Archive for the ‘Academia’ Category

This article highlights the disjointedness of the unhinged left. It also highlights universities’ political leanings. It isn’t surprising that the protest is being organized by a bunch of unhinged lefties.

According to the article, “St. Cloud State University and the College of St. Benedict are exploring options to send students, staff, faculty and the public to the Jan. 21 event.” When asked what they’ll be protesting, Jane Olsen, the director of the Women’s Center at St. Cloud State, said “Probably every single person you would ask would have a different response, as we’re taking our personal histories and experiences with us to the march. I think one, the importance and the belief in democracy is honored by being public and raising our voices about equity, respect, democracy, human rights and, really, a challenge to the behavior of Donald Trump and his associates during the campaign.”

TRANSLATION: We’re upset that Hillary lost. We’re upset that Trump won. We’re upset that a bunch of hicks from flyover country didn’t listen to their betters.

There’s really 2 issues in play here. The local issue is that large parts of SCSU are inhabited by unhinged, bitter progressives. Jane Olsen never tried organizing anti-Obama protests during President Obama’s inaugurations. This isn’t surprising. It’s just disappointing.

Olsen is getting paid handsomely for a job that shouldn’t exist. Taxpayers shouldn’t be footing the bill for collegiate activists. If private citizens want to pay for collegiate activists, that’s their right. Olsen’s job isn’t essential, especially while SCSU is running a deficit. Here’s Olsen’s SCSU bio:

Jane Olsen has been the Director of the SCSU Women’s Center since its founding in 1989. She has more than 31 years of administrative, programmatic, activist and advocacy experience in women’s organizations in both Minnesota and Illinois. Olsen holds a master’s degree and B.A. in Psychology from the University of Illinois-Springfield (formerly Sangamon State University). Her position includes responsibility for the overall program and administration, as well as budgeting, staffing, services and programming functions at the Women’s Center. Olsen is a member of the National Women’s Studies Association, including active participation in the national Women’s Center Committee. She was a member of the Board of Directors of the Minnesota Women’s Consortium from 2007 to 2013, and continues to support the Consortium through service on the Governance Committee. The Minnesota Women’s Consortium is a statewide coalition of 150 member organizations that support equality and justice for women and girls in Minnesota. (

After reading that, it isn’t surprising that SCSU is running a deficit.

Betsy DeVos has the chance of being one of the best secretaries of Education ever. According to this WSJ article, Mrs. DeVos has gone toe-to-toe with the ‘education establishment’ and lived to tell about it. In fact, she didn’t just live to tell about it, she defeated them. In fact, she didn’t just defeat them, she kicked some serious ass.

According to the WSJ article, “Mrs. DeVos is a philanthropist who has devoted years and much of her fortune to promoting school reform, especially charter schools and vouchers. She chairs the American Federation for Children (AFC).”

This year, “AFC was especially successful … as 108 of the 121 candidates it supported won their elections. AFC candidates in Florida won 20 of 21 targeted races. The group’s biggest coup was ousting a scourge of school choice in a Miami-Dade Senate district where Democrats are a majority. The teachers’ union dumped $1 million into the race but still lost.” [Editor’s note: winning 108 of 121 elections is a winning percentage of 89.25%, which certainly qualifies as kicking ass.

It’s especially heartening to see this many school choice advocates getting elected. They’re the future civil rights leaders of the next 15 years. Even more importantly, being seen as school choice advocates will help Republicans in minority communities irrespective of what Randi Weingarten said in this interview:

In Ms. Weingarten’s over-the-top statement, she said “In nominating DeVos, Trump makes it loud and clear that his education policy will focus on privatizing, defunding and destroying public education in America. DeVos has no meaningful experience in the classroom or in our schools. The sum total of her involvement has been spending her family’s wealth in an effort to dismantle public education in Michigan. Every American should be concerned that she would impose her reckless and extreme ideology on the nation.”

This is a perfect illustration of the left’s wanting money out of politics … if the money is spent opposing the left’s monopolies. Mrs. DeVos has spent a portion of her wealth trying to increase educational competition in the hopes of forcing the forces of the status quo into providing a better product. The reason why the minority community likes school choice is because public schools have failed their children too often.

Here’s hoping that Mrs. DeVos carries out President-Elect Trump’s school choice agenda when she’s confirmed.

This morning, Donald Trump picked Gov. Nikki Haley, (R-SC), to be the US Ambassador to the UN. This afternoon, President-Elect Trump picked Betsy DeVos to be his Education Secretary. The Washington Post describes Mrs. DeVos as a “billionaire and conservative activist” who “has quietly helped change the education landscape in many states, spending millions of dollars in a successful push to expand voucher programs that give families taxpayer dollars to pay for private and religious schools.”

Of course, the article wouldn’t be complete without quoting Randi Weingarten. Ms. Weingarten is quoted as saying “Trump’s pick makes it loud and clear that his education policy will focus on privatizing, defunding and destroying public education in America.”

In picking DeVos, President-Elect Trump is telling conservatives that he will push their school choice agenda. This pick, more than any other pick besides Jeff Sessions as Trump’s AG, signals that Trump’s education agenda aligns with Republicans’ education agenda.

After accepting the nomination to be the US ambassador to the US, Mrs. Haley said “When the President believes you have a major contribution to make to the welfare of our nation, and to our nation’s standing in the world, that is a calling that is important to heed,” Haley said, adding that she will “remain as governor until the U.S. Senate acts affirmatively on my nomination.”

DeVos will likely get the most criticism from Democrats because school choice represents an existential threat to the Democrats’ teacher union special interest allies. I’d think that Haley will sail through for confirmation.

Technorati: , , , , , , , , , ,

A loyal reader of LFR just sent me a lit piece that a private citizen put together and distributed on St. Cloud’s south side. It’s something worth highlighting for multiple reasons. First, whoever put that together is definitely motivated. Next, it’s clear they’ll either vote against the referendum or that they’ve already voted to reject the referendum. Third, the person (or group of people) who put this lit piece together put together a well-thought-out series of arguments against building a new Tech High School.

One of the lit piece’s points says “The school that the District plans to build is modeled after the new Alexandria High School (opened 2 years ago). Incorporated into the plan are numerous “informal learning spaces” which offer places where students may gather outside of the traditional class room. The first year that Alexandria opened resulted in the failure of the new high school to meet adequate yearly progress (AYP) for federal requirements in reading. Last year, the school failed to meet the AYP in the areas of reading, math and graduation rates. This was a high school that had excellent AYP (no failures) year after year. That changed after the new school was built and opened.” Here’s the first page of the lit piece:

Here’s the second page of the lit piece:

Every voter in ISD 742 should take the time to read this lit piece. It sets forth some important information and well-reasoned arguments against building a new Tech HS.

Technorati: , , , , , , , , ,

Ric Studer is a candidate for the ISD 742 School Board. This morning, I noticed Mr. Studer’s LTE published in the St. Cloud Times. Saying that it’s a bit unusual is understatement. Frankly, I find it repulsive.

The opening paragraph of Mr. Studer’s LTE says “I am a candidate for St. Cloud school board. As much as I would like your vote and to serve on the board, I ask that you vote for the very qualified Shannon Haws and Monica Segura-Schwartz.” The next paragraph says “There are no ethnic minorities or women remaining on the board after Les Green and Debbie Erickson chose not to run for re-election. Our district is ethnically, religiously and racially diverse. I find it appalling that the three remaining board members and six of the eight candidates are white, middle-aged, middle class, Christian or Jewish men.”

While I agree that there isn’t enough diversity on the ISD 742 School Board, it isn’t that I’m worried about the ethnic or religious diversity. The diversity that’s lacking is diversity of thought. This board suffers from a chronic case of groupthink. They’re arrogant, too, but that’s another story. This Board hasn’t disagreed with Willie Jett in any meaningful way, much less challenged him on anything. Each of the current members and all but one of the candidates running for the Board think that taxpayers are ATMs to be tapped whenever the Board wants.

The ‘solution’ that the Board has come up with is foolish and expensive. Build a new school, they say, even though Apollo will soon be big enough to house all of the district’s high school students. This Board wants taxpayers to vote for a $143,250,000 bonding referendum simply because they want something for their legacy. That type of groupthink isn’t just expensive. It’s foolish.

I wrote this post to highlight the fact that John Palmer would be the lone voice of sanity if he were elected to the ISD 742 School Board. Dr. Palmer is a retired professor who taught education at SCSU. He’s the taxpayers’ advocate in the race. That’s why he’s needed on the Board.

Finally, there’s this from Mr. Studer:

How can good decisions be made for the district’s people without the representation of a true cross section of our community? A vote for Shannon and Monica will give us the respected voices of women and the Latino community on the board.

We’ve seen that good decisions can’t be made when everyone practices groupthink. That’s how we’ve arrived at this mess. What’s needed is a fresh perspective. What’s needed is a leader. John Palmer provides both qualities. That’s why I’m voting for him this Nov. 8.

Technorati: , , , , , , , , ,

The first thing I noticed about the St. Cloud Times’ endorsed school board candidates is that they’re ideologues. They’ve drank the School Board’s Kool-Aid. They each agree that voters must approve the $143,250,000 bonding referendum. These endorsed candidates don’t care that property taxes will skyrocket because of this vote. These endorsed candidates don’t care about the people living in St. Cloud who are living on modest fixed incomes and what those property tax increases will do to their family budgets.

They certainly don’t care that building the new Tech HS isn’t necessary. They don’t care that building the new Tech HS is foolish. They’ve gotten their marching orders and they’re going to do their best to carry those marching orders out.

It’s been reported that the ISD 742 School Board has held listening sessions. That isn’t true. They held gatherings that started with a professionally-produced presentation. It’s indisputable fact that it’s impossible to listen when you’re talking.

The Times’ Editorial Board did their best to spin these candidates’ qualifications but it won’t work. Here’s what they wrote:

Yes, on the surface all four might not seem to offer much diversity. But their answers to written questions from this board, campaign materials, experiences and news coverage about all eight candidacies show they are the best qualified to help lead the district in addressing its many challenges.

It isn’t just the surface that makes it seem like they “might not seem to offer much diversity.” It’s that they’re cookie-cutter DFL/Education Minnesota ideologues who won’t hesitate to raise taxes and rubberstamp Willie Jett’s agenda.

Frankly, the decisions that this board has made have been questionable at best. That’s especially true with the purchase of the land where the proposed new Tech HS is supposed to be located. When they first purchased it, they didn’t bother to determine whether it was fit for building on. It wasn’t. That’s why they had to do a land swap with the City of St. Cloud.

Now these ideologues want us to write them a blank check in the amount of $143,000,000? It isn’t just that I don’t think so. It’s that I’m saying ‘Hell no!‘ to these ideologues. I’ll say that emphatically by voting for just one candidate, John Palmer. Unlike these ideologues, Dr. Palmer won’t hesitate to ask the difficult questions. Unlike these ideologues, Dr. Palmer won’t hesitate in saying no to Education Minnesota’s agenda. Unlike these ideologues, Dr. Palmer will be the taxpayers’ and the students’ watchdog. Unlike these 4 ideologues, Dr. Palmer has earned my vote with his ideas, intelligence and his independence.

Finally, it’s time to tell the School Board that a) they work for us, b) they don’t work for Education Minnesota and/or Willie Jett and c) we aren’t their ATMs.

The St. Cloud and Sauk Rapids school districts sit side-by-side geographically. Despite that geographic closeness, they’re heading in opposite directions enrollment-wise. Kirsti Marohn’s article on the Sauk Rapids school district shows a vibrant, growing district. Jenny Berg’s article tells the story of a stagnating, shrinking district.

Marohn wrote that as of Oct. 1, “the district’s total enrollment is 4,459, up from 4,294 at the end of last school year. That’s an increase of almost 4 percent.” Berg wrote that “The number of elementary students attending St. Cloud schools dropped by approximately 10 percent from last year’s numbers, according to enrollment data released by the district Thursday.”

Additionally, Marohn wrote “The growth is due to a combination of higher birth rates in the Sauk Rapids-Rice area new families moving into the district and students from other districts choosing to attend Sauk Rapids-Rice schools through the open enrollment option, Bittman said. A demographer’s report predicted the district will grow by as much as 17 percent n the next five to 10 years.”

Then there’s this:

Januszewski predicted Tech would gain even more students in the coming years if the referendum passes and a new school is built on the south side of town. The new school would most likely lure students from other districts, he said.

That’s wishful thinking. People are moving into the Sauk Rapids-Rice district in droves. They don’t have a shiny new building. What’s attracting these students to the district? It might be that parents are using open enrollment to abandon the St. Cloud district’s sinking ship.

Recently, a memo was sent out talking about the need for SCSU to embrace “diversity and encourage the celebration of multicultural traditions.” The email says that “two Meditation and Prayer Rooms are available on campus to students, faculty, staff and visitors for reflection, prayer and meditation. The rooms, located in Atwood Memorial Center and the Miller Center, are open to all and cannot be reserved.”

While that sounds fine, what LFR has learned is that Semya Hakim, a Human Relations and Multicultural Education professor and adviser to the Muslim Student Association, pushed this initiative. LFR has also learned that SCSU has spent over $11,000 thus far on the prayer and meditation room in Miller Center and that that price will definitely go higher. Prior to Prof. Hakim’s intervention, SCSU showed no signs of caring about religious diversity.

Considering Prof. Hakim’s background as an adviser to the Muslim Student Association and their ties to CAIR, it isn’t exactly a stretch to think that Prof. Hakim wasn’t that worried about the civil rights of people of other faiths.

In this article about CAIR, Hakim said that the definition of Islamophobia is the “extremely strong dislike or fear of Islam and the people who practice it.” Prof. Hakim then said that Jaylani Hussein’s talk would “likely talk about definitions of Islamophobia, incidents that have displayed it and what people can do in response.”

SCSU is running another deficit this year, especially since headcount enrollment dropped another 2.4% this semester. The fact that budgets were cut while this project was approved is disturbing. It’s disturbing that SCSU put a higher priority on displaying their diversity than they put on getting the University’s finances in order. Unfortunately, it isn’t surprising.

It’s unfortunate that the special interests run SCSU. Until it changes, its struggles will continue.

Thank God for Jenny Berg’s article on enrollment in St. Cloud’s elementary schools. According to Ms. Berg’s article, “This year, 534 fewer students are enrolled in kindergarten through sixth grade. Kevin Januszewski, executive director of business services, said some of the change is due to students moving to a different district or state. But some students also left public schools to attend charter schools.” Further, the article states that “The district’s total enrollment is down by 276 students — about 2.7 percent — bringing the total enrollment to 9,881 students.”

In this post, I noted that Apollo had the capacity to hold 2,400 students when the district offices didn’t take up a significant portion of Apollo’s space. Let’s shrink Tech and Apollo’s enrollment by 2.7% even though it will be more than that within 10 years. That brings total enrollment down to 2,640 students. Are we really going to build a state-of-the-art new high school for 250 students, especially when the cost of that state-of-the-art school will exceed $100,000,000?

The ISD 742 School Board is tax-happy and fiscally irresponsible. If they want to spend $100,000,000 because Apollo doesn’t have the capacity to hold 250 students, then it’s legitimate to say that the ISD 742 School Board is fiscally irresponsible and utterly incompetent.

The solution to this insanity is to vote to reject the bonding referendum, then elect a voice of sanity to the board so the people are heard. Once those immediate needs are accomplished, then we can start from scratch by asking the right questions. (Think questions like whether we need a bigger building. Hint: We don’t.)

This article further undercuts the School Board’s argument that we need to spend $104,500,000 on a new Tech HS. With enrollment dropping, their argument now has to shift to being ‘renovating Apollo isn’t good enough.’ Getting people to vote to spend $104,500,000 on a school that they don’t need and will never need is foolish in the extreme.

I haven’t hidden the fact that I’m voting against the St. Cloud Tech bonding referendum because the School Board started with a vision of a new school rather than doing its homework on whether a new school building is needed. I think I was clear in stating that the only school board candidate asking the right questions was John Palmer. Now it’s time to talk about what questions voters should ask the school board candidates.

First, it’s important to ask each candidate why they’re supporting the building of a new Tech HS. Tell the candidates that if they say something generic like ‘we have to invest in education’ or ‘Tech is 100 years old’ will disqualify them from getting your vote. These aren’t reasons. They’re empty platitudes. We already have enough School Board members who speak in empty platitudes.

It’s worth noting that anyone who speaks in these empty platitudes isn’t willing to do the work of providing legitimate oversight on the District’s finances. Speaking in empty platitudes is proof that they’re part of the education community, the equivalent of the GOP establishment. That type of groupthink isn’t what’s needed.

Next, it’s important to ask each candidate what the high school enrollment is for ISD 742 and what it’s projected to be for 2020. If the candidate can’t answer, that should be eliminate them from getting your vote. If that candidate doesn’t know that the District’s enrollment is shrinking, they aren’t fiscally conservative enough to properly manage a school budget.

Finally, if only one candidate answers the questions thoughtfully, then you should only vote for that candidate. Candidates need to earn your vote. Sending that signal to the education community will let them know that you expect substantive, responsive representation.