You will not have read this expose in the “New York Times,” as neither their controlling shareholders nor their staffers have their children in the affected schools, but –

FOR MANY DECADES, financially challenged urban African-American and Hispanic kids have had virtually no choice but to attend local schools noted for low academic standards and minimal preparation for higher education. Instead, they are being trained to be eager consumers (see John Taylor Gatto’s unreadable book –“The Underground History of American Education — that nonetheless makes the prior valid point) and they learn the finer points of how to get low-paying service jobs in industries importantly catering to the whims and alleged needs of affluent white suburbanites.

Of course, they are not tutored in the particulars of said jobs, like “at will” employment versus being involved in a union contract, or the vagaries of health insurance.  Why would “we” spoil a good thing. We do not want real change, but the guilt part of our psyche does mean that money has been poured into the above schools, with, uh, no discernible impact.

The affluent have always had school choice – it is a function of the thickness of their wallets.  They simply pick up and move to districts offering better educational opportunities. Those with lesser financial resources have been rendered vote-less.  Some “volunteer” to become additionally impoverished — the double whammy of taxes and parochial school tuition. Later, they discover that the first priorities of these schools are “values” and safety, not academic rigor.

Adding to the fraudulent aspect of their schools, the overworked (absurd caseloads) guidance counselors in urban America are not well-versed on that many colleges. Often they resort to default options, like suggesting local two-year colleges or low-cost state schools, which may or may not be appropriate (and would never happen in an affluent area).

In this overall education environment, I am not chagrined to see adverse publicity about various voucher programs, which in aggregate involve a handful of students nationally.  Negative feedback will bring changes in their modus operandi or they will disappear.  In contrast, the neighborhood school down the street in urban America can be under-educating its kids for decades and it lives on, providing nice employment for the adults.

Howard Fuller, the well-known African American education reformer, had it colorfully right more than twenty years ago, “it (changes in our approach to educating those with limited financial resources) ain’t about the research, it’s about the will.”

P.S. High-performing charter schools begin with that will, the passion to deliver a quality education to all students, regardless of their particular backgrounds.

 

 

Welcome!

Take your seat and put your emotions on hold. You are about to hear things you never expected, not in a dream, nor in a nightmare.

It is January 21. President Trump has been widely praised, except by the bicoastal media elites of course, for yesterday’s inaugural address, in which he promised both to be the president of all the people and to uphold those attributes of the United States which have contributed to its unique place in the world.

*President Trump and the Executive-Director of the National Immigration Law Center are at the podium.

Trump: I realize that the majority of Americans want a positive program of immigration reform. I too want such an outcome, although my methods may differ.

NILC: Immigration advocates undoubtedly disagree with you on many, if not virtually all, of your electioneering statements concerning immigration. At the same time, NILC is in complete agreement that it serves all of our interests to deport the estimated 800,000 criminals who are undocumented immigrants. We also acknowledge that we have hurt the perception of our cause when we made excessive demands and when we marched under the flag not of the USA, but of our prior home country.

Trump: Thank you. We are all immigrants; we simply came at different times and under different rules. I am announcing that there will be no change in the DACA program; it will continue to roll forward on its two-year time-frame. Growth in the American economy must be stimulated and these young, educated individuals are becoming important contributors to that growth. I know that Canada has recognized this and has liberalized its rules regarding international students and immigrants alike.

Upon the advice of people expert in construction and surveillance, I am reconsidering how to best protect America from those who simply walk into the country. It may be that a different approach to technology utilization and cross-border cooperation will be a better combination than an expensive new wall separating us from our important trading neighbor, Mexico. Be assured that the safety of Americans is my prime concern.

*President Trump and the Executive-Director of the American Muslim Center are at the podium.

Trump: For sure, I am guilty of overstatement during my campaign. For that I apologize.

AMC: On our part, we have been negligent in not speaking out more regularly and aggressively about the damage being done to the Muslim diaspora by the criminals of ISIS. We call on Muslims everywhere to disassociate themselves from those who distort the teachings of the Koran.

Trump: Thank you. America was built by people from all nations, with wide variations in culture and religious beliefs. At present, I am nervous about people entering the USA from the seven nations listed by former President Obama as fostering state terrorism: Iran, Iraq, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria, and Yemen. That they happen to be Muslim nations does not mean that I am anti-Muslim. And it does not mean that other Muslim and non-Muslim countries have not been the source of terrorists. I realize that those wanting to distort what I am going to do will do so; that is uncontrollable.

While the AMC will disagree with the policy to be implemented, and I respect that, for the next three months, people entering from the countries former President Obama named will be detained at the airport and subjected to extensive questioning. This does not apply to those holding American green cards or specialized visas such as H-1B work authorizations.

*Trump is now solo at the podium.

I was elected on the basis of two primary promises: stronger economic growth and a safer America.

The actions outlined above speak to these pledges. In fact, immigration reform is essential for economic reasons. Among other factors is that the country is aging and the ratio of working people to retirees has dropped significantly, which puts social security in jeopardy if we do not have higher employment. It may be that importing labor is essential to moving our economic growth rate up, but this only makes sense if (1) we are assured that citizens will not take the relevant jobs, (2) we are satisfied that our education system is producing capable employees, and (3) we are able to adequately vet those newcomers to America.

Globalization itself is tied to immigration. Over half the companies started in Silicon Valley have immigrant founders. These are some of our most dynamic enterprises, and their energies must be protected. This can be done with an expanded H-1B program, which does not contradict the steps outlined above to more closely scrutinize those entering the USA from certain countries.

Globalization is tied as well to the terms of trade. Not only do I have some skills in making deals, but several of my cabinet members have made their living in negotiating for their companies. Yes, you may see some unusual tariffs and some jawboning with countries having overvalued currencies, but there should be no hand-wringing that international trade is going to be suddenly stopped. I simply want better terms of trade, which on balance will mean somewhat less outsourcing and bring renewed job growth to our country.

Healthcare costs, which per capita are double those of neighboring Canada, are a restraint on economic growth. We will address this issue in a manner which does not mean the loss of insurance for low-income populations.

People know that I am emotional. I cannot help but be critical, sarcastic even, when the media is more concerned with “gotcha” questions than with unbiased give-and-take. Similarly, to have rich Hollywood types screaming from their multi-million dollar homes and gated communities about refugees that they would not give the time of day to, except perhaps as disposable servants, is really bad theater. Nor will debt-strapped, unemployed college students be taking refugees into their homes. Acceptance of refugees is a matter for all of us to decide, hopefully favorably, in line with our historical narrative. Right now the issue is safety first, a pause to make sure of credentials.

My third and final fundamental promise to the American people was that I would “empty the swamp;” what I meant in this admittedly overly dramatic verbiage was that it would not be business as usual in Washington. Thus, I am not at all taken back by the screams of wounded pigs who have supped at the federal trough for decades. I want the economic benefits of my changes not to be centered in Washington or in the 1%ers but to be felt in middle America, the people who were ignored by the opposition in the recent election.

Thank you.

 

The alert consumer discovers that she is not getting the same number of chips or ounces of edible stuff in the packages she routinely buys at the supermarket. The cost of the box is the same as before. The quantity is not. The company does not announce that it has raised prices.

Colleges do the same thing:

*the three hour course is now two and one half hours

*the obligatory fee formerly included in tuition is now a separate cost item on the bill without any reduction in the tuition
*advice on resume writing and interview techniques, formerly provided by the student’s advisor, now becomes a paid course

Okay, since I am complaining about higher education, let me toss in a few non-financial items:

*if a college is promoting the opportunity for a semester abroad, could it please inform students on how to juggle their prerequisite and major schedules so that the semester abroad does not screw everything up.

*when a student signs up for an in-class course, he expects physical presence, not on-line in his room. Of course, if the in-class presentation by the professor is exclusively power point, coupled with a request to not take notes, the student might as well be in his room.

*Do professors care whether tests are consistent with their self-written syllabi? Consistency in grading admittedly is a pipe dream. Years ago, when my daughter brought home a test on which she had received a 105, my reaction was “no way, 100 is the top mark.” Extra credits are like a virus, right up there with self-esteem t-shirts, ego stroking with scant evidence of substantive impact.

*An education leader of my acquaintance used to ask her professors: are you grading on the student’s life story, how hard they worked, or what they actually accomplished in the class?

The modified contemporary internalized questions of college graduates in many cases seem to be:  have you made a lot of friends, do you know how to network, is your resume current, will you contribute to the alumni association? Absent in many cases, but discovered by the professional interviewer, is a level of content knowledge that would make the student a prospective employee.

Graduates should keep in mind that a diploma guarantees nothing. Rather, it is a “ticket” which gets the graduate past the closed door and into the room for a discussion about employment. It is what happens in that conversation that tells the true story of the student’s higher education and preparedness for the real world.

 

 

As the Executive-Director of a foundation which for many years has assisted young people to attend college,
I have developed a distaste for the manner in which the purveyors of “higher education” conduct themselves
when it comes to … money! And there is no question that the vast percentage of “our”
students regard colleges with the same warmth as they view other businesses.

This snapshot is an outgrowth of that attitude.

We all know the college experience is special. One example is the innovation displayed by their accountants.
As shown, in their financial approach, they shun the absurd and highly irritating small item breakdowns favored
by their counterparts in the telephone and cable industries. Whoops, they actually are no better.

College                                  Telephone                                              Cable

Activity fee 203.00                 Federal universal service charge 1.36   Basic fee 17.95
Tuition 21720.00                   Regulatory charge 0.21                          Box fee 10.00
Room 8153.75                      Administrative charge 1.23                     Broadcast tv surcharge 3.99
Meals 3575.00                      NJ 911 System fee 0.90                         Sports tv surcharge 4.97
Co-curricular fee 217.00       NJ sales tax 4.33                                    Preferred package 57.00
Health fee 361.00                 Smartphone line access 40.00               Sales tax 0.70
Internet fee 220.00               Wireless phone protection 7.15              Franchise fee 3.76
Course fee 5.00                   Monthly charge 40.00                             State regulation fee 0.08
Health insurance 2230.00    FCC user fee 0.08
College program fee 35.00
Athletic fee 287.50
Academic Excellence fee 187.50
University fee 62.50
Recreation fee 56.00
Academic Support fee 9.50
Academic Record fee 5.00
ID Card fee 5.00

Don’t you admire a college accounting staff that in a total cost environment of many thousands of dollars can
find another 50-75 cents to extract from the student. And the diligence with which they find a way
to isolate $5.00 for fees which the layman might assume were covered by tuition.

The telephone and cable industries should be pleased. Their bills are less complex than those of colleges. At
the same time, they should be chagrined because they get labeled as bad guys while colleges still have a
residual halo effect, though it is fast diminishing, in part because of these financial shenanigans.
BobHowittbooks.com/?page_id=22

 

 

When there are nine crazies at our Senior Center basketball outings, we have one team with five players, rotating them in order to play four-on-four. This is interesting, but irrelevant. Equally unimportant is that when we have a substitute because of the above situation, we play to 11 baskets instead of 8.

What is crucial to understanding that which I am about to describe is that we play loser’s out, as in regular basketball but also dissimilar from much of New Jersey playground ball.

Ok, to finally arrive at the particulars –

The fact that we had the single best player on our team at the moment seemed meaningless, even though he was on the bench watching when the opponents took a commanding 10-5 lead.

No way we could overcome such a deficit. It would mean at least six “stops” matched by an equal number of hoops scored by our side.  But the credo in such circumstances, no matter how dire looking, is “one stop.” And then the exhortation is repeated and repeated.

Steve, Lionel, Frank D., Tom D. (sub), and myself dug in our heels against Mark, Tom M., Frank C., and Danny.  We swarmed, we fought through picks, we had hands in every shooter’s face, we grabbed rebounds from erstwhile winning shots which fortunately fell off the rim.

And it magically became 10-10.

As Steve’s teammate, you know that he wants to take the last shot (and most of the others as well); of course, this is no secret to the other team either and they proceed to surround him.

I wander to the left corner, midway between the baseline and the foul line extended, hands ready for a pass.  With no breathing room at all, Steve double bounces a pass to me, and I loft the ball quickly as Frank C. is running at me like a man possessed.

Nothing but freakin’ net!!!

We win 11-10, culminating the greatest defensive performance seen at this court in many years.

bobhowittbooks.com/?page_id=22

 

Many critics of the American economic system have an inch-deep understanding of its history. At the same time, they always have a long list of political “devils,” those individuals with whom they are in disagreement and who, by definition, are behind all negative policy decisions.

In the 20^th century, the average standard-of-living increased many-fold and lifetime expectancy grew significantly. During this period, it is fair to characterize the American economy as being more capitalist than any other philosophy.

In assessing the role of capitalism in the much improved standard of living, these are the observer’s choices:

Capitalism had nothing to do with the demonstrated growth

It had everything to do with the growth

The growth was despite the capitalist philosophy

Capitalism was a factor, but not as important as other factors

It brought the growth, but the price was too high

Capitalism was by far the leading contributor to the growth

Obviously line six is the best answer. At the same time, one would be hard-pressed to define our current economic model as being remotely close to pure capitalism. The United States Code of Federal Regulations has 169,000 pages. And government spending is one-third of GDP, versus 7.5% a hundred years ago.

No, the overriding philosophy is consumerism, whatever it takes to create — more stuff.

P.S. While the above was written pre-election, there is no reason to change anything. Unconnected to the election is the logic of drilling down on choice number five above. Another time.

bobhowittbooks.com/?page_id=22

 

Trying to figure out the interface of these two characteristics is challenging; so often, there is an overlap. At what might be considered one extreme, William F. Buckley, Jr. once commented that he would rather trust the creation of public policy to the first column of names in the Boston phonebook than to the faculty of Harvard University.

For sure, this has been an “interesting” year for so-called experts. Both pollsters and the intelligentsia have been proven wrong, at least predictively, in really big spots: Brexit, Santos (Colombia), and Trump.  People, shockingly to the media, are voting confidentially in their polling places, not sharing their thoughts with the survey-takers, who many times are construed as working for the “system” anyway.  Of course, if you flipped this picture, the experts would argue that given honest answers, they would have been more on-target in their predictions.  At the same time, their implicit arrogance blinded them from even contemplating what to others was obvious: if Trump could blast McCain and not drop in the polls, some other factor was clearly at play.

Not to be oblivious, there is another explanation behind the election and poll discrepancy: racism is both completely pervasive and normally exercised relatively quietly, i.e. not put in the face of a pollster, unless empowered, as is apparent now, by the unique context which is evident in our society.

Moving right along, as they say, stunningly to those mapping campaign strategy for the odds-on favorite to win the presidential election, this country has many people who are not enamored with the bicoastal media elites –for the latter Trump was a wet dream. More than a few of the elites have made themselves wealthy by playing a system which cares little about the daily lives of those they conveniently fly over or see only as a bunch of digits on their computer screens.

The arrogance of the Democratic National Committee clearly fogged its vision. The DNC was not listening when Charlie Munger, Warren Buffet’s partner, made this point at the Berkshire Hathaway annual meeting, “if you do not know your opponent’s argument, you do not know your own.”

It is similarly true that “It is hard to understand something when your paycheck (or your fund-raising) is dependent on not understanding.” Case in point, the NAACP totally misses the message that minority parents have endorsed high-performing charter schools and instead, reflecting its budgetary dependency on the teachers union, comes out with an anti-charter statement.

A broader truth, a psychological or real step taken by virtually everybody without typically noting it, is  that if there is a problem perceived as extremely difficult to resolve, the last place a person, especially an arrogant individual, looks is inside. They find an external source, a scapegoat. Lots of that going around, as Stewie from “Family Guy” would put it.

Yes, I have a problem with arrogance, especially that demonstrated by those individuals who attempt to use the credentials on their business cards — or the digital version thereof — not their expertise, to make their case when discussing an issue.

Years back, on meeting a school official for the first time, I called her by her first name. When she coldly responded, “that’s Dr. XYZ,” reflecting her Ph.D status, I knew she was not somebody with whom I would be successfully discussing educational policy. Some time later, when a staff person attempted to end our discussion by noting her high-level academic credential – implying that the questioner must be an idiot not to see the logic of her position – I quietly informed her that “I was too old to genuflect at the altar of Ph.D –holders.” (My best run on Wall Street was at a place that hired only individuals characterized as Ps.D: poor, smart, and driven.)

In truth, the best people I know have wonderful combinations of high-level intelligence, heart, passion, energy … and humility. They do not put down people with whom they disagree by calling them names. They do not match hateful, and irrational, messages with their own brand of venom.

Meanwhile, three interesting, maybe even positive and relevant, thoughts come to mind, lest I get totally depressed at the state of the world, as can easily happen.

*Longer-term, demographics will win out. Right now, there is virtually an even split between the number of whites under five years of age and the number of minorities.  Most of both categories are going to live for many years, making the future composition of the population highly predictable. Power at all levels of society inevitably will be transferred; let’s pray it is accomplished in a somewhat more peaceful manner than is indicated by what is taking place today.

*If, according to surveys done by the Pew Research Center,  74% of registered voters say “undocumented immigrants who meet certain requirements should be allowed to stay legally,” does not this percentage rise if Trump deports bona fide criminals?

*A 26 year-old immigration advocate of my acquaintance and a 69 year-old social service organization leader whom I have known for a quarter-century both come at the pending Trump presidency the same way, after they pulled the blankets back and climbed out of their respective beds of depression, that is. Before, they were fighting for social justice … and, simply put, that fight certainly continues.

As a final note, can there be any debate that, collectively this is THE ISSUE of our times: being able to say “I do not understand, please help me,”  being emotionally prepared to sit down and discuss a particular topic with somebody holding an opposite viewpoint, and being able to employ the Japanese proverb – “to find out the real reason, ask why seven times” without anybody storming out the room, cursing the other person’s lack of expertise and/or unwarranted arrogance.

 

 

The seven year-old girl lay prone on the patient table in the cardiologist’s office.  Unsurprisingly for anybody who knew this delightful young lady, she peppered the doctor with questions. His replies conveyed about as much sensitivity as that of the blinking machine he was studying. When, without any preparatory commentary, the doctor turned his patient over to his assistant to administer an EKG, the normally strong-willed girl began to cry. Only when the wires were calmly connected did she relax.

Perhaps she was really reacting to the loss of personal control, a circumstance which bothers most people, whether in a medical facility or in ordinary, daily life.

In our current high-stress environment, exacerbated by daily outbreaks of senseless loss of lives, the issue of the undulating sands of control is evident wherever one looks.

Who, I thought, feels more devoid of control (a partial list for sure, and in no order of importance):

A policeman trying to balance his job requirements with the environment in which he/she functions

All of us devoid of ideas for making more headway on racism

A minimum wage participant in the service economy

An undereducated, father-free, 18 year-old African American male

A middle-aged white male unemployed for the first time ever

An affluent parent attempting to explain that an attitude of entitlement is not appropriate

An undocumented Hispanic immigrant

A parent trying to keep social media in proper perspective for her/his children

An Asian with high SATs, rejected by an Ivy League college which already has enough Asians

A striving woman in a large corporation

The New York Times editorial board after the election

A gay person who has yet to leave the closet

A Sanders acolyte

A parent attempting to interact with the typical urban school leader

A CEO whose job is dependent on his quarterly earnings report

A farmer whose income is importantly driven by the weather

A cab driver with no regular customers

A college student walking into an all-or-nothing final exam

A single parent filling out paperwork in a welfare office

A person shunning the ethic of consumption and attempting to live off the grid

An economist trying to discourse logically about 1%ers, which cut across all demographic lines

 

Or –a writer befuddled by the task of putting down his thoughts in a clearly articulated manner!

Note: Our heroine has a strong heart, accompanied by a mild case of PAC:  premature arrhythmic contraction, basically an occasional extra heartbeat. She has no restrictions on activity, which includes running in 2,000 meter races, and the PAC diagnosis will be revisited in six months. We love her.

 

 

 

 

Frank McTeigue was typically the first one to warm up at the Chatham Senior Center basketball court, working on his inimitable overhead two-hander from the baseline corners.  Knowing these were his favorite spots and his primary shot was an advantage to the defender, but the latter had to have discipline to stay close to Frank. Otherwise, he would be picking the ball up after Frank’s shot went in, as it did a good percentage of the time.

For those unaware of the niceties of basketball, even as played by aging crazies, it is both a contact sport and a reactive one, which in combination can produce inadvertent falls.  During a seemingly normal morning outing in October, Frank tripped over another player’s feet and hit the floor with a tremendous thud to the back of his head.  He wanted to continue playing, but we insisted on him taking a break, after which he joined us as if nothing had happened.

Two days later, Frank complained of a headache and his family took him to Overlook Hospital; at the time it was thought to be simply a precautionary step as years earlier he had experienced a heart attack, after which he was on blood thinner. Unfortunately, the diagnosis was a blood clot in his brain and a difficult operation was immediately required.

Despite the efforts of skilled surgeons and the good subsequent care he received, Frank passed away, at the age of 82.

Frank was a charter member of our band of passionate basketball players. We will miss him greatly.

 

I have had an office in the center of Dover, New Jersey for many years, and I am not great at cleaning, hence the dust. More positively, during that time, without any planning, I have randomly scotch-taped certain sayings to my desk.

Below are some gems of good advice. The taped material is in 14-point bold.    Succinct comments are added; whole essays could be written, but not here.

***

Circumstances and networking: put yourself in situations where the people you meet can be relevant to your future career aspirations.

Talent, perseverance, self-reflection: three of the ingredients of success.

Right message, right messenger: students want to see and hear people like them.

Going to or Going from: the former is more likely to be correlated with positive analysis; applies to colleges, majors, jobs, relationships.

Ask questions, do research, analyze: three more success ingredients.

Be yourself: seems obvious, but often lack of confidence can obscure this advice.

Decide, dedicate, succeed: not surprising that success has multiple ingredients.

To get the real answer, ask why seven times: Japanese proverb about how to learn the “truth” about a situation.

Bring the bad news first, the good news can wait: expeditious action is required for the former; the party for the latter can take place whenever.

The real debate is whether to have data-infused conversations or data-free pontification: good to remember in the age of unfiltered, unedited social media. Mark Twain had it right a long time ago: a lie travels around the world before the truth gets out of bed.

You are entitled to your own opinion. You are not entitled to your own facts. And simply because somebody has the right to do something does not necessarily make it the right thing to do.