in-las-vegas

Comparte este contenido:

EEUU: Money for tutoring, a deal to ease transfers, new textbooks: What’s new in education

EEUU/November 11, 2017/By: Joy Resmovits/Source: http://www.latimes.com

In and around Los Angeles:

  • Los Angeles will receive an $11.2-million grant from the U.S. Department of Education for tutoring and summer school.
  • The L.A. Community College District signed an agreement with Loyola Marymount University to encourage more transfers and curricular continuity.

In California:

  • The state’s public colleges are trying to fix the transfer process.
  • Hundreds of people spoke out before the Board of Education voted to approve new textbooks to satisfy the state’s history social science guidelines.

Nationwide:

  • Private colleges are expected to outpace public universities in tuition revenue growth for the first time in a decade.
  • After some pushback, schools in Spokane, Wash., will not use Planned Parenthood’s sex education curriculum.

Source:

http://www.latimes.com/local/education/la-essential-education-updates-southern-l-a-s-tutoring-grant-easing-1510327577-htmlstory.html

Comparte este contenido:

Puerto Rico: Departamento de Educación de EE.UU. otorgará dos millones dólares a la isla

Centro América/Puerto Rico/11 Noviembre 2017/Fuente: Hoy los ángeles

La secretaria de Educación de Puerto Rico, Julia Keleher, informó hoy que el Departamento de Educación de Estados Unidos otorgará a la agencia en la isla dos millones de dólares bajo el Proyecto de Respuesta a Emergencia de Escuelas Violencia (SERV, por su sigla en inglés).

Este programa financia servicios de corto y largo plazo relacionados con la educación para ayudar a agencias educativas locales e instituciones de educación superior a recuperarse de eventos violentos o traumáticos que han obligado interrumpir el curso, como pudiera ser el caso de huracanes.

El gobernador de la isla, Ricardo Rosselló, y la secretaria del Departamento de Educación de Estados Unidos, Betsy DeVos, quien llegó a la isla para conocer de primera mano el impacto que tuvo el huracán María en el sistema de educación pública, visitaron hoy la escuela Loaiza Cordero en Santurce.

El primer mandatario indicó que «no hay mejor manera para la secretaria DeVos de conocer las necesidades que tiene nuestro sistema de Educación en la actualidad, que entrar en contacto con la comunidad escolar y los diferentes componentes de nuestra agencia educativa».

Además agradeció a la secretaria de Educación federal «por apoyar la reconstrucción del Departamento, a fin de servir con excelencia a nuestra comunidad estudiantil».

El proyecto busca ayudar en la recuperación a las agencias de educación o instituciones de educación superior que han enfrentado alguna interrupción en el proceso de enseñanza tras un evento violento o traumático.

Al agradecer que DeVos aceptara la solicitud de visitar la isla, Keleher señaló que «es muy importante que la secretaria DeVos vea y conozca personalmente la situación en Puerto Rico para que cuando le toque hablar sobre la educación aquí, o cuando le toque presentar o defender presupuestos, esté clara y tome decisiones basadas en su experiencia».

Asimismo, la titular de Educación estatal indicó que «también deseo agradecer la ayuda y cooperación de la secretaria DeVos y el Departamento de Educación federal en todo momento, ya que anteriormente había enviado a Puerto Rico al secretario auxiliar de Educación Elemental y Secundaria, Jason Botel».

«Nuestro empeño es seguir tocando puertas, todas las que sean necesarias, para lograr que nuestro sistema educativo robustezca y cumpla con las necesidades de nuestros estudiantes y las demandas del siglo XXI», concluyó Keleher.

Durante la visita, DeVos estuvo acompañada de su ayudante especial, Josh Venable, así como del secretario auxiliar interino de Educación Elemental y Secundaria y subsecretario auxiliar del Departamento de Educación federal, Jason Botel.

Fuente: http://www.hoylosangeles.com/g00/efe-3432729-13547465-20171108-story.html?i10c.encReferrer=

Comparte este contenido:

EEUU: Defensores de la educación pública condenan la estafa del impuesto Trump y aplauden a Sewell Bill

América del Norte/EEUU/pfaw.org/

El 3 de noviembre, People For the American Way anunció su oposición a la versión del fraude fiscal del Presidente Trump presentado por el presidente de la Cámara de Representantes, Paul Ryan, y otros republicanos de la Cámara, citando sus promesas vacías de cuidado infantil y el daño que podrían causar a la libertad religiosa. eliminando la Enmienda Johnson. Ahora estamos agregando a nuestra lista de preocupaciones sus ataques a la educación pública, en particular el esquema de cupones escolares que han establecido para recompensar a los estadounidenses ricos por destinar más dinero para la educación de las escuelas privadas de sus hijos.

Tanto PFAW como los ministros afroamericanos en acción son miembros de la Coalición Nacional para la Educación Pública , que dijo lo siguiente sobre el plan Trump-Ryan:

Estamos decepcionados, pero no sorprendidos, de que los republicanos incentiven a los estadounidenses ricos a reservar más recursos para la educación escolar privada en su factura. Al finalizar el programa Coverdell Education Savings Account y permitir que los ahorros pasados ​​y nuevos fluyan a las cuentas 529 -que eliminan las limitaciones de ingresos de los donantes y permiten contribuciones más altas- están permitiendo a los padres tener una nueva opción para aumentar sus activos libre de impuestos y redirigir mayores cantidades de fondos para escuelas privadas y religiosas.

El Congreso debería centrarse en financiar nuestras escuelas públicas, donde el 90 por ciento de los niños reciben educación, en lugar de renunciar a los ingresos para ayudar a las familias adineradas a enviar a sus hijos a escuelas privadas. Para colmo de males, si bien la ley actual ya permite a los padres acumular ahorros en nombre de futuros hijos, el presidente Ryan y sus colegas republicanos han permitido específicamente que los «niños no nacidos» califiquen como ahorradores de la matrícula .

Afortunadamente, también tenemos buenas noticias para compartir en el frente de la educación pública. La representante Terri Sewell introdujo la Ley de Dólares Públicos para las Escuelas Públicas , que pondría fin a otro plan de impuestos prohibiendo a las personas «doble inmersión» y aprovechando los créditos fiscales de colegiaturas privadas reclamados en sus declaraciones de impuestos estatales y federales. PFAW se unió a AASA, la Asociación de Superintendentes Escolares y otras 31 organizaciones para aplaudir el proyecto de Sewell:

Abiertas y no discriminatorias en su aceptación de todos los estudiantes, las escuelas públicas estadounidenses son un factor unificador entre la amplia gama de comunidades en nuestra sociedad. Las escuelas públicas son las únicas que deben satisfacer las necesidades de todos los estudiantes. No rechazan niños o familias. Sirven a todos los niños, incluidos aquellos con discapacidades físicas, conductuales e intelectuales, aquellos que son superdotados y aquellos que tienen diferencias de aprendizaje. La Ley de Dólares Públicos para las Escuelas Públicas asegura que el gobierno federal ya no permitirá que los estadounidenses se beneficien de sus donaciones a programas de vales que agotan los recursos del sistema de escuelas públicas.
Puede ver y descargar nuestra carta, con firmantes, aquí.

Fuente: http://www.pfaw.org/blog-posts/public-education-advocates-condemn-trump-tax-scam-applaud-sewell-bill/

Comparte este contenido:

Entrevista: El sistema educativo colombiano les exige demasiado a los niños

El sistema educativo colombiano les exige demasiado a los niños

Por: Simon Granja

 

Médicos de Estados Unidos, México y Colombia no daban con un diagnóstico certero sobre el padecimiento de Daniela. No hallaban la causa de los fuertes dolores estomacales que la adolescente, de 15 años, empezó a sentir un día y que no paraban. En medio de la incertidumbre, alguien planteó el peor escenario: podría ser cáncer.

Sus padres siguieron buscando hasta dar con la respuesta. “Finalmente nos dijeron que era estrés escolar, algo sobre lo que nunca habíamos escuchado”, cuenta el estadounidense Jürgen Klaric, su papá.

La tensión de Daniela había llegado a tal punto que desembocó en problemas gástricos. “No sabíamos que sufría tanto por el colegio. Nos explicó que le iba mal en matemáticas, pero que no nos había contado porque no quería decepcionarnos”, dice Klaric, un reconocido experto en ‘neuromarketing’, autor de dos ‘best sellers’ (‘Véndele a la mente, no a la gente’ y ‘Estamos ciegos’) y una celebridad en redes sociales: tiene más de 1,6 millones de seguidores en Facebook y en Instagram, 381.000. Además, asesora a compañías de todo el mundo en temas de motivación.

Gobernadores de la Costa piden adición al presupuesto escolar
Sin enseñanza de la historia, ¿cómo entender la Colombia del presente?

Después de esa experiencia, que ocurrió hace unos tres años, decidió retirar a su hija del colegio, enseñarle en casa junto con su esposa (con la educación virtual como complemento) e investigar por qué los sistemas educativos están enfermando a niños como Daniela.

Eso lo llevó, durante los últimos dos años, a 14 países (incluidos Finlandia, Singapur, Estados Unidos y Colombia), donde consultó a más 100 personas. Habló con el expresidente uruguayo Pepe Mujica y los colombianos Rodolfo Llinás y Antanas Mockus, entre muchas otras personalidades, y construyó el documental ‘Un crimen llamado educación’, que desde este sábado estará al aire en redes sociales.

Klaric, de 47 años, estuvo esta semana en Bogotá, donde conversó con EL TIEMPO.

Su documental empieza con ‘Another Brick in the Wall’, de Pink Floyd. ¿Acaso, como dice la canción, no necesitamos educación?

Claro que sí, la educación es lo más maravilloso del mundo. Todos la necesitamos. El ser humano, para trascender, debe tener conciencia y valores, y para tenerlos debe estudiar. Pero la educación de hoy no está formando al ser humano en competencias blandas –liderazgo y trabajo en equipo, por ejemplo– ni en habilidades prácticas para la vida. La gente se gradúa sin saber hacer nada y después sale al mundo y se encuentra con una pared. Por eso hay tanta gente tan afectada por su situación económica y por su infelicidad.

¿Debemos romper el muro?

Sí, debemos romper el muro creado por la industrialización de hace 200 años, que hoy es totalmente incompetente e insensible a las necesidades del ser humano.

El sistema educativo está dirigido hacia una sola inteligencia, la matemática, y eso va en contra de la teoría de Howard Gardner sobre las inteligencias múltiples

¿Por qué dice que la educación es un crimen?

Porque no considera que todos los seres humanos somos diferentes y enseña a todos igual. El sistema educativo está dirigido hacia una sola inteligencia, la matemática, y eso va en contra de la teoría de Howard Gardner sobre las inteligencias múltiples. Menospreciamos las mentes creativas, visuales, a los artistas, a los músicos. Ellos siempre se ven afectados por el sistema, que está hecho para la mente matemática.

¿Cuáles pueden ser las consecuencias de este crimen?

Hoy se suicidan entre tres y cuatro chicos al día (en promedio) por estrés, ‘bullying’ escolar y matoneo del maestro. No sabemos lo que está pasando en el mundo. En Corea del Sur, que tiene el mejor sistema educativo según las pruebas Pisa, la mitad de los estudiantes tiene pensamientos suicidas. Allá hay hasta una terapia contra el suicidio, para que los estudiantes descubran lo doloroso que es suicidarse y cómo esa decisión puede afectar a sus familias.

¿Cuál es el principal problema del sistema educativo?

Describir el principal problema es muy difícil porque el mecanismo tiene muchos engranajes y son muchos los que están mal. Sin embargo, creo que uno de los más grandes es que no somos conscientes de lo que está pasando. La gente no tiene tiempo para analizar, para estudiar y para enterarse de por qué un sistema educativo es malo. La gente no sabe cómo funciona el cerebro y cómo el sistema educativo actual está agrediendo a nuestros niños y dejándolos sin las competencias básicas para la vida.

Uno de los países que visitó fue Colombia, donde habló con reconocidos personajes del sector educativo, como Antanas Mockus. ¿Qué piensa ahora de nuestro sistema educativo?

El sistema educativo colombiano es demasiado exigente. Tiene una problemática muy atípica y es que los niños entran al colegio a muy tempranas horas. Se ha podido comprobar que no hay nada mejor para el desarrollo cerebral de los niños que dormir. Cuando hicimos el documental, detectamos que Colombia es uno de los países donde los niños comienzan más temprano la jornada escolar.

Y otra cosa: es uno de los países que más tareas les dejan a los niños. Los chicos se despiertan a las 5 de la mañana, empiezan clases a las 7 y regresan a sus casas a las 5 de la tarde. Y después tienen que hacer dos horas de tarea. Entonces, no les queda tiempo para tener desarrollo social o para el entretenimiento. En resumen, entre los grandes problemas de Colombia están los horarios y el exceso de tareas, que generan un estrés escolar excesivo.

Entre los grandes problemas de Colombia están los horarios y el exceso de tareas, que generan un estrés escolar excesivo

¿Cómo debería ser la educación?

Debería ser práctica, no por materias. Por ejemplo, un chico al que le encanta dibujar puede diseñar una montaña rusa; al que le gustan las matemáticas puede hacer los cálculos de velocidad y al que le gusta la comunicación podría hacer un reportaje sobre el tema.

En Estados Unidos se utiliza el Project Based Learning (PBL o aprendizaje basado en proyectos) desde hace 20 años y ha sido todo un éxito, solo que el Gobierno no permite que más del 7 por ciento de los colegios enseñen mediante esta técnica, debido a intereses económicos. Finlandia lleva un año implementándolo y allá también ha sido un éxito.

¿Cómo se imagina la educación del futuro?

Libre. Me imagino niños yendo felices al colegio –muchos no quieren ir–, un colegio donde ellos cultiven sus alimentos, donde coman de forma sana, donde no sean castigados, sino que los lleven a cuartos de meditación para controlar su energía.

Me imagino una educación en la que esté prohibido recetar Ritalina y en la que predominen el deporte y la respiración. Me imagino colegios hermosos donde profesores y chicos trabajen en proyectos, y en la que se aprenda a hablar en público y a ser felices.

Usted dice en el documental que el mundo necesita amor, pero yo me pongo de abogado del diablo y digo que eso no le sirve al sector productivo. ¿O sí?

Claro que sí. La gente feliz produce más, la gente que no tiene estrés es más exitosa. Yo creo que el sector productivo sí está interesado en que la gente sea más integral y tenga valores, y no simplemente en que sepa cosas específicas. Hoy es necesario que la gente aprenda a trabajar en equipo y tenga mejor comunicación asertiva, por ejemplo. Esas habilidades permiten que la gente sea más productiva.

¿Por qué está en contra de las pruebas estandarizadas?

Estoy 100 por ciento en contra de los exámenes Pisa; están haciendo un daño enorme porque principalmente evalúan las matemáticas, las ciencias y la lectura. El ser humano podría ser buenísimo en matemáticas, en ciencia y en lectura, pero si no tiene competencias blandas –como inteligencia emocional– no habremos cumplido el rol principal de la educación, que es trascender. Creo que los exámenes Pisa deben revaluar totalmente su propuesta y evaluar qué tan felices son los estudiantes en el sistema educativo. Podemos ser los mejores en matemáticas, ciencia y lectura, pero ¿qué logramos si los niños ni siquiera quieren ir al colegio?

¿Qué espera lograr con este documental? 

Generar conciencia. Me he dado cuenta en estos dos años de trabajo de investigación, en tantos países, de que no hay conciencia; la gente no sabe por qué el sistema educativo afecta tanto a la gente. Otra cosa es que no saben cómo reaccionar a la problemática, están desesperados porque no ven resultados.

Y también es bien importante que los padres sean conscientes de que son los más responsables de la educación de sus hijos. Yo creo que vamos a generar conciencia, y siempre que generas conciencia generas propuesta. Y cuando hay conciencia y propuesta, hay cambio.

¿Qué se necesita para que haya un cambio de verdad en el sistema educativo?

Lo primero es que seamos conscientes de que todos somos el problema. No es de los políticos, de los maestros o de los rectores; el problema no es del método, no es solo de los padres. Es un problema generalizado. Cuando se dice sistema, se habla de muchos componentes y engranajes. Todos debemos tener presente el rol que tenemos dentro del sistema educativo y todos debemos generar un cambio específico en una zona específica. Yo creo que este documental puede lograr eso.

Fuente: http://www.eltiempo.com/vida/educacion/entrevista-con-el-estadounidense-juergen-klaric-sobre-su-documental-un-crimen-llamado-educacion-148102

Comparte este contenido:

Gobernador se reúne con secretaria de Educación de Estados Unidos

Estados Unidos/Noviembre de 2017/Fuente: Metro

El gobernador Ricardo Rosselló Nevares se reunió en la mañana de hoy con las secretaria de Educación de EEUU, Betsy DeVos.

En la reunión con la funcionaria estadounidense,  también participó la titular de Educación de Puerto Rico, Julia Keleher, quien afronta críticas y protestas debido a que no ha abierto la mayoría de los planteles de la Isla a casi dos meses del paso del huracán María.

Organizaciones como la Federación de Maestros alegan que Keleher aprovecha la coyuntura del huracán para cerrar definitivamente escuelas.

DeVos dialogó con el gobernador sobre el estado de las escuelas en la Isla y los planes de reconstrucción para reiniciar las clases.

Junto al mandatario, la secretaria de Educación estadounidense tiene planificado visitar la escuela Loaiza Cordero.

La funcionaria de EEUU defiende la privatización de la educación y apoya las escuelas “charter”, ya que ha sido una defensora de marginar al gobierno de la educación.

Fuente: https://www.metro.pr/pr/noticias/2017/11/08/gobernador-se-reune-secretaria-educacion-estados-unidos.html

Comparte este contenido:

Estados Unidos: NC superintendent slams ‘disturbing’ spending at state education agency

Carolina del Norte / 08 de noviembre de 2017 / Por: Kelly Hinchcliffe / Fuente: http://www.wral.com/

State Superintendent Mark Johnson listened last week as State Board of Education members bemoaned the millions of dollars in recent budget cuts to the North Carolina Department of Public Instruction. The cuts have harmed staff and students, one board member explained, and he urged Johnson to join them in reaching out to state lawmakers to say «enough is enough.»

But Johnson declined. Instead, he said in his 11 months as superintendent he has found excessive spending at the state education agency and said he hopes an upcoming $1 million audit he has commissioned will root out any other potential waste at the agency.

«In my time as state superintendent, I have found a lot of things that I’ve found disturbing about this department,» Johnson said. «I will not go into the long list of them, but one little item that I can point out is our SurveyMonkey accounts.»

Johnson explained that the agency uses the online tool to send out surveys to principals, teachers and others to get feedback on important topics. Instead of the agency sharing one account, Johnson said he discovered it was paying for nine accounts. SurveyMonkey plans cost anywhere from $0 for a basic account to nearly $1,200 a year for a premier plan. DPI’s accounts varied in level.

«The really great professional staff (at DPI) pointed that out to me, and that’s something we’re taking care of,» Johnson said.

The communications department’s account alone was $800 to $900 a year, according to newly hired communications director Drew Elliot. He said the agency has stopped anyone from renewing an annually billed account and has begun consolidating them. In addition to the nine SurveyMonkey accounts, the North Carolina Virtual Public School has its own contract with Qualtrics for surveys, Elliot said.

WRAL News asked the superintendent to provide other examples of spending that he has found disturbing since he took office in January. Lindsey Wakely, the superintendent’s senior policy advisor and chief legal counsel, said they did not have a pre-existing document tracking or detailing any examples, but she agreed to put together a list.

«Below are some examples of DPI’s past spending practices and costs, while facing budget cuts, that the Superintendent and his staff have identified and are seeking to address moving forward,» Wakely wrote.

In addition to the nine SurveyMonkey accounts, the superintendent’s office identified the following items:

  • Extensive conference-related costs, such as:
    • Paying excess rates for conference speakers
    • Large sums for meals and room rentals
    • $25,000 to sponsor World View Symposium held by UNC
  • $2,500 to sponsor one episode of a single-market television program.
  • Overhead charges paid to hire personnel through intergovernmental contracts rather than directly hiring personnel, which would cost DPI less.
  • Reversion of over $15 million in Excellent Public Schools Act funds that could have been used to support early childhood literacy.

In an emailed statement, Johnson said «the General Assembly is frustrated with inefficiencies at DPI under the State Board’s leadership, and I understand that. To avoid future cuts, we must work on building trust that we are spending our available dollars wisely – keeping our educators and students as the top priority.»

The board and other education leaders «must be held accountable for the taxpayer dollars entrusted to them,» he wrote. Johnson said the agency did not give educators access to almost $8 million in funds provided in fiscal years 2015 and 2016 for early childhood literacy efforts.

«That’s a total of over $15 million that went unused to support the education of our youngest students,» Johnson wrote. «When I was made aware that the same thing was about to happen earlier this year, I worked with the General Assembly to salvage $5 million to procure digital devices for literacy support under NC Read to Achieve. Moving forward, I am working with DPI literacy and early learning staff to ensure that funding provided by the General Assembly for Read to Achieve is fully utilized to support the critical goal of our children becoming lifelong readers.»

In an interview with WRAL News after last week’s meeting, State Board of Education Chairman Bill Cobey praised the superintendent’s efforts to find wasteful spending at the agency.

«Well, I’m glad to hear that,» Cobey said, adding that he was not aware of what other waste the superintendent had found.

After WRAL News provided Cobey with the superintendent’s list of spending issues, the chairman emailed a statement, saying he «applaud(s) the efficient use of appropriated funds and the elimination of any wasteful spending.»

«As the administrative head of DPI, it is important that the Superintendent and his staff continuously focus on the best utilization of all appropriated funds for the benefit of the public school children of NC,» Cobey wrote.

Lawmakers cut the education agency’s operating funds by 6.2 percent – $3.2 million – this year and 13.9 percent – $7.3 million – next year. State board members have urged the superintendent to speak out against the cuts in recent months, but he has repeatedly refused, saying he prefers to talk with lawmakers privately and does not think it’s productive «to try to negotiate through the media.»

Last month, state board member Greg Alcorn asked the superintendent to address «the elephant in the room» – the budget cuts – during his monthly superintendent’s message so the board could have clarity about where he stands. He declined, saying he wants his monthly report to focus on good things happening in schools.

Last week, state board member Eric Davis tried a different approach and told the superintendent of a recent conversation he had with an unnamed education leader in the General Assembly.

«I brought up these cuts and said, ‘Is there anything we can do to avoid this?’ And this education leader said if the state board and the state superintendent came together to the General Assembly and said, ‘Enough is enough. We can’t serve our students and absorb another cut,’ that would have great weight in the General Assembly,» Davis said. «So I would suggest we take this education leader up on his advice.»

«I would love to talk to that education leader as well,» Johnson responded. «There are many, many different education leaders in the General Assembly that have vastly different opinions. I know that because I’ve been working very closely with all of them. And so, yes, that is a conversation we can have. I’d like to talk to who you talked to.»

Davis tried again.

«Sure. I think this particular advice was keen on that we are together in that request, that we are unified in advocating for the department, that the department can’t absorb any more cuts. It’s important for us to publicly say that,» Davis said.

«I look forward to discussing that with the education leader you discussed it with,» Johnson responded.

«So are we in agreement on avoiding future cuts?» Davis asked.

The superintendent stared straight ahead, not acknowledging Davis’ question, as others in the room laughed nervously at the awkward silence.

A few minutes later, Davis circled back to the discussion, this time urging all of his colleagues to work together to fight budget cuts.

«Before we can confront what we need to do in terms of equity for our students, we have to know who we have on the team that can deliver whatever our message is. We’ll never make progress on equity with a constantly diminishing staff worried about their own jobs, unable to deliver the kinds of (services) needed,» he said. «I hope my colleagues will join me in saying enough is enough, we cannot absorb any more cuts.»

Johnson quickly responded, telling Davis and the rest of the board about the «disturbing» spending he had discovered at the agency and said he will be relying on the upcoming $1 million outside audit to find any other potential waste.

«The operational audit might say no more cuts. It might say here are places where we can be more efficient and drive the work better and combine departments and be better, and that might also mean no cuts,» Johnson said. «But I am very much looking forward to the operational review and having that information to guide these conversations and to tell us what is working and what is not.»

Johnson said he hopes the audit will be ready in April. In the meantime, board member Becky Taylor said she wants everyone to be on the same page.

«I think the audit’s going to be great, because it’s going to provide efficiencies, which all agencies need,» she said. «But I think we need to send the message that we are unified in supporting our DPI staff in delivering the services they need to deliver and really stop the bleeding.»

Fuente noticia: http://www.wral.com/nc-superintendent-slams-disturbing-spending-at-state-education-agency/17089497/

Comparte este contenido:
Page 187 of 397
1 185 186 187 188 189 397