Drafts by Rachael Sedgwick
The Fool represents potential, new beginnings, innocent wisdom, playful or joyful anticipation of... more The Fool represents potential, new beginnings, innocent wisdom, playful or joyful anticipation of the future, and more. The card is usually a sign of good things to come (the ultimate meaning of this card depends on the cards with which it is pulled, as per the usual in the world of tarot). The Fool follows his heart, "marches to the beat of his own drum," has a vivid imagination, and experiences great awe and wonder as a matter of course. The Fool is eccentric. He is a seeker, one who is willing to sacrifice innocence for experience. This means his path is seldom easy but always brings wisdom. It is a path with great wealth potential. "Only fools fall in love," as they say. And, according to the teachings of Islam, profane love is the product of a madman, or fool. It is written that:
Many have discussed the conundrum of Donald Trump in American politics today. Some claim his sup... more Many have discussed the conundrum of Donald Trump in American politics today. Some claim his supporters are, by and large, poor and uneducated, which is why they fall for his "politics of resentment." Others claim that, on the contrary, Trump appeals to those who are "better educated and wealthier than the American average." In either case, Trump's campaign has brought attention to the social divisions between the poor, working class, and elite in the United States-and people blame education. Trump's campaign has also sparked conversation about race in America, as have international tragedies that have implicated stark racial divides in our world today. And the conversation about Trump implies that education is the solution-not just just to the mystery of Trump's popularity but also to alleviating the ills of racism world-wide. Indeed, we can "arm [children] with information to resist and debunk racism and its myths, and to inculcate in them a knowledge about and respect for differences between people." As such, it is vitally important that the international community shows its unanimous support for education by protecting people's right to it. It is already true that because education has such power-the power to distribute wealth, change perceptions, and bring about peace-the international community has determined that education is a fundamental human right under the United Nations Declaration and other legally binding treaties.
After all, education is essential to liberty. One cannot enjoy other human rights without an education, for one must know one's rights before one can assert them. Because education is a fundamental human right under treaty, States have obligated themselves to provide a free, compulsory, quality education for all their citizens. As a result, education represents a lucrative investment.
Partnerships between States and education service providers, which are often multi-national corporations, have developed to provide educational services. When multi-national corporations sell their services-either to a foreign State or directly to foreign nationals-they do so under the international trade regime. So, for example, when the private, for-profit Bridge International Academies corporation opens "schools-in-a-box" in Africa, it is required to follow the rules of international trade, as expounded in the General Agreement om Trade in Services.
However, the GATS is an economic instrument with an economic focus. As such, the international trade regime is not adequate to ensure that international human rights law is honored. The GATS focuses on economic measures and quantities, whereas the main goal and purpose of a school revolves around quality and educating students well. But currently, quantitative measures like the numbers of children in school or the amount of money spent per student take precedence over qualitative measures. Although sending more children to school is a positive step, it is not sufficient; simply spending more time in school is not enough to ensure effective learning. Therefore, measuring the cost per child or the time students spend in a classroom is not relevant to the commitment to education as a human right. Instead, students need to spend time in school on tasks that actually increase their learning, which occurs when teachers are well-trained. It is, for the same reasons, not enough to simply fund schools well-the countries that spend the most on education do not yield the best results. It is clear that success measures should comprise educational standards and academic achievement markers, and they should not focus solely on English and mathematics. After all, the most important factor in ensuring that students are well educated is the quality of instruction to which they are exposed.
Currently, however, there is no regulatory mechanism or supervisory entity to ensure multi-national companies focus on more than just profits. As such, the international community should develop an Educational Services Agreement (EdSA) to ensure that education services meet quality standards, not just economic ones. An EdSA would outline best practices, provide parameters, and protect the unwary when States and multi-nationals establish partnerships to provide educational services within a given State. Education is essential to liberty, to society, and to our future. It is worth expending the resources necessary to protect it-regardless of how potentially lucrative an investment education may currently be, in the absence of quality regulations.
The Tucson Unified School District has come under fire recently, particularly in light of several... more The Tucson Unified School District has come under fire recently, particularly in light of several judicial decisions regarding the responsibilities of the District to desegregate the schools, provide culturally relevant curriculum, and stay within the bounds of Arizona law. TUSD finds itself on both sides of the litigation: on one hand, it must defend its failure to desegregate the schools under the Unitary Status Plan (USP) it negotiated with Plaintiffs, who represent Mexican- and African-American students in the district. On the other hand, TUSD claims that the State of Arizona violated the Constitution when it passed ARS § 15-112.
Tucson Unified School District (TUSD) leaders developed a Mexican American Studies (MAS) program in 1998 in an effort to close achievement gaps, improve academic achievement, and desegregate the district. In part, the decision was made to honor a federal court order to desegregate TUSD schools that has been in place since the 1980s. At that time, Plaintiffs alleged discrimination against TUSD. Under court oversight, therefore, TUSD has developed desegregation agreements in collaboration with Plaintiffs, including most recently, a Unitary Status Plan (USP).
Many have discussed the conundrum of Donald Trump in American politics today. Some claim his sup... more Many have discussed the conundrum of Donald Trump in American politics today. Some claim his supporters are, by and large, poor and uneducated, which is why they fall for his “politics of resentment.” Others claim that, on the contrary, Trump appeals to those who are “better educated and wealthier than the American average.” In either case, Trump’s campaign has brought attention to the social divisions between the poor, working class, and elite in the United States—and people blame education. Trump’s campaign has also sparked conversation about race in America, as have international tragedies that have implicated stark racial divides in our world today. And the conversation about Trump implies that education is the solution—not just to the mystery of Trump’s popularity but also to alleviating the ills of racism world-wide. Indeed, we can “arm [children] with information to resist and debunk racism and its myths, and to inculcate in them a knowledge about and respect for differences between people.” As such, it is vitally important that the international community shows its unanimous support for education by protecting people’s right to it. Indeed, it is already true that because education has such power—the power to distribute wealth, change perceptions, and bring about peace—the international community has determined that education is a fundamental human right under the United Nations Declaration and other legally binding treaties.
Education is a human right. By legally binding treaty, all members of the United Nations have ag... more Education is a human right. By legally binding treaty, all members of the United Nations have agreed to provide a compulsory, increasingly free, increasingly high quality public system of education. Thus, under the international human rights regime, countries are obligated to establish anti-discrimination measures, set minimum learning standards, and endeavor to provide an increasingly free, appropriate quality, compulsory basic education system for all. This obligation, which is premised upon the fundamental importance of education as a doorway right to enjoying other human rights, is one of profound importance. Even so, it is not an easy one to fulfill. School systems are costly and complicated to develop and maintain, and different countries have different obstacles to navigate in their journey to providing a quality education system. Education services providers (ESPs) have stepped in to help, and they have shown to be a lucrative investment. Indeed, education is now a billion-dollar industry.
When ESPs trade internationally, they do so under the international trade regime’s General Agreement on Trade in Services (GATS). The GATS has enabled ESPs to offer education services in the neediest communities; however, the GATS has also led to an increase in the privatization of education. Privatization in the sector has led to discrimination, in violation of human rights obligations, thus privatization is detrimental to the neediest peoples, including those in developing nations, particularly females and the very poor.
One reason for the increasing privatization in education is the international trade regime, pioneered by the GATS and its prodigy, the World Trade Organization (WTO). Indeed, the human rights and international trade regimes have competing purposes. The GATS, for example, is an economic instrument with an economic focus. Human rights, on the other hand—like the right to education—are often preserved at the expense of economic gain.
The Tucson Unified School District has come under fire recently, particularly in light of several... more The Tucson Unified School District has come under fire recently, particularly in light of several judicial decisions regarding the responsibilities of the district to desegregate the schools, provide culturally relevant curriculum, and stay within the bounds of Arizona law. TUSD finds itself on both sides of the litigation: on one hand, it must defend its failure to desegregate the schools under the Unitary Services Plan (USP) it negotiated with Plaintiffs, who represent Mexican- and African-American students in the district. On the other hand, TUSD claims that the State of Arizona violated the Constitution when it passed ARS § 15-112.
Tucson Unified School District (TUSD) leaders developed a Mexican American Studies (MAS) Program in 1998 in an effort to close achievement gaps, improve academic achievement, and desegregate the district. In part the decision was made to honor a federal court order to desegregate TUSD schools that has been in place since the 1980s. At that time, Plaintiffs alleged discrimination against TUSD. Under court oversight, therefore, TUSD has developed desegregation agreements in collaboration with Plaintiffs, including most recently, a Unitary Status Plan (USP).
Under the USP, TUSD must provide culturally relevant courses (CRC). However, under Arizona law, TUSD is not permitted to continue the MAS Program, despite the program’s potential to raise student achievement markers, including test scores and graduation rates. That is because state legislators enacted A.R.S. § 15-112 to eliminate MAS in TUSD. TUSD has taken the matter to court to decide whether the law is constitutional.
In 2015, in Arce v. Douglas, the Ninth Circuit affirmed the conclusion that a prong of A.R.S. § 15-112(A) is unconstitutional. However, the remainder of the statute stands—until and unless Plaintiffs can prove at trial that the Arizona legislature applied the statute with discriminatory intent, or they can show that the legislature violated their First Amendment rights.
In the wake of Arce, Arizona State Superintendent Douglas has implied her willingness to work with TUSD to develop appropriate CRC; however, there seems to remain an unwillingness to acknowledge that A.R.S. § 15-112, as a whole, is problematic. On the other hand, TUSD has not dealt with matters in the most deft fashion. The District finds itself repeatedly in the news and in court. Further, the court has seemed to lose patience with the District’s seeming incapacity to develop wholly appropriate, effective plans for desegregation and high student achievement. Although Arce was remanded for further consideration, TUSD would be best served by avoiding litigation altogether and settling matters by quiet negotiation and other political processes outside of court.
Uploads
Drafts by Rachael Sedgwick
After all, education is essential to liberty. One cannot enjoy other human rights without an education, for one must know one's rights before one can assert them. Because education is a fundamental human right under treaty, States have obligated themselves to provide a free, compulsory, quality education for all their citizens. As a result, education represents a lucrative investment.
Partnerships between States and education service providers, which are often multi-national corporations, have developed to provide educational services. When multi-national corporations sell their services-either to a foreign State or directly to foreign nationals-they do so under the international trade regime. So, for example, when the private, for-profit Bridge International Academies corporation opens "schools-in-a-box" in Africa, it is required to follow the rules of international trade, as expounded in the General Agreement om Trade in Services.
However, the GATS is an economic instrument with an economic focus. As such, the international trade regime is not adequate to ensure that international human rights law is honored. The GATS focuses on economic measures and quantities, whereas the main goal and purpose of a school revolves around quality and educating students well. But currently, quantitative measures like the numbers of children in school or the amount of money spent per student take precedence over qualitative measures. Although sending more children to school is a positive step, it is not sufficient; simply spending more time in school is not enough to ensure effective learning. Therefore, measuring the cost per child or the time students spend in a classroom is not relevant to the commitment to education as a human right. Instead, students need to spend time in school on tasks that actually increase their learning, which occurs when teachers are well-trained. It is, for the same reasons, not enough to simply fund schools well-the countries that spend the most on education do not yield the best results. It is clear that success measures should comprise educational standards and academic achievement markers, and they should not focus solely on English and mathematics. After all, the most important factor in ensuring that students are well educated is the quality of instruction to which they are exposed.
Currently, however, there is no regulatory mechanism or supervisory entity to ensure multi-national companies focus on more than just profits. As such, the international community should develop an Educational Services Agreement (EdSA) to ensure that education services meet quality standards, not just economic ones. An EdSA would outline best practices, provide parameters, and protect the unwary when States and multi-nationals establish partnerships to provide educational services within a given State. Education is essential to liberty, to society, and to our future. It is worth expending the resources necessary to protect it-regardless of how potentially lucrative an investment education may currently be, in the absence of quality regulations.
Tucson Unified School District (TUSD) leaders developed a Mexican American Studies (MAS) program in 1998 in an effort to close achievement gaps, improve academic achievement, and desegregate the district. In part, the decision was made to honor a federal court order to desegregate TUSD schools that has been in place since the 1980s. At that time, Plaintiffs alleged discrimination against TUSD. Under court oversight, therefore, TUSD has developed desegregation agreements in collaboration with Plaintiffs, including most recently, a Unitary Status Plan (USP).
When ESPs trade internationally, they do so under the international trade regime’s General Agreement on Trade in Services (GATS). The GATS has enabled ESPs to offer education services in the neediest communities; however, the GATS has also led to an increase in the privatization of education. Privatization in the sector has led to discrimination, in violation of human rights obligations, thus privatization is detrimental to the neediest peoples, including those in developing nations, particularly females and the very poor.
One reason for the increasing privatization in education is the international trade regime, pioneered by the GATS and its prodigy, the World Trade Organization (WTO). Indeed, the human rights and international trade regimes have competing purposes. The GATS, for example, is an economic instrument with an economic focus. Human rights, on the other hand—like the right to education—are often preserved at the expense of economic gain.
The Superintendent’s Report followed typical course. As such, it was both surprising and not. The Report was deficit-focused and revolved around the several reasons why TUSD does not have enough money to fulfill promises made to teachers (MINUTE 5:40 – 9:30). At MINUTE 7, the Supt. sums it up: basically, TUSD has serious problems because the future is unknown.
Tucson Unified School District (TUSD) leaders developed a Mexican American Studies (MAS) Program in 1998 in an effort to close achievement gaps, improve academic achievement, and desegregate the district. In part the decision was made to honor a federal court order to desegregate TUSD schools that has been in place since the 1980s. At that time, Plaintiffs alleged discrimination against TUSD. Under court oversight, therefore, TUSD has developed desegregation agreements in collaboration with Plaintiffs, including most recently, a Unitary Status Plan (USP).
Under the USP, TUSD must provide culturally relevant courses (CRC). However, under Arizona law, TUSD is not permitted to continue the MAS Program, despite the program’s potential to raise student achievement markers, including test scores and graduation rates. That is because state legislators enacted A.R.S. § 15-112 to eliminate MAS in TUSD. TUSD has taken the matter to court to decide whether the law is constitutional.
In 2015, in Arce v. Douglas, the Ninth Circuit affirmed the conclusion that a prong of A.R.S. § 15-112(A) is unconstitutional. However, the remainder of the statute stands—until and unless Plaintiffs can prove at trial that the Arizona legislature applied the statute with discriminatory intent, or they can show that the legislature violated their First Amendment rights.
In the wake of Arce, Arizona State Superintendent Douglas has implied her willingness to work with TUSD to develop appropriate CRC; however, there seems to remain an unwillingness to acknowledge that A.R.S. § 15-112, as a whole, is problematic. On the other hand, TUSD has not dealt with matters in the most deft fashion. The District finds itself repeatedly in the news and in court. Further, the court has seemed to lose patience with the District’s seeming incapacity to develop wholly appropriate, effective plans for desegregation and high student achievement. Although Arce was remanded for further consideration, TUSD would be best served by avoiding litigation altogether and settling matters by quiet negotiation and other political processes outside of court.
After all, education is essential to liberty. One cannot enjoy other human rights without an education, for one must know one's rights before one can assert them. Because education is a fundamental human right under treaty, States have obligated themselves to provide a free, compulsory, quality education for all their citizens. As a result, education represents a lucrative investment.
Partnerships between States and education service providers, which are often multi-national corporations, have developed to provide educational services. When multi-national corporations sell their services-either to a foreign State or directly to foreign nationals-they do so under the international trade regime. So, for example, when the private, for-profit Bridge International Academies corporation opens "schools-in-a-box" in Africa, it is required to follow the rules of international trade, as expounded in the General Agreement om Trade in Services.
However, the GATS is an economic instrument with an economic focus. As such, the international trade regime is not adequate to ensure that international human rights law is honored. The GATS focuses on economic measures and quantities, whereas the main goal and purpose of a school revolves around quality and educating students well. But currently, quantitative measures like the numbers of children in school or the amount of money spent per student take precedence over qualitative measures. Although sending more children to school is a positive step, it is not sufficient; simply spending more time in school is not enough to ensure effective learning. Therefore, measuring the cost per child or the time students spend in a classroom is not relevant to the commitment to education as a human right. Instead, students need to spend time in school on tasks that actually increase their learning, which occurs when teachers are well-trained. It is, for the same reasons, not enough to simply fund schools well-the countries that spend the most on education do not yield the best results. It is clear that success measures should comprise educational standards and academic achievement markers, and they should not focus solely on English and mathematics. After all, the most important factor in ensuring that students are well educated is the quality of instruction to which they are exposed.
Currently, however, there is no regulatory mechanism or supervisory entity to ensure multi-national companies focus on more than just profits. As such, the international community should develop an Educational Services Agreement (EdSA) to ensure that education services meet quality standards, not just economic ones. An EdSA would outline best practices, provide parameters, and protect the unwary when States and multi-nationals establish partnerships to provide educational services within a given State. Education is essential to liberty, to society, and to our future. It is worth expending the resources necessary to protect it-regardless of how potentially lucrative an investment education may currently be, in the absence of quality regulations.
Tucson Unified School District (TUSD) leaders developed a Mexican American Studies (MAS) program in 1998 in an effort to close achievement gaps, improve academic achievement, and desegregate the district. In part, the decision was made to honor a federal court order to desegregate TUSD schools that has been in place since the 1980s. At that time, Plaintiffs alleged discrimination against TUSD. Under court oversight, therefore, TUSD has developed desegregation agreements in collaboration with Plaintiffs, including most recently, a Unitary Status Plan (USP).
When ESPs trade internationally, they do so under the international trade regime’s General Agreement on Trade in Services (GATS). The GATS has enabled ESPs to offer education services in the neediest communities; however, the GATS has also led to an increase in the privatization of education. Privatization in the sector has led to discrimination, in violation of human rights obligations, thus privatization is detrimental to the neediest peoples, including those in developing nations, particularly females and the very poor.
One reason for the increasing privatization in education is the international trade regime, pioneered by the GATS and its prodigy, the World Trade Organization (WTO). Indeed, the human rights and international trade regimes have competing purposes. The GATS, for example, is an economic instrument with an economic focus. Human rights, on the other hand—like the right to education—are often preserved at the expense of economic gain.
The Superintendent’s Report followed typical course. As such, it was both surprising and not. The Report was deficit-focused and revolved around the several reasons why TUSD does not have enough money to fulfill promises made to teachers (MINUTE 5:40 – 9:30). At MINUTE 7, the Supt. sums it up: basically, TUSD has serious problems because the future is unknown.
Tucson Unified School District (TUSD) leaders developed a Mexican American Studies (MAS) Program in 1998 in an effort to close achievement gaps, improve academic achievement, and desegregate the district. In part the decision was made to honor a federal court order to desegregate TUSD schools that has been in place since the 1980s. At that time, Plaintiffs alleged discrimination against TUSD. Under court oversight, therefore, TUSD has developed desegregation agreements in collaboration with Plaintiffs, including most recently, a Unitary Status Plan (USP).
Under the USP, TUSD must provide culturally relevant courses (CRC). However, under Arizona law, TUSD is not permitted to continue the MAS Program, despite the program’s potential to raise student achievement markers, including test scores and graduation rates. That is because state legislators enacted A.R.S. § 15-112 to eliminate MAS in TUSD. TUSD has taken the matter to court to decide whether the law is constitutional.
In 2015, in Arce v. Douglas, the Ninth Circuit affirmed the conclusion that a prong of A.R.S. § 15-112(A) is unconstitutional. However, the remainder of the statute stands—until and unless Plaintiffs can prove at trial that the Arizona legislature applied the statute with discriminatory intent, or they can show that the legislature violated their First Amendment rights.
In the wake of Arce, Arizona State Superintendent Douglas has implied her willingness to work with TUSD to develop appropriate CRC; however, there seems to remain an unwillingness to acknowledge that A.R.S. § 15-112, as a whole, is problematic. On the other hand, TUSD has not dealt with matters in the most deft fashion. The District finds itself repeatedly in the news and in court. Further, the court has seemed to lose patience with the District’s seeming incapacity to develop wholly appropriate, effective plans for desegregation and high student achievement. Although Arce was remanded for further consideration, TUSD would be best served by avoiding litigation altogether and settling matters by quiet negotiation and other political processes outside of court.