Monday, March 14, 2011

Education Leaders Unmasked: Elwood Cubberley part 2

Changing Conceptions of Education in America

By Ellwood Cubberley 1909

(Any typos are those of the transcriber not myself. Ignore formatting/font issues, but my words are always in Times New Roman 12 font, not italicized, as seen here.)


"the home altogether too often is unintelli- gent or neglectful in the handling of children, and not infrequently it has abdicated entirely and has turned over to the public school the whole matter of the training and education of the young.”

As you will see later in this post, Cubberley is promoting state takeover of children, not complaining that children are the burden of schools or what have you. Remember that Cubberley is a “pioneer” for administration, ( and who runs the school? The administration) and was Dean at Stanford, a very influential school and position. Keep this in mind as you read on… Cubberley is still referenced in teaching colleges today.

Factory life has also made it undesirable that children should labor. The result is that a boy or girl in our modern life has so little real home life, so much unprofitable leisure, and ac-quires so much through the eyes and the ears anc learns so little by actual doing, that the problem of providing a proper environment and of utiliz- ing this excess leisure time in profitable training has become one of the most serious as well as one of the most difficult problems now before us. The school, begun at first as a means of impart- ing to children the common rudiments of learn- ing, has gradually been transformed into one of the most important institutions of democracy and has been called upon to offer some practi- cable solution of the situation created. This has caused us to look at education in a new and a larger light.

I often reference John Taylor Gatto in my writings and recall reading in his book The Underground History of American Education, something along the lines of the fact that American compulsory education was a way to control people, to remove them from their own intellectual pursuits or musings or evne non-intellectual leisures and to guide young minds in a certain direction. I found this far-fetched but with Cubberley’s quote here, I begin to confirm such indications. Cubberley sees school as the end-all do-all of society, the shaper of democracy and our future, more than as a place of intellectual stimulation. Schools are to replace our failing home lives, and to replace our leisure time with profitable training.

The idea that free education was a right, and that universal education was a necessity, began to be urged and to find acceptance. The landgrants of Congress to the new states for the benefit of common schools greatly stimulated the movement. The published reports of those who

had visited Pestalozzi's school in Switzerland, and had examined the new state school system in Prussia, were extensively read. The moral and economic advantages of schools were set forth 'at length in resolutions, speeches, pamphlets," magazines, and books.

 

Free education did not come about easily. Americans were hesitant to pay taxes towards school, finding it to be one’s own decision to pursue and pay for (when it was not free). I often wonder if Americans had suspicions of the free compulsory school model, perhaps “nothing comes free” rang true in their minds, and for good reason. (Read my Prussian post http://3rseduc.blogspot.com/2011/03/to-prussia-with-love-or-prussians-are.html for more info). Here Cubberley admits our education is modeled after the Prussian state school system.

 

A new conception of free public education

as a birthright of the child on the one hand, and as an exercise of the state's inherent right to self-preservation and improvement on the other, had taken the place of the earlier conception of schools as merely a cooperative effort, based on economy, and for the instruction of youth merely in the rudiments of learning. The large immigra-

tion of illiterate Irish and clannish Germans which set in in the late forties gave particular emphasis to this point of view.

Here Cubberley is a little racist, showing his dark eugenic-friendly side of which you will read more of. He didn’t seek to educate the illiterate Irish or clannish Germans out of empathy but rather to try and either get them to conform to the racially superior Northern European societal norms of America, or to train them for menial labor.

The overwhelming success of the Prussian armies in the War of 1870 with France called new attention to the importance of public education. "The

Prussian schoolmaster has triumphed/' was as- serted on all sides.

Here again, in case one doubts my claims of our Prussian-modeled system, Cubberley cites the wonders of the Prussian education system.

In the early [eighteen]seventies, the kindergarten idea came to America from Germany, and was soon recog- nized as a valuable addition. In the eighties, the Herbartian conception of education, with its emphasis on proper psychological procedure and on character-building as the aim of education, began to reshape our educational theory.

 

One may think that this quote is benign but kindergarten is a Prussian concept. Recall the earlier quote about the home no longer being the rightful place for a child; the concept of “get them while they’re young and impressionable” prevails here. Also, I must ask, should education be a psychological function? If we are using psychological procedures in schools, that sounds to me like me are psychologically manipulating or shaping young minds instead of letting them shape themselves with some guidance. This sounds like a lighter shade of brainwashing to me. Character building has a similar function, to train children how to act because obviously the parents, church, community are not doing good enough of a job (or perhaps they are doing a job gone unchecked). I may be out on a limb here, but Mao Tse Tung re-educated the wealthy and had quite a character-building repertoire.

The new interest in school hygiene and the physical welfare of the child indicates a new and a commendable desire to care for the bodies as well as the heads of our children. The great educational lessons to be learned from a study of the educational, political, and industrial

progress of the German Empire during the past forty years are at last beginning to take root with us. Above all, the new and extensive interest in industrial and vocational training is especially significant of the changing conception of the function of the school and the classes in society which the school is in future expected to serve.

When I read John Taylor Gatto’s The Underground History of American Education, I came across Cubberley’s name and this quote which shocked me; from his 1905 Columbia dissertation, “[schools were to be factories] "in which raw products, children, are to be shaped and formed into finished products... manufactured like nails, and the specifications for manufacturing will come from government and industry." This quote and Cubberley’s quote above confirm to me what Gatto is trying to tell the reader: the founders of our educational system saw our children as products, not people, as slaves to the state and the corporations, to be trained to bend to the will of these powers, to indoctrinate.

 

school curriculum bids fair, too, to experi- ence many modifications during the next one or two decades, and chiefly along a line that will lead toward preparation for increased social efficiency.

Social efficiency related to eugenics movement and the Progressive movement’s Efficiency Movement which “played a central role in the Progressive Era in the United States, where it flourished 1890-1932.[4] Adherents argued that all aspects of the economy, society and government were riddled with waste and inefficiency. Everything would be better if experts identified the problems and fixed them” (wikipedia). Eugenics was a scientific approach to improving social efficiency, seeking to solve the ills of poverty, alcoholism, feeble-mindedness, etc often through not just education but sterilization. Therefore, when curriculum is designed for social efficiency, it makes one leery. Wikipedia states, in regards to curriculum theory- specifically the social efficiency theory of Franklin Bobbitt, Edward Ross, Cubberley and others, “these theorists believed that society could be controlled. Students would be scientifically evaluated (such as IQ tests), and educated towards their predicted role in society”. Yes, it has been stated: education according to Cubberly (among others) is to manage society. I further this idea below,

Our city schools will soon be forced to give up the exceedingly democratic idea that all are equal, and that our society is devoid of classes, as a few cities have already in large part done, and to be-

gin a specialization of educational effort along many new lines in an attempt better to adapt the school to the needs of these many classes in the city life. City, town, and country schools alike have, in the past, directed most of their training to satisfying the needs of the children of the well- to-do classes, and those headed for business life

or the professions. More recently, most of the larger cities have provided some form of work leading to preparation for the executive positions in technical pursuits.

If we remove the notion that we are all equal, we can more easily segregate the populous. Cubberley prescribes to the notion that our society should marginalize people and when you combine this notion with that of standardized achievement testing, you have the recipe for ability, class, or ethnicity based schooling, proving the eugenic “science” that “less thans” are exactly that, because we create a society where they can be nothing but “less thans”. Cubberley also admits here that certain schools of his time have already implemented a social efficiency curriculum, where children are pre-destined for greatness or not-so-greatness and the educational institutions ensure the progression of these pre-assigned roles. Cubberly bashes the notion of an academically challenging education for all as once existed, and promotes ability-based learning/role training. http://ezinearticles.com/?Social-Efficiency-versus-Democratic-Equality&id=175582 explores social efficiency further, and argues that schools often implement the social efficienct model for minority students- no wonder we have an achievement gap!

 

Instead of a study of school methods and management only, the work has

changed into a phase of political science, — that of a study of means of improving the state and of advancing the public welfare. Nearly all of our universities and colleges now have such chairs or

departments, and the state universities and our more democratic private institutions are now or- ganizing professional schools for the training of teachers and educational leaders for the state.

Cubberley is stating that teacher colleges ensure that their professors and department chairs practice the social efficiency model of education; if teacher colleges encourage these practices, that means the teachers they train further this model.


Each year the child is coming to belong more and more to the state,

and less and less to the parent. In all that relates to proper care, kindness, education, and advan- tages, the child belongs to the parent; but when neglect, abuse, and the deprivation of the child of any natural right takes place, the child belongs to the state. The right to reasonably good treatment, proper care, an education, pro- tection from vice, and protection from labor be- yond his strength and years, the state will soon guarantee. The plea in defense that " the child is my child " will not be accepted much longer by society. Our future welfare is too thoroughly in the keeping of the child to permit of such a policy.

This quote is demonstrating the will of Cubberly and like minds to control the child, to remove the power of parenting from the parents and replace it with that of the school. One must wonder if programs such as the school lunch program, school health screenings, and other school welfare programs exist purely to help those in need or if they exist as a way to have the school “keep the child” and promote state welfare under the social efficiency model- leaving parenting to the scientifically-trained experts (teacher-college trained teachers) and way from those who are not the experts (parents).

through all the complicated machinery of the school, some way must be found to awaken a social consciousness as opposed to class consciousness, to bring out the important social and civic les-

sons, to point out our social and civic needs, and to teach our young people how to live better and to make better use of their leisure time.Read- ing, Writing, Arithmetic, Grammar, Geography, and History, the staples of the elementary cur- riculum, are really of little value except as they are closely related with the needs and problems

of our social, civic, and industrial life.

Cubberly argues that school is to awaken a social consciousness, to be conscious of the greater good and welfare of the collective instead of one’s own needs or desires. Schools must teach children what to do with their lives and how to do it because only the experts know what’s good for you. Core curriculum is not important per se, but it must be framed around the idea of social responsibility and pre-determined societal roles as determined by the “experts”.

If our schools are to become more effective social institutions, our teachers must become more effective social workers.

Again, the notion that schools and the properly trained teacher are to encourage social welfare. When the term “social worker” is used, I think of the worker helping people that need “intervention” and that’s the point.

The overeducated man is scarcely possible if an education adapted to his needs and station in life is given him. The work of public education is with us, too, to a large de- gree, a piece of religious work. To engage in it is to enlist in the nation's service. Its call is for those who would dedicate themselves in a noble way. Those who would serve must be of the world, with red blood in their veins ; they must

know the world, its needs, and its problems ; they must have largeness of vision, and the courage to do and to dare ; and they must train the youth with whom they come in contact for useful and efficient action.

Mirroring the Prussian system, everyone gets a free compulsory education but only is trained and educated to a point, so not to be “too educated”. Too much education could challenge the status quo and educating someone of the lower class would be seen as a waste of time and effort because science proves they are less-than. Cubberley encourages a tracking system in education, where roles are determined and never challenged. He calls upon teachers with such emotionally charged buzz words as “blood in their veins”, “dare”, “vision”, “useful”, and “action”; the propagandized words seek to further the agenda under the utopian pretext of passion and a desire to solve the world’s problems.

Changing Conceptions of Education in America can be found at http://www.archive.org/stream/changingconcepti00cubbuoft/changingconcepti00cubbuoft_djvu.txt

Education Leaders Unmasked: Elwood Cubberley part 1

Ellwood Cubberley (1868-1941) was a superintendent, professor at Stanford and Columbia, an author, editor, educator, “pioneer” in the educational administration field, and a man who saw education as an instrument of social engineering. Wikipedia states, “Some academicians have used Cubberley's methodology as a cautionary tale and termed his approach anachronistic and evangelistic, and some of his administration stances have been attacked as sexist and autocratic.” And I’d have to agree.

Here’s why… in his book, Changing Conceptions of Education in America he wrote, "southern and eastern Europeans have served to dilute tremendously our national stock, and to corrupt our civil life.. . . Everywhere these people tend to settle in groups or settlements, and to set up here their national manners, customs, and observances. Our task is to break up these groups or settlements, to assimilate and amalgamate these people as a part of our American race and to implant in their children. . . the Anglo-Saxon conception of righteousness, law and order, and popular government. . ." Sounds a little racist/ethnocentric to me, as seemed to be the trend of educational “pioneers” of his time.

He saw that there was no “science” behind educational administration and a lack of training so he sought to bring both to the field of education. This seems to echo Prussian education and the progressive want to input “science” (often bogus statistics) into the practice of psychology and education.

As a student he enrolled in a course with professor David Starr Jordan, a prominent eugenicist. Cubberley was so in awe of Starr’s evolution course that he later made it a mandatory course for education students at Stanford.

In 1896, Cubberley was Superintendent of San Diego schools, where he implemented his belief that administration (that being Cubberley) should have autonomy over the school board, and that administration should not be decided by the boar but rather by administration (himself).

In 1899 he was appointed a professorship at Stanford as well as the position of the Head of the Education department. Starr gifted Cubberley a permanent position as long as he could make education respectable, or else it be abolished, of which he must have been successful because in 1917, after many years teaching, he was granted the position of the very first Dean of a new school within Stanford, the school of education.

Between 1899 and 1917, Cubberley took leave of Stanford to attend Teachers College, Columbia University to obtain an MA and PhD in school administration. While at Columbia, he found great interest in the educational tide of the time, that being the “science” behind education. In 1909 he wrote an essay, Changing Conceptions of Education in which it states many things which I will post in my next, quite lengthy, post, along with my editorial rebuttal.

Cubberley sought to shape schools in the “Teutonic” style, believing (as you will read in my next post) in racial superiority of Northern Europeans over other Europeans.

(A quick side note, Cubberley was editor of Houghton Mifflin's Riverside Textbooks in Education. (If you’ve read some of my posts I do have a bias against Houghton Mifflin, I admit to it. So having a racist man, who believed in social engineering, edit textbooks does not surprise me.) Riverside Publishing is all gugn-ho about common core standards, and the ARRA. Oh and Houghton Mifflin/Riverside was publisher of the first Stanford-Binet tests by who other than Lewis Terman, and has published any other standardized tests. Their president, Richard Swartz, was president of ETS, the company publishing most standardized exams. )
Read more: http://www.answers.com/topic/cubberley-ellwood-patterson#ixzz1Gbu9Dqqq

And read my next post about Changing Conceptions of Education in America

Charter Schools question...



riddle me this: WHY ARE CHARTER SCHOOLS "EVIL" OR "BAD"??? PLEASE PLEASE PRETTY PLEASE ANSWER THIS.

I work for a charter school. My own aunt thinks I am evil and must practice exclusivity/cherry picking and that I must educate the elite who can afford such schools.

Excuse me? Charters are public schools and are free and cannot practice cherry picking...just like a "regular" public school, we must accept anyone and everyone who wants to enroll.

I keep hearing "regular" public school teachers bash charters but I never know why.

Ok I do not live behind a rock (although I do live on bedrock....) so yes I hear of charter problems which could be why they're "bad"
1). They under-perform
2). They misalign funds/money laundering
3.) They do cherry-pick students
4). They hire un-credentialed teachers

Ok, 1-4 are true and do happen. But here's the thing, unlike "regular" public schools, charters can and MUST SHUT DOWN when they don't meet targets, do illegal activity, etc. I have worked at public schools that under perform or what have you, and they continue to operate. For decades. The reason charters get the bad rap perhaps is they they do shut down if they, well, suck. So you hear about many charters shutting down. Meanwhile "regular" schools continue to suck for years and years and no one bats an eye.

So still, please answer my question of why charters get the bad rap. I am not against "regular" public school since I've worked in many of them, but I think they should get the bad rap for NOT shutting down when they "suck".

Sunday, March 13, 2011

Hamburger cigarettes...blame it on everyone but me

This will be one of my more blogg-y, less "intellectual" posts but I had to get it off my chest and this writing style was most befitting.....

So I read two articles lately, one claiming a new movie "Rango" should be rated R because it "features too much smoking and will cause kids to light up" and another article- well really a letter to the editor- criticizing the library for giving away a free burger coupon for every five books read, blaming the library for our "obesity epidemic".

Ok so this has nothing much to do with education per se and yet it does...have common sense people! I'm sorry but if your child lights up because of a movie or contracts diabetes because they read 5 books and ate one burger...perhaps, for lack of better terminology, your parenting sucks. You didn't teach them the evils of smoking and you kept shoveling junk food down their throats... because I'm sorry, but one movie or one burger will not cause you to go off the deep end, unless it's the "last straw" and if that's the case, everything before the last straw is more to blame.

I was raised with parents that smoked and I don't smoke. Why? Because they taught me to not smoke by leading through bad example. There was no way in hell I wanted to wake up hacking up slime every morning, or smelling smokey, or wasting money on cigarettes. And obesity..ok I was blessed with a high metabolism but, my parents taught me to eat right. Oh my God, parents...parenting? I didn't have to rely on the school to parent? I can't blame media, or I don't know, the allignment of the stars on my problems? No. Because my parents parented. Not only did their smoking gross me out, but they told me, addiction is horrible, your grandfathers died because of smoking, don't be as stupid as we are. And, you have one body so treat it right, fresh picked berries and green beans are quite tasty, burgers are garbage but everything in moderation- you can have a burger or doritos some times but don't make it a habit.

Ok rant over.

Friday, March 11, 2011

Tracking Students

Giftedness and gifted education (GATE) is thought of as a positive educational model, differentiating instruction for our “advanced” students. I even once praised GATE programs, recalling my own experiences in school where I was bored by the “regular” education I was receiving, yearning for more “advancement”.

However, after doing some research, I came to a conclusion that begs to ask, “Why can’t all students receive a GATE-style education?”

Also, I began to find that GATE and other tracking programs further marginalize and label our children, and it is not by coincidence.

Tracking students is frowned upon in the current educational climate, yet we track all the time through “GATE” or “Special Ed”. We don’t call the groups the “smart kids” or “slow kids” as we once did, but the students know what track they are on and know if they’re “smart” or “slow”.

But who could argue that teaching “advanced” kids “advanced” lessons is a bad thing? Or of teaching a learning disabled child “at their level” being a bad thing? Differentiation is a key term in education today, and it can mean teaching each child to their interest but it can also mean teaching each child to their ability. But who decided their ability? And isn’t deciding their ability based on some arbitrary means such as a standardized test ludicrous? (But that is the point….) What if a “special ed” student wants more from their life than a “life skills track”? Labeling them for life puts them in a “dumbed down” educational program where yes, they will meet expectations- the slow kids will continue to be slow, and the GATE kids will continue to be advanced because that is what is expected of them, the system is built to support, almost force, that they stay confined to their label. Students internalize this and it creates contention among student groups, and if you wonder why the achievement gap exists, this is one of the reasons- we perpetuate it by tracking and labeling students and confining them to certain academic roles.

And this is all on purpose, with origins from Prussia, the IQ testing/standardized testing movement, and the eugenics movement.

One test to unite us all…one test to determine our future...and who to thank? One key person is Lewis Terman….

Thursday, March 10, 2011

Eugenics Etc


Sorry for the blurriness but here it is on outline form....interesting info and connections...

EUGENICS

  1. Human Betterment Foundation
    1. Lewis Ternman

He was a member of the Human Betterment Foundation, a California-based eugenics group.g

i. Normal Schools- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Normal_school has some info; Prussian education began the idea of teacher-training schools which we then “stole” and called “normal schools”; they modeled Prussian education ideas. Terman was principal of the Los Angeles Normal School in 1907. A good website for info, http://www.indiana.edu/~intell/terman.shtml

ii. SAT-1 through 9 (see #3 below under American Eugenics Society, Lewis Terman)

iii. Stanford

(see #3 below under American Eugenics Society, Lewis Terman)

iv. American Eugenics Society Trustee

  1. Eugenics Record Office

Go to http://www.eugenicsarchive.org/eugenics/list3.pl and/or search wikipedia for info.

    1. Carnegie

The Cargenie Corporation funded eugenics and well, to put it simply, that is a bad thing! The Cargenie Corp. also now funds and/or is connected with “Teachers for a New America”, McGraw Hill textbooks, The Education Trust, Achieve Inc (a school testing Co.), ETS (another testing co) and many more. Curious, no?

  1. American Eugenics Society
    1. Lewis Terman

Coined the term “IQ” and to quote http://www2.facinghistory.org/Campus/rm.nsf/0/D9F412371E532A3485256FFD0007CE74 , “After the war Terman promoted the new IQ tests to school districts across the United States. He created the National Intelligence Tests for grades three to eight and the Terman Group Tests for grades seven to twelve. These tests were the most popular IQ tests used in public schools during the 1920s and 1930s to assist in placing students into ability grouping or tracks. Terman has been referred to as the "father of tracking."” And, “Terman believed the IQ test measured a relatively fixed and hereditarily determined intelligence and that there existed marked differences in intellectual capacity between different races. Terman was an active member in the American Eugenics Society and the Eugenics Research Association throughout the 1920s.” He was a professor of education and psychology at Stanford University from 1910-1946 and he helped create the SAT or Standard Achievement test. In California, students took the SAT-9 (not to be confused with the college entrance SAT) which became known as the CAT/^ (California Achievement Test) which then became known as the CST (California Standards Test.) http://www.oise.utoronto.ca/legacy/research/edu20/moments/1916terman.html?cms_page=edu20/moments/1916terman.html has a lot of good info on Terman. He was influenced by eugenicist G Stanley Hall.

To quickly divert to SAT/CAT/CST….according to the unpoblushed works of the California Department of Education and Edicational Testing Service, 2002, CST’s will be used as a common anchor between SAT/9 scores obtained in 2002 and CAT/6 in 2003. The statisctical correlation of SAT/9 and CST of High School Math, for example, ranges from 0.63-0.85. A correlation of 0.8 or stronger is “strong” and below 0.5 is “weak” so 0.63-0.85 is “somewhat strong” to “strong”. So the SAT originating from eugenics, intelligence testing, and racism, the SAT/9 must have some intelligence and racial bias (google it- it does) and thus the CST must. Read http://www.gutenberg.org/files/22425/22425-h/22425-h.htm for the first SAT test questions….an eye opener!

And another good source on Terman, http://www.stanfordalumni.org/news/magazine/2000/julaug/articles/terman.html

Planned Parenthood

We know planned parenthood is a program offering prenatal care, birth control, and abortions to women and is a supporter of women’s rights. But in a nutshell, the origins of Planned Parenthood are eugenic. Their founder, Margaret Sanger, has said, “"The most merciful thing that a family does to one of its infant members is to kill it." And “"Birth control must lead ultimately to a cleaner race."” And "Eugenic sterilization is an urgent need ... We must prevent multiplication of this bad stock." And "Our failure to segregate morons who are increasing and multiplying ... demonstrates our foolhardy and extravagant sentimentalism ... [Philanthropists] encourage the healthier and more normal sections of the world to shoulder the burden of unthinking and indiscriminate fecundity of others; which brings with it, as I think the reader must agree, a dead weight of human waste. Instead of decreasing and aiming to eliminate the stocks that are most detrimental to the future of the race and the world, it tends to render them to a menacing degree dominant ... We are paying for, and even submitting to, the dictates of an ever-increasing, unceasingly spawning class of human beings who never should have been born at all." And lastly “"Give dysgenic groups [people with 'bad genes'] in our population their choice of segregation or [compulsory] sterilization." Sanger was a member of the American Eugenics Society.

What does this have to do with education? Not too much but it is just a shocker and it does involve children.

  1. John Franklin Bobbitt
    1. Former Professor of Educational Admin, U of Chicago
    2. Eugenics

About Bobbitt..

To quote wikipedia, he said in regards to students, “They should only learn those skills which were necessary to fulfill their personal tasks” and he believed “girls had a very different future than boys, so they did not need the same sort of education.” He said, “Educate the individual according to his capabilities”. This requires that the material of the curriculum be sufficient various to meet the needs of every class of individuals in the community and that the course of training and study be sufficiently flexible that the individual can be given just the things that he needs. I think of this as NOT being individualized/differentiated instruction in the way we mayhthink of it but, as it says in his quote, teach just what someone needs…no more. To me that means do not further the capacity of their minds, bringing about a Prussian ideal of teaching just what that person will need to know- not what they want to know- to ensure they are not intelligent enough to cause a ruckus or be “too educated”. In 1909 he spoke about “Practical Eugenics” at the Child Welfare conference , lead by eugenicist G Stanley Hall (http://www.clarku.edu/micro/freudcentennial/history/1909childwelfare.cfm)

Bobbitt wrote “Eugenics and Curriculum”, and “Practical Eugenics”

From SYMPOSIUM: PROTECTING A NATIONAL MORAL CONSENSUS: CHALLENGES IN THE APPLICATION OF ATKINS V. VIRGINIA: Seventeenth Annual DePaul Law Review Symposium: ARTICLE: THE EUGENIC ORIGINS OF IQ TESTING: IMPLICATIONS FOR POST-ATKINS LITIGATION

In this vein, renowned University of Chicago scholar and education expert John Franklin Bobbitt remarked of the northern European elite, "one must admit the high purity of their blood, their high average sanity, soundness and strength." 6 Such assertions of genetic supremacy, propagated under the scholarly rubric of hereditary intelligence and character, 7 jangled through academic echo chambers on both sides of the Atlantic 8 with surprisingly little resistance. Throughout the early 1900s, eugenicists labored to devise objective methods of measuring and quantifying valued traits.”

  1. Francis Galton
    1. Eugenics

To quote Wikipedia, “He was the first to apply statistical methods to the study of human differences and inheritance of intelligenceand introduced the use of questionnaires and surveys for collecting data on human communities, which he needed for genealogical and biographical works and for his anthropometric studies…He was a pioneer in eugenics… His book, Hereditary Genius (1869), was the first social scientific attempt to study genius and greatness. As an investigator of the human mind, he founded psychometrics (see my psychometrics post to see relation to education).”

un-equal funding prop 13

Ok this is something I need to research to be sure of but...
CA prop 13 made it so that schools got equal funding, as before hand and in many other states, the rich towns give more taxes than poor, to education.
But I heard from a co-worker yesterday that ADA- attendance revenue- varies by town based on either their tax rate or income or something....so that Beverly Hills would get more ADA than Indio.
So at some point I will research this as I'm not bought and sold on prop 13 and this ADA-thing makes me more skeptical.