Looks like it's spend $130,000 now to avoid some sort of million-dollar lawsuit later.
Yeah I read the actual wording of your paraphrase of the single line of the article:
Stimulus rules allowed districts to spend money on teacher training, but Peterson suggested the money would be better spent on academic training.
Yeah, and? Let's say that a teacher writes a story problem like "Joe has three apples he's selling for 25 cents apiece. Jamal has 20 cents, does he have enough to buy an apple?" Which would have a correct mathematical answer. However let's say that some kid who's not white has a brother named Jamal, takes it home to show their parents the 100% they got on the entire test, and the parents get offended because they feel it portrays their ethnicity as stereotypically poor, gets a lawyer and wants a million dollars plus court and attorney costs.
Even though that's a hypothetical situation, I'm probably not far from the truth.
If this doesn't seem like an issue, would anyone instead take issue with something like this:
"Bob has 32 ounces he intends to distribute at a street corner. If he instead sells 5 ounces to his friend Greg at a discounted rate, how many ounces does he have left?"
I bet everyone would agree the latter shouldn't be on a test. The former is actually on the same line.
First problem is they shouldn't have gotten any stimulus money. That money is being put on the government's Visa card.
And I bet if they sent the money back you'd be complaining that they proverbially threw free money out the window while driving down the interstate.
And, right above the line, it tells us who Peterson is (emphasis is mine):
Paul Peterson, director of the Program on Education Policy and Governance at Harvard University, and a senior fellow at the conservative Hoover Institution at Stanford University, said cultural proficiency is part of a broader agenda advocated by people “who think that we should have a teaching force that has a certain political perspective.”
Hardly an objective source of information.
To put all of this another way, let's say you're in the checkout at the grocery store and the clerk says to another at a shift change "it's good you're here so a non-sister can deal with a crackerjack honky that's next in line." Chances are good you'd want monetary damages for mental anguish and pain and suffering and whatever.
Posted on July 13, 2011 - 02:00 PM