It used to be the case that doing well on your SAT meant something. While different schools had different grading scales and different opportunities for sports, honor societies, etc., the SAT was a number you could use to measure roughly how good people from all across the country are at math, reading, and writing.
But the SAT is planning to introduce a new “adversity score” that is calculated with a 1-100 scale, according to The Wall Street Journal. SAT maker the College Board also refers to it as the “overall disadvantage level” and it includes 15 factors like crime and poverty in the neighborhood, single-parent and English as a second language in the family category, and then high schools factors like how hard the curriculum is and the free lunch rate.
Now this is all happening suspiciously close to a Supreme Court decision on affirmative action between Harvard University and a group representing Asian American students. I don’t want to sound like a conspiracy theorist, but it’s almost like there are some malicious puppet masters behind the scene saying “hey just on the off chance the Supreme Court outlaws affirmative action, we better make sure we’ve already embedded it into one of the quantitative, objective admission metrics.”
Indeed, Anthony Carnevale of Georgetown, who used to work for the SAT’s maker, the College Board, said “the purpose is to get to race without using race.”
Western culture is predicated on achievement. Sure, it’s nice that you tried hard, but the men who make the history books — and women, and women — don’t do so because of their effort, but rather the observable, quantifiable results of that effort. S-A-T? More like S-A-D. Sorry, just had to throw in a boomer joke.
William Latson was principal at Spanish River Community High School in Palm Beach until a little earlier this week. The school reassigned Latson to another job in the district after the revelation of comments he made to a parent in an email exchange last year, reported The Washington Post.
Latson told the parent that he lets info about the Holocaust be presented but that “not everyone believes the Holocaust happened….I have the role to be politically neutral but support all groups in the school….I can’t say the Holocaust is a factual, historical event because I am not in a position to do so as a school district employee.”
He’s not in the position to do so, he says. I’m sorry but is there any position more qualified to comment on a historical event than the leader of an educational institution? Like isn’t it your job to know these things?
The principal said “I regret that the verbiage that I used when responding to an email message from a parent, one year ago, did not accurately reflect my professional and personal commitment to educating all students about the atrocities of the Holocaust.”
But state legislators called for Latson to be terminated and the school subsequently removed the principal from his position and put him elsewhere in the district. It’s a particularly ironic story considering Palm Beach County Schools is one of the only districts in the country to employ a curriculum administrator who addresses only Holocaust education — he apparently also won an award for it.
San Francisco’s board of education decided to paint over this mural showing George Washington, along with a dead Native American and an enslaved African American, reported The Washington Post.
Ironically enough, the school where this artwork is showcased is named George Washington High School. Mark Sanchez, vice president of the board, said “We believe students shouldn’t be exposed to violent imagery — that it’s degrading” and California State American Indian Studies professor Joely Proudfit said “It is time to erase the dominant narrative of the dead and defeated Native American….It is important that our public schools are a place for all students to learn and be educated in a safe environment.”
OK so I guess it’s one thing to object to violent imagery. But it’s quite another to question the factual validity of that imagery. The school’s still going to be a safe environment, Joely — the mural can’t attack people — and you can’t just discount history you don’t like by calling it a “narrative.” That kind of thinking probably underminesyour students’ ability to learn.
And what’s really ironic about this cultural Marxist mindset is that, in this case, it’s targeted at a mural that definitely isn’t pro-Washington and was apparently painted by Victor Arnautoff, a communist party member.
San Francisco — or San Franpsycho — also just might have some LGBT protesters on its hands if it covers up the whole mural. One of the panels apparently features a rainbow. San Francisco State professor Robert Cherny mentioned that the vote happened during Pride Month so if they cover up that picture, too, the real angle on this story is “Homophobic, Anti-Liberal California City Paints Over A Communist’s Portrait AND A Rainbow.” Not so woke now, are we?
A drag queen recently stripped during an event for children at Renton Public Library in Washington state, reported The College Fix.
Now this was apparently at a “Teen Pride” event, but the library listed it as suitable for teens and tweens, which are around age 9 through 12 and one of the moms who attended it undercover to film said that she SAW kids as young as ten.
Now, this undercover operation by the moms didn’t go so well, as event organizers and COPS removed moms who didn’t bring children.
Emerald City Antifa posted to Twitter, saying “today we had two queerphobic adults filming kids going in and out of the bathrooms at Teen Pride event at Renton Public library….We’ll post link in thread, please help us identify these pervs.”
Now, obviously if the moms were actually filming that, in addition to the drag show, that’s pretty sketch. But other users on Twitter began talking about one of the mom’s address and date of birth and posted photos of one of their cars and license plates.
So you know, you’ve got to wonder. You have Antifa and the far left pushing drag queens, but then you also have big corporations advertising with them and, of course, promoting physical violence. If you’re on the side of big corporations, how much of a radical are you really?
