Displaying posts published in

2016

Copying Singapore’s Math Homework The world needs a network of organizations to help countries learn from each other’s education systems. By Wendy Kopp

Ms. Kopp is the founder of Teach For America and CEO and co-founder of Teach For All, a global network of independent organizations working to expand educational opportunities in 40 countries.

Every three years, hundreds of thousands of teenagers in dozens of countries take an exam that tests their knowledge in science, math, reading, collaborative problem solving and financial literacy. The most recent results, issued this week, provide rich data for determining whether countries’ education systems are high-performing, making progress, or lagging behind. The PISA test is administered by the Program for International Student Assessment, a project of the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development.

Here are a few of the success stories from the current report: In Australia, immigrant students perform as well as other children. In South Korea, students from lower-income families perform on a par with wealthier peers. In Vietnam, the academic performance of girls and boys is roughly equitable. And Qatar experienced the fastest progress in math, while Georgia experienced the fastest progress in science.

Unfortunately, experience shows that most countries, including the U.S., fail to make the most of the PISA data. Even though PISA shines a light on policies and practices driving high performance and meaningful progress, only sporadic, ad hoc and generally bilateral opportunities exist to carry knowledge of what’s proving successful in one country to other parts of the world. Most countries write off the opportunity to learn from the highest-performing countries, since they are far away and seem very different. What can the U.S. or Chile, for example, learn from Singapore or Estonia—and vice versa?

The answer is almost certainly a great deal. For an issue like education—which is of enormous importance to global development—this absence of a global approach for fostering the exchange of ideas and best practices is an anomaly. Other global issues such as public health and the environment have robust channels and funding mechanisms for spreading best practices. In education, innovative ideas and new approaches that could benefit students on the other side of the world rarely see the light of day beyond a particular place. CONTINUE AT SITE

Shortcuts to Addiction Big Pharma, the author argues, has inflated the number of Americans with chronic pain to 100 million when 25 million would be more realistic. Sally Satel reviews “Drug Dealer, MD” by Anna Lembke. By Sally Satel

Psychiatrist Anna Lembke, chief of addiction medicine at Stanford University’s medical school, has spent her career helping patients battle their addiction to opioid drugs, from Vicodin to heroin. Out of this experience comes “Drug Dealer, MD,” a short and feisty book in which, among much else, she calls out practitioners for overprescribing painkillers and censures a scamming subculture in which patients abet their own addiction and suffering.

The “prescription drug epidemic,” as Dr. Lembke calls it, encompasses several trends, the most dramatic being a spike in overdose deaths. Prescription-drug abuse, she explains, began to be a problem in the 1990s, when campaigns for improved pain treatment gained ground. In 2001 the powerful Joint Commission on Accreditation of Healthcare Organizations established standards for pain management in response to the widespread problem of under-treating pain.

Few experts would deny that the inadequate treatment of pain had long been a challenge for American medicine, and the new standards were not in themselves misguided. But the pendulum has since swung in the other direction. Too many well-meaning doctors use long-acting, high-dose narcotics to treat nasty toothaches and minor injuries when such drugs are really meant to relieve the agony of cancer and other severe, unremitting conditions. The more opiate medications in circulation, the more opportunities for patients—and non-patients—to abuse them.

Part of the blame for the epidemic, Dr. Lembke says, rests with the pharmaceutical companies, which have been heavy-handed in their promotion of narcotics to doctors. Meanwhile, she argues, Big Pharma has exaggerated the number of Americans with chronic pain, inflating the figure to 100 million when 25 million would be more realistic.

Users themselves, of course, must assume some responsibility too, and one can only applaud Dr. Lembke for wading into these politically incorrect waters, given that any discussion of the role of the user is construed as blaming the victim. There are patients, Dr. Lembke writes, who “visit a doctor’s office not to recover from illness but to be validated in their identity as a person with an illness.” She describes how patients finagle pills out of doctors and, in an amusing riff, labels their strategies by user type. “Senators” will “filibuster” the doctor with unrelated problems until the final few minutes of a visit and then make a plea for narcotics; the doctor is now so short on time that he relents. “Exhibitionists” writhe in fake pain. The “Dynamic Duo”—a patient and his crying mother (“the commonest co-dependent”)—present a team too pitiful to refuse. CONTINUE AT SITE

A Lawyer for a Lawless EPA Scott Pruitt can restore respect for the states in environmental policy.

As Donald Trump rolls out his domestic-policy nominees, Democrats are discovering to their horror that more often than not he meant what he said. The latest evidence is the President-elect’s intention to nominate Oklahoma Attorney General Scott Pruitt to run the Environmental Protection Agency.

There was a time when Republican EPA administrators were liberals in GOP power suits. Think William Reilly under George H.W. Bush or Christine Todd Whitman under George W. Bush. They more or less agreed with the left’s command-and-control model of environmental regulation, and they’d pile more costs on the private economy.

The Democratic Party’s green extremism, especially on climate change, has made such Republicans obsolete. President Obama couldn’t get his climate-change agenda through a Democratic Congress, so he ordered the EPA to impose it on the 50 states by diktat. The agency reinterpreted statute after ancient statute as its bureaucrats saw fit, daring the courts to stop them. Think of the Clean Power Plan to put the coal industry out of business, the carbon endangerment rule, grabbing authority to call any pond or puddle a “waterway,” and so much more.

Mr. Pruitt’s first job will be restoring respect for the Constitution and cooperative federalism in EPA rule-making. He knows how to do this because he led the legal charge by the states against EPA abuses, including the victory of a Supreme Court stay on the Clean Power Plan as it moves through the appellate courts. If he is confirmed by the Senate, Mr. Pruitt could order the EPA’s lawyers to inform the courts that the agency no longer stands by the legal interpretation behind the Clean Power Plan.

Democrats will attack Mr. Pruitt as a climate-change “denier,” but his only offense is disagreeing with them on energy policy. The irony is that Mr. Pruitt will probably do more for the environment than Mr. Obama ever did because he will make sure that rules issued by the EPA are rooted in law and thus won’t be overturned in court.

PRESIDENT FRANKLIN DELANO ROOSEVELT ON DECEMBER 8, 1941

Yesterday, December 7, 1941 — a date which will live in infamy — the United States of America was suddenly and deliberately attacked by naval and air forces of the Empire of Japan.

The United States was at peace with that nation, and, at the solicitation of Japan, was still in conversation with its government and its Emperor looking toward the maintenance of peace in the Pacific.

Indeed, one hour after Japanese air squadrons had commenced bombing in the American island of Oahu, the Japanese Ambassador to the United States and his colleague delivered to our Secretary of State a formal reply to a recent American message. And, while this reply stated that it seemed useless to continue the existing diplomatic negotiations, it contained no threat or hint of war or of armed attack.

It will be recorded that the distance of Hawaii from Japan makes it obvious that the attack was deliberately planned many days or even weeks ago. During the intervening time the Japanese Government has deliberately sought to deceive the United States by false statements and expressions of hope for continued peace.

The attack yesterday on the Hawaiian Islands has caused severe damage to American naval and military forces. I regret to tell you that very many American lives have been lost. In addition, American ships have been reported torpedoed on the high seas between San Francisco and Honolulu.

Yesterday the Japanese Government also launched an attack against Malaya.
Last night Japanese forces attacked Hong Kong.
Last night Japanese forces attacked Guam.
Last night Japanese forces attacked the Philippine Islands.
Last night the Japanese attacked Wake Island.
And this morning the Japanese attacked Midway Island.

Japan has therefore undertaken a surprise offensive extending throughout the Pacific area. The facts of yesterday and today speak for themselves. The people of the United States have already formed their opinions and well understand the implications to the very life and safety of our nation.
As Commander-in-Chief of the Army and Navy I have directed that all measures be taken for our defense, that always will our whole nation remember the character of the onslaught against us.

No matter how long it may take us to overcome this premeditated invasion, the American people, in their righteous might, will win through to absolute victory.

I believe that I interpret the will of the Congress and of the people when I assert that we will not only defend ourselves to the uttermost but will make it very certain that this form of treachery shall never again endanger us.

Hostilities exist. There is no blinking at the fact that our people, our territory and our interests are in grave danger.

With confidence in our armed forces, with the unbounding determination of our people, we will gain the inevitable triumph, so help us God.

I ask that the Congress declare that since the unprovoked and dastardly attack by Japan on Sunday, December 7, 1941, a state of war has existed between the United States and the Japanese Empire.

President Franklin Delano Roosevelt

Sanctuary Campuses How the safety of students and faculty are compromised to achieve the leftist agenda. Michael Cutler

Two disturbing articles focusing on “Sanctuary college campuses,” serve as the predication for my article today.

On November 22, 2016 “The Atlantic” published, “The Push for Sanctuary Campuses Prompts More Questions Than Answers: It’s not clear how far colleges would or could go to stop the deportation of students.”

This article detailed how some “Sanctuary” colleges will not cooperate with immigration authorities.

Consider this excerpt from this article:

“Faculty at Trinity College in Hartford, Connecticut, who would like to see the school become a sanctuary campus, met on Monday with administrators to “have a better sense of what their expectations are for a sanctuary campus,” said Joanne Berger-Sweeney, the school’s president. Her faculty expressed interest in the school declining to pass immigration information to federal authorities, and in establishing a network of alumni who are willing to offer pro bono legal help to undocumented students.”

On December 1, 2016 the website, “The College Fix” posted, “UC President Napolitano to campus cops: Don’t enforce federal immigration law.”

Here is are salient excerpts from this article:

Napolitano — who served as Secretary of Homeland Security under the Obama administration, charged with protecting the nation’s borders — put out a statement Wednesday that her office will “vigorously protect the privacy and civil rights of the undocumented members of the UC community and will direct its police departments not to undertake joint efforts with any government agencies to enforce federal immigration law.”

The announcement comes as students in the country illegally and their peer allies are distraught that there might be mass deportations of undocumented students under a Donald Trump presidency. Many student leaders have announced their schools are “sanctuary campuses.” Now campus leaders are essentially following suit.

According to Napolitano’s office, there are about 2,500 undocumented students enrolled across the 10-campus UC system.

“While we still do not know what policies and practices the incoming federal administration may adopt, given the many public pronouncements made during the presidential campaign and its aftermath, we felt it necessary to reaffirm that UC will act upon its deeply held conviction that all members of our community have the right to work, study, and live safely and without fear at all UC locations,” Napolitano stated.

Kerry Says Muslim Terrorists Who Call for Slicing Open Chests are Committed to Nonviolence.” Daniel Greenfield

In his rant at the Saban Forum denouncing Israel for the lack of peace, John Forbes Kerry claimed that the Islamic terrorists who run Fatah are pacifists. “We have a leader of a not-perfect entity, the Fatah, who is committed to nonviolence.”

Here’s a sample of Fatah’s commitment to non-violence courtesy of Palestinian Media Watch.

The Fatah song emphasizes that Fatah’s “oath” is to destroy Israel, saying “free the state from the hands of the Zionists,” and that this will be done through violence, terror and killing:

“Slice open the enemy’s chest, slice it”
“Shoot the Dashka (machine gun) and the cannon”
“The Fatah man… fires the mortar and the machine gun”
“Strike, mortar, strike!”

And just in case there’s any ambiguity…

“I have no love other than the love of the rifle.”
“The sound of the rifles gives us joy”
“Bullets! Sing for us”

That’s real commitment to non-violence. Maybe Kerry should be the one to be committed.

Why the Left Cried When Fidel Died What really lies behind progressives’ sorrow when a monster dies. Jamie Glazov

Reprinted from Breitbart.com.

The death of Fidel Castro has driven a stake into the heart of the Left, causing progressives worldwide to weep and moan at the loss of their secular deity. While North Korea and Raúl Castro have enforced days of mandatory mourning, leftists in the free world are beating their breasts and wailing with a voluntary and committed passion.

The examples are endless: Canada’s Prime Minister Justin Trudeau gushed about how he learned of Castro’s death with “deep sorrow” and went on to pay tribute to a “legendary revolutionary.” Rep. Barbara Lee (D-CA) praised Castro and pleaded with everyone to “stop and pause and mourn.”

Other usual suspects did not disappoint. UK’s Labor opposition leader Jeremy Corbyn, the U.S. Green Party’s presidential candidate Jill Stein, Rev. Jesse Jackson and former President Jimmy Carter all stepped forward, expressing their deep sadness, extolling Castro’s “heroism,” struggle for “social justice” and other expected feats of revolutionary valor. The list goes on and on.

What exactly is going on here?

To understand why leftists, especially of the Western variety, are weeping upon Castro’s death, it is first crucial to grasp the underlying foundation of the progressives’ belief system. The leftist is a believer in a political faith, a faith that envisions a classless utopia of perfect equality and “social justice.” This faith is interlinked with the leftist’s revulsion of his own democratic-capitalist host society, which he sees as oppressive and unjust – and which he seeks to destroy. And it is upon the ashes of this intended destruction that the leftist hopes to build, with his other self-appointed social redeemers, the secular socialist paradise.

From this ideological foundation grow many pathologies, including the obvious philosophy of the enemy of my enemy is my friend. Indeed, by logic, anyone else who wants to destroy the leftist’s host society is seen as a helpful ally – and so it becomes completely obvious why, as David Horowitz has documented, the Left formed an Unholy Alliance with communism during the Cold War and why it continues that tradition with Islamic Supremacism in our terror war today.

‘Tacit Consent’ in Israeli-Russian Relations Moscow is not interfering with Israeli attacks on Hezbollah in Syria.

One of the most interesting stories, if not the most puzzling, is the close understanding and amity between Jerusalem and Moscow. While the Russian Air Force pounds the civilian population in Aleppo on behalf of the Syrian dictator Bashar Assad and his Iranian allies, Russia is coordinating the moves of its Air Force in Syria with Israel’s Air Force. Moscow is not interfering with Israeli attacks on Hezbollah convoys carrying lethal arms shipped to Syria by Iran, as the Shiite terrorist group is attempting to move these arms to Lebanon. Walla, a Hebrew language Israeli news outlet wrote on December 1, 2016 that “Russia’s silence following reports that the Israeli Air Force bombed an arms depot and a Hezbollah bound weapons convoy in Syria on Wednesday might signal ‘tacit consent’ to such action as long as they do not harm Kremlin’s interests.” Israel, on its part, is staying out of the civil war in Syria, but provides medical assistance to wounded opposition fighters combatting the Assad regime.

The Obama administration failure to act on its announced “Red Line,” (on Assad’s use of chemical warfare on fellow Syrians) and subsequently leaving the Syrian arena in Russian hands, has damaged U.S. credibility in the region. It has also encouraged Russia to take aggressive action against opposition forces supported by the U.S., and Syrian civilians.

Gen. Igor Konashenkov, spokesman for the Russian defense ministry said according to Russian RT-TV (11/29/2016) that, “Over the past few days, well planned and careful action by the Syrian troops resulted in a radical breakthrough. Half of the territory previously held by the militants in eastern Aleppo has been de facto liberated.” Konashenkov’s cynical statement referring to the Assad regime’s brutal actions in attacking (along with Russian aerial support) civilians in homes, hospitals and schools with barrel-bombs to be “well planned and careful action,” sharply contrasts with Israeli hospitals opening their doors to perform truly humanitarian work by treating wounded Syrian civilians and fighters.

Konashenkov also stressed that “over 80,000 Syrians, including tens of thousands of children, have been freed. Many of them, at long last were able to get water, food and medical assistance at humanitarian centers deployed by Russia. Those Syrians served as human shields in Aleppo for terrorists of all flavors.” That statement is turning the truth upside down. After relentless bombing by Russian and Syrian jets that have killed thousands (mostly Sunni civilians), these Syrians do not consider Russia’s role as “humanitarian.”

Putin’s Russia has saved Bashar Assad’s skin, and has done so for purely Russian interests, including air and naval bases in the Latakia Governorate of northwestern Syria, bordering the coveted Mediterranean Sea. Putin’s Russia has planned to sell, and according to Russian and Iranian sources, already delivered to Iran the highly sophisticated S-300 air defense system. Israel’s Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, in his many meetings with Russia’s President, Vladimir Putin, implored the latter not to sell such weapons to the Islamic Republic of Iran. Thomas Shannon, U.S. Under-Secretary of State for Political Affairs, said that, “We have made it very clear to the Russians that we consider this (the sale of the S-300) to be a bad move, that we consider it to be destabilizing and not in keeping with what we’ve been trying to accomplish, not only through the JCPOA (Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, commonly known as the Iran nuclear deal) , but broadly in terms of our engagement with Iran.”

Delegitimizing Trump What’s really behind the recounts and petitions. Daniel Greenfield

If the Jill Stein recount were a car, it would be on fire in a ditch while being swarmed by angry snakes.

The failed Green Party candidate raised $7.2 million for presidential recounts that have so far increased Trump’s lead in Wisconsin and made a convincing argument why Detroit shouldn’t be allowed to participate in elections after the ballots on the books didn’t match voting machine printouts in 59% of the precincts. Stein may end up having to pay the entire cost of the Michigan recount and is struggling in Pennsylvania. Meanwhile 42% of Clinton voters believe the recount will show she won.

They’re going to be very disappointed.

The recount follies are just one of a number of clumsy efforts to deny Trump the White House.

There’s the faithless elector drive which has so far signed up one Republican faithless elector who immediately got a New York Times op-ed. That’s something McCain couldn’t even swing when he was running for president. Too bad the Electoral College has 538 members. And so far the tactic of harassing electors with phone calls, emails and death threats isn’t getting Hillary Clinton any closer to victory.

4.6 million people, who have never read the Constitution or anything longer than a Tweet, signed a Change.org petition titled, “Electoral College: Make Hillary Clinton President.” It’s easy to mock these desperate outbreaks of soreloserdom. But the larger agenda isn’t to find 50 million ballots in a dumpster to make Jill Stein president or to have a bunch of faithless electors take John Kasich to the White House.

It’s about delegitimizing Trump.

The left doesn’t begin with policy critiques of Republican presidential candidates. Instead it accuses them of being temperamentally unfit for the office and illegitimately elected. The anti-Trump playbook is just the anti-Bush playbook with a little dust on the cover and a few more page creases. Bush was a cowboy who stole the election. Trump is erratic and stole the election. The rest is just elaboration.

THE AUSTRALIAN WAR MEMORIAL ON THE HOLOCAUST

Dr Brendan Nelson, a former medical practitioner and former federal politician (from 2007-8 he was leader of the Liberal Party in opposition, succeeded by Malcolm Turnbull, Australia’s current prime minister) is presently director of the Australian War Memorial in Canberra.

At the opening of the War Memorial’s exhibition “The Holocaust: Witnesses and Survivors” on 29 November Dr Nelson delivered an interesting speech. Inter alia:

‘Six million people. Almost a quarter of the population of Australia, almost the entire population of Sydney. That is how many were exterminated in the worst genocide of the twentieth century. Jews, Roma, gypsies, the disabled and political prisoners. But almost all were Jews.

Jewish identity has been shaped by three things: Antisemitism, still a virulent and repugnant force in many parts of the world; The Holocaust or “Shoah”; The embattled nature of the state of Israel for whom existence is a daily struggle.

Adolf Hitler was able to undertake this mass extermination for two principal reasons. The first was that the majority were indifferent to the plight of the minority. The second was that in Germany – as in other parts of Europe, antisemitism was deeply rooted – religious, secular and racial.

One observation through my own life not having ever faced nor endured even a fraction of the adversities suffered by many of you here, is that almost all of life’s suffering and pain stems from people making themselves the centre of their own lives. So too, nations making their own narrow self-interest the centre of all else….

The Australian War Memorial is many things. But above all else is the repository of our nation’s soul. This place and the stories of two million men and women told here, reminds us that we are Australians and that there are in the end some truths by which we live. And they are worth fighting to defend – politically, diplomatically and at times, militarily.

Not everyone agrees with this exhibition. One regular visitor to the Memorial told me emphatically that she was opposed to this exhibition. “This has nothing to do with Australia and the Australian War Memorial”, she said. She told me that she would never walk through it. It has everything to do with us, for we are a part of humankind.

In a world grappling with the mass movement of people; the persecution of political, religious and ethnic minorities; euthanasia and a generational struggle against resurgent totalitarianism in the form of those who have hijacked the good name [sic] of Islam to build a violent political utopia, we must remind ourselves of that of which humankind is capable.

Our responsibility is to stimulate and challenge visitors, Australian and international, to see the world through the eyes of others….