“SOFT BIGOTRY”: THE REJECTION OF MERIT AND THE BETRAYAL OF OUR YOUTH AND NATION
The Goals of the Woke, Socialist “Crits” and“Regressive—Progressives” Are Threatened by Quality, Excellence, Merit, and Ability
David Barnhizer
The Rejection of Merit Is a New Form of Racism and Discrimination
The NYC Department of Education Has Rejected Merit, Educational Excellence, and Ability as Standards
“[T]he real goal is simply to help adults who run the schools hide their failures in getting kids to learn. That’s why the teachers unions and their allies in the system, like state education czar Betty Rosa, oppose standardized tests. [A] new [NYC] DOE guidance warns that “recognizing student excellence via honor rolls and class rank can be detrimental to learners who find it more difficult to reach academic success.” Even grades can negatively influence “future student performance.” … Staff should “eliminate practices that penalize students who have been marginalized based on their race, culture, language and/or ability.” Ability? Insane. A poor grade doesn’t “penalize” students but alerts them, their parents and school staff that they haven’t learned material they need to advance in school and later life. Absent any warning, they’re all too likely to fall further behind.” “De Blasio’s DOE takes its war on learning to a new extreme with ‘no honor roll’ push”, New York Post Editorial Board, 9/1/21.
It Is a “Truth” Because Dan Farley Said So!
The Oregon Department of Education’s Director of Assessment Dan Farley stated that teachers must accept the conclusion that “standardized testing being rooted in White supremacy is a “truth” to be accepted across the state’s education system” and is not open for discussion.
“The Oregon Department of Education’s (ODE) state board hosted a work group Monday that declared standardized testing is rooted in White supremacy and has been “weaponized” against students of color. State board staff attended the virtual meeting titled, “Work Group on Equitable and Racially Responsive Balanced Assessment,” which was mostly led by ODE Director of Assessment Dan Farley. … Farley kicked off the discussion by saying the concept of standardized testing being rooted in White supremacy is a “truth” to be accepted across the state’s education system.” “Oregon Department of Education links standardized testing to White supremacy: Oregon official said concept of standardized testing is rooted in White supremacy”, Jessica Chasmar, 2/15/22.
The Real Truth Is That Eliminating Merit Harms America’s National Security, Economy, and Divides the Nation
“Scientific research is about one thing: advancing knowledge. Scientists are not in the business of closing the academic achievement gap; that task falls to families, cultural leaders and schools. Diverting ever more US STEM resources from the pursuit of knowledge to the pursuit of alleged racial equity all but guarantees that a hard-charging, merit-driven China will win the war for scientific and technological dominance, giving it a formidable military advantage.
US schools are eliminating gifted and talented programs in the name of racial equity and deemphasizing — if not eliminating — algebra instruction to conceal racially disparate performance in algebra classes. China is taking the opposite course. It identifies its top math talent early on and gives mathematically gifted students accelerated instruction. Its rigorous university entrance exams reward effort and achievement, not identity. Undergraduate math competitions provide a pipeline to the best graduate programs in STEM. These efforts are working. As of 2018 China ranked number one in the international tests of K-12 math, science and reading known as PISA; America ranked 25th. Chinese teams dominate Stanford’s challenge for machine-reading comprehension and the International Olympiad in Informatics. Highly trained STEM Ph.D.s are pouring out of its graduate schools.” https://nypost.com/2022/03/14/as-chinas-military-tech-dominates-us-science-bows-to-racial-justice/. “As China’s military tech dominates, Congress demands science bow to racial ‘justice’”, Heather Mac Donald, 3/14/22.
The War on Educational Excellence Includes Banning Programs for Talented and Gifted Children.
Former New York Lieutenant Governor Betsy McCaughey has serious doubts about the quality, focus and outcome resulting from what she termed “The War on Educational Excellence” and the effort to eliminate programs for “talented and gifted children” in America’s public schools. The “War” is taking place in many K-12 school systems across America and the inevitable result is that children’s futures are being ruined and the nation weakened dramatically. This is due to the most capable students being intellectually under-developed, with millions of other students being left miseducated, “dumbed down” by the system’s failure to provide them a strong quality core education, and the fact that a unique form of politically propagandized curricular content is generating a wave of ignorance and social division. McCaughey describes key aspects of what is taking place.
“Parents whose kids excel in school need to be on guard. Leftist politicians and school administrators across the country, not just in New York City, are banning gifted programs in elementary and middle schools and advanced-placement courses in high schools. Typically with no notice to parents, an eighth-grader’s accelerated-science class or a fifth-grader’s fast-track math class is merged into the regular classroom. Talented students lose out. They need accelerated programs every bit as much as children with learning challenges need special education. It’s discrimination to deprive them of the learning opportunities that allow them to thrive in academic settings. The equity warriors are also attacking the nation’s 165 competitive public high schools. From Boston to Alexandra, Virginia and San Francisco, they are eliminating entrance exams and allocating seats by lottery or ZIP code. … The real populism is parents rising up to resist dumbing down their children’s education. These parents, including many poor Asian Americans, know that their best shot at the American Dream is to have their children succeed in a highly competitive public school. No one should take that away.” “Chasing mediocrity: The left’s war on excellence threatens the American Dream”, Betsy McCaughey, 10/11/21.
The Woke are Threatened by Quality, Excellence, Merit, and Ability
A Few Examples
1. “Wait a Minute: I Thought Merit Meant the Ability to Do the Job?”
Given his experience with the young man who couldn’t read after going through the Chicago Public School system, film maker Eli Steele wondered why there was no mention of the importance of merit in the new educational standards the Chicago school system was in the process of adopting. He writes:
“I set up the camera and thought of how far this man’s world was from the new standards that the education leaders in Illinois believed would uplift Blacks and shrink the performance gaps between Whites and Blacks. While most people certainly would have no issues with teachers being “culturally competent” and “responsive” to students, what struck me when I first read the new standards was there was no mention of the word “merit.” These new standards would require teachers to subscribe to “progressive values” and “hold high expectations in which all students can participate and lead as student advocates or activists.” (The rule-writers recently changed “progressive” to “inclusive” but every aspect of the new standards reflects progressive politics.) How would these “high expectations” help this young Black man out looking for work?” “Reporter’s Notebook: Chicago schools face nightmare as Illinois pushes progressive politics: Only 37% of Illinois’ third-graders demonstrated grade-level proficiency in English-language arts in 2019”, Eli Steele, 2/18/21.
2. Doing away with honest standards of qualitative measurement means teachers and administrators can’t be evaluated in terms of their effectiveness, and the students can’t either.
“[T]he real goal [of the “no honor roll” and grade movement] is to help the adults who run the schools hide their failures in not getting kids to learn. That’s why the teachers unions and their allies in the system … oppose standardized tests. [A] new [NYC] DOE guidance warns that “recognizing student excellence via honor rolls and class rank can be detrimental to learners who find it more difficult to reach academic success.” Even grades can negatively influence “future student performance.” … Staff should “eliminate practices that penalize students who have been marginalized based on their race, culture, language and/or ability.”
3. Eliminating Grades of “F” to Combat “Systemic Racism”?
“[W]hat we define to be excellence has become captive to a certain political agenda,” says Brown University economics professor Glenn Loury. Yet, in the name of “eliminating systemic racism,” Sunrise Park Middle School in White Bear Lake, Minnesota, near St. Paul, will no longer hand out “F” grades to students who turn in the lowest quality work. The new grading system will no longer reflect student behavior or tardiness, or whether an assignment was completed on time. Grading, the school’s website reads, perpetuates systemic racism. Sunrise Park Middle School is not alone in abandoning failing grades. This “everyone-gets-a-trophy” approach to education is also found in high-school math curricula and the phase-out of college entrance exams—all in the name of “equity.” “Dropping ‘F’ grades for kids is a new ‘soft bigotry of low expectations’: Sunrise Park Middle School in Minnesota is not alone in abandoning failing grades”, Lindsey M. Burke, 10/9/21.
4. “Grade Inflation Has Turned Transcripts into Monopoly Money”.
“Consider these facts: A 50-plus-year nationwide study of the history of college grading finds that, in the early 1960s, an A grade was awarded in colleges nationwide 15 percent of the time. But today, an A is the most common grade given in college; the percentage of A grades has tripled, to 45 percent nationwide. Seventy-five percent of all grades awarded now are either A’s and B’s. The National Association of Colleges and Employers reported in 2013 that “66 percent of employers screen candidates by grade point average (GPA).” [E]mployers have known about grade inflation for years, which is why their most common complaint to me is that college transcripts have become less and less meaningful. After all, virtually all new college graduates sport nothing but A’s and B’s on their transcripts. For the same reason, grade inflation also hinders the ability of graduate school admissions boards to differentiate meaningfully among student transcripts. So, the answer to the question, “How did these unqualified students manage to graduate from these elite institutions?” is straightforward: When an A is the most common grade given in college, how hard is it to graduate?” https://www.forbes.com/sites/tomlindsay/2019/03/30/the-other-college-scandal-grade-inflation-has-turned-transcripts-into-monopoly-money/?sh=46e9b2664182. “The ‘Other’ College Scandal: Grade Inflation Has Turned Transcripts into Monopoly Money”, Tom Lindsay, 3/30/19.
5. “A professor at Arizona State University is calling for the end to “White supremacy language,” and to do away with the common way of grading papers in favor of labor-based grading that will redistribute “power.”
“White language supremacy in writing classrooms is due to the uneven and diverse linguistic legacies that everyone inherits, and the racialized white discourses that are used as standards, which give privilege to those students who embody those habits of white language already,” Asao Inoue, professor of rhetoric and composition at Arizona State University, said.” “Professor says grading system is racist, proposes labor-based system: ‘White language supremacy’: Labor-based grading would weigh papers based on how much ‘labor’ students put into their assignments”, Emma Colton, 11/9/21.
6. “The University of California agreed to no longer consider SAT or ACT scores when making admissions and scholarship decisions under a settlement in a 2019 lawsuit filed on behalf of low income students of color and students with disabilities.
“The 10-campus system, … decided not to continue fighting a judge’s injunction issued last fall that barred it from considering the scores for admission, the San Francisco Chronicle reported. … The College Board, which produced the SAT, rejected the notion that their standardized tests were inherently racist. … “The SAT itself is not a racist instrument. Every question is rigorously reviewed for evidence of bias and any question that could favor one group over another is discarded.” “University of California agrees to nix SAT, ACT in admissions decisions in settlement with minority students”, Danielle Wallace, 5/16/21.
7. The Entire California Public University System Follows UC Berkeley’s Lead and Ends Standardized Test Requirements for Admission
“California State University, the largest public university system in the United States, on Wednesday said it will no longer use college entrance exams in undergraduate admissions. The change means that applicants may still submit their SAT or ACT scores if they wish to do so, but admissions counselors at Cal State will not look at them. Instead, Cal State universities will utilize a “multi-factored admission criteria” to determine each applicant’s eligibility. “This decision aligns with the California State University’s continued efforts to level the playing field and provide greater access to a high-quality college degree for students from all backgrounds,” said Steve Relyea, Cal State’s acting chancellor. … The ACT criticized the move, arguing that it is more likely to harm than help students, especially those of underrepresented demographics who depend on standardized test scores to showcase their academic achievements. “Abandoning the use of objective assessments like the ACT test introduces greater subjectivity and uncertainty into the admissions process, and this decision is likely to worsen entrenched inequities in California,” the ACT said in a statement. “Troubling differentials in educational outcomes and performance appear in the same way for academic measures like high school GPA as they do for standardized exams.” https://www.theepochtimes.com/california-state-university-permanently-ends-standardized-test-requirements-for-admissions_4357369.html. “California State University Permanently Ends Standardized Test Requirements for Admissions”, Bill Pan, 3/25/22.
8. Oregon’s POC Students Do Worse than White Students on Reading, Writing, and Mathematics Tests—So “Racist” Tests Will Not Be Required
“Oregon’s governor recently signed a bill that allows high school students to graduate without proving they can read, write, or do math. Oregon Senate Bill 744 states that students “may not be required to show proficiency in Essential Learning Skills as a condition of receiving a high school diploma” in the next three school years. … Charles Boyle, an aide to the Democrat, told the paper that suspending the proficiency requirements will benefit “Oregon’s black, Latino, Latina, Latinx, Indigenous, Asian, Pacific Islander, tribal, and students of color.” “Oregon Governor Signs Bill Letting Students Graduate Without Proving They Can Read, Write, or Do Math”, Zachary Stieber, 8/11/21.
9. The American Medical Association Rejects Merit and Ability as Standards, and Then Adopts Critical Race Theory!
I know the American Medical Association isn’t K-12 education—but the way the AMA is heading demonstrates how quickly and pervasively the effort to replace merit and ability with alternative “criteria” is spreading. The idea that a scientific system ultimately responsible for human lives can vociferously and proudly reject the concept of merit in exchange for Critical Race Theory indicates how far that political movement has progressed, infiltrated, and corrupted America’s institutions.
“The American Medical Association (AMA), the largest national organization representing physicians and medical students in the United States, says it will set aside its long-held concept of meritocracy in favor of “racial justice” and “health equity.” [T]he AMA set out a three-year road map detailing how the advocacy group will use its influence to dismantle “structural and institutional racism” and advance “social and racial justice” in America’s health care system. According to its plan, the AMA will be following a host of strategies, including implementing “racial and social justice” throughout the AMA enterprise culture, systems, policies, and practices; expanding medical education to include critical race theory; and pushing toward “racial healing, reconciliation, and transformation” regarding the organization’s own “racially discriminatory” past.
“The AMA also makes clear that it now rejects the concepts of “equality” and “meritocracy,” which have been goals in the fields of medical science and medical care. “Equality as a process means providing the same amounts and types of resources across populations,” the association said. “Seeking to treat everyone the ‘same,’ ignores the historical legacy of disinvestment and deprivation through historical policy and practice of marginalizing and minoritizing communities.”
While the AMA doesn’t run America’s health care system, it holds tremendous influence over medical schools and teaching hospitals that train physicians and other health professionals. Those institutes, the AMA says, must reject meritocracy, which it describes as a harmful narrative that “ignores the inequitably distributed social, structural and political resources.” “The commonly held narrative of meritocracy is the idea that people are successful purely because of their individual effort,” it states.
“Medical education has largely been based on such flawed meritocratic ideals, and it will take intentional focus and effort to recognize, review and revise this deeply flawed interpretation.” Instead, the AMA suggests, medical schools should incorporate into their programs critical race theory, an offshoot of Marxism that views society through the lens of a power struggle between the race of oppressors and that of the oppressed. As a result, according to the theory, all long-established institutions of Western society are considered to be tools of racial oppression.” “American Medical Association Embraces Critical Race Theory, Rejects Meritocracy”, GQ Pan, 5/12/21.
In late October 2021, the AMA released its 55-page guide describing how the concepts indicated above in its May 2021 announcement should be internalized by physicians and the medical profession generally. Rejecting merit is only the beginning. The following few passages are stunning.
“The American Medical Association recently released a guide on “Advancing Health Equity” that promotes how to fight for critical race theory, includes a list of words not to say and their “equity-focused alternatives,” and criticizes concepts like “meritocracy,” “individualism“ and the “’free’ market.” The 55-page document released on Oct. 28 cites a guide by the organization Race Forward for how to advocate for critical race theory (CRT), which is called “Guide to Counter-Narrating the Attacks on Critical Race Theory.” The health equity guide argues physicians cannot eliminate “health inequities” by “focus[ing] only on individuals, their behavior or their biology.” It says they instead must focus on language and collective political circumstances of certain groups.
The guide says doctors should not say “Low-income people have the highest level of coronary artery disease in the United States.” Instead, it says, doctors should phrase the same idea like this: “People underpaid and forced into poverty as a result of banking policies, real estate developers gentrifying neighborhoods, and corporations weakening the power of labor movements, among others, have the highest level of coronary artery disease.” Rather than using the word “fairness,” the guide suggests doctors say “social justice.” This is because, it says, fairness “pays no attention to how power relations in society establish themselves but primarily emphasizes outcomes within a pre-given set of rules.” “American Medical Association pushes pro-critical race theory materials in ‘Health Equity’ guide: Document cites AMA guide for how to advocate for critical race theory”, Tyler Olson, 11/10/21.
10. Mandatory Critical Race Theory Training in America’s Medical Schools
“Almost all of the nation’s top 25 medical schools are incorporating ideas related to critical race theory (CRT) into mandatory training programs for students and staff, warned a watchdog website documenting leftist indoctrination in K-12 and higher education. Critical Race Training in Education, a project founded by Cornell University law professor William Jacobson, has recently put online a new database on America’s most prestigious medical schools. The database finds that 23 of those 25 institutions maintain some form of mandatory student training or coursework related to CRT doctrines. The database also observes that 17 schools have mandatory CRT training for employees. For example, Cornell’s Weill Medical College requires all faculty and staff to complete “anti-bias training” on an annual basis while it works to “introduce additional educational content related to racism, social injustice, and social determinants of health into the medical curriculum.” In addition, 21 of the 25 listed institutions have offered their students materials such as books, talks, and articles by Ibram X. Kendi and Robin DiAngelo, two authors celebrated among proponents of CRT for their works on “anti-racism” and “white fragility.”
“The trainings can be targeted, such as a new requirement for a major or a department, or school-wide,” the website states, noting that the subjects of those trainings and coursework may be worded differently at individual schools, but usually use terms including “anti-racism,” “cultural competency,” “equity,” “implicit bias,” “DEI (diversity, equity and inclusion)” and critical race theory.” ““Critical Race Theory Makes Its Way Into Mandatory Trainings at Top US Medical Schools, New Database Shows”, Bill Pan, 2/21/22.
11. Elon Musk’s Ad Astra School
“Elon Musk’s Montessori preschool reimagining education closer to fruition: Musk’s foundation set aside approximately $100 million to create a technology-focused primary and secondary school in Austin.” Christina Shaw, 12/18/24. https://www.foxbusiness.com/fox-news-education/elon-musks-montessori-preschool-reimagining-education-closer-fruition.
Elon Musk is making yet another business move and this time he’s reimagining what education in the U.S. could be. The multi-billionaire has started funding Ad Astra, a Montessori private preschool, outside Bastrop, Texas, recently state-issued documents show. … Elon Musk has begun funding a Montessori private school named Ad Astra outside Bastrop, Texas. … Ad Astra’s website says it will be “centered around hands-on, project-based learning, where children are encouraged to explore, experiment, and discover solutions to real-world problems. Ad Astra offers a progressive learning environment that emphasizes the integration of Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM) into its curriculum.” …. The website describes the curriculum as being “carefully sequenced and activity-based” aimed at allowing children to develop essential skills and problem-solving techniques “at their own pace.” “This unique approach prepares children for, and ultimately mastery of, reading, writing and mathematics,” the website says.
The Schools Lack the Ability to Provide Quality Education, So They are “Dumbing Down” the Entire Educational System to Avoid Accountability
In writing about how the UK has sought to resist America’s push toward “Woke” education, Douglas Murray, author of “The Madness of Crowds: Gender, Race and Identity” offers a scathing analysis of the way US teachers’ unions and their leadership have sought to cover up their own failures to educate America’s children by blaming all shortcomings on standardized testing and other “systemic” challenges. Murray cites Luke Rosniak’s book, “Race to the Bottom: Uncovering the Secret Forces Destroying American Public Education,” for the proposition that “it isn’t just what is taught in American classrooms that is the problem. It is the whole crumbling structure now looming behind it.”
Murray adds that “even the most well-off school districts try to get around any disparities in racial testing among students”—not by actually offering better teaching and discipline—but by hiring “diversity” agents who tell them the problem is not “them” but “institutional” and “systemic” racism committed by “White privileged” actors. In such a context quality and ability disappear because any apparently empirical system of comparison is all the fault of discriminatory testing, not the quality of teaching or the content of the curriculum. Murray goes on to explain how the teachers’ unions use this strategy in an effort to retain their power and cover their inadequacies, excoriating the AFT’s Randi Weingarten in the process.
“[I]t is not as though it is some fringe movement that is trying this trick. Randi Weingarten is one of the most powerful people in American education. Perhaps one of the most important people in America. She is the president of the 1.7 million-member American Federation of Teachers. And she is just one of those who in recent years has decided to proclaim that standardized testing is — guess what — racist. Weingarten is probably one of the people most responsible for the decline in education standards in this country. Not least as one of those most responsible for the shutting of American schools during the pandemic. … Weingarten is one of those who should take most blame for the years of lost learning in America.
[F]or people like Weingarten, there is always an explanation that sidesteps their own blame. … The blame? “Standardized tests.” Because obviously if you abolished tests, then the school would be more equitable, more socially just and have better results. There is absolutely no evidence for any of this, but Weingarten and a whole generation of American educators are wedded to it anyway. For them, it is the easier path, and the best way to cover over their own stupendous failings.
Since they have proved unable to raise standards, they have decided instead to change the purpose of education. Such as by creating a generation of young activists and blaming any and all failures on amorphous forces such as “social injustice” or “systemic racism.” In doing this, the bureaucrats imagine that they are saving themselves. And they may well be. But they are wrecking the chances of a generation of American students, including those from underprivileged backgrounds who need excellence the most.” “America tried exporting woke education — the UK fought back”, Douglas Murray, 3/10/22. https://nypost.com/2022/03/10/america-tried-exporting-woke-education-the-uk-fought-back/.
Critical and Strategic Thinking, Active Creativity, Problem-solving, Solutions Development, and Effective Implementation
Our young people are being deprived of the essential “survival skills” that will allow them to have a real chance at life’s opportunities. This includes employment, where opportunities will become much more limited as Artificial Intelligence/Robotics systems and applications grow ever more sophisticated and powerful. In doing so they will replace all but the most capable human workers in a wide swath of economic activities.
There are many who remain committed to thinking the AI/Robotics transformation is just another periodic “Schumpeterian shift” after which we will produce another improved economic system. The harsh reality is that we are immersed in a unique and unprecedented remaking of our world. In that new world there will be increasingly limited “space” for people who lack the essential capabilities involved in critical and strategic thinking, active creativity, problem-solving, and solutions development.
That is why I am emphasizing “survival skills”. Development of such integrated skills requires disciplined and intensive behavior, as well as significant experience and a wide range of knowledge. It is the responsibility of our educational systems of all kinds to rethink their curricula and strategies in ways that provide the required packages of new skills. Those systems are falling far short of what is needed.
The online learning platform Springboard for Business recently released its 2024 State of the Workforce Skills Gap report. The report emphasized the skills of critical thinking, strategic analysis, problem-solving, along with both oral and written communication. Springboard for Business explained the key points raised by over 1000 business professionals.
Critical thinking is essential in “this pivot-or-perish environment where businesses must be strategic and adapt quickly to remain competitive.” “Our survey found that the most in-demand soft skill, also known as a durable or non-perishable skill, is strategic thinking,” Chris Duchesne, general manager of Springboard for Business based in Boston, told FOX Business. “More than half of leaders (57%) say their company needs more people with strategic thinking skills right now.” With the economy in a state of flux, Duchesne said, critical thinking is essential in “this pivot-or-perish environment where businesses must be strategic and adapt quickly to remain competitive.” … Additionally, soft skills such as problem-solving — which 49% of leaders say their companies need — and verbal and written communication skills (46%) are also essential to keep pace in a rapidly evolving landscape, the report revealed.
“Soft” and “Hard” Skills
“Soft skills are in great demand in today’s workforce: Here’s why Non-technical skills are becoming increasingly important in the workplace — experts reveal why”,Erica Lamberg, 2/17/24. https://www.foxbusiness.com/lifestyle/soft-skills-demand-todays-workforce-why
Your job performance is a combination of your “hard skills” — your technical knowledge and hands-on work product — and your intangible “soft skills,” which are taking the American workplace by storm. Soft skills are non-technical skills that relate to how you work.
These skills include how you interact with colleagues, how you solve problems and how you manage your work, according to The Balance, a personal finance website.
For example, soft skills include “interpersonal skills, communication skills, listening skills, time management, problem-solving, leadership and empathy, among others,” the same source said. Employers are seeking these skills, as employees who possess these skills enhance a workplace, experts said. “Success in the workplace often requires more than the technical ability to do the job. Soft skills are what make the difference.”
Are These Key Skills Even “Teachable”?
The answer to the above question is yes but doing so demands a very different type of teacher with a significantly changed sense of mission. I taught strategic thinking and action for over twenty years, engaged in diverse contexts in which I consulted with governments, businesses, academic institutions and more. I also wrote a book that brought together the systems of military and martial arts strategy created by Sun Tzu in The Art of War 3,000 years ago and Miyamoto Musashi in A Book of Five Rings six centuries past.
Those two works offer a powerful structure for the understanding of strategic thinking and action, and integrate the emotive dimension of human thought and behavior with our intellectual and analytic dynamics to create a coherent and full conceptual structure. That structure requires the teacher to possess an understanding of the vital importance of the various skills sets that make up what I am calling the “survival skills”.
What the “skills” of creativity, critical and strategic thinking, problem-solving, a wide range of diverse knowledge, and pattern recognition actually mean is challenging. So are the questions of how we can determine if an individual possesses the innate traits, as well as the extent to they can be enhanced by education and experience. Beyond the issues of definition, recognition and intellectual substance, range and content, we need to ask the extent to which such diverse skill sets are teachable or primarily representative of innate qualities one either “has” or does not.
Creativity, for example, is not something possessed by all or even by many. There is also an important issue of recognizing different forms of creativity in specific dimensions of activity. Some people are artistically creative while others are financially creative along with numerous other variants of the supposed skill such as mathematical skill or pattern recognition. Others are creative in terms of problem-solving or forms of opportunity development such as creative persons as Elon Musk or Albert Einstein. It is necessary, therefore, to ask, when we think of “creativity” what category of activity is involved?
Digital literacy, another frequent component of skill lists, is a technical skill that many Millennials and even ten year olds possess to some degree. So while digital literacy will be a necessary qualification, it is a “dime-a-dozen” factor unless, and this is a very significant “unless”, it is linked to something such as high creativity in a relevant area of work activity and advanced innovative ability.
Even if an individual is not a genius who possesses the skills of critical thinking, creativity, pattern recognition, and the ability to possess, comprehend and apply deep knowledge in multiple fields and effectively cross-reference, interpret and apply that knowledge effectively, a well-designed educational process coupled with relevant experiences can assist in the development of the capabilities. The interactive capability can certainly be improved through education, but at the highest levels of such skills only a few excel. The rest of us basically “try hard” and end up with a range of capabilities ranging from not very good to average and good.
Although critical thinking is an absolutely vital skill, a surprisingly small portion of the American population possesses the capacity or willingness to do high-level critical thinking which, by the way, requires a significant level of data, experience, and insight that can in many instances be provided by a strong educational process. The challenge is that particularly in the past several decades, our educational systems have betrayed their responsibilities to fully educate. They have functioned poorly in facilitating among our young people the teachable skills of critique, analysis, synthesis and creative pattern recognition and interpretation.
On these issues, See, “The Importance of Teaching Critical Thinking”, Lee Watanabe Crockett, 7/25/15, https://globaldigitalcitizen.org/the-importance-of-teaching-critical-thinking. See also, “Why critical thinking is overlooked by schools and shunned by students”, Ben Morse, 9/12/12, https://www.theguardian.com/teacher-network/2012/sep/12/critical-thinking-overlooked-in-secondary-education. John Droz, in his excellent analysis of the development of critical thinking, also provides numerous important interpretations and examples on his Substack site.
Many people, perhaps even most of us, are not disciplined thinkers, critical analysts and decision-makers. Quite a few are “feelers” who function primarily on the emotional level of perception and opinion, and activists who do not enjoy, value or appreciate the processes required to fully engage them in critical thinking and analysis. Nor is this an attack on people who take their own and others emotional states, reactions and interpretations into account in their decision making.
An issue for educators in dealing with themselves and students is that if you aren’t “into” the intense and disciplined dynamics needed to master the skills of critical thinking, strategy and other essential elements, or at least improve them significantly, being required to do so “hurts”. This creates resistance when what we are asked to do involves assessing human behavior, including our own. Such an introspective undertaking requires analysis and honesty that requires understanding ourselves and others far better than we might find pleasant. That inward looking process requires questioning virtually everything, as well as enhancing our corresponding ability to recognize the links and interactions between the complex range of elements and characteristics with which we are dealing.
The Fear of Being “Canceled”—Intellectual Rot at the Highest Levels
Unfortunately, our educational systems appear to be getting worse at teaching critical thinking. This is happening even at many of our “best” universities that were long thought to provide the highest quality measure of analytical thought. Recently, “elite” institutions such as Harvard, Yale, Columbia, Cal Berkeley, Stanford and others that we thought were leaders in critical, integrative and deeply analytical work have been exposed as politicized mechanisms pushing an intolerant ideology. In the ultra sensitive and politically correct world we have created, critical questioning and critique can get you into trouble.
One report, for example, revealed that a majority of Harvard faculty and students are afraid of contradicting the assertions being made by Critical Race Theory activists and Woke colleagues. There are an amazing number of “taboo” subjects whose proponents tolerate no alternative perspectives. Even questioning the assumptions and assertions being made in those areas is considered evidence of a kind of phobia or bigotry. This same attitude has spread downward from universities to K-12 educational systems. The result is an anti-intellectual corruption of our educational institutions at all levels.
Rikki Schlott reports on the results of the Harvard survey.
“Over half of Harvard professors are too afraid to discuss controversial subjects with students – what’s become of this bastion of free speech?”, Rikki Schlott, 10/22/24. https://nypost.com/2024/10/22/opinion/over-half-of-harvard-profs-fear-controversial-topics/.
Harvard professors are biting their tongues and dodging political issues out of fear of losing their jobs, being ‘cancelled’ or attracting heat online. Harvard is the nation’s premier university and produces a disproportionate number of our leaders. It’s expected to set an example and be a bastion of discourse and debate — with its professors boldly leading the way. But a survey published by the university’s own Open Inquiry and Constructive Dialogue Working Group found a solid majority of profs now avoid touchy topics both inside and outside of the classroom, after things boiled over in the last year with campus protests related to the war in Gaza.
The 1,411 surveyed faculty and staff were prompted to “think about teaching a controversial issue in a class at Harvard” — and their primary reaction seems to be fear. Just 18% said they would be very comfortable doing so, and 31% somewhat comfortable. But more than half said they would be somewhat (33%) or very (18%) reluctant. That means more than half of Harvard’s faculty admitted they’re afraid to discuss controversial issues in the classroom. Rather, out of fear for their jobs, they’ve abdicated the responsibility of facilitating difficult discourse.
What many young workers will face with the growing use of AI systems that multiply individual productivity, is that we will increasingly see the employment equivalent of “No Vacancy” signs on the most desirable employment niches. If the productivity multiplying effects of AI/Robotic systems allow one worker to do the work of ten people employed prior to the transformation then as many as nine former workers engaged in the work will be eliminated at a time when similar situations are spreading throughout the economic base. Many people will want the jobs but only a limited number will be needed. Nor will the job displacement be limited to basic manual labor categories. The ranks of CPAs, journalists, public relations writers, investment advisors, teachers, data processors and much, much more will continue to shrivel.
The “Anti-Educators”
At this troubled point in American culture, honest and critical interaction and inquiry offends many people and identity clusters. The “true believers” in such politicized areas take their conception of reality as a given and demand that all others do so as well. They seek to punish and ostracize anyone they feel is challenging or contradicting the tenets of their belief system, comfort zone, or “safe space”. In the self-contained and closeted of that “safe space” we are not going to be able to develop students who possess the skills of critical and strategic thought and other essential survival skills. Even those who enter their educational experiences with the innate potential in those categories, the “weight” of the system and the culture that has been created suppresses such capabilities. Jacob Howland offers the following insights.
Public education exists primarily to supply economic and political necessities: basic literacy and numeracy, a dollop of civics. But beyond these modest (and increasingly unmet) goals, schools once gave students a taste of what Matthew Arnold called “the best which has been thought and said in the world”—or, if not that, then at least a few good books. …. Professional educators still talk about fashioning well-rounded graduates, but their words ring hollow. In our age of corporate wokeism, public and private schools from kindergarten to graduate school strive to turn students into standardized units of social and human capital. Confident expressions of cultured thought and feeling are in alarmingly short supply at the termini of what is now called the “education pipeline.” Schoolteachers and professors wield ideological abstractions like hammers to pound down individual particularities of heart and mind. Just as smooth blanks are needed for pressing coins, contrarian idiosyncrasies must be removed from souls that are to be stamped with the characterless visage of total political conformity.
Today’s sophists—a motley band of headmasters, superintendents, chancellors, administrators, consultants, accreditors, and the like—promise the fullness of genuine education but deliver only a void. Many seem incapable of distinguishing between phantasms and substantial realities, much less of feeling guilty about swindling young souls out of a liberal education. But the good news is that concerned parents and serious students are increasingly able to tell the difference and are looking for the genuine article. Jacob Howland, “The Anti-Educators: Promising genuine learning, today’s schooling too often delivers only a void—but academic alternatives are starting to appear.” 7/12/21. https://www.city-journal.org/article/the-anti-educators.
Two Fifth Circuit Judges Challenge the Application of the Disparate Impact Doctrine in Cases Involving Race
Fighting against racism does not mean inventing a new form of racial discrimination, including ones that create forms of “Anti-Racism” that inevitably “dumb down” America’s youth. Two federal judges captured this in critiquing the doctrine of “disparate outcome”. A 5th Circuit case, Rollerson v. Brazos River Harbor Navigation District, found two of the Federal Circuit’s judges questioning the application of the disparate outcome standard, arguing that it is particularly risky societally in cases involving race, and voicing concerns about Critical Race Theory concepts that push hard in that direction. In analyzing the disparate-impact case, Judge James Ho and Judge Edith Jones wrote concurrent opinions saying: “it should be up to Congress, rather than unelected officials, to decide whether disparate-impact theories can be pursued by litigants. Judge Ho discussed what he viewed as shortcomings of the theory and distinguishing between securing “equality of opportunity” versus “guaranteeing equal outcomes”. Judge James Ho wrote:
“There’s a big difference between prohibiting racial discrimination and endorsing disparate-impact theory,” Ho said. “It’s the difference between securing equality of opportunity regardless of race and guaranteeing equality of outcome based on race. It’s the difference between color blindness and critical race theory. … Prohibiting racial discrimination means we must be blind to race. Disparate-impact theory requires the opposite: It forces us to look at race—to check for racial imbalance and then decide what steps must be taken to advance some people at the expense of others based on their race.”
Assume Innocence, Not Bigotry
If disparate-impact theory is to be justified, it must be based on a legal presumption that evidence of racial imbalance is evidence of discrimination, he said. “But a presumption of discrimination runs into a bedrock principle of our legal system. We ordinarily assume innocence, not bigotry. Plaintiffs must typically prove, not presume, discrimination. … Moreover, opponents of disparate-impact theory worry that it will only exacerbate, rather than alleviate, racial tension—by pressuring defendants to adopt policy changes for the explicit purpose of taking from some and giving to others based on their race.” In her concurrence, Judge Edith Jones … wrote, “I think … that statutes prohibiting on their face intentional discrimination should not be extended by judicial or administrative fiat to encompass disparate-impact theories.”
Judge Ho said he shared Jones’ concerns about agency regulators usurping Congress’ authority on disparate-impact theory.
“It’s hard to imagine an area where we should be more wary of vesting discretion in public officials than race,” he wrote. “Citizens may fairly wonder how officials can condemn race-neutral policies as racist and defend explicitly race-conscious programs as inclusive.”