Many of the smartest people I know do not have college degrees.
Rikki Schlott writes at NYP: "In fact, a staggering 53% of companies eliminated degree requirements for at least some roles in the past year. It’s time for more to do the same. Gen Z has realized the academic cabal was holding their success hostage. We’re bucking the status quo — and now it’s incumbent on society to support us."
The Woke are eating their own, which was entirely predictable based on Ryan Grimm's June 2022 article.
According to this thread, Dr. Lee told FAIR she was accused of "whitesplaining" as she tried to set a meeting agenda, and she was told that she was perpetuating "white supremacy" by valuing punctuality & engaging in strategic planning.
This woman is speaking up, as are other parents where public school districts are trying to hide what they are telling students when it comes to gender ideology.
This is where I would have invested the >$100B that was inexplicably handed to Ukraine without meaningful debate: Teaching children how to read.
These dismal reading scores signal a bona fide national emergency affecting the lives of millions of Americans. These numbers portend a bleak future for the United States. The following are excerpts from "Is Your Child Becoming a Proficient Reader in School? Statistics Would Say No."
According to pre-pandemic 2019 Quincy Public Schools (QPS) Illinois Report Card Data compiled by Wirepoints, only 25.9% of 3rd grade students met or exceeded grade level reading standards, while reading proficiency in Black students fell to only 3.1%. Updated Report Card data for 2021 shows further declines statewide Unfortunately, this literacy tragedy is not unique to QPS, but representative of a national problem. 2022 National data compiled by the National Assessment of Education Performance, also known as the Nation’s Report Card, reveals that only 33% of all fourth graders are reading at a proficient level.
Why is this important? Research has shown that students who cannot read at grade level by the end of third grade are four times more likely to drop out of school. These students are more likely to live in poverty, rely on public assistance and experience poor health outcomes. Even more concerning is that 85% of youth who interface with the juvenile court system struggle to read while 70% of incarcerated adults cannot read at the fourth grade level. This is known as the school to prison pipeline.
Andrew Sullivan celebrates that the NYT has declared that will insist on doing real journalism on transgender issues, even though loud activists, many of them posing as journalists, demand otherwise:
[T]his week, we saw another campus maneuver: an open letter from a thousand or so New York Times contributors, accusing the NYT of “follow[ing] the lead of far-right hate groups” in its coverage of transgender issues. Other campus tactics: a loud demo outside; alliance between insiders and outsider activists; public shaming of named journalists; accusations that the NYT is a “workplace made hostile by bias” (the now-familiar HR gambit); and non-negotiable demands for even more hiring solely on the basis of identity and ideology.
It’s an echo of Evergreen and Yale and Middlebury and Reed. The ploys are repeated because they work and there’s no downside. And almost all the university presidents caved. They held meetings and meetings; they apologized; they appeased; they conceded core liberal principles of free speech and dissent; they terminated dissident faculty; they equivocated and collaborated in the pursuit of “diversity” and then “equity.” In a word, they were pathetic.
And in the summer of 2020, when campus tactics invaded newsrooms, and writers and editors were purged for committing journalism that violated the orthodoxies of social justice, we saw a similar collapse of nerve.
But this time was different. Check this out, from the executive editor of the NYT. It’s the response we always needed from the leadership of besieged liberal institutions before and never got:
It is not unusual for outside groups to critique our coverage or to rally supporters to seek to influence our journalism. In this case, however, members of our staff and contributors to The Times joined the effort. Their protest letter included direct attacks on several of our colleagues, singling them out by name. Participation in such a campaign is against the letter and spirit of our ethics policy … We have a clear policy prohibiting Times journalists from attacking one another's journalism publicly or signaling their support for such attacks …
We do not welcome, and will not tolerate, participation by Times journalists in protests organized by advocacy groups or attacks on colleagues on social media and other public forums.
Readers know I’m often merciless about the NYT, but Joseph Kahn is a hero for the clarity of this."