Are You Kidding Me?

Description:Changing the names of schools, instituting race-based affinity groups, and eliminating standardized tests are just a few of the actions that woke boards of education across the country are taking in pursuit of equity. The result is that schools are now focused on everything but academic instruction.In this episode, Naomi and Ian are joined by Nicole Neily, president and founder of Parents Defending Education (PDE). She says that lawsuits in places like northern Virginia and the suburbs of Boston, not to mention the school board recall in San Francisco, signify that even liberal progressives are fed up with performative wokeness that favors optics over outcomes. Nicole believes this movement of parental power is just getting started, and she encourages parents to continue pushing for transparency when it comes to their child’s education.Resources:• Judge calls Thomas Jefferson High admissions changes illegal | Hannah Natanson | Washington Post• Parents prevail over K-12 ‘bias incidents’ | The Wall Street Journal Editorial Board• In landslide, San Francisco forces out 3 board of education members | Thomas Fuller | The New York Times• Power to parents | Deseret News | Ian Rowe• Parents Defending Education resourcesShow notes:• 02:26 | What is PDE and what recent lawsuits have they been involved with?• 08:20 | Elite programs aren’t helpful if students are not properly prepared to succeed• 12:15 | The San Francisco school board recall reflect the sentiments of parents across the county?• 15:30 | Breaking down the PDE’s lawsuit against Wellesley Public Schools• 18:40 | Can the parental power movement sustain over time?

Description: The recently stalled Build Back Better legislation contains $110 billion for universal pre-school for three and four-year-olds. Is a large investment in early childhood education universal pre-k necessary or beneficial for the academic and social development of American children?In this episode, Naomi and Ian are joined by Katharine B. Stevens, founder and acting CEO of the Center on Child and Family Policy and former director of AEI’s early childhood program. Katharine breaks down new data from a randomized controlled trial studying 3,000 children from pre-k to sixth grade in Tennessee. The study revealed that students who did not attend pre-k displayed higher academic performance and were less likely to have disciplinary infractions than their peers who went to pre-k. Research on child development tells us that young kids need consistent, loving, one on one or small group relationships—factors that are often absent from public school pre-k programs. Katharine explains the need to support other ways of nurturing the development of these children, including family stability.Resources: • Effects of a statewide pre-kindergarten program on children’s achievement and behavior through sixth grade | Kevin Durkin et al | American Psychological Association• Universal Child Care: A Bad Deal For Kids? | Jenet Erickson and Katharine B. Stevens | Institute for Family Studies• Improving early childhood development by allowing advanced child tax credits | Katharine B. Stevens and Matt Weidinger | Tax Notes FederalShow Notes:• 01:00 | What is the Tennessee Voluntary Pre-K research project?• 08:55 | How should policymakers respond to the results from the study?• 13:30 | Thinking of school as an antipoverty program doesn’t benefit everyone• 17:20 | Human development really comes from strong and stable families • 30:00 | How do we encourage more people to follow the success sequence?

Description:Twenty years ago, education reformers on the right and left agreed that promoting charter schools and school choice were appropriate steps to close the achievement gap and improve kids’ educational outcomes. Today, feelings among the reformers about school choice are a lot more polarized. Moreover, the recent shutdowns of many schools during the pandemic may have jeopardized Americans’ decades-long relationship with public schools and shown that education is smack in the middle of the political fray. In this episode, Naomi and Ian are joined by Robert Pondiscio, a Senior Fellow in education policy studies at the American Enterprise Institute. Robert argues that we may not need bipartisan support for school choice and if the left-wing reformers have abandoned important ideas about accountability and meritocracy in our schools, they may do more to harm than help the movement. Encouraging private school choice and vouchers fits better in red-state politics and Republicans should not wait around trying to save a previously bipartisan coalition that may have outlived its usefulness. Resources:Does school choice need bipartisan support? An empirical analysis of the legislative record | Jay P. Green | James D. Paul | American Enterprise Institute After two years of uncertainty and shaken trust, America's relationship with its public schools is in play like never before | Robert Pondiscio | The 74The Left doesn’t like school choice. The Right doesn’t need them to | Robert Pondiscio | RealClearPolicyDemystifying Goliath: An Examination of the Political Compass of Education Reform | Ian Kingsbury | Journal of School ChoiceShow notes:• 01:05 | What is the landscape of education reform two years into the pandemic?• 05:40 | Do everyday parents share the same ideology as progressive ‘elites’ when it comes to school choice?• 07:20 | How has the left changed its stance on education reform specifically regarding the school choice movement?• 15:00 | Has the personal connection between parents and school systems become broken?• 17:50 | What is the impact of groups like Parents Defending Education when it comes to stopping ideologies they don’t share?

Description:There are over 70,000 adoptions of children in the United States every year, with a majority coming from foster care. Despite adoptions being more diverse and 75% of adoptive parents having a positive relationship with the birth parents, some are calling for adoption to end because it is too traumatic for children. In this episode, Naomi and Ian are joined by Ryan Hanlon, the acting CEO and President of the National Council for Adoption. Ryan explains that many children have experienced abuse and neglect prior to their adoption and adoption itself can actually be a necessary intervention in their lives. Research from the National Council for Adoption also suggests that adoptive parents are focused on ensuring their adoptive children receive the supportive services they need. With higher rates of children in foster care, Ryan believes we need to do a better job of educating both expectant parents on what their options are and the public on what being an adoptive parent looks like.Resources:Adoption: By the Numbers | National Council for AdoptionThe Multiethnic Placement Act and Transracial Adoption 25 Years Later | Department of Health and Human ServicesLet’s restart the adoption movement | Arthur C. Brooks | The New York TimesShow notes:01:30 | What does adoption look like in the United States?05:50 | Effects of adoption on children09:30 | What explains the increased age of adoptive children?13:40 | Evidence shows that transracial adoption is not a factor in determining the well-being of an adopted child18:35 | Are there enough families out there to meet the needs of children in foster care?26:25 | What can policymakers do to encourage foster care among middle-class Americans?

Description:Young people who graduate from high school, get a job, and get married before they have children are less likely to live in poverty later in life. Given the importance of this information, some have suggested that this ordering of milestones—known as “the success sequence”—be taught in K-12 schools.In this episode, Naomi and Ian are joined by Nat Malkus, a senior fellow and deputy director of education policy at AEI. Using data from the August 2021 American Perspectives Survey, which asked over 2,500 American adults about a range of opinions on education, Nat finds overwhelming support among the public for teaching the success sequence. He argues that schools should not only teach students the success sequence but also how to “think statistically” so students can understand the relationship between their actions and their life outcomes. Resources:Uncommonly popular: Public support for teaching the success sequence in school | Nat Malkus | American Enterprise InstituteCreating an Opportunity Society | Ron Haskins and Isabel V. Sawhill | Brookings Institution PressHow can the success sequence help kids beat any obstacle? | Ian Rowe and Chris Stewart | Education is Power podcastShow notes:01:10 | What is the success sequence and what does this new survey ask?04:00 | Survey samples include the general public and parents of school-aged children06:40 | Even the most opposed group were in support of teaching the success sequence by a two to one margin09:25 | Prescriptive vs. descriptive messaging14:15 | Non-adherents to the success sequence still support teaching it

Description:In March 2021, the California Department of Education approved the final version of the ethnic Studies Model Curriculum. In October 2021, Governor Gavin Newsom signed Assembly Bill No. 101 into law, making California the first state to require an ethnic studies class for graduation.In this episode, Naomi and Ian are joined by Dr. Wenyuan Wu, executive director of the Californians for Equal Rights Foundation. Dr. Wu explains that, while seemingly benign, the objective of ethnic studies is to train K-12 students to recognize which of them are natural oppressors and victims. Students are required to recite Aztec chants in class, including some by tribes who practice human sacrifice. This ideology has also infiltrated mathematics. The new math instruction is to teach it in a way that avoids finding the right answer and having to show one’s work, as those are signs of white supremacy. We discuss the recent letter signed by prominent mathematicians and scientists across the country objecting to this change. Resources:California Ethnic Studies curriculum California Assembly Bill No. 101California Mathematics frameworkOpen letter to California Gov. Gavin NewsomCalifornia leftists try to cancel math class | Williamson M. Evers | The Wall Street JournalShow notes:• 02:05 | What is the California Ethnic Studies curriculum and AB 101?• 04:40 | What are students learning under this curriculum?• 06:35 | Ethnic studies has previously ignored various groups’ contributions to America• 09:00 | Are Californians aware of what is going on in their schools?• 13:35 | The new math framework focuses more on equity than learning algebra• 19:40 | The compelling alternative that will actually help students

Description:A student in Boston public schools recently knocked her principal unconscious during school hours. A girl was recently sexually assaulted in a Loudon County, Virginia, school, and administrators falsely denied knowledge of its occurrence. What is causing an increase in school violence and how can administrators use their resources to improve school safety and students’ lives?In this episode, Naomi and Ian are joined by Max Eden, a research fellow in education policy at the American Enterprise Institute. Max explains that the push for restorative justice in schools—trying to even out disparate rates of discipline by race or disability—has actually led to school administrators not disciplining students at all. They ignore important factors like family structure, poverty, and neighborhood crime, which are highly correlated with different rates of behavioral infractions in school. Max believes that we are at the beginning of a broader public recognition of the dangerous impact of restorative justice policies and the need for parents to exercise more oversight over their kids’ school environments.Resources:Boston Public Schools principal unconscious for ‘at least’ 4 minutes after beating: police report | Sean Phillip Cotter | Boston HeraldRestorative justice cannot combat the tide of school violence | Naomi Schaefer Riley | Deseret NewsYoungkin makes the GOP the parents’ party | Max Eden | The Wall Street JournalShow Notes:• 03:15 | Are parents noticing the lack of school discipline?• 05:30 | The limits of public policy when only viewing the world through race• 10:10 | The importance of parental involvement in schools• 13:35 | How do you have a productive conversation with school administrators and those on the ground who disagree with you on this issue?• 16:35 | Is there a way to elevate student’s voices who now feel they are in a more dangerous learning environment?• 18:50 | How can we rehabilitate kids using a different approach?

Description:The child tax credit (CTC) in the United States has always required its recipients to work. Yet the recent proposal from the Biden administration eliminates the work requirement in the CTC. Ensuring that parents earn a small amount of money benefits kids and helps lift families out of poverty. How can we ensure our policies align with what’s best for kids?In this special episode, Naomi and Ian are joined by Robert Doar, President and Morgridge scholar at the American Enterprise Institute. Robert explains that from 1995 until 2020, our country made strides to bring more people into the labor force, increase positive educational outcomes, and improve children’s relationship with the criminal justice system. But our child welfare and public school systems need to be reformed to ensure that they are focused on helping children.Resources:The bad science behind the child tax credit expansion | Robert Doar | The Wall Street JournalThe antipoverty, targeting, and labor supply effects of the proposed child tax credit expansion | Bruce D. Meyer and Kevin Corinth | Becker Friedman InstituteCensus Bureau’s household pulse survey shows significant increase in homeschooling rates in fall 2020 | Casey Eggleston and Jason Fields | United States Census BureauEnrollment in N.Y.C. public schools declined by 50,000 since the start of the pandemic | Eliza Shapiro | The New York TimesShow Notes• 01:45 | The history of child tax credits (CTC) and the new CTC proposal• 03:35 | The National Academy of Sciences made an important error• 07:30 | Why are we forcing single parents to work at all?• 10:45 | Are we getting better at caring for low-income children?• 16:35 | People don’t want to hear viewpoints they disagree with• 18:00 | Is it possible to create a system for children where everyone is satisfied?

Description:For decades, women have increasingly outnumbered men in higher education and the problem is getting worse. Men—generally speaking—prefer to work rather than go to school. Yet more traditional, blue-collar jobs now require advanced degrees.In this episode, Naomi and Ian are joined by Kay Hymowitz, the William E. Simon Fellow at the Manhattan Institute and a contributing editor of City Journal. Kay explains how this trend has not been considered problematic because society is used to thinking about furthering the progress of girls in higher education. She outlines how “degree inflation” is turning into a big problem for young men. To encourage more boys to stay in school and get the skills they need, she suggests that K-12 education should provide career pathways for those not wanting to attend college, and that they build in more time for recess.Resources:Dr. Biden’s lesson | Kay Hymowitz | City Journal A Generation of American Men Give Up on College: ‘I Just Feel Lost’ | Douglas Belkin | The Wall Street JournalHigher education just isn’t built for men right now | Naomi Schaefer Riley | Deseret NewsShow Notes:• 02:20 | Since 1980, women have moved ahead of men in higher education enrollment• 06:25 | What are the men doing if they are not in school? • 08:30 | Traditional blue collar jobs are now requiring four-year degrees• 12:55 | What can be done in K-12 education? • 16:20 | Going to college is now synonymous with middle-class life• 20:35 | What will the impact be on future family structure?

Description:Educational institutions are supposed to serve the interests of children and their families. Yet parents are increasingly finding themselves coming up against a system that is turned against them. In some instances, they are even labeled by the National School Board Association as "domestic terrorists" for simply voicing their opinion.In this episode, Naomi and Ian are joined by Christine Rosen, a senior writer at Commentary magazine and chair of the Colloquy on Knowledge, Technology and Culture at the Institute for Advanced Studies and Culture at the University of Virginia. Christine explains that school boards passing emergency use restrictions combined with an ideological push to teach critical race theory in schools has led many parents—conservative and liberal—to come together in an effort to change school policies. Resources: Will parents become activists? | Christine Rosen | Commentary Academic transparency is gaining traction in the states | Max Eden | AEIdeasParents Defending EducationParents United AmericaFAIR For All